I always took the FITW thing as benign. I heard the 'Four fathers of the believer' teaching and occasionally people would use the phrase, but it wasn't a big deal. I was a twig cordo for 2 yrs and even in the meetings I got to go to they never made a big deal about it.
So,
a teaching that said the opposite of what
Jesus Christ said-
Matthew 23:9
"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."
-and THAT's "benign"? THAT's "no big deal"?
I notice that lcm and vpw seemed able to recite everything ELSE from
"Babylon Mystery Religion",
but THAT item seemed to elude them.
Good book until I want to call myself something unBiblical?
I always took the FITW thing as benign. I heard the 'Four fathers of the believer' teaching and occasionally people would use the phrase, but it wasn't a big deal. I was a twig cordo for 2 yrs and even in the meetings I got to go to they never made a big deal about it.
Well, John it is entirely a different thng to say Black Sabbath was the father of Metal. (I saw them live in 1970 or 1971??, front row by the way. Awesome concert.)
Back to the pit with you!! Back!!! Back!!!
(from an Un-Black Sabbath fan)
I think B.S. and Metal are great examples. Because of course, B.S. and Ozzie aren't the Fathers of Metal Music (hallowed be It's Heaviness) but there are those who would consider them to be, yes. It would be a euphimism, a title of credit and nothing more. Except for the True Fans of Metal, who are probably not seen or heard from much anyway as they're in their basements, listening to B.S. and working on their pale.
Others might claim others as their Fathers in Metal. Which would be fine, they could all play Dueling for Fathers with their Charvel guitars. Last one standing gets to play "who's your daddy" for the night.
I think Paul's mention of his own fatherly status was only meant to say that he was the guy who'd witnessed and taught those particular people. He wanted to encourage them to keep to his teaching. They only had one "father" in the Word, but I'd hope he didn't mean that they were to follow him right or wrong, or always listen to everything he said as if it were the Word of God. If Paul went off half-cocked in his behavior, doing stupid stuff that was "off" the Word he'd taught them, he'd still be their "father" because of his part in their lives at one time, but it wouldn't mean that they were obligated to put up with it, shut up about it or follow that same behavior. To do so would be stupid. The "value" of someone being a "father" in that context is limited, as I see it. It's not "spiritual", there's no Rights and Privileges that go along with it, no get-out-of-jail cards that allow the good Padre to be a thorn in everybody's side. It ain't a mystical badge of a position.
I realized - there might be some interest in one of my books, an older one, but one packed full of dynamic and inspirational information on this very topic - it would be wrong for me to not offer it in light of the great need for it.
Titled "Make Room For Daddy", it was at one time a real hot item for newly orphaned Wayfers. It helped them then and the time has come for it's reissuance!
If you've ever asked yourself "Why do I need a Father in the Word and what will he do for me?", ask no longer, help is on the way! Regain your childhood - get a Daddy today! And the best part - this book is absolutely free! At no charge whatsover to you or any of your siblings - ever! With the book you will also receive an official "Certificate of Birth", certifying that you are indeed someone's child! complete with a smudged footprint from an actual baby! But that's not all - !!! Act now and receive bronzed baby booties with this incredible package! That's right - bronzed booties!!!
Just send 199.95 U.S. to "luke-iAMyourfather.com" to cover the special handling and packing fees and you will receive this entire package, straightaway with no delays of any kind! And absolutely free!!!
I realized - there might be some interest in one of my books, an older one, but one packed full of dynamic and inspirational information on this very topic - it would be wrong for me to not offer it in light of the great need for it.
Titled "Make Room For Daddy", it was at one time a real hot item for newly orphaned Wayfers. It helped them then and the time has come for it's reissuance!
If you've ever asked yourself "Why do I need a Father in the Word and what will he do for me?", ask no longer, help is on the way! Regain your childhood - get a Daddy today! And the best part - this book is absolutely free! At no charge whatsover to you or any of your siblings - ever! With the book you will also receive an official "Certificate of Birth", certifying that you are indeed someone's child! complete with a smudged footprint from an actual baby! But that's not all - !!! Act now and receive bronzed baby booties with this incredible package! That's right - bronzed booties!!!
Just send 199.95 U.S. to "luke-iAMyourfather.com" to cover the special handling and packing fees and you will receive this entire package, straightaway with no delays of any kind! And absolutely free!!!
