Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

The Absent Christ?


OldSkool
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, T-Bone said:

That’s a great question, cman!

And I agree with your guesstimate “It must be talking about something other than what we were taught”. And in my humble opinion, trying to wade through the mishmash of confusing, eclectic, and sometimes contradictory ideas of what wierwille/TWI taught is more than just a daunting task – it’s downright absurd to the Nth degree…but limiting your “guesstimate statement”  :rolleyes:     to just the fundamentalism aspect of TWI-doctrine  -  I’ll take a stab at it – merely as food for thought on this discussion.

Fundamentalism takes a strictly literal approach to interpreting the Bible. The Bible says Jesus Christ ascended into heaven – so he’s gone. He’s at the right hand of God…someday he’s coming back as King of kings…so he’s not here…but what about verses like: I’m with you always…it’s God in Christ in you…so which is it? Is he here or there?

I think it’s possibly both.

I don’t know how…but trying to wrap my mind around stuff that may go way beyond our concepts of matter, energy, space and time is fun to try...and investigating and explaining the unseen and unknown is the passion of  theorists who get into  stuff like   string theory     ,   superstring theory    and   the theory of everything  …and there may even be more ways for spiritual beings and the spiritual realm to be immanent and yet at the same time transcendent – maybe that info is classified :biglaugh:  .  A fascinating subject though – I’ve touched on this    here     and     here   .

 

Fundamentalism won’t allow for reasoning, speculating, or theorizing outside its rigid dogma.

You might enjoy exploring philosophy and philosophy of religion. There’s a lot more wiggle room in both.

 

DVD extras:

quantum mechanics

immanence

transcendence

 

T-Bone and cman - thanks! I think I have a better understanding here. Wierwille is known for shamelessly plagairazing verious authors, stealing classes, etc. I think the word of God takes the place of the absent Christ garbage is telling and probably originated with Wierwille. I think the strict, regimented, fundamentalist view that Wierwille had lead him to make stupid statements such as this one. It's stupid because, as you noted T-bone:

Quote

Fundamentalism takes a strictly literal approach to interpreting the Bible. The Bible says Jesus Christ ascended into heaven – so he’s gone. He’s at the right hand of God…someday he’s coming back as King of kings…so he’s not here…but what about verses like: I’m with you always…it’s God in Christ in you…so which is it? Is he here or there?

Vicster couldn't make it fit with his rigid mindset so he made up something that made it all make sense to him. He couldn't really understand spiritual matters in this case...could it be that this is an example of the natural man receives not the things of the spirit? Mr Lo Shanta obviosly faked speaking in tongues...so who really knows. For me this discussion has helped me get a better grasp on this garbage, even though I have denied that doctrine a long time ago. Cool discussion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, cman said:

If Christ is not absent, then why is there a "return"? Or "coming of the Lord". It must be talking about something other than what we were taught.

 

9 hours ago, cman said:

I don't believe Christ is absent or missing.

My apologies that my humor was lost in cyberspace. Sometimes things don't come across that great when they are posted. I feel you hit the nail on the head that Wierwille tried to explain something that has far deeper implications than he was able to teach or comprehend. I appreciate your insight. Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the origin of this statement “the word takes the place of the absent Christ” probably has to do with the mixup VP had over some of the transitive qualities of math.

Remember “things equal to the same thing are equal to each other”?  Transitive aspect of equality.

This works with real numbers.

When you get in to human aspects it doesn’t really apply.  Only kind of.

Is Michael Jordan the GOAT?  Or was it Wilt?  Lebron?

Not many agree on transitive qualities in humans.

If only Vic would have been a more dedicated student in grade school math ….

I view the statement as an extreme fundamentalist interpretation.  In this they show themselves to be following the path of the scribe who Jesus confronted.

Edited by chockfull
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/8/2022 at 3:33 PM, Mark Sanguinetti said:

OldSkool, that is simply one of the doctrines that TWI taught,  "that by our minds renewed to God's word we take the place of the absent Christ". I wonder if they still taught that from 1996 to 2008? Do other people remember that TWI doctrine?

