I thinked they backed up from that a little by the time I took the AC. It's probably because of you!
Thanks, erkjohn, but I seriously doubt it had anything to do with me.
In the corporate world of The Way, I never rose above the position of "mail-boy".
A later teaching I heard explained that God could put spirit "on" you if the need existed, just like He did in the OT. ----That still doesn't fully explain the contradiction.
Got it! Sort of . . . Thanks erkj and Waysider, I did take the AC. . . . but, thankfully, I don't remember much.
So the chief priests and the Pharisees called the council together and said, "What are we doing? For this man is performing many miraculous signs. If we allow him to go on in this way, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away our sanctuary and our nation." Then one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said, "You know nothing at all! You do not realize that it is more to your advantage to have one man die for the people than for the whole nation to perish." (Now he did not say this on his own, but because he was high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the Jewish nation, and not for the Jewish nation only, but to gather together into one the children of God who are scattered.) So from that day they planned together to kill him
Now, I am betting Caiaphas was probably "out of fellowship" when he prophesied about the Lord. .. ..but, God still used him. It was his function as high priest. I am thinking he and God were not pals. No little (s) or spirit upon.
God is not limited. . . . burning bush, whirlwind, donkey, blinding someone on the street. . . . audible voice. . . . . the only thing I don't see in scripture anymore.. .. is TWI's take on "revelation" and its imposed limitations of God. . . . to our ability to be "in fellowship". . . . or i.e., our conformity to TWI's principles.
Hi Spec, I enjoyed reading your post. You bring up some good points. I agree with most of what you say namely that Christians are born again with incorruptible seed that will not be stolen away. Certainly there is sin in this world and that affects those who are children of God and that sin will not take away our eternal standing before the Father. I am not coming against the idea of eternal life. What I am bringing into serious question is so-called Great Priniciple and the implications thereof. I personally believe that this teaching of the Great Principle is one of the most damaging doctrines the Way International purported. It relegates God to a principle, and it totally strips intimate relating to the Father. I personally think it makes a rather silly game between God and the believer.
---------------------------------
Thanks for the “vote of confidence” Erkjohn! I did my best to explain what you were looking for, but of course I know I’m not perfect. If only some of what I said made sense to you, then I am happy to have helped – even if (in the “long run”) I may have “erred” somewhat.
Just a note to clarify my post – I never stated that I believe “The Great Principle” is valid. I was merely showing what I knew that TWI had taught about it. In fact, I agree with your idea that it seems to “relegate God to a principle”, and “makes a rather silly game between God and the believer”.
-------------------------------
Another implication of the Great Principle is this separation between the spirit and flesh. I believe this is where you have some, shall we say issues, with what I posted.
Without going into too much detail, I would like to say a dangerous teaching of TWI and other "name it and claim it" ministries is it's concept of sin. Does sin sound a little to "archaic", or "silly"? Then let's use the definition of "sin" which is "missing the mark". I believe a Christian is in serious derision if they believe a just God will not hold them accountable for their actions to their fellow man. There are warnings in the Gospels about abusing children. Jesus said it's better that a millstone be hung around someone's neck and have them thrown into a lake than to bring any harm to the little ones. There are warnings in the Epistles about leaders bringing harm and abusing their flock. There are scriptures all over the Bible about the poor oppressing the weak. I could go on and on but I don't want to derail this thread. Especially since I started it.
----------------------------------
I don’t want to “derail your thread” either, but I have something to say about the concept of "sin". I understand it to be “anything contrary to that which is holy, just and true in God’s eyes” - in short, anything "unrighteous". Now of course, there is not a man alive who does not transgress “God’s perfect truth” in one way or another. We are actually only responsible for what we understand thus far. Let me explain something TWI never really taught well…
I Jn 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
You have to KNOW you are walking in darkness, which means you are not doing something you understand is right – or doing something you know is wrong, all according to what little you may understand about “the ultimate truth”.
7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
When we walk according to what we know is right, all is “fine” between ourselves and others “in the fold”, so to speak.
