For many of us who have checked them out at various times after leaving twi, they were stopping points to help us leave the twi mindset while we still had the opinion that twi/piffle had the corner on truth. Unfortunately, if you hang around many of the offshoots very long, the same types of dysfunction become apparent very quickly. For example:
- Those in the Geer groups ("licensed" to run the "Walking in God's Power" series, et al) - - IMO, still have the Wierwille worship running deep in their mindset. So it's a "don't ask, don't tell" - - there's a big elephant in the room (VP's story as reported all over the Internet) - - but don't you dare speak ill of the idol.
- Also, parallel to that with many of those Geer groups (I am acquainted with 5 who are pretty heavy hitters in his group), is that we will all speak "the same" belief. So, don't ask any questions, shun any of the former twi leaders/clergy who can think and are questioning past research and don't necessarly agree with Geer's take on the world, be prepared to be a bit of an outcast if you don't march in step with the groupthink. And God forbid you should think anything other than that CG is the new MOG. (Of course, this is never out right discussed, just practiced.) Central to these groups, in my own observation and in my own discussions with having visited them - - is the "we are right" mindset. We are right in our worship of "the Word" is more like it and there is no room for, acknowledgement of, or respect for the greater Body of Christ that "just doesn't know the word like us." It's "God in a Box" at its best.
- There are many independent home-based fellowship types (some solo, some grouped in a local region) led by former twi folks / Corps / "clergy" who don't want to have any part of CG's gang, Hendrick's gang, CFF, Lynn's group, etc. and have various degrees of loyalty to vpw's teachings, Piffle, and/or their own take on the Bible. Great, sincere, wonderful, kind folks who teach and seem to have a great passion for what they do and what they feel God has called them to do. Just don't ever get curious enough to expose their hero, vp, because you most likely will be called on the carpet for "thinking evil" of a brother (and for some, the all important "Father in the Word" role).
- Then there are all the former leaders who, "as I see it" (that's my opinion stated here) have varying degrees of that need to be in the spotlight still (and they are in all the groups listed above). They were NOT elected to succeed vpw. In all the chest thumping and turf wars that went on post-POP, many have opted their calling is still to "teach the Word" - - and God bless them for their sincerity. I have observed a couple of troubling patterns with some of these former leaders. 1) some have never worked an honest day in their lives since college (if they attended) or joining the Way Corps way back when, and are obsessed with their work, more so they can maintain the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed (yes, I know there are exceptions). Some of these really know how to play the "tithing" game with the few well-off professionals they have in their groups, stilll live in the homes disporportionately extravegant versus those in their "group", are quite content with their mini-MOGness - - and are still quite focused on "being right" or "the sole (or main) source of truth". And 2) Many of these leaders have yet to "come clean" in my opinion for what they know to be true of the true history of vp, ha, cg, lcm, etc. Their group "partcipants/followers/minions" are made up, in part, of those who participated in a twig way back when twigs were actually somewhat autonomous - - and have no idea the relationship to what was promoted and the what was really going on at HQ and at many of the limb/region leadership levels. It's kind of like someone in a witness protection program who has no past (don't ask/don't tell again) - - just keep teaching "hot bible" and gloss over the rest.
Overall, I think that many of us former twi-ites had an idealistic desire to be a part of something wonderful, Godly, bigger than ourselves, something that helped ourselves and other people. I think it would be safe to guess that those who don't know some of the information contained on this board, would still be motivated to participate in an offshoot for the same reason. I don't begrudge any of them their right to choose what they want to do, just offer my opinion/perspective/experience as one who was involved in twi from the earlier days til POP and then DID participate in various of the offshoot groups for a time. And as our dear friend Mark O. would say, YMMV.
Great..it's called 'like-minded beleivers'. As I said on a previous thread, one doesn't own a Yamaha 125 motorcycle and expect to ride with Harley owners ya know.
All power to the off-shoots !
Yes we run an off-shoot ministry that is growing (albeit slowly) but we have 'stumbled' on a cupla 'keys' to help produce 'mega growth' and if some of you ( I know who) who are conducting fellowships want to hear about it please p.m. me.