I'm new to posting on this forum. Having been a part of the Way in the days of the King (a.k.a. LCM) he refered to VP as our father in the word. This I must say that he is the father of The Branch Wierwillians his own sect. As all false apostles he came up with his own doctrine from other others words and teachings. Was he a teacher of the Word? He used the Word to justify his teachings just as all men do who appoint themselves to lead others. The bible does not condone men like him or even Paul calling themselves father to anyone in the Word. There is no doubt VPW is the Father Of Branch Wierwillians, just like Bill Gates is the father of Microsoft his company he formed from stealing others ideas. We don't follow Bill Gates and live from his every word do we?
I know you will question my statement about Paul, if you look into the scriptures and detail out his conversion, ministry, and doctrine you will see the pattern for all false teachers and apostles. Think about it they all see visions of Christ or God, they all take scripture out of context or miss quote it, and they are all self proclaimed. Now I know you will start quoting The Epistles for your proof text but that would be like quoting VPW, leave Luke's accounts in Acts alone because that would be like quoting LCM. Peter gives one recomendation of Paul at the end of his 2nd Epistle. But, Jesus also told Peter at the end of his life he would be led astray John 21:18. Other than Paul's follwers no one else commends him. Paul misquoted scriptue, took it out of context, saw a vision of the lord but gives contradicting information in each account. The matter of self proclaimed cannot be covered in so limited if a space. Take some time to ponder this before responding it is not a straw man that you can knock over with a few blows. Yes, it stands in the face of christianity, but most of all Paul contrdicts Jesus on so many levels. Paul started Christianity not Jesus.
I believe we can say we have a "father in the Word" if we want, and it doesn't mean that is idolatry, unless we put that "father" above "our Heavenly Father".
Just like we can love and worship Jesus Christ... as long as we do not worship him above God...
quote: There is no verse that says a father is allowed to keep
his children in indentured servitude until his own death,
nor that he could transfer said indentured servitude
in perpetuity to his successor.
Please present it, if you disagree.
Can we please talk about ONE thing at ONE time? Until now you've been saying that the phrase FITW is idolatry. NOW you're talking about abusing the title. You Wierwille haters are so desperate to demonize him that you resort to logic that tries to fit a square peg into a round hole. I was never an indentured servant for VPW or LCM.
What about Paul calling Abraham the father of all them that believe in Romans? Either Paul was wrong or your rigid legalistic interpretation of Jesus' words is wrong.
quote: Excellent points 2 natures. Your description of wierwille and false profets fits to a *T*.
Uh, yeah, and also Paul, Luke, Peter, and even Jesus. Jesus said to his 12 that they would be witnesses unto him ... yet Peter was "led astray", Luke was LCM, and Paul was VPW. So Jesus was a false prophet as well. It's just like the hard core liberals think: Jesus was nothing more than a glorified cult leader. Whew, now I can get a good night's sleep.
quote: There is no verse that says a father is allowed to keep
his children in indentured servitude until his own death,
nor that he could transfer said indentured servitude
in perpetuity to his successor.
Please present it, if you disagree.
Can we please talk about ONE thing at ONE time? Until now you've been saying that the phrase FITW is idolatry. NOW you're talking about abusing the title. You Wierwille haters are so desperate to demonize him that you resort to logic that tries to fit a square peg into a round hole. I was never an indentured servant for VPW or LCM.
What about Paul calling Abraham the father of all them that believe in Romans? Either Paul was wrong or your rigid legalistic interpretation of Jesus' words is wrong.
I see I went too fast for you. I'll slow down.
You were replying to this:
I'll skip the "bifurcation", aka "false dilemma",
and run thru all the possibilities.
You can pick your favourite.
A) The Gospel is wrong.
The Bible can't be trusted, don't be a Christian, twi AND all Christians
are wrong, get a new hobby.
B) The Epistle is wrong.
The Bible can't be trusted, don't be a Christian, twi AND all Christians
are wrong, get a new hobby.
========
C) Both verses are right; Jesus' words are misunderstood.
Woodrow explained this one in detail in "Babylon Mystery Religion".
This "Father" thing was with the connotations of a religious leader
who must be followed without question, and had precedents
in the Old Testament among people in error.
Therefore, Jesus' words are correctly understood-and in this
context, PRECISELY RELEVANT.
Most twi people who had this book DID know this-but never
applied it to the mog.
D) Both verses are right; Paul's words are misunderstood.
twi has taught that this meant Paul was to be followed off
a cliff like lemmings or something, and beyond question.
This is neither true of EARTHLY fathers nor any OTHER
kind. It also contradicts the previous verse.