8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
I mentioned this before – we can never assume we aren’t doing at least something wrongall the time – because of our ignorance of that which is PERFECT. So we acknowledge that and are thankful that “we are cleansed (constantly) by the blood of Jesus Christ”.
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, AND to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
We are only required to confess “our sins” – that is, the ones we KNOW ABOUT. And in that case, we are not only forgiven for those, but (in addition) we are (by mercy) cleansed from all unrighteousness. It is as though we have fulfilled every “jot and tittle” without having performed it all.
I would say that most of our “fellowship” is covered by that aspect alone, so it is a good idea to “tap into it” by taking care of what we do know! Then we are “perfectly clean”. There is more about this, but I will stop here for now.
10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
Again, to sum it up, we should never consider that we don’t transgress something or otherall of the time which we are not even aware of yet, for we make God a liar who said we do. This keeps the separation between what you are responsible for and what others are responsible for. This way we can share kindness and understanding between ourselves and not judge one another according to what we know.
Basically, grace covers us for what we do know and confess [our sins], and mercy covers all the rest which is “behind the scene” [all unrigheousness - the rest of it all].
I had a major issue with TWI and its leadership at times when somebody did me wrong. They said I was supposed to “forgive him in my heart”, even if he never said he was sorry. That is ridiculous, because he just kept doing it over and over! God does not forgive unless we confess, so why should I when that guy does not say he is sorry? I believe that is “acting in a godly manner”, and is good practice.
I have found that the best way is to let somebody know what is wrong (just like we do here in posts) and try to work it out with him. Most of the time I find that they “just didn’t realize” there was a problem in the first place. And when the misunderstanding is cleared up, things are fine. (We confess to God – and among ourselves - when we understand we have made an error – then there is forgiveness between all parties involved – on earth AND above!)
But what if you KNOW the person is aware of the problem, but will not acknowledge it? How can you just forgive him and “go on as if nothing happened”? In that case, surely I don’t have to hang around the guy any more if I don’t want to. That is one of the major reasons I left TWI – I just got tired of getting “stepped on” by the leadership – and they knew better!
-------------------------------
What's this all going to look like? Darned if I know. I believe that seed is incorruptible, eternal, holy and probably a lot more. But I no longer believe that deeds done with the body are irrelevant in the God's eyes. I'm not talking about hitting your thumb with a hammer and yelling "poopie!" I'm also not saying that anyone is sinless and there isn't Grace. In fact, for a person that wants to discontinue a life of hurting others and themselves, the Kingdome will spend itself unreservedly for them. Again, I don't know all the answers. I just believe God is just, and that God will even the playing field someday. I don't believe we have some free pass given to us by Jesus that allows us to take advantage of our fellow man.
-----------------------------
I agree – we certainly don’t have a “free pass” to take advantage of people!
At the AC in 1973, during one of our afternoon twig meetings, I questioned the contradictory nature of this very topic. You know what I was told? "If you would speak in tongues more on a daily basis, stay in fellowship and operate the other two utterance manifestations with greater frequency, God could talk to you and answer that question."
:blink:
I was in the Advanced Class '89 at Emporia KS, and LCM was speaking about these things, along with ABS. He said (in so many words) that if you didn't do them, then "God won't even spit in your direction!"
I think that is just fine because I don't really want God to spit on me anyways. And besides that, I really doubt that he spits on people in the first place!
This was about the time of the "great split" of The Way, and the ensuing "fog years" to come. He said that if we were to "ever leave the fellowship and protection of this household of God", then we would be "greasespots by midnight" !
And guess what? His "prophecy" actually came true, for not too long after I left TWI, I found this WONDERFUL CAFE - I'm now a "Grease Spot" and loving every minute of it!
Now, how's about a nice cup of coffee and a slice of pie?
Thanks, erkjohn, but I seriously doubt it had anything to do with me.
In the corporate world of The Way, I never rose above the position of "mail-boy".
