Wierwille did good things too, so he had good character.
IF you say that he had an evil character because of his evil works, then I can say he had good character, because of his good works. We're even.
So, the times he spoke forth the word and taught the word with believing, he was a man of good character.
Some people will never get a clue OM. No true critic of VPW will ever begin to appreciate that fact, anymore than the true pessimist who insists that the glass half full of water is still empty.
The way labeling appears to work in the Bible is that it specifies a particular behavior of a person as such a dominant characteristic as to warrant them that title. Thus a person is called a "thief" because he steals. An "adulterer" is one who commits adultery. I wouldn't confuse the issue by saying any of these people have an "evil character." People are complicated beings and the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary says "character" is the complex of mental and ethical traits marking and often individualizing a person. So perhaps another way of describing a person who has a long-suit in lying - would be to say that the person has a serious character flaw in personal integrity.
Look at a directive in I Corinthians 5 for dealing with an immoral person who refuses to repent – it says the person is to be expelled! Note especially the use of labels in verse 11 "…you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler…" Wow wee – I bet Paul never would have imagined all those sinful traits being wrapped up in one little ol' plagiarist of the twentieth century?
I Corinthians 5:1-13 NIV
1 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father's wife. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn't you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? 3 Even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if I were present. 4 When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5 hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.
6 Your boasting is not good. Don't you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough? 7 Get rid of the old yeast that you may be a new batch without yeast—as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8 Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth.
9 I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people — 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.
12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you."
Interesting - the instruction is to expel - not embrace the immoral person. From what I remember in studying the background of I and II Corinthians - this act of excommunication was instrumental in a particular immoral person repenting - and in II Corinthians Paul encourages them to welcome the person back into the fold with open arms. The immoral person repented between the time-frame of when I and II Corinthians were written...
My point - I'm not condemning anyone to hell or labeling anyone as evil-incarnate. Maybe if some of the leadership of a little ol' religious outfit like TWI would have had the guts to confront VPW early on - maybe things would have worked out a whole lot differently! If you notice Paul's reasoning for expelling this person was because of the bad influence it would have on the whole church of Corinth [verses 6 to 8]. There were always people around who chose to look the other way, cover up, or minimize, rationalize or some how justify VPW's despicable behavior – and I think they bear some of the responsibility in allowing his influence to poison an organization. And judging by the posts of some VPW-defenders here at GSC – there's still people around who wish to carry on that nefarious mission – thereby perpetuating his insidious legacy.
Wierwille did good things too, so he had good character.
IF you say that he had an evil character because of his evil works, then I can say he had good character, because of his good works. We're even.
So, the times he spoke forth the word and taught the word with believing, he was a man of good character.
I think we're coming at this from different directions OM. First, I did not label Wierwille's character explicitly as good or evil. Second, the way I understand character, it's not something that flips back and forth as you do different things during the day: you help an old lady across the street at 1:00 PM, you have good character; at 2:00 PM you steal a piece of fruit from the corner grocery you now have bad character. Your character is the complex web of motivations, opinions, upbringing, etc that makes you the kind of person who will both help that old lady and steal the fruit. Everybody's character is on a continuum that may range from altruistic to 100% mean S.O.B. -
Wierwille did both good and evil. It was indicative of his character that he could talk about believing and the love of God and everything else that sounded good in PFAL and lure young women into the motor coach and lie and encourage others' adulation.
Some people will never get a clue OM. No true critic of VPW will ever begin to appreciate that fact, anymore than the true pessimist who insists that the glass half full of water is still empty.
As I replied to Oldies, I don't agree that it's a "fact". Some of you guys saw your TWI experience as good. In retrospect, I can't say the same about mine. You look at Wierwille as someone who "taught you the Word", I look at him as someone who used the bible to manipulate and gain power.
...and some people are totally freaking clueless as to the nature of the discussion.
Fer krap's sake, character isn't some gee-dammm freaking light switch......how pathetically inane and sophomoric can a 50 year old adult be to think " I think he had "good charater", whatever the eff that means, when he taught the word....
here's some Word for you klueless klem kadiddle-hoppers----- a fountain puts forth not bitter water AND sweet---or didn't you know that??????
For those who chant the "Wierwille's character doesn't affect the TRUTH he taught" mantra:
Every single person who made it though PFAL and stayed active for even a short period of time did so because they believed that Wierwille was telling the truth in PFAL. Why did we believe this? Because we did our own research? Usually because we took Wierwille's word for most of what he said, and the things that we "investigated" on our own we did using assumptions and premises that we accepted from Wierwille. No, we believed what was in PFAL largely because we decided that Wierwille was trustworthy and that he knew what he was talking about. He convinced us of it himself.
I certainly can't speak for you, but VPW highly encouraged us to do our own research and not just take his word for it. I distinctly remember at a number of "Weekend in the Word" conferences he highly encouraged people to do their own research and he also said many times to us, "read it for yourself". He also demonstrated how he did biblical research at these "Weekend in the Word" conferences so we could learn how to better research the Word of God on our own and for ourselves. (This was circa 1970's). NOW if that weren't so, I know for a fact I'd still be a trinitarian today.
You see, it wasn't VPW who convinced me JCING, it was me because I decided to research it for myself. The sorry thing of it is, TWI quit doing those conferences to help people make full use of the biblical materials and the resouces for biblical research that they were originally introduced to in PFAL. I believe it's one of the primary reasons why TWI failed, and why TWI is so screwed up today.
As I replied to Oldies, I don't agree that it's a "fact". Some of you guys saw your TWI experience as good. In retrospect, I can't say the same about mine. You look at Wierwille as someone who "taught you the Word", I look at him as someone who used the bible to manipulate and gain power.
I just gave you the answer [above] to the reason why your experience in TWI was very different than mine. I'm sorry I can't tell you exactly why TWI stopped these "Weekend in the Word" conferences where we got into the core principles of biblical research - other than there were more pressing needs in the ministry at the time. I think this was right around the time when all the Ted Patrick/deprogramming stuff started happening, and even some peoples lives were at stake - i.e. the M*nty Pelt* deprogramming case being one of many.
I'm sorry if you (and others) see VPW as someone who used the bible to manipulate and gain power, when he was actually there for God's people - especiailly at times when they needed him the most. Are you still looking for sympathy from others because of this? Well, I'm so sorry to hear just how badly you and others here had gotten short changed and were literally "screwed" out of your own "good bible experience" by VPW.
Fer krap's sake, character isn't some gee-dammm freaking light switch......how pathetically inane and sophomoric can a 50 year old adult be to think " I think he had "good charater", whatever the eff that means, when he taught the word....
here's some Word for you klueless klem kadiddle-hoppers----- a fountain puts forth not bitter water AND sweet---or didn't you know that??????
I can't quite figure out who said this, it was in quotes but I couldn't find any original post containing it...
"I'm sorry if you (and others) see VPW as someone who used the bible to manipulate and gain power, when he was actually there for God's people - especiailly at times when they needed him the most. Are you still looking for sympathy from others because of this? Well, I'm so sorry to hear just how badly you and others here had gotten short changed and were literally "screwed" out of your own "good bible experience" by VPW."
OK... so... how was he there for God's people when he was raping drugged women?
oh, and I'm really glad he was dead before I had a chance to sit in on the dog porn movie.
...and some people are totally freaking clueless as to the nature of the discussion.