In the case of Paul, he worked SPECIFICALLY with these
people, and PERSONALLY educated them, and now, like
any parent, he had to let them go and hope he educated
them correctly.
There is no verse that says a father is allowed to keep
his children in indentured servitude until his own death,
nor that he could transfer said indentured servitude
in perpetuity to his successor.
Please present it, if you disagree.
Now then,
any careful reader should be able to see that I ran thru all the
possible meanings of the 2 concepts disagreeing.
Anyone who wanted to make consistent sense of them,
furthermore, can see that the Gospels verse was
approximately understood correctly, and the Epistle
verse was written correctly, but twisted from its meaning
to form an excuse to abuse Christians.
Jesus' warning was NOT to disregard your natural father.
"Honor your father and mother" is the first commandment with promise.
Jesus warned against taking another man, and making him an
authority figure with religious power.
Like in Judges 17.
This Micah guy made himself a bunch of graven images
(in violation of the First Commandment), and a house for them.
Then he decided to finish the whole set.
Judges 17:9
"And Micah said unto him, 'Whence comest thou?' And he said unto
him, 'I am a Levite of Bethlehem-Judah, and I go to sojourn where I
may find a place.'
17:10
And Micah said unto him, 'Dwell with me, and be unto me a
father and a priest,
and I will give thee ten shekels of silver by the year, and a
suit of apparel, and thy victuals.'
So the Levite went in.
17:11
And the Levite was content to dwell with the man; and the young
man was unto him as one of his sons."
Is the account inconsistent? Did he offer the man being a father
and instead make him a son?
The account IS consistent, and the offer was as stated.
The "father" Micah referred to was a title of RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY,
much like the secular authority of a natural or foster-father,
except in a religious dimension.
The young man lived there like he was one of the family,
but the position he filled was as "father and priest",
religious authority.
If you need more, the next chapter tells more on this.
THIS is the type of authority Jesus said NOT to have,
and it's the type twi specializes in.
======
So, what was Paul on about?
Paul spoke to someone specific, and said that he
"fathered" him. Paul acted as an advisor and educator
to this specific person, as an earthly father might.
He did not act as "religious authority" even though this
would not have seemed unreasonable at the time.
Further, since Paul knew that now EVERY CHRISTIAN
was a "priest", Paul knew the CONCEPT just COULD
not work-even on paper.
Paul was not acting as if he had any legal rights
(or any other rights) to boss around his "son"-
marking this different from the Judges incident AND
Jesus' warning. His "son" was effectively an
"adult". If one would try to extend authority and
claim Paul could claim the same rights as an
earthly father, this would not work, since an earthly
father could not boss around his adult sons who made
their own paths in the world.
So, no matter how you slice it, Paul was NOT claiming
Patriarch status, nor religious priest status, over the
few people he PERSONALLY "fathered".
There is no Biblical basis for the twi-invented doctrine
The term "Father in the Word" does not appear in any Bible. It is strictly a TWI take off from 1 Corinthians 4:15.
"For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet [have ye] not many
fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel."
These were the words of Paul to the Corinthians. "Father in the word" does not appear here. The first related term is "instructors in Christ" ... followed by "not many fathers" implying "in Christ". He goes on to say "in Christ I have begotten you through the Gospel"
So Paul implied the term "father in Christ" , speaking of himself in regards to his relationship to the Corinthinans. He did not say "father in the word".
For TWI's "Father in the Word" teaching to pass any kind of muster, the meaning to the individual using the term should correlate to Paul's intended meaning in 1 Corinthians 4:15.
So what did Paul mean by "father [in Christ]" ? And is it the same meaning that TWI/VPW taught?
Paul was making a point to the Corinthians. He was not telling them to start calling him "father in the word" as some kind of honorific title.
So how was Paul a father to the Corinthians? Paul said "I have begotten you through the Gospel". Paul estabished the church at Corinth. He was there for about 18 months (if I remember correctly) where he worked as a tentmaker and where he taught Jesus as the Messiah, the good news of salvation and redemption in Jesus Christ.
What was the crux of VPW's teachings? Was it Christ centered? Did he work among us as did Paul? Were we or anyone "begotton in Christ" by VPW ? Can we honestly equate VPWs ministry with that of Paul's very unique ministry.?
Can somone honestly say (biblicaly I mean) that by simply taking PFAL via film, video or audio that VPW then becomes one's "father in the Word" ? Is this what Paul meant in 1 Cor 4:15? I don't think so.
