I still have a hard time when I realize how messed up things were Bolshevick.
Looking back at it it seems plain to me that simple contextual reading was all we needed to see that some of LCM's stuff was really, really bad.
But wasn't it hard at first to get over our group induced opinion of top leadership and realize that not only were these people not living up to their press, but the things we were learning weren't even good lies in some cases.
Yeah, I just had one of these "Duh!" moments myself.
It took me a good 10 years to learn how to friggin read after I got out of TWI without my mind bouncing around like a hyper ping pong ball.
I always had ten books on my desk during my way years and bounced from one to the other to the other and from one section of the bible to another to another on whims---I knew a lot of snippets of things devoid of any real context but lacked the abilty to think conceptually about much of anything at all (OK some you will argue I still don't :) ..)
I dont know if it was the overall plan to keep people off balance or severe unbridled Attention Deficit Disorder in manifestation..I do know that it screwed me up and it took along time for me to correct
Contexual reading? Like everything else in twi, it was a bait and switch tactic...
Wierwille would proclaim..."read it in the context"...and would then go on to tell you what the context was. He would give you the illusion that you were studying it on your own when in fact, he was telling you what to think. If you disagreed with him, you either conformed your opinion to his or you hit the road.
Contexual reading? It was more like mindless reading.
Contexual reading? Like everything else in twi, it was a bait and switch tactic...
Wierwille would proclaim..."read it in the context"...and would then go on to tell you what the context was. He would give you the illusion that you were studying it on your own when in fact, he was telling you what to think. If you disagreed with him, you either conformed your opinion to his or you hit the road.
Contexual reading? It was more like mindless reading.
Twasn't mindless at all...the minds were actively being programmed as either his victims or his henchmen
Now then, you might recall from PFAL that one of the keys to interpretation of the Bible is the usage of a word or expression "in the context."
Additionally, a word or expression might have been "used before" - so we were exhorted to check out "first usage" of a word. And that encouraged everyone to learn to flip around the Bible looking for first usages and to forget to look at the context.
In fact, the PFAL class and just about every teaching looks at one verse or section of a verse, and then jumps onto something else. Sure, we were given syllabuses, and we wrote down scripture references during teachings, so that we could check them out later...but generally people were kept so busy that there was little time for privately checking anything out.
To begin with, things weren't wholly awry. There was some semblance of relating a verse to its context (after all, that was PFAL). If it appeared to say something other, well, that was because we didn't know enough Bible to be able to argue differently.
Later, of course, we were fully indoctrinated into the special interpretations given by TWI with our special understanding that "those churchy Christians" couldn't understand because they had no spiritual awareness. On those rare occasions when it was possible to find time to read the whole context, it could often be seen that the interpretation was not quite that given by the TWI teacher. Or it might not bear the emphasis given. But by then, of course, we had learned to defer to the teaching and/or didn't want to expose our own lack of spiritual understanding.
That idea of pulling a verse out of the hat (as it were) and introducing it into a teaching is fine IF everyone is FULLY instructed and understands the context ... a sort of shorthand for referring to the whole context or incident.
It's entirely inappropriate for beginners, with no background, where it only serves to magnify the teacher's superior knowledge.
I find it helpful to read more modern-English versions of the Bible (anything but KJV) so as (among other things) to avoid that voice in the back of the head triggering off a TWI-approved line of thinking.
Hmm. I see Groucho picked up on the same point........
Yeah, it was funny how one of the keys to the bible interpreting itself was the context when we hardly ever read the context. The principle (if you accept biblical inerrancy) that no section of scripture may contradict another section makes sense...to an extent, but only if the whole context of each verse is taken into account. Oftentimes the verses cited in these "ping-pong" teachings weren't talking about the same thing, but were used to bolster dubious premises.
Recommended Posts
JeffSjo
I still have a hard time when I realize how messed up things were Bolshevick.