We hold to much of pfal doctrine but run our services closer to 'Hillsong' style, bless ya !
I always chuckle at these "offshoot" discussions. To me, it's like saying..............The Way Tree was the original and any and all who exited twi are "offshoots."
Twi was an offshoot of B.G. Leonard's ministry. Mrs. W's book spells it out plainly....after veepee returned from B.G's classes, twi was shortly thereafter incorporated in 1953.
So..........was twi successful as an offshoot...??? Hmmmmmmmm.
Yes, I'm part of a CG "offshoot" and we believe that VPW was a man of god who happened to sin in his flesh as opposed to a sexual predator who happened to have a bible ministry, which is what many GSers think. That's NOT idolatry just to respect someone for something.
Some of the double talk on GSC is very subtle. Some people say that it's possible to worship someone even if they're not God; that there are varying degrees of worship, and true there is some biblical evidence of this.
Then other threads accuse people of "worshipping" VPW, TWI, or PFAL with the connotation that ANYTHING that is "worshipped" other than God indicates "idolatry". Is there a difference between worship and respect or admiration?
I'm thinking of 2 particular OT idols that were worshipped to the eventual detriment of those who worshipped them...baal and dagon. Baal was a weather god who was worshipped in hopes that the weather would accomodate the growth of crops. I don't know for sure about dagon, but I do know that dagon was a fish and that the major cities in the Phillistines nation were all on the Mediterranian sea, so it's probable that dagon was worshipped so they'd hopefully catch a lot of fish.
In other words, these gods were expected to GIVE THE INCREASE. THAT'S what made it idolatry. Simply respecting a man's teaching or liking a musical group doesn't mean that I'm expecting any "increase" from the man or the group. However, if that respect or admiration turns into fear that bad things are going to happen to me if I don't ABS or something like that, THEN perhaps the line has been crossed over into idolatry and I know that this was happening a lot between 1994 and LCMs exile.
I have yet to see any evidence of idolatry at the CG fellowship I attend.
It would seem that the offshoots are not offering anything different that community churches already have in place. So, why would anyone be attracted to an offshoot of TWI?
Simple --- we ate the fish, and spit out the bones. :)
quote: It would seem that the offshoots are not offering anything different that community churches already have in place. So, why would anyone be attracted to an offshoot of TWI?
I'll concede that churches have caught up with TWI in some major ways. Before TWI had large numbers of people joining them, churches all seemed to basically teach people they'd go to hell if they didn't stay "right with God" which really meant stay in the good graces of the church leadership. I think groups like TWI were a wake up call to the denominational churches. Hey! People need more from church than being told they could go to hell. Duh.
Yet TWI proved you could have church in the home without the financial backing of a denomination. They were so successful that the churches HAD to notice and give respect. Yeah, their lip service was "It's a cult! Run for it!", but they changed with the times didn't they? Having been in a few churches since leaving TWI, I'd say they've lightened up on the hell stuff quite a bit.
But those doctrinal issues are still there. Personally, I need certain things from a church's doctrine and I need certain things from the church's people. So...
Why shouldn't anyone be attracted to an offshoot of TWI?
I believe TWI taught peole to NOT go to church after vpw died.
In the early eighties , many of us did go to church, while involved with twi.
believe it or not we would hold twigs and go together or alone to a service or a community thing and no one shunned the idea.
I spoke to a friend in about this the other day and he freaks and says it never happened but yes we did, he didnt maybe because he closed his mind the minute he joined twi and wanted to go that path exclusively.
many of us didnt tho back in the day, we went to church we attended family stuff went to parties given by unblelievers we lived a good life, how do you THINK so many got involed?
What happened was so many got stuck with the stuff twi was teaching and if it was brought up as a d8iscussion in many of the churches twi people would be asked to leave the church, it happened alot and that is why the group got so darn exclusive in its thinking and being together .
I know in the ninties it would have been thought of as a sin, and absolutely unheard of.
Yet TWI proved you could have church in the home without the financial backing of a denomination. They were so successful that the churches HAD to notice and give respect. Yeah, their lip service was "It's a cult! Run for it!", but they changed with the times didn't they? Having been in a few churches since leaving TWI, I'd say they've lightened up on the hell stuff quite a bit.
