Less confrontational, kind & gentler....yakkity smakkity... ...so what?
When Pawtucket interviewed me for "Episode Seven" a few years ago, one of things that I brought up was that it wasn't so much whether "leadership" actually interfered in peoples' lives, but that they thought that they could.
No matter how "nice" they act, do they still reserve the right to stick their noses in?
Less confrontational, kind & gentler....yakkity smakkity... ...so what?
When Pawtucket interviewed me for "Episode Seven" a few years ago, one of things that I brought up was that it wasn't so much whether "leadership" actually interfered in peoples' lives, but that they thought that they could.
No matter how "nice" they act, do they still reserve the right to stick their noses in?
Oakspear has raised a serious point - about other people thinking they have the "right" to pry into your business. I happen to think it is important to ask ourselves some questions like:
1) Just what is the point of allowing anyone to pry into your life under the guise of being your "spiritual leader?"
2) Who do they think they are?
3) By what authority do they act?
4) Why would you allow that type of control over you?
Make no mistake. There is no authority but your own that allows another to do that, at least in this country.
There were times, even during the mid-to-late 90's when I thought that everything was fine, nobody was bothering me or sticking their noses where they didn't belong.
But then they came for me...
Unless they specifically disavow the practice of running peoples' lives for them, then the possibility of it popping back up is always there.
Oakspear has raised a serious point - about other people thinking they have the "right" to pry into your business. I happen to think it is important to ask ourselves some questions like:
1) Just what is the point of allowing anyone to pry into your life under the guise of being your "spiritual leader?"
2) Who do they think they are?
3) By what authority do they act?
4) Why would you allow that type of control over you?
Make no mistake. There is no authority but your own that allows another to do that, at least in this country.
Peace,
Penworks
Lots of good questions, penworks.
IMO....."spiritual leadership" from the twig coordinator, branch coordinator, limb coordinator, etc. WAS THE WAY TREE SETUP VIA WIERWILLE. Yes, martindale took it to new heights (or lower lows).....very rarily was one ever advised to "take it to the Lord" or "pray about it" or "God will show you and lead you"....??
Twi "leadership" was/is the fabric of the cult community.
Corps "training" entitled the corps to stick their noses in.....the mog said so. Corps teachings, year after year,
challenged and demanded that corps get involved with "their people." With each passing year, the nazi corps were "promoted" to the ranks of region coordinators. Martindale applauded them on every turn. Even mild limb coordinators were sent back to run branches.....as martindale's hard-core leaders were mimicking his "leadership" style in the mid-90s.
What did martindale tell bill gr33n3 when that couple wanted to leave staff? Bill, you married them.....you have entre into their lives......you go tell ram0na that I want to see her. Tell her NOT to leave with him (her husband).......[a day or so later, the guy committed suicide].
And, rosalie has stayed the course.....like her plaf-teacher. Same rut.....same outcome......same insanity.
There were times, even during the mid-to-late 90's when I thought that everything was fine, nobody was bothering me or sticking their noses where they didn't belong.
But then they came for me...
Unless they specifically disavow the practice of running peoples' lives for them, then the possibility of it popping back up is always there.
I always feel the need for this quote at this point...
I always feel the need for this quote at this point...
"First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me."
- Hans Niemoller (translated)
I love this quote, WW. From what I've observed over the years it seems people don't speak up and/or aren't willing to, regardless of the kind of group -- religious or political or even in business --until they are directly negatively affected. It usually has to get personal. When it is, they know for themselves without a doubt that something is wrong and are willing to take a risk on their own behalf. Otherwise, we like the status quo usually. But I'm no psychologist...
It was true for me ...it took a personal experience to pry me out of my "tunnel vision" before I left twi. Until then, I did not inquire as to why others "left" or "tripped out." I accepted the party line that they were decieved or possessed. I'm ashamed of that.
Then it was my turn, then I found myself in a position of thinking something was unjust. Then it was worth fighting for myself and what I thought was good.
...and this was their arrogance. To question and then attack people who had stood with them for years. People who had worked hard and had been faithful. According to their own doctrine, we were ALL son's of God...but they treated people disrespectfully and with malice. They taught that we could all receive revelation but they insisted on making spiritual decisions FOR you...They taught that God made us righteous but they ridiculed and condemned...they cast out those who were in need and they spoke evil of those who rebuked them with their own doctrines...
...and then it was MY turn...but I chose the time and the issue...and when I walked out, I never looked back.