Yes Mark with an extreme fundamentalist view people think of themselves as equal to Jesus Christ because they are thinking about scripture.  I remember that doctrine taught clearly in the foundational and renewed mind classes.

This really twists up the transitive aspect of equality into something as illogical as the Catholics believing that bread and wine literally turns into body and blood.

I guess my progression away from fundamentalism has me focus on the relationship and lifestyle of Christ as opposed to illogical juxtapositioning of myself as god because my opinion lines up with some interpretation.

Edited by chockfull
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, chockfull said:

Yes Mark with an extreme fundamentalist view people think of themselves as equal to Jesus Christ because they are thinking about scripture.  I remember that doctrine taught clearly in the foundational and renewed mind classes.

Thank you for the information. Also thank you OldSkool. Hopefully, TWI has improved their doctrines at least a little. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Mark Sanguinetti said:

Thank you for the information. Also thank you OldSkool. Hopefully, TWI has improved their doctrines at least a little. 

YW!! Unfortunately, they haven't.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/8/2022 at 4:33 PM, Mark Sanguinetti said:

OldSkool, that is simply one of the doctrines that TWI taught,  "that by our minds renewed to God's word we take the place of the absent Christ". I wonder if they still taught that from 1996 to 2008? Do other people remember that TWI doctrine?

I realize this is a false, serpentine doctrine, but what does it mean? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has it occurred to anyone that the expression at issue on this thread may have been meant as nothing more than a figure of speech? IDK, but it seems plausible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Rocky said:

Has it occurred to anyone that the expression at issue on this thread may have been meant as nothing more than a figure of speech? IDK, but it seems plausible.

Ok. Fine. Let it be a figure of speech. Still, what does it mean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nathan_Jr said:

I realize this is a false, serpentine doctrine, but what does it mean? 

You = Christ if you have a renewed mind.

What is a renewed mind?  One that is filled with Gods Word.

That is the gist.

In practice it comes to be equivalent with compliance to leadership.  And as such is a foothold for a cult taking over a persons life friends opinions finance politics and career path.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, chockfull said:

You = Christ if you have a renewed mind.

What is a renewed mind?  One that is filled with Gods Word.

That is the gist.

In practice it comes to be equivalent with compliance to leadership.  And as such is a foothold for a cult taking over a persons life friends opinions finance politics and career path.

Thanks, Chockfull.

A mind filled with God's Word? Does that mean a mind filled with the Bible? Or does it mean filled with God's will?

So much bull$hit it almost makes sense.

 

A renewed mind is not one conformed to any doctrine, any book, any teacher - this is an enslaved mind. A renewed mind is one that is free and clear. Like a child's mind. Free to be in awe of the wonder of that which cannot be named.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Nathan_Jr said:

Thanks, Chockfull.

A mind filled with God's Word? Does that mean a mind filled with the Bible? Or does it mean filled with God's will?

So much bull$hit it almost makes sense.

 

A renewed mind is not one conformed to any doctrine, any book, any teacher - this is an enslaved mind. A renewed mind is one that is free and clear. Like a child's mind. Free to be in awe of the wonder of that which cannot be named.  

You know I think these questions illustrate the problem with the doctrine very clearly.

Do you see the confusion here by the juxtaposition of the Bible, a sanctioned interpretation of the Bible, and spiritual direction in life?

With Way logic all you need to do is line up your opinions with their sanctioned interpretation of the Bible (compliance to past Way teachings) and you have a renewed mind.

Brainwashing language masked as spiritual maturity.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, chockfull said:

Do you see the confusion here by the juxtaposition of the Bible, a sanctioned interpretation of the Bible, and spiritual direction in life?

With Way logic all you need to do is line up your opinions with their sanctioned interpretation of the Bible (compliance to past Way teachings) and you have a renewed mind.

Brainwashing language masked as spiritual maturity.

 

Ah yes, the old switcheroo game!

c384b363-7f1e-49f6-943e-621272b90057_1.e

 

 

Switcheroo: an unexpected change, especially one in which one thing or person is quickly or secretly exchanged for another

from:     Cambridge Dictionary: switcheroo

 

Also see     Wikipedia - bait and switch

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chockfull said:

You know I think these questions illustrate the problem with the doctrine very clearly.