IMO, twi did NOT prove you could have church in the home blah, blah, blah. It was the steady march of the pfal class, add the hype, the youth, the word-of-mouth campaign,......and you get about 35,000 - 40,000 faithful and attendance at the Rock of Ages hits an all-time high of around 24,000 (in 1984).
As far as "church in the home".............my grandparents HAD church in the home back in the 1920s.
IMO, way too much credit is given to twi, at times.
johniam, church in the home wasn't invented by twi, even if you don't count "church in the home" as mentioned in Acts. In fact, "Twig" was the third home fellowship I participated in, back in the late 60s, early 70s. Twi was just part of a movement in that direction, a movement that I think gained momentum because a lot of people were getting fed up with their churches during that time, particularly the young people.
I went to one class of one offshoot and found it to be pretty boring--regurgitated PFAL. But that's just me. Some people want to continue in twi doctrine (or something close to it) and twi practice minus the scandals. I say fine for them. I have no objection if that's what they want to do. It's just not for me.
As for growth, I'd ask some people who are involved in CFF. My impression (and I could be wrong) is that it's one of the larger spin-offs from twi.
Except for one Pentecostal church I attended before twi, and the Baptist churches I visited with friends, I never heard much hellfire and brimstone preached in church. I never heard much of anything preached in church, which is why I was searching for answers outside the "mainstream."
I'm not attending a church now myself, but from what many have posted and from what I've observed, it sounds like there are lots of churches that have a lot to offer in terms of different types of fellowships and activities. I wouldn't credit twi with that. Churches had to change because many of them were failing miserably.
I'll concede that churches have caught up with TWI in some major ways. Before TWI had large numbers of people joining them, churches all seemed to basically teach people they'd go to hell if they didn't stay "right with God" which really meant stay in the good graces of the church leadership. I think groups like TWI were a wake up call to the denominational churches. Hey! People need more from church than being told they could go to hell. Duh.
Churches have caught up with TWI - thats silly. I can't honestly say what alot of other churches teach on the different subjects because for most of my adult life I attended TWI. We were conditioned to believe what TWI wanted us to believe about other churches. Thats a pretty blanket statement to make if you haven't attended all the different churches and listened to their doctrine or read thier materials. How can you possibly know what "all" churches taught. Is that "all without exception or all "without distinction"?
Not trying to be a smart-foot, just curious how you could know so much about other churches. I went to a couple different home fellowships before I hooked up with TWI in 1975. And heard of many more when witnessing to others.
quote: Not trying to be a smart-foot, just curious how you could know so much about other churches. I went to a couple different home fellowships before I hooked up with TWI in 1975. And heard of many more when witnessing to others.
No, I didn't personally ask all of them, but I grew up in Grand rapids, MI, or "little Jerusalem" as some church people called it. Tons of churches in GR. In my neighborhood, none of the other kids could play outside on Sunday except from 2 catholic families. All the Dutch reformed or Christian reformed kids told me they'd go straight to hell if they did that.
When I was in 8th grade the church I went to had us go to several other churches during that year. The one that was the most fun was a black Baptist church. That service was almost like the church service depicted in both Blues Bros. movies. But they treated us snot nosed 8th graders like we were royalty and this was less than a month after MLK got assassinated.
The dutch reformed church stuck us up in the balcony and hardly interacted with us. We were the "heathen church" y'know. So, no I didn't ask every church if they were into hell motivation, but what church experience I had made a solid impression on me. By the way, the church I grew up attending was a liberal church. The main minister was on the Today show in 1971 saying he did NOT believe in the literal, physical resurrection of Christ. They didn't teach about hell, but they didn't teach about Christ, either. Liberals can be just as self righteous and cruel as any fundamentalist.
Linda: I wasn't trying to infer that church is a bad choice and I admit that TWI taught us to be bigots about church people. I know church in the home was not originated by TWI, but I can't think of any other groups whose whole MO was church in the home. They put all their eggs in that basket and it worked. Today's TWI wouldn't exist if it weren't for the success of the 70s TWI.