Fer krap's sake, character isn't some gee-dammm freaking light switch......how pathetically inane and sophomoric can a 50 year old adult be to think " I think he had "good charater", whatever the eff that means, when he taught the word....
here's some Word for you klueless klem kadiddle-hoppers----- a fountain puts forth not bitter water AND sweet---or didn't you know that??????
OM, you take the freaking cake.... :confused:
See,
you can look at PART of the life of one guy,
and say that MOST of the time, he was a good man.
He was considered a pillar of his local civic community,
a member of the Jaycees,
and even entertained children as a clown.
HOWEVER,
character is not a "part of the time" thing.
Most people would say that-although only a tiny fraction of the time John Wayne Gacy
spent in his community was spent killing young boys- that tiny fraction of time
was sufficient to erase any supposed good the community received when he
wasn't kidnapping, imprisoning or killing.
Character is what you are 100% of the time-
not 25% or 50% or 75% or even 95%.
If you are the scum of the earth, you can spend relatively little of your time
killing, raping, molesting, and so on,
and people will consider you scum.
That's not an inordinate amount of focus on evil deeds.
That's putting the focus on where it should be.
When discussing anyone but vpw, just about everyone on the planet
has no difficulty getting this.
The way labeling appears to work in the Bible is that it specifies a particular behavior of a person as such a dominant characteristic as to warrant them that title. Thus a person is called a "thief" because he steals. An "adulterer" is one who commits adultery. I wouldn't confuse the issue by saying any of these people have an "evil character." People are complicated beings and the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary says "character" is the complex of mental and ethical traits marking and often individualizing a person. So perhaps another way of describing a person who has a long-suit in lying - would be to say that the person has a serious character flaw in personal integrity.
Look at a directive in I Corinthians 5 for dealing with an immoral person who refuses to repent – it says the person is to be expelled! Note especially the use of labels in verse 11 "…you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler…" Wow wee – I bet Paul never would have imagined all those sinful traits being wrapped up in one little ol' plagiarist of the twentieth century?
I Corinthians 5:1-13 NIV
1 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father's wife. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn't you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? 3 Even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if I were present. 4 When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5 hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.
6 Your boasting is not good. Don't you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough? 7 Get rid of the old yeast that you may be a new batch without yeast—as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8 Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth.
9 I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people — 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.
12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you."
Interesting - the instruction is to expel - not embrace the immoral person. From what I remember in studying the background of I and II Corinthians - this act of excommunication was instrumental in a particular immoral person repenting - and in II Corinthians Paul encourages them to welcome the person back into the fold with open arms. The immoral person repented between the time-frame of when I and II Corinthians were written...
My point - I'm not condemning anyone to hell or labeling anyone as evil-incarnate. Maybe if some of the leadership of a little ol' religious outfit like TWI would have had the guts to confront VPW early on - maybe things would have worked out a whole lot differently! If you notice Paul's reasoning for expelling this person was because of the bad influence it would have on the whole church of Corinth [verses 6 to 8]. There were always people around who chose to look the other way, cover up, or minimize, rationalize or some how justify VPW's despicable behavior – and I think they bear some of the responsibility in allowing his influence to poison an organization. And judging by the posts of some VPW-defenders here at GSC – there's still people around who wish to carry on that nefarious mission – thereby perpetuating his insidious legacy.
I certainly can't speak for you, but VPW highly encouraged us to do our own research and not just take his word for it. I distinctly remember at a number of "Weekend in the Word" conferences he highly encouraged people to do their own research and he also said many times to us, "read it for yourself". He also demonstrated how he did biblical research at these "Weekend in the Word" conferences so we could learn how to better research the Word of God on our own and for ourselves. (This was circa 1970's). NOW if that weren't so, I know for a fact I'd still be a trinitarian today.
You see, it wasn't VPW who convinced me JCING, it was me because I decided to research it for myself. The sorry thing of it is, TWI quit doing those conferences to help people make full use of the biblical materials and the resouces for biblical research that they were originally introduced to in PFAL. I believe it's one of the primary reasons why TWI failed, and why TWI is so screwed up today.
[As has been pointed out before, using vpw's own standards and tools to examine vpw's materials
is not the way to objectively examine or to most fairly evaluate the accuracy of the materials.
There's a bias there, which will affect your results.
Moreover, if you WANT to legitimize his stuff, that will further bias your results.
That having been said, some people have examined his work, and concluded by the standards
espoused in pfal, pfal falls short of its stated performance.
That also having been said, I've seen what WTH considers sufficient for his own standards,
and I'm not impressed. A lot of things could pass HIS standard that wouldn't come close
to passing mine.
There's also a selective memory in effect here-
those who came up with conclusions contradicting vpw were NOT embraced by vpw,
nor was their work studied to see if he could improve his own.
vpw's position was retained, and the other person's was suppressed.
That's why even the response to the "Adultery" letter wasn't so shocking-
suppressing the "unpleasant news" was standard operating procedure at the way.]
I just gave you the answer [above] to the reason why your experience in TWI was very different than mine. I'm sorry I can't tell you exactly why TWI stopped these "Weekend in the Word" conferences where we got into the core principles of biblical research - other than there were more pressing needs in the ministry at the time. I think this was right around the time when all the Ted Patrick/deprogramming stuff started happening, and even some peoples lives were at stake - i.e. the M*nty Pelt* deprogramming case being one of many.
[Actually, your answer did nothing of the kind. Frankly, the Ted Patrick/Deprogramming things
were a windfall for twi- vpw was able to use them to monger fear and get everyone to
"circle the wagons" because those evil deprogrammers were out to get them.
Also, the experience of any one person is irrelevant here-the consistent pattern of the criminal
is what we're looking at. If he does not commit a crime Tuesday, and we're watching him
Tuesday, that doesn't mean he's become a fine, upstanding citizen.]
I'm sorry if you (and others) see VPW as someone who used the bible to manipulate and gain power, when he was actually there for God's people - especiailly at times when they needed him the most. Are you still looking for sympathy from others because of this? Well, I'm so sorry to hear just how badly you and others here had gotten short changed and were literally "screwed" out of your own "good bible experience" by VPW.
[some of the time, he taught some good Bible. Some of the time, he did some nice things for some
people. Some of the time, he taught things that were very harmful. Some of the time, he did some
despicable, evil things to some people.
The times people needed him to be godly the most were the times he was in the middle of
committing dark, corrupt acts, and compounded them by shrouding them in
the legitimacy of a clergy title. THAT's when they "needed him the most." That's when he
really should have made the effort a normal male does to try to "be the man he knows himself
to be".
To hide this is to facilitate evil by hiding or excusing it, and those are actions never sanctioned
by Scripture. Calling evil "good" is roundly condemned.
Of course, WTH can't see that evil actions deserve some outrage because they're wrong.
That requires a working conscience. Instead, he can only conjecture why normal, healthy
adults would be angry about vpw's crimes. No, we're not looking for sympathy. Most of us-
especially the males- were never raped or drugged by vpw. (At least not physically.)
We're outraged over crimes that were committed, and crimes labelled "acceptable" using
a cloak of legitimacy by misusing clergy positions, and crimes covered up by a number
of people- and still being covered up to this day-or at least attempted so.
The blessing of the LORD makes rich, and He adds no sorrow to it.
The blessings of vpw made a few rich, and added crippling sorrow to a few others.