However, if someone wants to refer to VPW as their Father in the Word, that's their perogative. Old habits die hard especially for those prone to adoration of religious "leaders" It is similar to the Catholics having a Pope ( father) But it is an extreme twisting of scripture top say it is a biblical practice.
Now read chapter 5 of 1st Corinthians where Paul says not to keep company with, and to put away from ourselves; fornicators, extortioners, drunkards, railers, etc ..... he furthermore calls someone like this a "wicked person".
Why in the world anyone want to refer to VPW as "father in the word", beats the hell out of me. I see no basis for it whatsoever.
What was the crux of VPW's teachings? Was it Christ centered? Did he work among us as did Paul? Were we or anyone "begotton in Christ" by VPW ? Can we honestly equate VPWs ministry with that of Paul's very unique ministry.?
Answers.......
1) The Law of Believing is THE GREATEST LAW IN THE UNIVERSE
Recommended Posts
WordWolf
So,
a teaching that said the opposite of what
Jesus Christ said-
Matthew 23:9
"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."
-and THAT's "benign"? THAT's "no big deal"?
I notice that lcm and vpw seemed able to recite everything ELSE from
"Babylon Mystery Religion",
but THAT item seemed to elude them.
Good book until I want to call myself something unBiblical?
Strange targeting system in play....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Wierwille worship is benign (harmless)...????
Hardly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
So you're saying Paul was wrong too then?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Back to the pit with you!! Back!!! Back!!!
(from an Un-Black Sabbath fan)
I think B.S. and Metal are great examples. Because of course, B.S. and Ozzie aren't the Fathers of Metal Music (hallowed be It's Heaviness) but there are those who would consider them to be, yes. It would be a euphimism, a title of credit and nothing more. Except for the True Fans of Metal, who are probably not seen or heard from much anyway as they're in their basements, listening to B.S. and working on their pale.
Others might claim others as their Fathers in Metal. Which would be fine, they could all play Dueling for Fathers with their Charvel guitars. Last one standing gets to play "who's your daddy" for the night.
I think Paul's mention of his own fatherly status was only meant to say that he was the guy who'd witnessed and taught those particular people. He wanted to encourage them to keep to his teaching. They only had one "father" in the Word, but I'd hope he didn't mean that they were to follow him right or wrong, or always listen to everything he said as if it were the Word of God. If Paul went off half-cocked in his behavior, doing stupid stuff that was "off" the Word he'd taught them, he'd still be their "father" because of his part in their lives at one time, but it wouldn't mean that they were obligated to put up with it, shut up about it or follow that same behavior. To do so would be stupid. The "value" of someone being a "father" in that context is limited, as I see it. It's not "spiritual", there's no Rights and Privileges that go along with it, no get-out-of-jail cards that allow the good Padre to be a thorn in everybody's side. It ain't a mystical badge of a position.
Edited by socksLink to comment
Share on other sites
socks
I realized - there might be some interest in one of my books, an older one, but one packed full of dynamic and inspirational information on this very topic - it would be wrong for me to not offer it in light of the great need for it.
Titled "Make Room For Daddy", it was at one time a real hot item for newly orphaned Wayfers. It helped them then and the time has come for it's reissuance!
If you've ever asked yourself "Why do I need a Father in the Word and what will he do for me?", ask no longer, help is on the way! Regain your childhood - get a Daddy today! And the best part - this book is absolutely free! At no charge whatsover to you or any of your siblings - ever! With the book you will also receive an official "Certificate of Birth", certifying that you are indeed someone's child! complete with a smudged footprint from an actual baby! But that's not all - !!! Act now and receive bronzed baby booties with this incredible package! That's right - bronzed booties!!!
Just send 199.95 U.S. to "luke-iAMyourfather.com" to cover the special handling and packing fees and you will receive this entire package, straightaway with no delays of any kind! And absolutely free!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Thanks, socks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I'll skip the "bifurcation", aka "false dilemma",
and run thru all the possibilities.
You can pick your favourite.
A) The Gospel is wrong.
The Bible can't be trusted, don't be a Christian, twi AND all Christians
are wrong, get a new hobby.
B) The Epistle is wrong.
The Bible can't be trusted, don't be a Christian, twi AND all Christians
are wrong, get a new hobby.
========
C) Both verses are right; Jesus' words are misunderstood.
Woodrow explained this one in detail in "Babylon Mystery Religion".
This "Father" thing was with the connotations of a religious leader
who must be followed without question, and had precedents
in the Old Testament among people in error.
Therefore, Jesus' words are correctly understood-and in this
context, PRECISELY RELEVANT.