A later teaching I heard explained that God could put spirit "on" you if the need existed, just like He did in the OT. ----That still doesn't fully explain the contradiction.
You knew I was joking, right? About the "you" part that is.
This whole thing makes a nonsense of God being able to speak with anyone. Hmm, have we forgotten "the witness in the stars"? There for anyone to read? What about the witness of all of creation?
We are "sealed with the holy spirit of promise" which is to be "a comforter" and which will "teach" us. But that doesn't limit it to the only way God can teach us...or anyone else.
I believe he's always been able to teach those who seek the things after his own heart - no matter what color or creed they follow. The Bible itself talks of those who are gentiles following the things of God. Well, how do they know how to do this unless somehow or other God had been able to teach them? And yet they do rightly "by nature". Do "gentiles" have a different "nature" from "Jews"? I think not; all are human beings. Yet God seems able to teach them even though they are "outside the pale" or outside the place he could give them his "holy spirit".
Like ErkJohn I never understood this but as Corps, you daren't ask the question - that's if you still remembered it after you'd been knocked back a few times.
Romans 2:13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law,<a name="22"> they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15 since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)
No matter the denomination or even religion, God cannot be expected to explain Himself clearly and concisely. No, no, no! He MUST remain vague, cryptic, and inscrutable - otherwise it spoils all the fun...
The bigger nonsense-which is why they backed off quietly on it no matter how many times vpw said it, was "God is Spirit, and GOD CAN ONLY SPEAK TO THAT WHICH HE IS."
Sometimes it was "God is Spirit, and GOD CAN ONLY GIVE THAT WHICH HE IS."
These were, and still are, nonsense. God gives spirit. God is Spirit. (For the sake of discussion, I'll agree.) God gave manna. God is NOT manna.
Follow me through this supposed "Great Principle."(Others have posted here about this before.)
The idea is that God gives you "spirit". God then communicates with that spirit- since He can't communicate with flesh and blood. Then your spirit communicates with your flesh and blood. Wait, what? HOW?
If GOD'S Spirit can't manage it-and we're talking GOD ALMIGHTY here - why should I think my own comparatively miniscule spirit can manage it? If MY spirit can communicate with flesh and blood, then so can God's, and the stated reason for me to have spirit is negated.(If I have been given spirit, communication is not the reason.)
=================
God can do whatever He wants whenever He wants.
If He wants to communicate with someone, He has lots of choices
as to how to accomplish it,and is NOT limited due to being Spirit.( Too much work trying to simplify things ends up trivializing a TRANSCENDENT God into a God we can define into a neat box.)...
A made-up explanation is given as to how God communicates with
non-believers who don't HAVE spirit. Supposedly, God has to
ambush them with spirit, giving them spirit they never asked for
nor wanted, in order to communicate with them....
================
I also noticed that people were completely oblivious to the
arbitrary nature of the supposed definition of "phenomena."
Whenever something happened that wasn't specifically promised,
twi feels compelled to give it a title-"phenomena." That's anything that happens that wasn't guaranteed by God.
Instead, they smugly categorize the unexpected as "phenomena" and are unaware that this does nothing to actually EXPLAIN what probably was inexplicable to begin with. They're convinced this actually addressed the subject.
the way international has found many ways to istill errors and
blind obedience in people who deserve a lot better than twi...
DAMN'D GOOD POST WORDWOLF!! I say again, "Good show!"
Hearing it the way you put it makes so much sense - and believe me, I am a "hard nut to crack" at times. But I'm with you now on this matter!
I loved the logic you used about how "our spirit" (which is a little bit of His) can do something His cannot! Ridiculous!
And to them "phenomenon" seemed to cover everything else they could not explain - sort of like the "catch all verse" used by relgions to "shut down" questions from their followers:
De 29:29 The secret things belong unto the LORD our God...
Yes, TWI certainly understood how to put God in a box. So many times I was told to "read my blue book" again for everything from "soup to nuts". Well, maybe they should take notice of it again themselves - especially the chapter on "Are You Limiting God?" !