That's not acceptable to almost everyone,
and if it wasn't vpw doing it, it wouldn't be acceptable to anyone.
BTW, I think the above quote is a perfect example of the types of response one can
expect from a dulled (seared) conscience when faced with suffering resulting from
evil acts. No sympathy, just a rude joke.
If WTH is the "after" picture, I feel confident that few people will be rushing to
I can't quite figure out who said this, it was in quotes but I couldn't find any original post containing it...
"I'm sorry if you (and others) see VPW as someone who used the bible to manipulate and gain power, when he was actually there for God's people - especiailly at times when they needed him the most. Are you still looking for sympathy from others because of this? Well, I'm so sorry to hear just how badly you and others here had gotten short changed and were literally "screwed" out of your own "good bible experience" by VPW."
OK... so... how was he there for God's people when he was raping drugged women?
oh, and I'm really glad he was dead before I had a chance to sit in on the dog porn movie.
That was WTH's reply to Oakspear's post.
WTH didn't make it clear this is what he was doing.
He was attempting to copy my style, but left out a critical detail.
(That is, who is speaking when.)
When you've experienced WTH some more, this won't surprise you.
BTW,
once the CFS class was on tape, vpw didn't always show the dog porn movie.
The taped class DESCRIBES the movie, which is more information than I wanted.
It also shows him amused with the thing as he describes it,
rather than the disgust/distaste most of us would evidence on tape if forced
Vic was a rather good actor on stage- I wouldn't argue that he couldn't put on a good show.
How can you gague a mans character or lack thereof by how he acts in front of the crowd?
You can't. The persona a person beholds may be little more than a carefully crafted illusion.
Most in the ministry never saw vic:
throwing temper tantrums.. and they could be NASTY. Somebody's head rolled..
chewing some guy up one side and down the other for a MINOR infraction, a rather small slip at some inane detail.. and then saying he raised so much hell because he loved us. That little trait did emerge publically a few times for those who were "spiritual" enough to handle it..
The vast majority did not know the goings on in the motor coach.
Applying his influence as an authority figure to USE a HUMAN BEING for SEX, not just once, or twice..
Then applying his influence as an authority figure on others to cover his tracks..
Most of us didn't have a CLUE what was really going on, and what we know now I think is the tip of the iceberg.
It's a rhetorical question in the bible, and unfortunately, it is possible, and does happen...
Yes - good point, OldiesMan. And it's interesting to read the context of that reference – especially on this thread about character. [NIV renders the KJV of "…sweet water and bitter…" as "…fresh water and salt water…" in verse 11.]
James 3:1-12 NIV
1 Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. 2 We all stumble in many ways. If anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to keep his whole body in check.
3 When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can turn the whole animal. 4 Or take ships as an example. Although they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are steered by a very small rudder wherever the pilot wants to go. 5 Likewise the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts. Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. 6 The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole person, sets the whole course of his life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell.
7 All kinds of animals, birds, reptiles and creatures of the sea are being tamed and have been tamed by man, 8 but no man can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.
9 With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God's likeness. 10 Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be. 11Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? 12 My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water.
People can be walking contradictions at times. Nobody is perfect. But I think we've all come across people in life who seem to excel at being contradictory. I mean we all have our own litmus test for determining hypocrites. I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing. Maybe that's why there's passages in the Bible like the above – that seem to set a standard…a code of conduct…for a teacher of God's Word, for a believer of God's Word. People are made in God's likeness [verse 9] – which ain't bad! Yet sometimes people can act so ungodly [verse 10] – which ain't good. It's contrary to what we were designed to be.
Jesus said what comes out of a person's mouth is only the tip of the iceberg.
Matthew 15:10-20 NIV
10 Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. 11 What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "
12 Then the disciples came to him and asked, "Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?"
13 He replied, "Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. 14 Leave them; they are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit."
15 Peter said, "Explain the parable to us."
16 "Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them. 17 "Don't you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? 18 But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man 'unclean.' 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. 20 These are what make a man 'unclean'; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him 'unclean.' "
As verse 18 shows – and what's been said earlier on this thread in a number of ways – what's in a person's heart eventually makes its way out. Character is revealed by actions…
I am amazed by the shallow concept some VPW-defenders seem to have of what it means to be a minister of God, a teacher of God's Word, a spiritual leader. I think James and Jesus emphasize that what a teacher DOES is important! Do you think it really matters to God that some "teacher" showed there were four crucified with Jesus? Is the whole Bible really going to fall to pieces if there were only two crucified with Jesus? Do you think it matters to God when that same teacher sexually molested women? What about their whole life falling to pieces because of what he did to them? How does any amount of Bible teaching justify such acts? "There must be something wrong with our scale of values…" Oh yeah – I remember that line from PFAL.
This rationalizing by some VPW-defenders makes me think of Martin Luther's time. Martin Luther noticed that many people in Wittenberg weren't coming to church for confession anymore. He found out they were going to neighboring towns to buy Indulgences. People were paying the church to pardon their sins – any church history buffs correct me if I'm remembering this wrong – but I think you could buy an Indulgence to remit punishment of any past, present or future sin. How is that so different from thinking: "Look at all these people VPW helped with PFAL. Surely that's worth something to God. So what if he had a little bad habit. The good he's done far outweighs the bad."
Proverbs 9:10 NIV
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.
I think the Bible puts more emphasis on the moral aspect of God's wisdom rather than any academic perspective of it. The fear of the Lord is what bows the soul to humbly accept His way of doing things. It looks to me like getting to know the Holy One – personally – is the key to understanding – that's a lot different than just gaining a knowledge of the Holy Bible… "Holy" – sacred, perfect in goodness and righteousness…I would think these are ideas a good teacher of the Bible would want to instill in his students.
It's a rhetorical question in the bible, and unfortunately, it is possible, and does happen.
And maybe even by some of us here at GS CAFE..? :o
Yes, it is a rhetorical question, with the unspoken answer being "no", illustrated by other examples. The point is that the same mouth both blessing and cursing is unnatural.
For some reason I can't do multiple quote boxes, I'm using the WordWolf method of putting my replies in bold type:
I certainly can't speak for you, but VPW highly encouraged us to do our own research and not just take his word for it.
I agree that this is what he said, but the "research" that what encouraged was a "re-searching" (a perverting of the actual meaning of "research") what was already taught. Researching what was taught using Wierwille's assumptions and premises was not very exhaustive, and quite possibly circular
I distinctly remember at a number of "Weekend in the Word" conferences he highly encouraged people to do their own research and he also said many times to us, "read it for yourself".
I distinctly remember it too. Like I said earlier, research was for the purpose of confirming PFAL.
He also demonstrated how he did biblical research at these "Weekend in the Word" conferences so we could learn how to better research the Word of God on our own and for ourselves. (This was circa 1970's).
So we could better come to the same conclusions as he did - 70's? Yup, I was there
NOW if that weren't so, I know for a fact I'd still be a trinitarian today.
Okay
You see, it wasn't VPW who convinced me JCING, it was me because I decided to research it for myself.
You, like many other are convinced that you did research. Maybe some other time we can have a doctrinal discussion about these specific issues, right now I'm just exptressing my opinion about TWI "research"
The sorry thing of it is, TWI quit doing those conferences to help people make full use of the biblical materials and the resouces for biblical research that they were originally introduced to in PFAL. I believe it's one of the primary reasons why TWI failed, and why TWI is so screwed up today.