I'm much more open to churches now than I ever have been, but they're still not the only game in town.
From Rejoice ~~~ It would seem that the offshoots are not offering anything different that community churches already have in place. So, why would anyone be attracted to an offshoot of TWI?
From me ~~~
Simple --- we ate the fish, and spit out the bones.
From WordWolf ~~~
I wish I could charge money every time that saying
is used, and put it directly into the GSC operating fund.
Why do people keep using that same expression,
instead of just saying what they mean?
Ok -- I can do that. :)
Instead of eating fish and spitting out bones,
let's just say I took in what was good, and got rid of the refuse.
Since I am in accordance with SOME of the beliefs taught in twi, and
since MOST of the beliefs I am in accordance with are found in off-shoots,
and since SOME the off-shoots (so far) have not seen fit to micro-manage,
I have no problem with off-shoots, and prefer the teachings I find there --
over those found in community churches --
(although I have gone to a few of them as well).
I'm not denigrating community churches here by any means.
I have heard many a good sermon at a few, and the folks there were stellar.
Genuine, caring, friendly, and given my experiences at these places --
I would attend again.
So -- in essence -- it is the teachings offered by off-shoots
(minus the *iron-fisted* authority evinced by twi) that is *attractive*.
They are offering *fish* -- (food for thought) --
twi offers *bones* -- skeletal remains, worthy of spitting out.
I am thinking that during the 70's (which was the hippie, anti-establishment era) there were alot of these "home based fellowships" around. It was yet another way of striking at the establishment and people doing their own thing to rebel against the established churches and dogma. I know I liked the home based fellowships because I was "free" from some of the rigid standards taught in churches. This is what initially attracted me to TWI.
I had attended a couple of others though prior to my involvement - I even moved into a house and lived with some "believers" and that became rather rigid. Kinda like a Way Home, it was not to my liking and shortly thereafter was witnessed to by someone and started going to twig. This was in the early 70's. I liked the "free" atmosphere.
teens and young adults would listen to music , talk and maybe a witness and a small teaching of some sort from the bible.
we had them all over the place.
I still go to the the christian coffee houses they are gaining in popularity again with rock or heavy rock bands of several sorts playing in the background in a relaxed large room that offers free coffee tea and pizza for 50 a slice.
we have manyl here .
the night I first went to twi it was a "coffe house," honestly thousand had atttended it was in a very large motel in the city.
I think it's worth mentioning that as far as twi's impact on the Christian world...twi was barely a small blip on the radar screen...most church people had never heard of them, or if they did, they considered twi a cult.
Wierwille's impact was marginal at best. Outside of twi, he was barely a footnote and had no real "impact" on Christian churches...
...As far as the offshoots go, they exist because of the egos of former twi leaders and the need (real or imagined) of some former twi members to continue with what they find to be familiar and comfortable.
All that being said...The body of Christ is a spiritual church with only one head...
As soon as someone starts a church/organization, they give it a name, appoint leaders, hoist their flag, and figure out a way to collect money...it then becomes political.
To each his own...As for me, I don't like to "clutter up" my personal faith with the politics of organizations.
I can't speak from experience, but from what I recall reading and observing here through the years, the offshoots were considered something like a "halfway house" for people who left TWI, especially those who were unjustly kicked out. Sort of like "TWI Light", if you will.
Those people who still subscribe to TWI doctrine and who are more comfortable with the "familiar-ness" of the organization are generally the ones who are attracted to the offshoots.
Soome people who leave TWI and move to the offshoots find that the group IS too much like TWI for them or they start having the same questions they had about the doctrine and practices of the group and end up leaving. Most of those have had their share of drama and soap operas, some very similar to TWI's.
I'm not saying they are bad or good. It's not for me, but it does meet the needs of some people. I like having many choices of things to get involved with. I like having a "building" and not having to scrounge around for places to hold big meetings. I like a lot of "church" things that these kinds of groups can't provide. I like knowing where my money is going and how it's being spent. :)
Success is a relative term and would vary according to the person asked. Apparently they are doing well enough for them to have people living nicely off the money of those who attend and their overhead is very low because of the "home" aspect. They do help some people and would probably tell you that "size doesn't matter" And it doesn't. My church is relatively small, especially for a thriving area like Orlando.