Looking back at it it seems plain to me that simple contextual reading was all we needed to see that some of LCM's stuff was really, really bad.
But wasn't it hard at first to get over our group induced opinion of top leadership and realize that not only were these people not living up to their press, but the things we were learning weren't even good lies in some cases.
Yeah, I just had one of these "Duh!" moments myself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
It took me a good 10 years to learn how to friggin read after I got out of TWI without my mind bouncing around like a hyper ping pong ball.
I always had ten books on my desk during my way years and bounced from one to the other to the other and from one section of the bible to another to another on whims---I knew a lot of snippets of things devoid of any real context but lacked the abilty to think conceptually about much of anything at all (OK some you will argue I still don't :) ..)
I dont know if it was the overall plan to keep people off balance or severe unbridled Attention Deficit Disorder in manifestation..I do know that it screwed me up and it took along time for me to correct
LCM and Wierwille were the worst in my opinion.
bounce, bounce, bounce
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Now I know why rosie looks more like a bouncer..
*AHEM* sowie. Wrong context..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Contexual reading? Like everything else in twi, it was a bait and switch tactic...
Wierwille would proclaim..."read it in the context"...and would then go on to tell you what the context was. He would give you the illusion that you were studying it on your own when in fact, he was telling you what to think. If you disagreed with him, you either conformed your opinion to his or you hit the road.
Contexual reading? It was more like mindless reading.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RumRunner
Twasn't mindless at all...the minds were actively being programmed as either his victims or his henchmen
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Now then, you might recall from PFAL that one of the keys to interpretation of the Bible is the usage of a word or expression "in the context."
Additionally, a word or expression might have been "used before" - so we were exhorted to check out "first usage" of a word. And that encouraged everyone to learn to flip around the Bible looking for first usages and to forget to look at the context.
In fact, the PFAL class and just about every teaching looks at one verse or section of a verse, and then jumps onto something else. Sure, we were given syllabuses, and we wrote down scripture references during teachings, so that we could check them out later...but generally people were kept so busy that there was little time for privately checking anything out.
To begin with, things weren't wholly awry. There was some semblance of relating a verse to its context (after all, that was PFAL). If it appeared to say something other, well, that was because we didn't know enough Bible to be able to argue differently.
Later, of course, we were fully indoctrinated into the special interpretations given by TWI with our special understanding that "those churchy Christians" couldn't understand because they had no spiritual awareness. On those rare occasions when it was possible to find time to read the whole context, it could often be seen that the interpretation was not quite that given by the TWI teacher. Or it might not bear the emphasis given. But by then, of course, we had learned to defer to the teaching and/or didn't want to expose our own lack of spiritual understanding.
That idea of pulling a verse out of the hat (as it were) and introducing it into a teaching is fine IF everyone is FULLY instructed and understands the context ... a sort of shorthand for referring to the whole context or incident.
It's entirely inappropriate for beginners, with no background, where it only serves to magnify the teacher's superior knowledge.
I find it helpful to read more modern-English versions of the Bible (anything but KJV) so as (among other things) to avoid that voice in the back of the head triggering off a TWI-approved line of thinking.
Hmm. I see Groucho picked up on the same point........
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
the vicster didn't want to know what people believed about any given verse either.. made that pretty clear early on..
went on to claim that denominations were caused by private interpretation. But wasn't that taken out of context as well?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Yeah, it was funny how one of the keys to the bible interpreting itself was the context when we hardly ever read the context. The principle (if you accept biblical inerrancy) that no section of scripture may contradict another section makes sense...to an extent, but only if the whole context of each verse is taken into account. Oftentimes the verses cited in these "ping-pong" teachings weren't talking about the same thing, but were used to bolster dubious premises.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
"Ping pong" teachings, LOL
(Hey, that wouldn't be "pong" as in, something stinks about the teachings, would it?
)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I dunno.. I think the bible from herr vicster was more like learning medical science from a quack.. some of it may work, the rest of it.. well..
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.