TWI continued to do a lot of that on a local level with the same purpose: to solidify in people's minds TWI doctrine
I just gave you the answer [above] to the reason why your experience in TWI was very different than mine.
Actually, it sounds like the experience was the same, only our interpretations of the experience are different
I'm sorry if you (and others) see VPW as someone who used the bible to manipulate and gain power, when he was actually there for God's people -
And I'm sorry that you still see Wierwille as someone who was there for God's people and not as someone who manipulated
Are you still looking for sympathy from others because of this?
Never was
Well, I'm so sorry to hear just how badly you and others here had gotten short changed and were literally "screwed" out of your own "good bible experience" by VPW.
That would be figuratively "screwed". Literally "screwed" would mean something much more physically painful
For some reason I can't do multiple quote boxes, I'm using the WordWolf method of putting my replies in bold type:
<_<
Oak, I don’t know if this is the best way to do multiple quotes but I’ve found it works okay for me. I think there’s a short time-frame for it to work this way – anyway…say there’s 3 posts I want to quote on a thread – I go to the first post click on Reply – as soon as the Reply Window comes up I immediately click on Add Reply. Then I go to the next post and do the same thing, then the third post – same thing. I think because I do it within a short time-frame of each other – all three posts that I’ve quoted appear as only one reply by me. Then – by clicking on the Edit Button I open my post and edit the quotes down and add my comments.
Yes, it is a rhetorical question, with the unspoken answer being "no", illustrated by other examples. The point is that the same mouth both blessing and cursing is unnatural.
By the way - I liked your reply on this a lot better than mine – short and to the point…Guess I’m still stuck in some TWIt-brain line of thinking…dunno…is there a gift ministry of verbosity? The Right Reverend Hot Air…
By the way - I liked your reply on this a lot better than mine – short and to the point…Guess I’m still stuck in some TWIt-brain line of thinking…dunno…is there a gift ministry of verbosity? The Right Reverend Hot Air…
Naw, sometimes you have to spell it out; I read your post and hit it from a different angle. Thanks for the quote tips.
[As has been pointed out before, using vpw's own standards and tools to examine vpw's materials is not the way to objectively examine or to most fairly evaluate the accuracy of the materials. There's a bias there, which will affect your results. Moreover, if you WANT to legitimize his stuff, that will further bias your results.
That having been said, some people have examined his work, and concluded by the standards espoused in pfal, pfal falls short of its stated performance.
Of course we are to believe those "some people" that you are refering to do not have their own standards or tools that also bias their results whenever they examine VPW's biblical materials [research]- right? OH NO - how could we ever get the idea and think that was even possible?
If that's the defense you are making and are justifing, then you ought to rewrite your bible so it reads, "Study to show thyself approved unto men". At least that way your bible will be more accurate, because that is what men do and is the end result when one examines somebody else's biblical workmanship rather than the Word of God. This argument about there "being a bias here which will affect one's results" comes off sounding much like the familiar cheesy sci-fi dialog between Anakin Skywalker and Chancellor Palpatine from Star Wars III.
Anakin Skywalker: "The Jedi use their power [knowlege] for good.
Chancellor Palpatine: "Good is a point of view, Anakin. The Sith and the Jedi are similar in almost every way, including their quest for greater power [knowledge]."
Anakin Skywalker: "The Sith rely on their passion for their strength. [knowledge.] They think inward, only about themselves.
Chancellor Palpatine: "And the Jedi don't?"
Many have already heard and have already learned this basic lesson:
Knowledge is Power.
But as Chancellor Palpatine vividly reminds us all:
Remember back to your early teachings. All who gain power are afraid to lose it - even the Jedi.
Unfortunately few ever remember their early biblical teachings, one of which is: "Man's basic spiritual problem is the accuracy and integrity of God's Word." People are more intent rather they are far more content with putting their microscope on another man's deeds and also on his biblical workmanship rather than turning their microscope on the Word of God for themselves. Why? Because the integrity and accuracy of God's Word is not their primary concern (being man's basic spiritual problem as it is) but rather the writings, the works, and the deeds of another man are their primary concerns.
Go back to your first bible lesson. The first bible lesson is simply: "Read exactly what is written - don't read into what is written." I remember how I often quoted John 20:31: "But these are written that ye might know that Jesus is the Christ ... etc. " Now that sounds pretty accurate I'd say. In fact, quoting that scripture exactly like this will come off sounding a million percent biblically accurate to the 99.9% highly educated "some people" you say have examined "VPW's biblical materials" or PFAL - or whatever else VPW did. I know it does, because this is the type of biblical accuracy that is good enough for them. I hear it and see it in their biblical examiniation [in their biblical exegesis] all the time. Their exegisis is usually this, which is: What difference does it make? That is not the accuracy of John 20:31. Go back to your early biblical teaching and "read exactly what is written". What John 20:31 accurately says is this: "But these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ ... etc."
I am not expecting a standing ovation from anyone here on this extremely brief example of biblical accuracy in respect to: "reading exactly what is written". Certainly not here. Rather I am expecting that these "some people" will only respond with this: Whooping big deal! What difference does that make? (Now were have we heard that argument before?) What's the big difference in just one little word - in knowing Jesus is the Christ or in believing Jesus is the Christ?
Because unto men knowlege is highly important - especially in respect and in regards to some future knowlege a man might gain; because to men:
Knowlege is Power.
(We've all been hearing and even been responding to that lousy teaching for decades!)
For example: It is highly important to men exactly where you got your biblical knowledge, exactly who you got your biblical knowledge from, and that you properly acknowledge [credit] those from who you got your bible knowledge. Should one miss it on any of those points, those who pride themselves on knowledge will be the first to point it out. The threads and topics that are on GSC are constantly centered on these exact subjects and is proof enough of it.
But what does God say in His Word that is the important - that is, if accuracy is ever to be of any importance to anyone with any biblical knowledge at all? Is it knowing - or is it believing? Perhaps I should re-phrase that. "What's the most important thing to you?" Whatever your answer to that question is will also determine whether one is seeking to please men or if one is seeking to please God. Because for most men, knowledge is what pleases them because to man knowledge is power and it gives men a "sense of power" over other men who don't have the same knowledge". To briefly summarize this paragraph:
Knowlege pleases men.
Believing pleases God.
My only question to you is this:
Who do you want to please the most?
Man or God?
(Big hint: See answer above.)
Getting back to John 21:25 that I quoted earlier. In irony I was attempting to show someone here how the early disciples must have been highly incompetent in the proper documenting and the recording of the works of Jesus Christ. The irony behind it is, that would indeed be the truth - that is, IF knowledge of Jesus and the bible is all that is important to somebody and all that is available to someone. Why do I say that? Because as the disciple John declared regarding the Lord Jesus Christ, "... the world itself could not contain the books that should be written." This disciple of the Lord would indeed be a liar, if knowledge of the Lord (or the bible if you want to put it that way) is all that was ever available to the Christian. Perhaps this humble disciple of Jesus Christ realized something else - something far greater than a mere senses knowledge of Jesus Christ.
I have heard the typical witness of most Christins as some of us were the typical Christian in witnessing the Lord unto others. Christians have often said to me like they often say to the unsaved: Do you know the Lord? Have you ever heard that one before?
But how many Christians do you know have ever said to someone, (I'm not being critical of them - I'm just pointing out this fact)
Do you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ?
