IF....twi trustees were ANNOINTED BY GOD and were DOING THE LORD'S WORK, and hazarding their lives for the Lord.....then maybe this could be considered??
IF....the corporate entity of twi WAS NOT A BUSINESS, but a godly work and exhibited the signs, miracles, wonders, and boldness with power from on high as keynoted throughout the book of Acts.....then maybe lcm would have a point.
IF....MISREPRESENTATION of truth wasn't such a glaring issue in martindale's teaching......then maybe followers would have "all things common."
IF....there were any true, God-fearing APOSTLES around........then maybe???
TWI TRUSTEES AND TOP LEADERS ARE THE MODERN-DAY PHARISEES.......not the liberators, not the True Church, serving in the name of the Lord.
They conspire to burden their followers with guilt and twisted logic to ensnare them. The trustees and top leaders are biblically aligned with sadducees and pharisees....who hide behind false authority to gain entrance.
Skyrider, you keep bring back such teachings (memories) which now seem almost ubelieveable to me. Yet we sat there like a duck....in 1997 and years afterwards too while he taught things that even VPW probably would have hesitated in teaching.
Plurality Giving. I remember it well. In my mind I knew I would never reach this level as I barely tithed anyway. So I just lived with the pain & suffering and guilt. I believed what he was saying. I was not living anywhere near the standard that God expected of me.
But others were more committed than me. They DID give plurlaity..... anything left over. I seem to remember thinking that any form of substantial savings (above a few months emergency need) was not God's true will according to this teaching. I remember him talking about how we shouldn't horde money. What a crock! It was easy to read between the lines. It seemed to me he was saying "save a little and give the rest away to TWI."
He was not dumb. He was calculating. In my opinion he also new there were large inheritances in the future with our age group. For example our middle aged friends Tom & Ann here who inherited over $1 million when her Dad passed away. They were, until then, living modestly. Why would they need $1 million? True disciples would operate Plurality Giving when they receive their windfall.
Nevertheless, we humbly gave a little more as the "carrot" was raised higher. We turned our giving up a notch or two after this teaching was prevalent. Of course top leadership concurred and taught these things too.
I am sure it raised more cash for TWI....cash which was raised on what now seem to me to be deceit and lies. But meanwhile, the disciples were less propserous than they were before.
Sky, I think it's important to remember that spontaneity was the underlying foundation to the first record that was rated P.G. in Acts 2. After Pentecost there was a "mad rush" of activity amongst the followers of Jesus Christ in response to what had happened. We don't have to squint to see that.
They already knew the laws on tithes and offerings, their obligations as Jews. What happened in this category of sharing was a real inner response to salvation in Christ. They were "touched" as it were, deeply, and it was reflected in what they did.
On the one hand it's a very natural response. When something good happens, something wonderful and exciting, people tend to reflect that. Here after Pentecost we see all the earmarkings of what it was going to mean to be a Christian - an inner real change and experience, consideration of it's meaning and a response to that.
The question could be framed - was the response a result of the actual change those people underwent or was it a deliberate decision in response to what they were told to do?
Craig worked the "taught" aspect of it in to his teaching on plurality giving and narrowed it down to that in practical application. This had always been taught in the Way (elsewhere too) - that tithing and abundantly sharing of your stuff was first and foremost a decision. And it is, of course. But he taught Acts 2 and what the people did as following what the apostles told them to do. Can't document that exactly, I heard it in a taped teaching though.
But without the requisite change inside the person first it's bound to turn in to ritualized wishful thinking -"Do this because that's what you're supposed to do." That's fine, on one level. But it won't be a valid response to an actual change, it will be obedience to a moral concept and an ethical postulation of that concept. Headwork, not heartwork.
"ouf of the abundance of the heart man speaks". No 'bundance, cheap speak. It has everything to do with the person and nothing to do with money or stuff. The "silver and gold" is in the riches of Christ. It's clearly the honor of each person to determine what and how they respond, in their own way.