It was true for me ...it took a personal experience to pry me out of my "tunnel vision" before I left twi. Until then, I did not inquire as to why others "left" or "tripped out." I accepted the party line that they were decieved or possessed. I'm ashamed of that.
Then it was my turn, then I found myself in a position of thinking something was unjust. Then it was worth fighting for myself and what I thought was good.
During my in-rez years, I saw Wierwille, on three separate occasions, verbally strip-gut these THREE corps that involved very insignificant and petty matters. Yet, a mean-spirited wierwille was hell-bent on lashing out with an unrelenting attack in a public setting. Yet, I did not speak out.
During the "fog years" I met face-to-face with Ricard0 and inquired about Geeer's POP statement that "the trustees were murderers".......and heard, from Ricard0's pov, the gist of what Geeer alluded to. And, we talked about Schoenhxxt's "adultery paper" and stuff. Yet, I did not speak out.
During Martindale's march of the "homo purge and genuine suspicion"....I heard of injustices, I heard of suspicions that were way off base. Yet, as it did not involve me......I did not speak out.
During Martindale's "promised land of the prevailing word"......the suggestive doctrine and twisting of scripture was building with each passing week. I contemplated, I studied the inconsistencies......I talked with other leadership. Yet, I did not speak out enough.
Then, when I'd had my fill.....when the encroaching legalism of twi doctrine on scheduling, corps pregnancies, finances, sex lives, family communication, travel arrangements, pets, etc. etc. was weekly fodder on corps meetings...........I spoke out loud and clear. My wife and I resigned our corps status. Within 24 hours, region coordinators moved in to silence us.....and labeled us mark/avoid to the branch and state.
Like impending tornadoes.....it doesn't mean much UNLESS IT HITS YOUR HOUSE.
The biggest thing that stood out in my mind when I was in turmoil about leaving TWI was:
PRACTICAL ERROR ALWAYS LEADS TO DOCTRINAL ERROR
I heard LCM says that soooo many times when I was on Staff. My eyes started to open the last few years I was at HQ. I left in 2001. After LCM got caught with his pants down, I began to think that there was more to it than what was told to us. The practical error bothered me, and I wasn't sure about TWI. But the fear of having nowhere to go kept me in TWI. Right after the Allens left HQ, they tried to do damage control by telling us all at HQ that they were devilish and made horrible accusations against the BOT.
Then I went out on the field, and I started thinking more. Then I came to GSC and saw the sex thing always happened. I saw another side of the story about LCM, Wierwille, and many other things which happened in TWI. And my thoughts about practical error always leading to doctrinal error made me question what I was taught even more.
Sure, they are less confrontational until you tick them off. I'm sure Rozilla has reamed a few since the kinder gentler times. She reamed me once for a very small thing. That was pretty common for many leaders. I think they were trying to exercise their "leadership" muscle rather than being an example of God's love. I haven't seen teeth in God's love since leaving TWI. I see people make mistakes, and they need to be shown the error or their way. They never deserve a reaming. Nobody deserves to be reamed, EVER!!! I don't care how "off the word" someone is. Just typing that phrase makes me want to puke because they are so hypocritcal about what is "on" or "off" the word.
I'm waiting for certain leadership's life-style to become exposed. That will establish more practical error, and those that stay will have to once again find an excuse to stay because of their fear that there's nowhere else to go.
Secondly, if twi has changed...........it's because of the hemoragging of FINANCES. Twi's directors may be dumb and insane, but they are not stupid!! In looking at their financial reports, they know that they've lost mega-bucks from escapees.....AND THE NEXT GENERATION OF KIDS.
Oh, I don't know about that. Imo, they were stupid to run off all of us gullible, faithful followers who would have kept on giving money. That was always my opinion back then, too. You can't run any organization without money.
I heard LCM says that soooo many times when I was on Staff. My eyes started to open the last few years I was at HQ. I left in 2001. After LCM got caught with his pants down, I began to think that there was more to it than what was told to us. The practical error bothered me, and I wasn't sure about TWI. But the fear of having nowhere to go kept me in TWI. Right after the Allens left HQ, they tried to do damage control by telling us all at HQ that they were devilish and made horrible accusations against the BOT.
Yeah.......martindale harped on that statement time and time again. And yet, twi was beseiged by practical error.......BEGINNING WITH ITS TRUSTEES.