Thanks again for a great post WordWolf! You "hit the nail on the head" with this one.
Sorry, I couldn't get this to read the way I needed it to so I had to cancel out. I'll post later. In any event, I really appreciated your post Wordwolf. You really "hit the nail on the head".
Recommended Posts
Broken Arrow
And I appreciate that, Roy! You're obviously a very nice man!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks erkjohn
i love too my friend
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Thanks, erkjohn, but I seriously doubt it had anything to do with me.
In the corporate world of The Way, I never rose above the position of "mail-boy".
A later teaching I heard explained that God could put spirit "on" you if the need existed, just like He did in the OT. ----That still doesn't fully explain the contradiction.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
Got it! Sort of . . . Thanks erkj and Waysider, I did take the AC. . . . but, thankfully, I don't remember much.
So the chief priests and the Pharisees called the council together and said, "What are we doing? For this man is performing many miraculous signs. If we allow him to go on in this way, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away our sanctuary and our nation." Then one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said, "You know nothing at all! You do not realize that it is more to your advantage to have one man die for the people than for the whole nation to perish." (Now he did not say this on his own, but because he was high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the Jewish nation, and not for the Jewish nation only, but to gather together into one the children of God who are scattered.) So from that day they planned together to kill him
Now, I am betting Caiaphas was probably "out of fellowship" when he prophesied about the Lord. .. ..but, God still used him. It was his function as high priest. I am thinking he and God were not pals. No little (s) or spirit upon.
God is not limited. . . . burning bush, whirlwind, donkey, blinding someone on the street. . . . audible voice. . . . . the only thing I don't see in scripture anymore.. .. is TWI's take on "revelation" and its imposed limitations of God. . . . to our ability to be "in fellowship". . . . or i.e., our conformity to TWI's principles.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
It was very clear indeed!
SPEC
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
I was in the Advanced Class '89 at Emporia KS, and LCM was speaking about these things, along with ABS. He said (in so many words) that if you didn't do them, then "God won't even spit in your direction!"
I think that is just fine because I don't really want God to spit on me anyways. And besides that, I really doubt that he spits on people in the first place!
This was about the time of the "great split" of The Way, and the ensuing "fog years" to come. He said that if we were to "ever leave the fellowship and protection of this household of God", then we would be "greasespots by midnight" !
And guess what? His "prophecy" actually came true, for not too long after I left TWI, I found this WONDERFUL CAFE - I'm now a "Grease Spot" and loving every minute of it!
Now, how's about a nice cup of coffee and a slice of pie?
SPEC
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
You knew I was joking, right? About the "you" part that is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
Gee -- Thanks, Waysider!
SPEC
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
This whole thing makes a nonsense of God being able to speak with anyone. Hmm, have we forgotten "the witness in the stars"? There for anyone to read? What about the witness of all of creation?
We are "sealed with the holy spirit of promise" which is to be "a comforter" and which will "teach" us. But that doesn't limit it to the only way God can teach us...or anyone else.
I believe he's always been able to teach those who seek the things after his own heart - no matter what color or creed they follow. The Bible itself talks of those who are gentiles following the things of God. Well, how do they know how to do this unless somehow or other God had been able to teach them? And yet they do rightly "by nature". Do "gentiles" have a different "nature" from "Jews"? I think not; all are human beings. Yet God seems able to teach them even though they are "outside the pale" or outside the place he could give them his "holy spirit".
Like ErkJohn I never understood this but as Corps, you daren't ask the question - that's if you still remembered it after you'd been knocked back a few times.
Romans 2:13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law,<a name="22"> they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15 since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
No matter the denomination or even religion, God cannot be expected to explain Himself clearly and concisely. No, no, no! He MUST remain vague, cryptic, and inscrutable - otherwise it spoils all the fun...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
depends on what you are listening for
and from
and not some textual source,
at least not by itself
even without texts,
whatever it is, is still here
it does take people i think
but the catalyst is neither textual or people
so what is being sought?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
The bigger nonsense-which is why they backed off quietly on it no matter how many times
vpw said it, was
"God is Spirit,
and GOD CAN ONLY SPEAK TO THAT WHICH HE IS."