All things in common?? Wonder how many folks had living accomodations comparable to the *chalet*, while in rez.
What a joke!! Martindale was a SPIRITUAL PIKER compared to Peter and John in Acts 4. Along with twi hierarchy, he lived off the fat of the lamb.......full salary, chalet living, medical & dental & chiropractic services, full car maintenance for his family, travel expense account, love offerings (cash in fist -- tax free money), gifts sent to mog, etc. etc. etc. Some highly speculate that ROA abundant sharing (barrels of cash) was skimmed and sent over to the chalet.
He11....with all those atrocities, martindale was not just a spiritual piker, he was downright evil to try and deceive the followers!!!!
He had aces in the hole....and expected others to live on the edge of life with NO SAFETY NETS or comfort zones.
Plurality Giving. I remember it well. In my mind I knew I would never reach this level as I barely tithed anyway. So I just lived with the pain & suffering and guilt. I believed what he was saying. I was not living anywhere near the standard that God expected of me.
igotout,
This "standard" was unique.....and documented in a sequence of events where mighty men moved with God's authority after Pentecost. No comparison to twi's twisted agendas!!!
You and I knew the difference.....and REFRAINED FROM THIS DECEPTION, THAT'S ALL.
Socks, excellent words of wisdom. Makes perfect sense, your explanation of giving inspirationally.
Yeah, Skyrider, I was already an evil horder of money (a good saver) when this was being pushed. I just couldn't see giving more when he was living in a luxurious log mansion and having every tiny little need taken care of even more than many multi millionaires of today. Servants at his beck and call, every speck of dust in order. And he wasn't very good at his job to boot, losing millions in ABS via multiple bad decisions as I saw it.
Yet he beat us up spiritually and belittled us and on every hand as did some other leaders. What a misreable life and one which I would hope he is regretful of today.
It also makes me a little angry that these top leaders of today stood by and did nothing about it and say nothing of it this day other than to make him appear as their scapegoat. I believe it was not ALL his fault. No apologies to anyone. What gutless cowards.
This topic deserves its own thread. Many here at GS talk about tithing and/or abundant sharing......BUT few know about plurality giving.
In 1997, just prior to my exiting twi.......LCM was teaching from Acts 4 and his message was one that ALL twi followers should strive for plurality giving. In brief form, tithing and abundant sharing (15%-20%) was NOT GOD'S WILL for the faithful....it was weak believing.
Acts 4:32-35 And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that aught of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.
And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus and great grace was upon them all.
Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
And laid them at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.
In this corps meeting teaching, LCM was adamant that ALL twi followers were falling short of THEIR responsibility to give. According to LCM's private interpretation of these verses....the faithful followers DID NOT NEED the extras in life. What extras?.....things like pets, cable tv, karate lessons, newer cars, etc.
Again, here's an example: Say a couple makes $50,000 a year and can live on $30,000 a year.....then, according to this plurality giving concept, the rest would (and SHOULD) be handed over to twi. According to lcm's teaching, THAT was the honest proportion and duty of EVERY WAY BELIEVER before God.
Look at how the numbers climb!!!
tithe of $50,000 = $5,000
ABS of $50,000 = $7,500
Plurality giving of $50,000 = $20,000
P.S. I left shortly after this, so am not sure it grabbed hold. But this plurality giving concept was twi's agenda in 1997.
"FEW know about plurality giving?
BUSHWAH!
Unless you count everyone who ever heard the Acts 29 song about "Plurality
Giving"-called "Plurality Giving"- "FEW" people, then a LOT of people heard
about it back in the mid-to-late 80s after their album "God First" was
released.
That was the album with the least number of songs, and TWO of them-count them,
TWO of them-were about giving money.
One was about the tithe, and was called "Firstfruits".
One was about "plurality giving", and was called "Plurality Giving".