During this time, the financial reservoir was drying up.........in part, because martindale mandated ALL CORPS to be full-time staff. It was revelation from God, ya know. Yet, within six weeks or less (by October 1995) martindale was directing Region guys to start dropping corps from the ranks like hot potatoes. In 1996, lcm followed don wierwille's suggestion to re-tape plaf......major time commitment, major finances, and a major flop in the end. WAP went down with a mighty THUD.
Practical error was rampant in twi......and the trustees didn't have a clue on how to stop it. Every decision seemed to advance twi's legalism and embolden fear-motivation. All this time....we later find out about martindale's "affairs" and sexual predation.....as lawsuits start coming down the pike in 1999.
If practical error always leads to doctrinal error........then, I'd say twi was WAY OVER ITS HEAD IN DONKEY-POO.
The biggest thing that stood out in my mind when I was in turmoil about leaving TWI was:
PRACTICAL ERROR ALWAYS LEADS TO DOCTRINAL ERROR
slightly
Wasn't it the other way around? Doctrinal error always leads to practical error? That's the reason for the big push for "right doctrine" isn't it?
I was remembering this weekend about not being able to "correctly" refer to the Christmas holidays as being centered around the birth of Jesus because he was supposedly born September 11. It was correct to refer to the holidays as "household holidays" and to leave the Christmas out of it in order to be correct in our doctrine. Therefore, the "right" doctrine led to "right" practice.
I don't recall the day or time when I finally quit believing that right doctrine and right believing was more important than loving one another, but when I finally came to that conclusion, I lightened up considerably. I don't care how many were crucified, how many magi or kings there were - or when they showed up, when Jesus was born, whether its proper to baptize with water, or if we are "sleeping" or in heaven after death. I believe that if my focus is on those things then I'm probably not doing too well in the loving one another category, which is central to the Christian faith along with believing that Jesus is the Son of God and that God raised Him from the dead, highly exalted Him and seated Him at His right hand.
Even if TWI has become less confrontational with its rank-and-file as it's poking around in the rank-and-file's personal lives, it is still highly confrontational with the rest of the body, and that I can do without.
Wasn't it the other way around? Doctrinal error always leads to practical error? That's the reason for the big push for "right doctrine" isn't it?
Martindale did teach that practical error leads to doctrinal, although I suppose there are arguments that can be made either way. The way he explained it was that people would twist doctrine in order to justify their practices, and when you think about it, that is what TWI leadership did. He had a verse to back up his thinking, but I don't remember what it was.
My memory isn't what it used to be. But, as I recall, it was taught in PLAF (The Wonder Class) that doctrinal error led to practical error and thus the need for more doctrinal instruction to get back on the right path. That's in the teaching on the Epistles being set up to follow a sequence of "Doctrine, Reproof, Correction". Conversely, it was taught in The Renewed Mind that practical error lead to doctrinal error. ----" If I act excited, I'll be excited, blah, blah, blah."--- The premise was that if you acted a certain way long enough it would become doctrinal in your life style. It's really just another example of the gibberish they twisted and manipulated to fit whatever purpose suited them.
I recall this saying as "doctrinal error leads to practical error." Let's face it, before we became Christians, all we had was practical error. We needed doctrine to set us right.
Tzaia - I echo your post. So much of what was taught was an intellectual satisfaction or curiosity, or something to set us apart. Details. Irrelevancy.
(Well, God is in the details, doncha know?)
The details of being loving, kind, merciful, tender-hearted, forgiving... now those became submerged in the need to confront wrong thinking.
Pah! Knowledge puffs up. Love builds up.
The biggest doctrinal (and practical) error was the concentration on the knowledge - that puffs up the person holding the knowledge. The concentration on that - not on the loving building up of the other person.
Wasn't it the other way around? Doctrinal error always leads to practical error? That's the reason for the big push for "right doctrine" isn't it?
Not that it really matters much..............but martindale taught it as "Practical error always leads to doctrinal error." Gee, it seems like he expounded on this stuff during five successive corps meetings.....citing how when one practices error, they make a doctrine out of it. And, thus....Galatians was to "correct the practical error that crept into the Church as a result of NOT heeding to the proper doctrine [Romans]." Of course, one can easily flip it around and challenge this statement from the other direction.
Heck......I think that when someone practices "error" they simply rationalize and justify their actions like martindale seemed to justify his. I guess one can even dismiss The Ten Commandments and stand week after week in the pulpit and still hold up the Bible......yet wreak havoc and destruction as a serial sex predator like the top mogs of twi.