Probably very few, if any. But the early apostles and disciples of Jesus Christ witnessed like that. Why isn't it like that today? Because today believing is not as important to people as is their knowledge of the scriptures and the bible or some other theological hang-up that they seem to have. To most knowledge is their primary objective - it's not believing on the Lord Jesus Christ himself. Truthfully when it comes to believing most people now only want to argue about it anyway - that is, whether if it's a law or not. Why do they want to bother with the arguing and the debate on believing? Because for them, something else other than believing {i.e. knowledge} is far much more important.
I'll just end by reiterating what VPW accurately stated to both you and I many years ago. "Tell me what you believe about the Lord Jesus Christ and I'll tell you how far you will go spiritually". I'm thankful VPW never said, "Tell me what you know about Jesus Christ, etc." because when it comes to the Lord Jesus Christ you and I will never know-it-all. At least not in this life - as the whole world could not contain the books that should be written as the disciple of the Lord declared many years before us. But today we seem to run into a bunch of know-it-all's. People want to tell you what they "know" - whether it's about JESUS, about VPW, about TWI, or whatever else it is they think is highly important for you to know and what they think you ought to "know" about. There are some people who highly INSIST on it! But "what-ever-it-is" that you know is somehow always irrelevant to them - unless it happens to fit their agenda. Funny how that works - how some people want to impose their knowledge on others and then go away thinking that somehow they did the true God a really great big whooping favor by it.
...If that's the defense you are making and are justifing, then you ought to rewrite your bible so it reads, "Study to show thyself approved unto men". At least that way your bible will be more accurate, because that is what men do and is the end result when one examines somebody else's biblical workmanship rather than the Word of God...Many have already heard and have already learned this basic lesson:
Knowledge is Power.
...I'll just end by reiterating what VPW accurately stated to both you and I many years ago. "Tell me what you believe about the Lord Jesus Christ and I'll tell you how far you will go spiritually". I'm thankful VPW never said, "Tell me what you know about Jesus Christ, etc." ...
The way it worked when I was in TWI – people were expected to agree that PFAL was the standard for truth. It was considered the ONLY way to rightly interpret the Bible in order to stand approved before TWI's little god [revealed for the umpteenth time in the next sentence]. God forbid anyone should find something in the Scriptures that contradicts what VPW taught – after all – this PFAL standard wasn't set in place to please God – but man – one man actually – VPW.
Yeah – like I really should have been concerned if VPW found out what I thought of Jesus Christ. Like he would be able to gauge how far I would go spiritually. A very good salesman VPW he was [simulated Yoda manner of speaking] – using the old bait and switch routine. At the beginning of the sales pitch there's lots of talk about Jesus, the ten commandments, a sprinkling of some Greek words. Sounds like some good wholesome Christian stuff…Somewhere along that gosh awful long stretch of class VPW substitutes his own little distorted version of Christianity – where Jesus Christ is eliminated. You don't read the gospels anymore because they're not addressed to you. Hmmmm – that's odd - the gospels are the only four books in the Bible that are ALL ABOUT Jesus Christ! I'll tell you what a typical student thinks of Jesus after taking PFAL - not much.
PFAL knowledge IS power to TWI-followers. In order to stand approved before TWI you better at least act like that's true.
Maybe recalling something else VPW said in PFAL would be more conducive to a Christian getting back on track with knowing Jesus Christ. It's the story of the crooked handle bars on the bike. The bike rider got use to them being crooked – when someone came along and straightened them out – the rider crashed. PFAL does a wonderful job of skewing the student's thinking process. There is no way students can thoughtfully process the Bible themselves once they've been trained to VPW's way of thinking. They have been trained to absorb instead of analyze. If there are any Christians who just left TWI and are reading this post - may I suggest something. Read the Bible - maybe even get another version - at least one that doesn't have your TWI notes in it. Read it...think...question...pray...keep on with the keeping on...
I dunno.. I don't really think that life is some kind of high-wire balancing act, where you try to do something nice to counter-balance despicable acts.. and that's going to make everything OK..
sounds like the Pharisee's philosophy- "tithing" fixes EVERYTHING.
Unfortunately few ever remember their early biblical teachings, one of which is: "Man's basic spiritual problem is the accuracy and integrity of God's Word." People are more intent rather they are far more content with putting their microscope on another man's deeds and also on his biblical workmanship rather than turning their microscope on the Word of God for themselves. Why? Because the integrity and accuracy of God's Word is not their primary concern (being man's basic spiritual problem as it is) but rather the writings, the works, and the deeds of another man are their primary concerns.
Might I suggest, What the Hey, that VPW got this idea kinda scewed? Man's basic spiritual problem is sin, not the "accuracy and intergrity of God's Word."
The statement VPW made in PFAL that you quoted, was a "hook," one of many that baited people into believing that VPW had all the answers.
The whole Bible is about the problem of sin, and God's answer to it, Jesus Christ. In John 8:31 and 32, Jesus is teaching his disciples and makes the statement that "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my diciples. Then you will know the truth and the truth shall make you free."
Well, hello, what will be free from? Keep reading and Jesus explains we will be free the bondage of sin.
I Cor. 15: 33 and 34 come to mind: "Do not be mislead. Bad company corrupts good character. Come back to your senses as you ought and stop sinning: for their are some who are ignorant of God-I say this to your shame."
Unfortunately, VPW never got to the point where he quit sinning. His corrupt character stayed corrupted, which is obvious by the "fruit" he left behind. And his corrupt character, influenced everything about his "ministry," including his teaching, example, etc.
These things are really just a no-brainer for anybody who still has one left after escaping the cult. VPW and company's sin and corrupt character led many, many people astray. Thank the Lord, that as his sin is being exposed, we can "know the truth," and be set free from the bondage of sin.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
8
14
8
11
Popular Days
Jan 18
18
Jan 17
15
Jan 19
14
Jan 22
13
Top Posters In This Topic
WordWolf 8 posts
Oakspear 14 posts
Ham 8 posts
T-Bone 11 posts
Popular Days
Jan 18 2007
18 posts
Jan 17 2007
15 posts
Jan 19 2007
14 posts
Jan 22 2007
13 posts
T-Bone
The way labeling appears to work in the Bible is that it specifies a particular behavior of a person as such a dominant characteristic as to warrant them that title. Thus a person is called a "thief" because he steals. An "adulterer" is one who commits adultery. I wouldn't confuse the issue by saying any of these people have an "evil character." People are complicated beings and the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary says "character" is the complex of mental and ethical traits marking and often individualizing a person. So perhaps another way of describing a person who has a long-suit in lying - would be to say that the person has a serious character flaw in personal integrity.
Look at a directive in I Corinthians 5 for dealing with an immoral person who refuses to repent – it says the person is to be expelled! Note especially the use of labels in verse 11 "…you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler…" Wow wee – I bet Paul never would have imagined all those sinful traits being wrapped up in one little ol' plagiarist of the twentieth century?
I Corinthians 5:1-13 NIV
1 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father's wife. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn't you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? 3 Even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if I were present. 4 When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5 hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.
6 Your boasting is not good. Don't you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough? 7 Get rid of the old yeast that you may be a new batch without yeast—as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8 Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth.
9 I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people — 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.
12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you."