I liked to play them back-to-back. So long as we're shilling for money,
let's not pretend we're not. :D-->
Back in the 80s, the teachings on "plurality giving" weren't coercive like
in the "Promised Land of the Prevailing Word", when people were to "prevail"
on the brink of poverty. lcm HIMSELF said, in the context of giving beyond your
need, that it was up to you to determine what your "need" was. He said that if
your need involved you owning 12 cars, then that was that.
I guess THAT's the part he really took for himself, though, and decided that
his "need" involved extensive luxuries. (This wasn't difficult-he already had
a live example of someone who decided that for themself to draw from for
years.)
Then again, lcm's messages got crazier over the years.
In the 80s, tithing was 10% ("tithe" means "tenth"),
abundant sharing was optional, and plurality giving was a nice goal.
By the end of the 90s, tithing was 15%, giving above that was mandatory,
and plurality giving was seen as the practical target for everyone they hadn't
run off.
===
Even a cursory reading of Acts 4:32-35 should show this was nothing like
THEIR practice!
"Neither was there any among them that lacked....distribution was made unto
every man according as he had need."
This practice took the EXTRA from some and used it to cover the NEED of OTHERS-
so that NOBODY had luxuries at that moment, but all had enough to cover their
NEEDS.
This was sufficient to cover the immediate needs of the situation, which were
the result of the immediate situation of the sudden influx of new arrivals who
didn't have jobs yet.
Compare this one-time incident with the WEEKLY practice of twi,
where you gave everything WEEK after WEEK,
and, instead of it going to the POOR to cover their needs,
it went to purchase luxuries for those at the top.
The apostles NEVER had luxuries for themselves, they bled out their lives for
God's people, and Paul himself worked a secular job to set a good example.
=====
This little 'Dead Sea' was dead for years-because it was all INLET and no
OUTLET.
( And because of all the dead bodies floatin' in it.)
I remember a couple in our area bought a BMW brand new. Of course they paid cash for it, but I remember hearing whispers about whether they really "needed" a BMW when a much less expensive car would do the same job. -->
Of course they wouldn't have caught any flack for it because if someone can pay cash for a BMW then they are also contributing heavily to the very nice lifestyle of the right reverend moneyhands.
Leave it to TWI to take a concept born of individual generosity and turn it into an obligation.
It goes beyond abundant sharing
It's giving your plurality
You really want to move the Word
It's time to raise your vision.
It goes beyond abundant sharing.
It's giving your plurality
You've got the choice.
It's in the Word.
What's your decision?
Don't you love how the "choice" is not whether or not to give, but rather whether or not to "do the Word." It's okay if you DON'T do the Word. That's your choice. You're just not doing the Word. No guilt trip there, right?
Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity, for God loves a cheerful giver.
I remember when you couldn't participate in ANYTHING unless you were abundantly sharing. Of course you were not forbidden, just they somehow "forgot" to put you name on one of the invitations.
I remember we weren't allowed to go to WIB because we had put airline tickets for required attendance at ROA on a Visa. I immediately asked for our money back and got yelled at some more. I guess we were supposed to let them keep it.
But that's debt. I always personally preferred to give cash, but that was nixed because only God could keep track of who gave it!
I always personally preferred to give cash, but that was nixed because only God could keep track of who gave it!
In my area they said it was selfish to give cash because the hfc had to use his own hard earned money and time to go buy a money order so he could send it in to hq. If you're going to give (and you are going to give if you want to live) then you better do it on our terms! Why, oh why did it take so long to see the b.s.??? -->
I remember some of the good old days... if you sent your own ABS in to headquarters on your own terms, you were REALLY under scrutiny.
Cripe- those guys must have been nuts. What were they afraid of? Or do they get some kind of "cut" out of ABS generated in their area? But you "couldn't" give cash. had to be check or money order. And you couldn't give it when you wanted- had to be when the "holy basket" was given its due rounds.. good grief.
"We have to make sure OUR people are even QUALIFIED to give".
Thankfully, I put up with that kind of crap for only about a month before leaving..
Really- I remember a couple of times that I tried to give ABS to one of the nuckleheads outside of "twig" only to have it REFUSED. "Bring it and give when you're SUPPOSED to!!!"