Most twi people who had this book DID know this-but never
applied it to the mog.
D) Both verses are right; Paul's words are misunderstood.
twi has taught that this meant Paul was to be followed off
a cliff like lemmings or something, and beyond question.
This is neither true of EARTHLY fathers nor any OTHER
kind. It also contradicts the previous verse.
In the case of Paul, he worked SPECIFICALLY with these
people, and PERSONALLY educated them, and now, like
any parent, he had to let them go and hope he educated
them correctly.
There is no verse that says a father is allowed to keep
his children in indentured servitude until his own death,
nor that he could transfer said indentured servitude
in perpetuity to his successor.
Please present it, if you disagree.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
2natures
I'm new to posting on this forum. Having been a part of the Way in the days of the King (a.k.a. LCM) he refered to VP as our father in the word. This I must say that he is the father of The Branch Wierwillians his own sect. As all false apostles he came up with his own doctrine from other others words and teachings. Was he a teacher of the Word? He used the Word to justify his teachings just as all men do who appoint themselves to lead others. The bible does not condone men like him or even Paul calling themselves father to anyone in the Word. There is no doubt VPW is the Father Of Branch Wierwillians, just like Bill Gates is the father of Microsoft his company he formed from stealing others ideas. We don't follow Bill Gates and live from his every word do we?
I know you will question my statement about Paul, if you look into the scriptures and detail out his conversion, ministry, and doctrine you will see the pattern for all false teachers and apostles. Think about it they all see visions of Christ or God, they all take scripture out of context or miss quote it, and they are all self proclaimed. Now I know you will start quoting The Epistles for your proof text but that would be like quoting VPW, leave Luke's accounts in Acts alone because that would be like quoting LCM. Peter gives one recomendation of Paul at the end of his 2nd Epistle. But, Jesus also told Peter at the end of his life he would be led astray John 21:18. Other than Paul's follwers no one else commends him. Paul misquoted scriptue, took it out of context, saw a vision of the lord but gives contradicting information in each account. The matter of self proclaimed cannot be covered in so limited if a space. Take some time to ponder this before responding it is not a straw man that you can knock over with a few blows. Yes, it stands in the face of christianity, but most of all Paul contrdicts Jesus on so many levels. Paul started Christianity not Jesus.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
I believe we can say we have a "father in the Word" if we want, and it doesn't mean that is idolatry, unless we put that "father" above "our Heavenly Father".
Just like we can love and worship Jesus Christ... as long as we do not worship him above God...
God is Supreme.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Excellent points 2 natures. Your description of wierwille and false profets fits to a *T*.
Welome to greasespot :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: There is no verse that says a father is allowed to keep
his children in indentured servitude until his own death,
nor that he could transfer said indentured servitude
in perpetuity to his successor.
Please present it, if you disagree.
Can we please talk about ONE thing at ONE time? Until now you've been saying that the phrase FITW is idolatry. NOW you're talking about abusing the title. You Wierwille haters are so desperate to demonize him that you resort to logic that tries to fit a square peg into a round hole. I was never an indentured servant for VPW or LCM.
What about Paul calling Abraham the father of all them that believe in Romans? Either Paul was wrong or your rigid legalistic interpretation of Jesus' words is wrong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: Excellent points 2 natures. Your description of wierwille and false profets fits to a *T*.
Uh, yeah, and also Paul, Luke, Peter, and even Jesus. Jesus said to his 12 that they would be witnesses unto him ... yet Peter was "led astray", Luke was LCM, and Paul was VPW. So Jesus was a false prophet as well. It's just like the hard core liberals think: Jesus was nothing more than a glorified cult leader. Whew, now I can get a good night's sleep.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolchef1248 @adelphia.net
i always had a problem with this verse
my earthly was my father and my best friend
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I see I went too fast for you. I'll slow down.
You were replying to this:
Now then,
any careful reader should be able to see that I ran thru all the
possible meanings of the 2 concepts disagreeing.
Anyone who wanted to make consistent sense of them,
furthermore, can see that the Gospels verse was
approximately understood correctly, and the Epistle
verse was written correctly, but twisted from its meaning
to form an excuse to abuse Christians.
Jesus' warning was NOT to disregard your natural father.
"Honor your father and mother" is the first commandment with promise.
Jesus warned against taking another man, and making him an
authority figure with religious power.
Like in Judges 17.
This Micah guy made himself a bunch of graven images
(in violation of the First Commandment), and a house for them.