Interesting - the instruction is to expel - not embrace the immoral person. From what I remember in studying the background of I and II Corinthians - this act of excommunication was instrumental in a particular immoral person repenting - and in II Corinthians Paul encourages them to welcome the person back into the fold with open arms. The immoral person repented between the time-frame of when I and II Corinthians were written...
My point - I'm not condemning anyone to hell or labeling anyone as evil-incarnate. Maybe if some of the leadership of a little ol' religious outfit like TWI would have had the guts to confront VPW early on - maybe things would have worked out a whole lot differently! If you notice Paul's reasoning for expelling this person was because of the bad influence it would have on the whole church of Corinth [verses 6 to 8]. There were always people around who chose to look the other way, cover up, or minimize, rationalize or some how justify VPW's despicable behavior – and I think they bear some of the responsibility in allowing his influence to poison an organization. And judging by the posts of some VPW-defenders here at GSC – there's still people around who wish to carry on that nefarious mission – thereby perpetuating his insidious legacy.
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
pond,
No offense intended, but I have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Wierwille did both good and evil. It was indicative of his character that he could talk about believing and the love of God and everything else that sounded good in PFAL and lure young women into the motor coach and lie and encourage others' adulation.
As I replied to Oldies, I don't agree that it's a "fact". Some of you guys saw your TWI experience as good. In retrospect, I can't say the same about mine. You look at Wierwille as someone who "taught you the Word", I look at him as someone who used the bible to manipulate and gain power.Link to comment
Share on other sites
alfakat
...and some people are totally freaking clueless as to the nature of the discussion.
Fer krap's sake, character isn't some gee-dammm freaking light switch......how pathetically inane and sophomoric can a 50 year old adult be to think " I think he had "good charater", whatever the eff that means, when he taught the word....
here's some Word for you klueless klem kadiddle-hoppers----- a fountain puts forth not bitter water AND sweet---or didn't you know that??????
OM, you take the freaking cake....
:confused: 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
yeah...what Alfakat said
Link to comment
Share on other sites
What The Hey
Link to comment
Share on other sites
potato
I can't quite figure out who said this, it was in quotes but I couldn't find any original post containing it...
"I'm sorry if you (and others) see VPW as someone who used the bible to manipulate and gain power, when he was actually there for God's people - especiailly at times when they needed him the most. Are you still looking for sympathy from others because of this? Well, I'm so sorry to hear just how badly you and others here had gotten short changed and were literally "screwed" out of your own "good bible experience" by VPW."
OK... so... how was he there for God's people when he was raping drugged women?
oh, and I'm really glad he was dead before I had a chance to sit in on the dog porn movie.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
See,
you can look at PART of the life of one guy,
and say that MOST of the time, he was a good man.
He was considered a pillar of his local civic community,
a member of the Jaycees,
and even entertained children as a clown.
HOWEVER,
character is not a "part of the time" thing.
Most people would say that-although only a tiny fraction of the time John Wayne Gacy
spent in his community was spent killing young boys- that tiny fraction of time
was sufficient to erase any supposed good the community received when he
wasn't kidnapping, imprisoning or killing.
Character is what you are 100% of the time-
not 25% or 50% or 75% or even 95%.
If you are the scum of the earth, you can spend relatively little of your time
killing, raping, molesting, and so on,
and people will consider you scum.
That's not an inordinate amount of focus on evil deeds.
That's putting the focus on where it should be.
When discussing anyone but vpw, just about everyone on the planet
has no difficulty getting this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
What The Hey:
[As has been pointed out before, using vpw's own standards and tools to examine vpw's materialsis not the way to objectively examine or to most fairly evaluate the accuracy of the materials.
There's a bias there, which will affect your results.
Moreover, if you WANT to legitimize his stuff, that will further bias your results.
That having been said, some people have examined his work, and concluded by the standards
espoused in pfal, pfal falls short of its stated performance.
That also having been said, I've seen what WTH considers sufficient for his own standards,
and I'm not impressed. A lot of things could pass HIS standard that wouldn't come close
to passing mine.
There's also a selective memory in effect here-
those who came up with conclusions contradicting vpw were NOT embraced by vpw,
nor was their work studied to see if he could improve his own.
vpw's position was retained, and the other person's was suppressed.
That's why even the response to the "Adultery" letter wasn't so shocking-
suppressing the "unpleasant news" was standard operating procedure at the way.]
[Actually, your answer did nothing of the kind. Frankly, the Ted Patrick/Deprogramming things
were a windfall for twi- vpw was able to use them to monger fear and get everyone to
"circle the wagons" because those evil deprogrammers were out to get them.
Also, the experience of any one person is irrelevant here-the consistent pattern of the criminal
is what we're looking at. If he does not commit a crime Tuesday, and we're watching him
Tuesday, that doesn't mean he's become a fine, upstanding citizen.]
[some of the time, he taught some good Bible. Some of the time, he did some nice things for some
people. Some of the time, he taught things that were very harmful. Some of the time, he did some
despicable, evil things to some people.
The times people needed him to be godly the most were the times he was in the middle of
committing dark, corrupt acts, and compounded them by shrouding them in
the legitimacy of a clergy title. THAT's when they "needed him the most." That's when he
really should have made the effort a normal male does to try to "be the man he knows himself
to be".
To hide this is to facilitate evil by hiding or excusing it, and those are actions never sanctioned
by Scripture. Calling evil "good" is roundly condemned.
Of course, WTH can't see that evil actions deserve some outrage because they're wrong.
That requires a working conscience. Instead, he can only conjecture why normal, healthy
adults would be angry about vpw's crimes. No, we're not looking for sympathy. Most of us-
especially the males- were never raped or drugged by vpw. (At least not physically.)
We're outraged over crimes that were committed, and crimes labelled "acceptable" using
a cloak of legitimacy by misusing clergy positions, and crimes covered up by a number
of people- and still being covered up to this day-or at least attempted so.
The blessing of the LORD makes rich, and He adds no sorrow to it.
The blessings of vpw made a few rich, and added crippling sorrow to a few others.
That's not acceptable to almost everyone,
and if it wasn't vpw doing it, it wouldn't be acceptable to anyone.
BTW, I think the above quote is a perfect example of the types of response one can
expect from a dulled (seared) conscience when faced with suffering resulting from
evil acts. No sympathy, just a rude joke.
If WTH is the "after" picture, I feel confident that few people will be rushing to
sign up for whatever program produces this.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
That was WTH's reply to Oakspear's post.
WTH didn't make it clear this is what he was doing.
He was attempting to copy my style, but left out a critical detail.
(That is, who is speaking when.)
When you've experienced WTH some more, this won't surprise you.
BTW,
once the CFS class was on tape, vpw didn't always show the dog porn movie.
The taped class DESCRIBES the movie, which is more information than I wanted.
It also shows him amused with the thing as he describes it,
rather than the disgust/distaste most of us would evidence on tape if forced
to describe such a tape.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
It's a rhetorical question in the bible, and unfortunately, it is possible, and does happen.
And maybe even by some of us here at GS CAFE..? :o
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Vic was a rather good actor on stage- I wouldn't argue that he couldn't put on a good show.
How can you gague a mans character or lack thereof by how he acts in front of the crowd?
You can't. The persona a person beholds may be little more than a carefully crafted illusion.
Most in the ministry never saw vic:
throwing temper tantrums.. and they could be NASTY. Somebody's head rolled..
chewing some guy up one side and down the other for a MINOR infraction, a rather small slip at some inane detail.. and then saying he raised so much hell because he loved us. That little trait did emerge publically a few times for those who were "spiritual" enough to handle it..