Recommended Posts
skyrider
IF....twi trustees were ANNOINTED BY GOD and were DOING THE LORD'S WORK, and hazarding their lives for the Lord.....then maybe this could be considered??
IF....the corporate entity of twi WAS NOT A BUSINESS, but a godly work and exhibited the signs, miracles, wonders, and boldness with power from on high as keynoted throughout the book of Acts.....then maybe lcm would have a point.
IF....MISREPRESENTATION of truth wasn't such a glaring issue in martindale's teaching......then maybe followers would have "all things common."
IF....there were any true, God-fearing APOSTLES around........then maybe???
TWI TRUSTEES AND TOP LEADERS ARE THE MODERN-DAY PHARISEES.......not the liberators, not the True Church, serving in the name of the Lord.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
A la prochaine
Sky,
Where does it stop! :eek
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
what a crock
do the trustees have cable tv, newer cars ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Hypocrites! For sure.
They conspire to burden their followers with guilt and twisted logic to ensnare them. The trustees and top leaders are biblically aligned with sadducees and pharisees....who hide behind false authority to gain entrance.
Blind guides.....demanding hefty fees,
Link to comment
Share on other sites
igotout
Skyrider, you keep bring back such teachings (memories) which now seem almost ubelieveable to me. Yet we sat there like a duck....in 1997 and years afterwards too while he taught things that even VPW probably would have hesitated in teaching.
Plurality Giving. I remember it well. In my mind I knew I would never reach this level as I barely tithed anyway. So I just lived with the pain & suffering and guilt. I believed what he was saying. I was not living anywhere near the standard that God expected of me.
But others were more committed than me. They DID give plurlaity..... anything left over. I seem to remember thinking that any form of substantial savings (above a few months emergency need) was not God's true will according to this teaching. I remember him talking about how we shouldn't horde money. What a crock! It was easy to read between the lines. It seemed to me he was saying "save a little and give the rest away to TWI."
He was not dumb. He was calculating. In my opinion he also new there were large inheritances in the future with our age group. For example our middle aged friends Tom & Ann here who inherited over $1 million when her Dad passed away. They were, until then, living modestly. Why would they need $1 million? True disciples would operate Plurality Giving when they receive their windfall.
Nevertheless, we humbly gave a little more as the "carrot" was raised higher. We turned our giving up a notch or two after this teaching was prevalent. Of course top leadership concurred and taught these things too.
I am sure it raised more cash for TWI....cash which was raised on what now seem to me to be deceit and lies. But meanwhile, the disciples were less propserous than they were before.
John Richeson
Tampa,FL
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Of ducks and diamonds, John!
:D-->
Sky, I think it's important to remember that spontaneity was the underlying foundation to the first record that was rated P.G. in Acts 2. After Pentecost there was a "mad rush" of activity amongst the followers of Jesus Christ in response to what had happened. We don't have to squint to see that.
They already knew the laws on tithes and offerings, their obligations as Jews. What happened in this category of sharing was a real inner response to salvation in Christ. They were "touched" as it were, deeply, and it was reflected in what they did.
On the one hand it's a very natural response. When something good happens, something wonderful and exciting, people tend to reflect that. Here after Pentecost we see all the earmarkings of what it was going to mean to be a Christian - an inner real change and experience, consideration of it's meaning and a response to that.
The question could be framed - was the response a result of the actual change those people underwent or was it a deliberate decision in response to what they were told to do?
Craig worked the "taught" aspect of it in to his teaching on plurality giving and narrowed it down to that in practical application. This had always been taught in the Way (elsewhere too) - that tithing and abundantly sharing of your stuff was first and foremost a decision. And it is, of course. But he taught Acts 2 and what the people did as following what the apostles told them to do. Can't document that exactly, I heard it in a taped teaching though.