Then he decided to finish the whole set.
Judges 17:9
"And Micah said unto him, 'Whence comest thou?' And he said unto
him, 'I am a Levite of Bethlehem-Judah, and I go to sojourn where I
may find a place.'
17:10
And Micah said unto him, 'Dwell with me, and be unto me a
father and a priest,
and I will give thee ten shekels of silver by the year, and a
suit of apparel, and thy victuals.'
So the Levite went in.
17:11
And the Levite was content to dwell with the man; and the young
man was unto him as one of his sons."
Is the account inconsistent? Did he offer the man being a father
and instead make him a son?
The account IS consistent, and the offer was as stated.
The "father" Micah referred to was a title of RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY,
much like the secular authority of a natural or foster-father,
except in a religious dimension.
The young man lived there like he was one of the family,
but the position he filled was as "father and priest",
religious authority.
If you need more, the next chapter tells more on this.
THIS is the type of authority Jesus said NOT to have,
and it's the type twi specializes in.
======
So, what was Paul on about?
Paul spoke to someone specific, and said that he
"fathered" him. Paul acted as an advisor and educator
to this specific person, as an earthly father might.
He did not act as "religious authority" even though this
would not have seemed unreasonable at the time.
Further, since Paul knew that now EVERY CHRISTIAN
was a "priest", Paul knew the CONCEPT just COULD
not work-even on paper.
Paul was not acting as if he had any legal rights
(or any other rights) to boss around his "son"-
marking this different from the Judges incident AND
Jesus' warning. His "son" was effectively an
"adult". If one would try to extend authority and
claim Paul could claim the same rights as an
earthly father, this would not work, since an earthly
father could not boss around his adult sons who made
their own paths in the world.
So, no matter how you slice it, Paul was NOT claiming
Patriarch status, nor religious priest status, over the
few people he PERSONALLY "fathered".
There is no Biblical basis for the twi-invented doctrine
of "vpw is our father in the Word."
Edited by WordWolfLink to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Today is a special day for the Branch Wierwillians.......it's veepee's birth date.
Many staunch followers of their doctrine will pay homage to their "father in the word."
NOT ME.
The sect is all but dead.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
The term "Father in the Word" does not appear in any Bible. It is strictly a TWI take off from 1 Corinthians 4:15.
"For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet [have ye] not many
fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel."
These were the words of Paul to the Corinthians. "Father in the word" does not appear here. The first related term is "instructors in Christ" ... followed by "not many fathers" implying "in Christ". He goes on to say "in Christ I have begotten you through the Gospel"
So Paul implied the term "father in Christ" , speaking of himself in regards to his relationship to the Corinthinans. He did not say "father in the word".
For TWI's "Father in the Word" teaching to pass any kind of muster, the meaning to the individual using the term should correlate to Paul's intended meaning in 1 Corinthians 4:15.
So what did Paul mean by "father [in Christ]" ? And is it the same meaning that TWI/VPW taught?
Paul was making a point to the Corinthians. He was not telling them to start calling him "father in the word" as some kind of honorific title.
So how was Paul a father to the Corinthians? Paul said "I have begotten you through the Gospel". Paul estabished the church at Corinth. He was there for about 18 months (if I remember correctly) where he worked as a tentmaker and where he taught Jesus as the Messiah, the good news of salvation and redemption in Jesus Christ.
What was the crux of VPW's teachings? Was it Christ centered? Did he work among us as did Paul? Were we or anyone "begotton in Christ" by VPW ? Can we honestly equate VPWs ministry with that of Paul's very unique ministry.?
Can somone honestly say (biblicaly I mean) that by simply taking PFAL via film, video or audio that VPW then becomes one's "father in the Word" ? Is this what Paul meant in 1 Cor 4:15? I don't think so.
However, if someone wants to refer to VPW as their Father in the Word, that's their perogative. Old habits die hard especially for those prone to adoration of religious "leaders" It is similar to the Catholics having a Pope ( father) But it is an extreme twisting of scripture top say it is a biblical practice.
Now read chapter 5 of 1st Corinthians where Paul says not to keep company with, and to put away from ourselves; fornicators, extortioners, drunkards, railers, etc ..... he furthermore calls someone like this a "wicked person".
Why in the world anyone want to refer to VPW as "father in the word", beats the hell out of me. I see no basis for it whatsoever.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Answers.......
1) The Law of Believing is THE GREATEST LAW IN THE UNIVERSE
2) No
3) No
4) Doubtful
5)
.........NO
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.