The vast majority did not know the goings on in the motor coach.
Applying his influence as an authority figure to USE a HUMAN BEING for SEX, not just once, or twice..
Then applying his influence as an authority figure on others to cover his tracks..
Most of us didn't have a CLUE what was really going on, and what we know now I think is the tip of the iceberg.
But he was good at giving a sermon.
"I'd go to the devil's heel for truth.."
I think some of us did just that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Yes - good point, OldiesMan. And it's interesting to read the context of that reference – especially on this thread about character. [NIV renders the KJV of "…sweet water and bitter…" as "…fresh water and salt water…" in verse 11.]
James 3:1-12 NIV
1 Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. 2 We all stumble in many ways. If anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to keep his whole body in check.
3 When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can turn the whole animal. 4 Or take ships as an example. Although they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are steered by a very small rudder wherever the pilot wants to go. 5 Likewise the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts. Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. 6 The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole person, sets the whole course of his life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell.
7 All kinds of animals, birds, reptiles and creatures of the sea are being tamed and have been tamed by man, 8 but no man can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.
9 With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God's likeness. 10 Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be. 11 Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? 12 My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water.
People can be walking contradictions at times. Nobody is perfect. But I think we've all come across people in life who seem to excel at being contradictory. I mean we all have our own litmus test for determining hypocrites. I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing. Maybe that's why there's passages in the Bible like the above – that seem to set a standard…a code of conduct…for a teacher of God's Word, for a believer of God's Word. People are made in God's likeness [verse 9] – which ain't bad! Yet sometimes people can act so ungodly [verse 10] – which ain't good. It's contrary to what we were designed to be.
Jesus said what comes out of a person's mouth is only the tip of the iceberg.
Matthew 15:10-20 NIV
10 Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. 11 What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "
12 Then the disciples came to him and asked, "Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?"
13 He replied, "Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. 14 Leave them; they are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit."
15 Peter said, "Explain the parable to us."
16 "Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them. 17 "Don't you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? 18 But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man 'unclean.' 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. 20 These are what make a man 'unclean'; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him 'unclean.' "
As verse 18 shows – and what's been said earlier on this thread in a number of ways – what's in a person's heart eventually makes its way out. Character is revealed by actions…
I am amazed by the shallow concept some VPW-defenders seem to have of what it means to be a minister of God, a teacher of God's Word, a spiritual leader. I think James and Jesus emphasize that what a teacher DOES is important! Do you think it really matters to God that some "teacher" showed there were four crucified with Jesus? Is the whole Bible really going to fall to pieces if there were only two crucified with Jesus? Do you think it matters to God when that same teacher sexually molested women? What about their whole life falling to pieces because of what he did to them? How does any amount of Bible teaching justify such acts? "There must be something wrong with our scale of values…" Oh yeah – I remember that line from PFAL.
This rationalizing by some VPW-defenders makes me think of Martin Luther's time. Martin Luther noticed that many people in Wittenberg weren't coming to church for confession anymore. He found out they were going to neighboring towns to buy Indulgences. People were paying the church to pardon their sins – any church history buffs correct me if I'm remembering this wrong – but I think you could buy an Indulgence to remit punishment of any past, present or future sin. How is that so different from thinking: "Look at all these people VPW helped with PFAL. Surely that's worth something to God. So what if he had a little bad habit. The good he's done far outweighs the bad."
Proverbs 9:10 NIV
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.
I think the Bible puts more emphasis on the moral aspect of God's wisdom rather than any academic perspective of it. The fear of the Lord is what bows the soul to humbly accept His way of doing things. It looks to me like getting to know the Holy One – personally – is the key to understanding – that's a lot different than just gaining a knowledge of the Holy Bible… "Holy" – sacred, perfect in goodness and righteousness…I would think these are ideas a good teacher of the Bible would want to instill in his students.
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
For some reason I can't do multiple quote boxes, I'm using the WordWolf method of putting my replies in bold type:
<_< Edited by OakspearLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Oak, I don’t know if this is the best way to do multiple quotes but I’ve found it works okay for me. I think there’s a short time-frame for it to work this way – anyway…say there’s 3 posts I want to quote on a thread – I go to the first post click on Reply – as soon as the Reply Window comes up I immediately click on Add Reply. Then I go to the next post and do the same thing, then the third post – same thing. I think because I do it within a short time-frame of each other – all three posts that I’ve quoted appear as only one reply by me. Then – by clicking on the Edit Button I open my post and edit the quotes down and add my comments.
By the way - I liked your reply on this a lot better than mine – short and to the point…Guess I’m still stuck in some TWIt-brain line of thinking…dunno…is there a gift ministry of verbosity? The Right Reverend Hot Air…
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
that fountain where he's buried is not spewing sweet water
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
What The Hey
Of course we are to believe those "some people" that you are refering to do not have their own standards or tools that also bias their results whenever they examine VPW's biblical materials [research]- right? OH NO - how could we ever get the idea and think that was even possible?
If that's the defense you are making and are justifing, then you ought to rewrite your bible so it reads, "Study to show thyself approved unto men". At least that way your bible will be more accurate, because that is what men do and is the end result when one examines somebody else's biblical workmanship rather than the Word of God. This argument about there "being a bias here which will affect one's results" comes off sounding much like the familiar cheesy sci-fi dialog between Anakin Skywalker and Chancellor Palpatine from Star Wars III.
Anakin Skywalker: "The Jedi use their power [knowlege] for good.
Chancellor Palpatine: "Good is a point of view, Anakin. The Sith and the Jedi are similar in almost every way, including their quest for greater power [knowledge]."
Anakin Skywalker: "The Sith rely on their passion for their strength. [knowledge.] They think inward, only about themselves.
Chancellor Palpatine: "And the Jedi don't?"
Many have already heard and have already learned this basic lesson:
Knowledge is Power.
But as Chancellor Palpatine vividly reminds us all:
Remember back to your early teachings. All who gain power are afraid to lose it - even the Jedi.
Unfortunately few ever remember their early biblical teachings, one of which is: "Man's basic spiritual problem is the accuracy and integrity of God's Word." People are more intent rather they are far more content with putting their microscope on another man's deeds and also on his biblical workmanship rather than turning their microscope on the Word of God for themselves. Why? Because the integrity and accuracy of God's Word is not their primary concern (being man's basic spiritual problem as it is) but rather the writings, the works, and the deeds of another man are their primary concerns.
Go back to your first bible lesson. The first bible lesson is simply: "Read exactly what is written - don't read into what is written." I remember how I often quoted John 20:31: "But these are written that ye might know that Jesus is the Christ ... etc. " Now that sounds pretty accurate I'd say. In fact, quoting that scripture exactly like this will come off sounding a million percent biblically accurate to the 99.9% highly educated "some people" you say have examined "VPW's biblical materials" or PFAL - or whatever else VPW did. I know it does, because this is the type of biblical accuracy that is good enough for them. I hear it and see it in their biblical examiniation [in their biblical exegesis] all the time. Their exegisis is usually this, which is: What difference does it make? That is not the accuracy of John 20:31. Go back to your early biblical teaching and "read exactly what is written". What John 20:31 accurately says is this: "But these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ ... etc."