But without the requisite change inside the person first it's bound to turn in to ritualized wishful thinking -"Do this because that's what you're supposed to do." That's fine, on one level. But it won't be a valid response to an actual change, it will be obedience to a moral concept and an ethical postulation of that concept. Headwork, not heartwork.
"ouf of the abundance of the heart man speaks". No 'bundance, cheap speak. It has everything to do with the person and nothing to do with money or stuff. The "silver and gold" is in the riches of Christ. It's clearly the honor of each person to determine what and how they respond, in their own way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
All things in common?? Wonder how many folks had living accomodations comparable to the *chalet*, while in rez.
-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
What a joke!! Martindale was a SPIRITUAL PIKER compared to Peter and John in Acts 4. Along with twi hierarchy, he lived off the fat of the lamb.......full salary, chalet living, medical & dental & chiropractic services, full car maintenance for his family, travel expense account, love offerings (cash in fist -- tax free money), gifts sent to mog, etc. etc. etc. Some highly speculate that ROA abundant sharing (barrels of cash) was skimmed and sent over to the chalet.
He11....with all those atrocities, martindale was not just a spiritual piker, he was downright evil to try and deceive the followers!!!!
He had aces in the hole....and expected others to live on the edge of life with NO SAFETY NETS or comfort zones.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
igotout,
This "standard" was unique.....and documented in a sequence of events where mighty men moved with God's authority after Pentecost. No comparison to twi's twisted agendas!!!
You and I knew the difference.....and REFRAINED FROM THIS DECEPTION, THAT'S ALL.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
igotout
Socks, excellent words of wisdom. Makes perfect sense, your explanation of giving inspirationally.
Yeah, Skyrider, I was already an evil horder of money (a good saver) when this was being pushed. I just couldn't see giving more when he was living in a luxurious log mansion and having every tiny little need taken care of even more than many multi millionaires of today. Servants at his beck and call, every speck of dust in order. And he wasn't very good at his job to boot, losing millions in ABS via multiple bad decisions as I saw it.
Yet he beat us up spiritually and belittled us and on every hand as did some other leaders. What a misreable life and one which I would hope he is regretful of today.
It also makes me a little angry that these top leaders of today stood by and did nothing about it and say nothing of it this day other than to make him appear as their scapegoat. I believe it was not ALL his fault. No apologies to anyone. What gutless cowards.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
"FEW know about plurality giving?
BUSHWAH!
Unless you count everyone who ever heard the Acts 29 song about "Plurality
Giving"-called "Plurality Giving"- "FEW" people, then a LOT of people heard
about it back in the mid-to-late 80s after their album "God First" was
released.
That was the album with the least number of songs, and TWO of them-count them,
TWO of them-were about giving money.
One was about the tithe, and was called "Firstfruits".
One was about "plurality giving", and was called "Plurality Giving".
I liked to play them back-to-back. So long as we're shilling for money,
let's not pretend we're not.
:D-->
Back in the 80s, the teachings on "plurality giving" weren't coercive like
in the "Promised Land of the Prevailing Word", when people were to "prevail"
on the brink of poverty. lcm HIMSELF said, in the context of giving beyond your
need, that it was up to you to determine what your "need" was. He said that if
your need involved you owning 12 cars, then that was that.
I guess THAT's the part he really took for himself, though, and decided that
his "need" involved extensive luxuries. (This wasn't difficult-he already had
a live example of someone who decided that for themself to draw from for
years.)
Then again, lcm's messages got crazier over the years.
In the 80s, tithing was 10% ("tithe" means "tenth"),
abundant sharing was optional, and plurality giving was a nice goal.
By the end of the 90s, tithing was 15%, giving above that was mandatory,
and plurality giving was seen as the practical target for everyone they hadn't
run off.
===
Even a cursory reading of Acts 4:32-35 should show this was nothing like
THEIR practice!
"Neither was there any among them that lacked....distribution was made unto
every man according as he had need."
This practice took the EXTRA from some and used it to cover the NEED of OTHERS-
so that NOBODY had luxuries at that moment, but all had enough to cover their
NEEDS.