Not that it really matters much..............but martindale taught it as "Practical error always leads to doctrinal error."
Now there is a NOT so profound statement from the dumb@$$ wanna be. You mean that if you get in a car accident from practical error you will now become a habitual bad driver doctrinally? Please...let's use a modicum of logic as opposed to the idiots pronouncements of "great truths." Martindork was a big mouthed idiot who spent a great deal of time TRYING to sound profound but when his logic is taken apart - well there was little if any logic left
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
9
6
5
13
Popular Days
Dec 2
13
Nov 20
13
Nov 28
8
Dec 3
6
Top Posters In This Topic
skyrider 9 posts
WordWolf 6 posts
Oakspear 5 posts
Ham 13 posts
Popular Days
Dec 2 2008
13 posts
Nov 20 2008
13 posts
Nov 28 2008
8 posts
Dec 3 2008
6 posts
Oakspear
Less confrontational, kind & gentler....yakkity smakkity...
...so what?
When Pawtucket interviewed me for "Episode Seven" a few years ago, one of things that I brought up was that it wasn't so much whether "leadership" actually interfered in peoples' lives, but that they thought that they could.
No matter how "nice" they act, do they still reserve the right to stick their noses in?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
penworks
Oakspear has raised a serious point - about other people thinking they have the "right" to pry into your business. I happen to think it is important to ask ourselves some questions like:
1) Just what is the point of allowing anyone to pry into your life under the guise of being your "spiritual leader?"
2) Who do they think they are?
3) By what authority do they act?
4) Why would you allow that type of control over you?
Make no mistake. There is no authority but your own that allows another to do that, at least in this country.
Peace,
Penworks
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
There were times, even during the mid-to-late 90's when I thought that everything was fine, nobody was bothering me or sticking their noses where they didn't belong.
But then they came for me...
Unless they specifically disavow the practice of running peoples' lives for them, then the possibility of it popping back up is always there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Lots of good questions, penworks.
IMO....."spiritual leadership" from the twig coordinator, branch coordinator, limb coordinator, etc. WAS THE WAY TREE SETUP VIA WIERWILLE. Yes, martindale took it to new heights (or lower lows).....very rarily was one ever advised to "take it to the Lord" or "pray about it" or "God will show you and lead you"....??
Twi "leadership" was/is the fabric of the cult community.
Corps "training" entitled the corps to stick their noses in.....the mog said so. Corps teachings, year after year,
challenged and demanded that corps get involved with "their people." With each passing year, the nazi corps were "promoted" to the ranks of region coordinators. Martindale applauded them on every turn. Even mild limb coordinators were sent back to run branches.....as martindale's hard-core leaders were mimicking his "leadership" style in the mid-90s.
What did martindale tell bill gr33n3 when that couple wanted to leave staff? Bill, you married them.....you have entre into their lives......you go tell ram0na that I want to see her. Tell her NOT to leave with him (her husband).......[a day or so later, the guy committed suicide].
And, rosalie has stayed the course.....like her plaf-teacher. Same rut.....same outcome......same insanity.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I always feel the need for this quote at this point...
"First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me."
- Hans Niemoller (translated)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
To do so they'd have to admit they did at least at one time. But they are *mog* ya know..
I think it is the same mentality as the nazi's after wwII.. just want to pretend it all didn't really happen..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
or live in some kind of fantasy world where it was "the most significant christian movement" since the earth cooled..
look at the other sites warm reception of jl's letter..
and I'd imagine more than one of them endured mental and emotional scourging at his hand, or those "like him"..
I understand vic could gut strip a lowly "follower" in fifty seconds flat.. and loy..
but they seem to reminisce the good times..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
penworks
I love this quote, WW. From what I've observed over the years it seems people don't speak up and/or aren't willing to, regardless of the kind of group -- religious or political or even in business --until they are directly negatively affected. It usually has to get personal. When it is, they know for themselves without a doubt that something is wrong and are willing to take a risk on their own behalf. Otherwise, we like the status quo usually. But I'm no psychologist...
It was true for me ...it took a personal experience to pry me out of my "tunnel vision" before I left twi. Until then, I did not inquire as to why others "left" or "tripped out." I accepted the party line that they were decieved or possessed. I'm ashamed of that.
Then it was my turn, then I found myself in a position of thinking something was unjust. Then it was worth fighting for myself and what I thought was good.