Sometimes it was
"God is Spirit,
and GOD CAN ONLY GIVE THAT WHICH HE IS."
These were, and still are, nonsense.
God gives spirit. God is Spirit. (For the sake of discussion, I'll agree.)
God gave manna. God is NOT manna.
Follow me through this supposed "Great Principle."
(Others have posted here about this before.)
The idea is that God gives you "spirit".
God then communicates with that spirit- since He can't communicate with
flesh and blood.
Then your spirit communicates with your flesh and blood.
Wait, what?
HOW?
If GOD'S Spirit can't manage it-and we're talking GOD ALMIGHTY here-
why should I think my own comparatively miniscule spirit can manage it?
If MY spirit can communicate with flesh and blood,
then so can God's, and the stated reason for me to have spirit
is negated.
(If I have been given spirit, communication is not the reason.)
=================
God can do whatever He wants whenever He wants.
If He wants to communicate with someone, He has lots of choices
as to how to accomplish it,and is NOT limited due to being Spirit.
(Too much work trying to simplify things ends up trivializing
a TRANSCENDENT God into a God we can define into a neat box.)
I noticed that this obsession with trying to simplify deep concepts
into neat little slogans that fit on bumper stickers affects lots
of teachings and lots of subjects.
In the Advanced class, it ends up ruining other material.
A made-up explanation is given as to how God communicates with
non-believers who don't HAVE spirit. Supposedly, God has to
ambush them with spirit, giving them spirit they never asked for
nor wanted, in order to communicate with them.
This explanation was given for the handwriting on the wall.
("Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin.")
Supposedly, the sole reason the false prophets and seers were
unable to give an explanation was they didn't have spirit and
the message was purely in a spiritual dimension.
When one is not forced to make up elaborate rationalizations for
one's doctrine, they are then free to seek the truth.
FF Bruce had a better answer. He pointed out that these words
were given without vowels, so the resembled a message something
along the lines of "a dollar and change" rather than
"weighed, numbered, divided." No need for an elaborate construct
when the mundane answer works just fine.....
=============
I also noticed that people were completely oblivious to the
arbitrary nature of the supposed definition of "phenomena."
Whenever something happened that wasn't specifically promised,
twi feels compelled to give it a title-"phenomena."
That's anything that happens that wasn't guaranteed by God.
Instead, they smugly categorize the unexpected as
"phenomena" and are unaware that this does nothing to
actually EXPLAIN what probably was inexplicable to
begin with. They're convinced this actually
addressed the subject.
the way international has found many ways to istill errors and
blind obedience in people who deserve a lot better than twi...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
DAMN'D GOOD POST WORDWOLF!! I say again, "Good show!"
Hearing it the way you put it makes so much sense - and believe me, I am a "hard nut to crack" at times. But I'm with you now on this matter!
I loved the logic you used about how "our spirit" (which is a little bit of His) can do something His cannot! Ridiculous!
And to them "phenomenon" seemed to cover everything else they could not explain - sort of like the "catch all verse" used by relgions to "shut down" questions from their followers:
De 29:29 The secret things belong unto the LORD our God...
Yes, TWI certainly understood how to put God in a box. So many times I was told to "read my blue book" again for everything from "soup to nuts". Well, maybe they should take notice of it again themselves - especially the chapter on "Are You Limiting God?" !
Thanks again for a great post WordWolf! You "hit the nail on the head" with this one.
SPEC
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Sorry, I couldn't get this to read the way I needed it to so I had to cancel out. I'll post later. In any event, I really appreciated your post Wordwolf. You really "hit the nail on the head".
Edited by erkjohnLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Thanks.
In all fairness, everything from the bumper sticker comment on was mine,
but the early paragraphs have already come up here years ago, so the
post was more a recap of points of earlier posters (at least the
first 1/2 was.)
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.