Concerning the Geerite spinoffs I have a pressing question. Why no websites or Internet presence by CG and some of the other CG affiliates? Something to hide perhaps? Afraid of what might be posted about you?
I've noticed for many years now that the Geer Network TOTALLY denies that it is a network, and very vehemently at times too!
There were times when I tried all sorts of vocabulary words, and respectful ones too, to describe their network, only to get viciously chewed out over it.
I gave up and now just call them the GRRR ministry. It seems to fit them best.
This odd policy gives rise to what you wondered over. Now you have somethig new to wonder about, maybe?
quote: Concerning the Geerite spinoffs I have a pressing question. Why no websites or Internet presence by CG and some of the other CG affiliates? Something to hide perhaps? Afraid of what might be posted about you?
It's very telling in my opinion.
Telling of what? Did Jesus have a website? or Paul?
quote: I'm not saying they are bad or good. It's not for me, but it does meet the needs of some people. I like having many choices of things to get involved with. I like having a "building" and not having to scrounge around for places to hold big meetings. I like a lot of "church" things that these kinds of groups can't provide. I like knowing where my money is going and how it's being spent.
I agree totally. Like I said, churches aren't the only game in town, but neither are home fellowships. Interestingly, in TWI 85% of ABS went to HQ with 15% staying in the limb. With CG it's the opposite. Every so often we have big gatherings and ABS money pays for food, rented rooms, etc. so to an extent, I DO know where my money is going. Back to me.
Belle, you might remember from that thread about John Hendricks that I recounted leaving and posted that we started looking for a church. Remember? At the time we thought as you just posted that a church would be better equipped to deal with our kids than a ex way spinoff. Well, we went to six churches, a mid week meeting and a Sunday service plus a one on one with a pastor or asst pastor. Someone from the CG fellowship called me about something non biblical related not knowing we weren't with John H anymore. One thing led to another and we started going to that fellowship which has been refreshingly absent of the kinds of pressure TWI and some spinoff leadership have put on people. We probably could've been happy in any of the churches we looked at, but this CG fellowship is working out for us.
By the way, are you even aware that I actually apologized to you on the JH thread for a couple of remarks I made to you?
quote: Wierwille's impact was marginal at best. Outside of twi, he was barely a footnote and had no real "impact" on Christian churches...
Oh, and THAT's why every time I went to a Christian book store their cult section had all kinds of books that usually listed TWI 3rd or 4th most "dangerous cult". It was about money, not doctrine. They figured TWI was stealing people from them. "Mind control", right? TWI "possessed" people against their will to sign those green cards. Yeppur! But to me, this indicates IMPACT.
quote: Concerning the Geerite spinoffs I have a pressing question. Why no websites or Internet presence by CG and some of the other CG affiliates? Something to hide perhaps? Afraid of what might be posted about you?
It's very telling in my opinion.
Telling of what? Did Jesus have a website? or Paul?
That question is more foolish than I am.
Was the internet available? Was there electricity?
Of course they didn't have websites... but they used whatever means was available to them 'back in the day'.
Why SHOULD CG have a website? Means to do WHAT? Anything you could forecast is just speculation.
This is another double standard. Back in TWI somebody once asked Donnie Fugit "JEEEZUS didn't have a motorcoach. Why does VP have one?" But if I say Jesus didn't have a website, that's a foolish question.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
9
9
10
8
Popular Days
Mar 28
27
Mar 27
21
Mar 29
16
Mar 26
10
Top Posters In This Topic
johniam 9 posts
Tom Strange 9 posts
dmiller 10 posts
pond 8 posts
Popular Days
Mar 28 2006
27 posts
Mar 27 2006
21 posts
Mar 29 2006
16 posts
Mar 26 2006
10 posts
jardinero
Good question, Rejoice.