This was sufficient to cover the immediate needs of the situation, which were
the result of the immediate situation of the sudden influx of new arrivals who
didn't have jobs yet.
Compare this one-time incident with the WEEKLY practice of twi,
where you gave everything WEEK after WEEK,
and, instead of it going to the POOR to cover their needs,
it went to purchase luxuries for those at the top.
The apostles NEVER had luxuries for themselves, they bled out their lives for
God's people, and Paul himself worked a secular job to set a good example.
=====
This little 'Dead Sea' was dead for years-because it was all INLET and no
OUTLET.
( And because of all the dead bodies floatin' in it.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I just liked this question....
:)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
As I remember it, in the 80s......."plurality giving" was like plurality palace.
:)-->
BUT....with the coercion and manipulation, it was TOTALLY something else. NOW, in this 1997 spearheading, they were telling us WHAT OUR NEED WAS.
* You don't *need* a pet dog........where's your commitment??
* You don't *need* cable tv.........go witnessing, be on a class crew.
* You don't *need* two cars.........your wife can do grocery shopping at night.
* You don't *need* to pamper your kids......just get them to fellowship.
* You don't *need* __________________.......just do the word.
Run till you hear glass!!!!!
-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
I remember a couple in our area bought a BMW brand new. Of course they paid cash for it, but I remember hearing whispers about whether they really "needed" a BMW when a much less expensive car would do the same job.
-->
Of course they wouldn't have caught any flack for it because if someone can pay cash for a BMW then they are also contributing heavily to the very nice lifestyle of the right reverend moneyhands.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Leave it to TWI to take a concept born of individual generosity and turn it into an obligation.
It goes beyond abundant sharing
It's giving your plurality
You really want to move the Word
It's time to raise your vision.
It goes beyond abundant sharing.
It's giving your plurality
You've got the choice.
It's in the Word.
What's your decision?
Don't you love how the "choice" is not whether or not to give, but rather whether or not to "do the Word." It's okay if you DON'T do the Word. That's your choice. You're just not doing the Word. No guilt trip there, right?
Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity, for God loves a cheerful giver.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Anyone remember when you couldn't participate in communion if you weren't abundantly sharing? Another great lcm idea!
-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I remember when you couldn't participate in ANYTHING unless you were abundantly sharing. Of course you were not forbidden, just they somehow "forgot" to put you name on one of the invitations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
I remember we weren't allowed to go to WIB because we had put airline tickets for required attendance at ROA on a Visa. I immediately asked for our money back and got yelled at some more. I guess we were supposed to let them keep it.
But that's debt. I always personally preferred to give cash, but that was nixed because only God could keep track of who gave it!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
And He sure wasn't gonna tell that bunch of morons anything either, was He?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waterbuffalo
I always believed the BOT all had, have offshore accounts and will live comfortably for the rest of their lives whether in or out.
So, what happened to Mrs. W? How did she get left out?
Strange.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
In my area they said it was selfish to give cash because the hfc had to use his own hard earned money and time to go buy a money order so he could send it in to hq.
If you're going to give (and you are going to give if you want to live) then you better do it on our terms! 
Why, oh why did it take so long to see the b.s.??? 
-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I dunno. I think ole rose will reach a point that, just for the life of her, she won't be able to remember where she stashed away all those numbers..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I remember some of the good old days... if you sent your own ABS in to headquarters on your own terms, you were REALLY under scrutiny.
Cripe- those guys must have been nuts. What were they afraid of? Or do they get some kind of "cut" out of ABS generated in their area? But you "couldn't" give cash. had to be check or money order. And you couldn't give it when you wanted- had to be when the "holy basket" was given its due rounds.. good grief.
"We have to make sure OUR people are even QUALIFIED to give".
Thankfully, I put up with that kind of crap for only about a month before leaving..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Really- I remember a couple of times that I tried to give ABS to one of the nuckleheads outside of "twig" only to have it REFUSED. "Bring it and give when you're SUPPOSED to!!!"
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.