Peace. And Happy Thanksgiving to all!
Penworks
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
...and this was their arrogance. To question and then attack people who had stood with them for years. People who had worked hard and had been faithful. According to their own doctrine, we were ALL son's of God...but they treated people disrespectfully and with malice. They taught that we could all receive revelation but they insisted on making spiritual decisions FOR you...They taught that God made us righteous but they ridiculed and condemned...they cast out those who were in need and they spoke evil of those who rebuked them with their own doctrines...
...and then it was MY turn...but I chose the time and the issue...and when I walked out, I never looked back.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
During my in-rez years, I saw Wierwille, on three separate occasions, verbally strip-gut these THREE corps that involved very insignificant and petty matters. Yet, a mean-spirited wierwille was hell-bent on lashing out with an unrelenting attack in a public setting. Yet, I did not speak out.
During the "fog years" I met face-to-face with Ricard0 and inquired about Geeer's POP statement that "the trustees were murderers".......and heard, from Ricard0's pov, the gist of what Geeer alluded to. And, we talked about Schoenhxxt's "adultery paper" and stuff. Yet, I did not speak out.
During Martindale's march of the "homo purge and genuine suspicion"....I heard of injustices, I heard of suspicions that were way off base. Yet, as it did not involve me......I did not speak out.
During Martindale's "promised land of the prevailing word"......the suggestive doctrine and twisting of scripture was building with each passing week. I contemplated, I studied the inconsistencies......I talked with other leadership. Yet, I did not speak out enough.
Then, when I'd had my fill.....when the encroaching legalism of twi doctrine on scheduling, corps pregnancies, finances, sex lives, family communication, travel arrangements, pets, etc. etc. was weekly fodder on corps meetings...........I spoke out loud and clear. My wife and I resigned our corps status. Within 24 hours, region coordinators moved in to silence us.....and labeled us mark/avoid to the branch and state.
Like impending tornadoes.....it doesn't mean much UNLESS IT HITS YOUR HOUSE.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
In a lot of ways, I think headquarters wasn't entirely unlike those who rule in Beijing..
I remember the images of Tianenmen square.. the government slaughtering it's own people to keep "order"..
wasn't that what those at hq did to "it's own" people, spiritually?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
The biggest thing that stood out in my mind when I was in turmoil about leaving TWI was:
PRACTICAL ERROR ALWAYS LEADS TO DOCTRINAL ERROR
I heard LCM says that soooo many times when I was on Staff. My eyes started to open the last few years I was at HQ. I left in 2001. After LCM got caught with his pants down, I began to think that there was more to it than what was told to us. The practical error bothered me, and I wasn't sure about TWI. But the fear of having nowhere to go kept me in TWI. Right after the Allens left HQ, they tried to do damage control by telling us all at HQ that they were devilish and made horrible accusations against the BOT.
Then I went out on the field, and I started thinking more. Then I came to GSC and saw the sex thing always happened. I saw another side of the story about LCM, Wierwille, and many other things which happened in TWI. And my thoughts about practical error always leading to doctrinal error made me question what I was taught even more.
Sure, they are less confrontational until you tick them off. I'm sure Rozilla has reamed a few since the kinder gentler times. She reamed me once for a very small thing. That was pretty common for many leaders. I think they were trying to exercise their "leadership" muscle rather than being an example of God's love. I haven't seen teeth in God's love since leaving TWI. I see people make mistakes, and they need to be shown the error or their way. They never deserve a reaming. Nobody deserves to be reamed, EVER!!! I don't care how "off the word" someone is. Just typing that phrase makes me want to puke because they are so hypocritcal about what is "on" or "off" the word.
I'm waiting for certain leadership's life-style to become exposed. That will establish more practical error, and those that stay will have to once again find an excuse to stay because of their fear that there's nowhere else to go.
Edited by NottawayferLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I always wondered about that.. it seemed to be like the question, which came first, the chicken or the egg?
And what did he consider to be "practical error", just being NICE to people?
apparently to loy it wasn't the sex..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waterbuffalo
Oh, I don't know about that. Imo, they were stupid to run off all of us gullible, faithful followers who would have kept on giving money. That was always my opinion back then, too. You can't run any organization without money.
Great post, as always, skyrider.
Edited by waterbuffaloLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
thank God..
they will never see a dime from my kids.. ever.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bramble
Nor will they run my kids through an emotional grinder.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Yeah, that too..