I am not expecting a standing ovation from anyone here on this extremely brief example of biblical accuracy in respect to: "reading exactly what is written". Certainly not here. Rather I am expecting that these "some people" will only respond with this: Whooping big deal! What difference does that make? (Now were have we heard that argument before?) What's the big difference in just one little word - in knowing Jesus is the Christ or in believing Jesus is the Christ?
Because unto men knowlege is highly important - especially in respect and in regards to some future knowlege a man might gain; because to men:
Knowlege is Power.
(We've all been hearing and even been responding to that lousy teaching for decades!)
For example: It is highly important to men exactly where you got your biblical knowledge, exactly who you got your biblical knowledge from, and that you properly acknowledge [credit] those from who you got your bible knowledge. Should one miss it on any of those points, those who pride themselves on knowledge will be the first to point it out. The threads and topics that are on GSC are constantly centered on these exact subjects and is proof enough of it.
But what does God say in His Word that is the important - that is, if accuracy is ever to be of any importance to anyone with any biblical knowledge at all? Is it knowing - or is it believing? Perhaps I should re-phrase that. "What's the most important thing to you?" Whatever your answer to that question is will also determine whether one is seeking to please men or if one is seeking to please God. Because for most men, knowledge is what pleases them because to man knowledge is power and it gives men a "sense of power" over other men who don't have the same knowledge". To briefly summarize this paragraph:
Knowlege pleases men.
Believing pleases God.
My only question to you is this:
Who do you want to please the most?
Man or God?
(Big hint: See answer above.)
Getting back to John 21:25 that I quoted earlier. In irony I was attempting to show someone here how the early disciples must have been highly incompetent in the proper documenting and the recording of the works of Jesus Christ. The irony behind it is, that would indeed be the truth - that is, IF knowledge of Jesus and the bible is all that is important to somebody and all that is available to someone. Why do I say that? Because as the disciple John declared regarding the Lord Jesus Christ, "... the world itself could not contain the books that should be written." This disciple of the Lord would indeed be a liar, if knowledge of the Lord (or the bible if you want to put it that way) is all that was ever available to the Christian. Perhaps this humble disciple of Jesus Christ realized something else - something far greater than a mere senses knowledge of Jesus Christ.
I have heard the typical witness of most Christins as some of us were the typical Christian in witnessing the Lord unto others. Christians have often said to me like they often say to the unsaved: Do you know the Lord? Have you ever heard that one before?
But how many Christians do you know have ever said to someone, (I'm not being critical of them - I'm just pointing out this fact)
Do you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ?
Probably very few, if any. But the early apostles and disciples of Jesus Christ witnessed like that. Why isn't it like that today? Because today believing is not as important to people as is their knowledge of the scriptures and the bible or some other theological hang-up that they seem to have. To most knowledge is their primary objective - it's not believing on the Lord Jesus Christ himself. Truthfully when it comes to believing most people now only want to argue about it anyway - that is, whether if it's a law or not. Why do they want to bother with the arguing and the debate on believing? Because for them, something else other than believing {i.e. knowledge} is far much more important.
I'll just end by reiterating what VPW accurately stated to both you and I many years ago. "Tell me what you believe about the Lord Jesus Christ and I'll tell you how far you will go spiritually". I'm thankful VPW never said, "Tell me what you know about Jesus Christ, etc." because when it comes to the Lord Jesus Christ you and I will never know-it-all. At least not in this life - as the whole world could not contain the books that should be written as the disciple of the Lord declared many years before us. But today we seem to run into a bunch of know-it-all's. People want to tell you what they "know" - whether it's about JESUS, about VPW, about TWI, or whatever else it is they think is highly important for you to know and what they think you ought to "know" about. There are some people who highly INSIST on it! But "what-ever-it-is" that you know is somehow always irrelevant to them - unless it happens to fit their agenda. Funny how that works - how some people want to impose their knowledge on others and then go away thinking that somehow they did the true God a really great big whooping favor by it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
The way it worked when I was in TWI – people were expected to agree that PFAL was the standard for truth. It was considered the ONLY way to rightly interpret the Bible in order to stand approved before TWI's little god [revealed for the umpteenth time in the next sentence]. God forbid anyone should find something in the Scriptures that contradicts what VPW taught – after all – this PFAL standard wasn't set in place to please God – but man – one man actually – VPW.
Yeah – like I really should have been concerned if VPW found out what I thought of Jesus Christ. Like he would be able to gauge how far I would go spiritually. A very good salesman VPW he was [simulated Yoda manner of speaking] – using the old bait and switch routine. At the beginning of the sales pitch there's lots of talk about Jesus, the ten commandments, a sprinkling of some Greek words. Sounds like some good wholesome Christian stuff…Somewhere along that gosh awful long stretch of class VPW substitutes his own little distorted version of Christianity – where Jesus Christ is eliminated. You don't read the gospels anymore because they're not addressed to you. Hmmmm – that's odd - the gospels are the only four books in the Bible that are ALL ABOUT Jesus Christ! I'll tell you what a typical student thinks of Jesus after taking PFAL - not much.
PFAL knowledge IS power to TWI-followers. In order to stand approved before TWI you better at least act like that's true.
Maybe recalling something else VPW said in PFAL would be more conducive to a Christian getting back on track with knowing Jesus Christ. It's the story of the crooked handle bars on the bike. The bike rider got use to them being crooked – when someone came along and straightened them out – the rider crashed. PFAL does a wonderful job of skewing the student's thinking process. There is no way students can thoughtfully process the Bible themselves once they've been trained to VPW's way of thinking. They have been trained to absorb instead of analyze. If there are any Christians who just left TWI and are reading this post - may I suggest something. Read the Bible - maybe even get another version - at least one that doesn't have your TWI notes in it. Read it...think...question...pray...keep on with the keeping on...
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I don't know if some people get the enormity of this.. this is a felony in most places.
"but he was sooooo good preaching the bible..." yeah, mixed with poison.
I agree with Exie.. the fountain there is not spewing sweet water.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I dunno.. I don't really think that life is some kind of high-wire balancing act, where you try to do something nice to counter-balance despicable acts.. and that's going to make everything OK..
sounds like the Pharisee's philosophy- "tithing" fixes EVERYTHING.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Might I suggest, What the Hey, that VPW got this idea kinda scewed? Man's basic spiritual problem is sin, not the "accuracy and intergrity of God's Word."
The statement VPW made in PFAL that you quoted, was a "hook," one of many that baited people into believing that VPW had all the answers.
The whole Bible is about the problem of sin, and God's answer to it, Jesus Christ. In John 8:31 and 32, Jesus is teaching his disciples and makes the statement that "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my diciples. Then you will know the truth and the truth shall make you free."
Well, hello, what will be free from? Keep reading and Jesus explains we will be free the bondage of sin.
I Cor. 15: 33 and 34 come to mind: "Do not be mislead. Bad company corrupts good character. Come back to your senses as you ought and stop sinning: for their are some who are ignorant of God-I say this to your shame."
Unfortunately, VPW never got to the point where he quit sinning. His corrupt character stayed corrupted, which is obvious by the "fruit" he left behind. And his corrupt character, influenced everything about his "ministry," including his teaching, example, etc.
These things are really just a no-brainer for anybody who still has one left after escaping the cult. VPW and company's sin and corrupt character led many, many people astray. Thank the Lord, that as his sin is being exposed, we can "know the truth," and be set free from the bondage of sin.
Amen. End of sermon for today.
Link 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.