Do you see the confusion here by the juxtaposition of the Bible, a sanctioned interpretation of the Bible, and spiritual direction in life?

With Way logic all you need to do is line up your opinions with their sanctioned interpretation of the Bible (compliance to past Way teachings) and you have a renewed mind.

Brainwashing language masked as spiritual maturity.

Dude...that's potent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Okay, I'm late to the party on this.

One thing that strikes me is that the gospels were almost forbidden territory.  Almost everything we were taught came from the epistles - Acts, and the Pauline epistles in particular.  So that actually did make Christ "absent" in our lives, to some extent.  

Do you remember VW talking in PFAL about having all those books about the Bible, but never actually reading it?  It seems to me that we had all these books, letters, articles, Waymag pages, etc, and the epistles to an extent, about the earthly life of Jesus, but we never actually read the very books, the gospels, where that life story was written.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing that strikes me is this:

Jphn 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. [13] And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

Okay, Jesus has gone to the Father (= absent) but we can do greater works than him?  Greater works than Jesus?  That makes us greater than Jesus, perhaps?  Ach, so: the Word of God is the will of God, because then - we are all Gods and greater than Jesus, who is merely a human being.  And an absentee human being, at that.  Shove over, Jesus.  It's us who should be seated at the right hand of the Father.  NOT!!!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Twinky said:

Another thing that strikes me is this:

Jphn 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. [13] And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

Okay, Jesus has gone to the Father (= absent) but we can do greater works than him?  Greater works than Jesus?  That makes us greater than Jesus, perhaps?  Ach, so: the Word of God is the will of God, because then - we are all Gods and greater than Jesus, who is merely a human being.  And an absentee human being, at that.  Shove over, Jesus.  It's us who should be seated at the right hand of the Father.  NOT!!!!

 

I was "taught" the "greater works" is SIT -- Jesus was incapable of speaking SIT, because he didn't have holy spirit, even though he's the one who sent it. 

The implication of most of the "teachings" about Jesus is that "he was a just a bastard Jew and a sacrificial scapegoat... something had to be sacrificed like a sheep or goat, so it might as well be this bastard Jew - he may be glorified at the right hand of God, but he's dead.... to/for....now, have you read the epistles!?!?... just tremendous...mmmmph....MMMPH..."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't recall what class this was taught in, but the "greater works" is supposed to be the ability to lead someone to the new birth, something Jesus couldn't do because it wasn't available. Well, then again, maybe it was in a FellowLaborer teaching. It may have been intermingled with all the belittlement and criticism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, waysider said:

I don't recall what class this was taught in, but the "greater works" is supposed to be the ability to lead someone to the new birth, something Jesus couldn't do because it wasn't available. Well, then again, maybe it was in a FellowLaborer teaching. It may have been intermingled with all the belittlement and criticism.


That was probably "taught" to me as well - smells familiar.

So, Jesus could only teach ABOUT the new birth, but he just didn't have the power to LEAD anyone to it? Only the Pharisee's Pharisee could do it? To be clear, the new birth wasn't available? Or the leading one to the new birth wasn't available?

Edited by Nathan_Jr
The liability, the liability, and nothing but the liability.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I was taught it was the "new birth" as well, which wasn't available before Jesus died, so of course he couldn't help (?) anyone there.

I don't know what this means, but I'm not willing to accept the say-so of a corrupt "teacher" who didn't understand basic principles of Christianity.  Is "the new birth" a "work" anyway?

I'd be satisfied if I could consistently do a fraction of the "works" that Jesus did.  Happy to aim bigger once I achieve consistency.

Edited by Twinky
Why d'esn't my o wrk prperly?
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, waysider said:

It wasn't the new birth per se. It was the leading someone to it that was the work.

So the leading by the teaching of the physical, formulaic mechanics of how (H-O-W) to say lo shunta la shonta, I presume?

Wow that really is a greater work! Just a tremendous kernel! 

Edited by Nathan_Jr
The glossolalia, the glossolalia, and nothing but the glossolalia.
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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...