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Yeah.......martindale harped on that statement time and time again. And yet, twi was beseiged by practical error.......BEGINNING WITH ITS TRUSTEES.
During this time, the financial reservoir was drying up.........in part, because martindale mandated ALL CORPS to be full-time staff. It was revelation from God, ya know. Yet, within six weeks or less (by October 1995) martindale was directing Region guys to start dropping corps from the ranks like hot potatoes. In 1996, lcm followed don wierwille's suggestion to re-tape plaf......major time commitment, major finances, and a major flop in the end. WAP went down with a mighty THUD.
Practical error was rampant in twi......and the trustees didn't have a clue on how to stop it. Every decision seemed to advance twi's legalism and embolden fear-motivation. All this time....we later find out about martindale's "affairs" and sexual predation.....as lawsuits start coming down the pike in 1999.
If practical error always leads to doctrinal error........then, I'd say twi was WAY OVER ITS HEAD IN DONKEY-POO.
Still is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
slightly
Wasn't it the other way around? Doctrinal error always leads to practical error? That's the reason for the big push for "right doctrine" isn't it?
I was remembering this weekend about not being able to "correctly" refer to the Christmas holidays as being centered around the birth of Jesus because he was supposedly born September 11. It was correct to refer to the holidays as "household holidays" and to leave the Christmas out of it in order to be correct in our doctrine. Therefore, the "right" doctrine led to "right" practice.
I don't recall the day or time when I finally quit believing that right doctrine and right believing was more important than loving one another, but when I finally came to that conclusion, I lightened up considerably. I don't care how many were crucified, how many magi or kings there were - or when they showed up, when Jesus was born, whether its proper to baptize with water, or if we are "sleeping" or in heaven after death. I believe that if my focus is on those things then I'm probably not doing too well in the loving one another category, which is central to the Christian faith along with believing that Jesus is the Son of God and that God raised Him from the dead, highly exalted Him and seated Him at His right hand.
Even if TWI has become less confrontational with its rank-and-file as it's poking around in the rank-and-file's personal lives, it is still highly confrontational with the rest of the body, and that I can do without.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
My memory isn't what it used to be. But, as I recall, it was taught in PLAF (The Wonder Class) that doctrinal error led to practical error and thus the need for more doctrinal instruction to get back on the right path. That's in the teaching on the Epistles being set up to follow a sequence of "Doctrine, Reproof, Correction". Conversely, it was taught in The Renewed Mind that practical error lead to doctrinal error. ----" If I act excited, I'll be excited, blah, blah, blah."--- The premise was that if you acted a certain way long enough it would become doctrinal in your life style. It's really just another example of the gibberish they twisted and manipulated to fit whatever purpose suited them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
I recall this saying as "doctrinal error leads to practical error." Let's face it, before we became Christians, all we had was practical error. We needed doctrine to set us right.
Tzaia - I echo your post. So much of what was taught was an intellectual satisfaction or curiosity, or something to set us apart. Details. Irrelevancy.
(Well, God is in the details, doncha know?)
The details of being loving, kind, merciful, tender-hearted, forgiving... now those became submerged in the need to confront wrong thinking.
Pah! Knowledge puffs up. Love builds up.
The biggest doctrinal (and practical) error was the concentration on the knowledge - that puffs up the person holding the knowledge. The concentration on that - not on the loving building up of the other person.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Not that it really matters much..............but martindale taught it as "Practical error always leads to doctrinal error." Gee, it seems like he expounded on this stuff during five successive corps meetings.....citing how when one practices error, they make a doctrine out of it. And, thus....Galatians was to "correct the practical error that crept into the Church as a result of NOT heeding to the proper doctrine [Romans]." Of course, one can easily flip it around and challenge this statement from the other direction.
Heck......I think that when someone practices "error" they simply rationalize and justify their actions like martindale seemed to justify his. I guess one can even dismiss The Ten Commandments and stand week after week in the pulpit and still hold up the Bible......yet wreak havoc and destruction as a serial sex predator like the top mogs of twi.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RumRunner
Now there is a NOT so profound statement from the dumb@$$ wanna be. You mean that if you get in a car accident from practical error you will now become a habitual bad driver doctrinally? Please...let's use a modicum of logic as opposed to the idiots pronouncements of "great truths." Martindork was a big mouthed idiot who spent a great deal of time TRYING to sound profound but when his logic is taken apart - well there was little if any logic left
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.