For many of us who have checked them out at various times after leaving twi, they were stopping points to help us leave the twi mindset while we still had the opinion that twi/piffle had the corner on truth. Unfortunately, if you hang around many of the offshoots very long, the same types of dysfunction become apparent very quickly. For example:
- Those in the Geer groups ("licensed" to run the "Walking in God's Power" series, et al) - - IMO, still have the Wierwille worship running deep in their mindset. So it's a "don't ask, don't tell" - - there's a big elephant in the room (VP's story as reported all over the Internet) - - but don't you dare speak ill of the idol.
- Also, parallel to that with many of those Geer groups (I am acquainted with 5 who are pretty heavy hitters in his group), is that we will all speak "the same" belief. So, don't ask any questions, shun any of the former twi leaders/clergy who can think and are questioning past research and don't necessarly agree with Geer's take on the world, be prepared to be a bit of an outcast if you don't march in step with the groupthink. And God forbid you should think anything other than that CG is the new MOG. (Of course, this is never out right discussed, just practiced.) Central to these groups, in my own observation and in my own discussions with having visited them - - is the "we are right" mindset. We are right in our worship of "the Word" is more like it and there is no room for, acknowledgement of, or respect for the greater Body of Christ that "just doesn't know the word like us." It's "God in a Box" at its best.
- There are many independent home-based fellowship types (some solo, some grouped in a local region) led by former twi folks / Corps / "clergy" who don't want to have any part of CG's gang, Hendrick's gang, CFF, Lynn's group, etc. and have various degrees of loyalty to vpw's teachings, Piffle, and/or their own take on the Bible. Great, sincere, wonderful, kind folks who teach and seem to have a great passion for what they do and what they feel God has called them to do. Just don't ever get curious enough to expose their hero, vp, because you most likely will be called on the carpet for "thinking evil" of a brother (and for some, the all important "Father in the Word" role).
- Then there are all the former leaders who, "as I see it" (that's my opinion stated here) have varying degrees of that need to be in the spotlight still (and they are in all the groups listed above). They were NOT elected to succeed vpw. In all the chest thumping and turf wars that went on post-POP, many have opted their calling is still to "teach the Word" - - and God bless them for their sincerity. I have observed a couple of troubling patterns with some of these former leaders. 1) some have never worked an honest day in their lives since college (if they attended) or joining the Way Corps way back when, and are obsessed with their work, more so they can maintain the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed (yes, I know there are exceptions). Some of these really know how to play the "tithing" game with the few well-off professionals they have in their groups, stilll live in the homes disporportionately extravegant versus those in their "group", are quite content with their mini-MOGness - - and are still quite focused on "being right" or "the sole (or main) source of truth". And 2) Many of these leaders have yet to "come clean" in my opinion for what they know to be true of the true history of vp, ha, cg, lcm, etc. Their group "partcipants/followers/minions" are made up, in part, of those who participated in a twig way back when twigs were actually somewhat autonomous - - and have no idea the relationship to what was promoted and the what was really going on at HQ and at many of the limb/region leadership levels. It's kind of like someone in a witness protection program who has no past (don't ask/don't tell again) - - just keep teaching "hot bible" and gloss over the rest.
Overall, I think that many of us former twi-ites had an idealistic desire to be a part of something wonderful, Godly, bigger than ourselves, something that helped ourselves and other people. I think it would be safe to guess that those who don't know some of the information contained on this board, would still be motivated to participate in an offshoot for the same reason. I don't begrudge any of them their right to choose what they want to do, just offer my opinion/perspective/experience as one who was involved in twi from the earlier days til POP and then DID participate in various of the offshoot groups for a time. And as our dear friend Mark O. would say, YMMV.
J.
Edited by jardineroLink to comment
Share on other sites
allan w.
Great..it's called 'like-minded beleivers'. As I said on a previous thread, one doesn't own a Yamaha 125 motorcycle and expect to ride with Harley owners ya know.
All power to the off-shoots !
Yes we run an off-shoot ministry that is growing (albeit slowly) but we have 'stumbled' on a cupla 'keys' to help produce 'mega growth' and if some of you ( I know who) who are conducting fellowships want to hear about it please p.m. me.
We hold to much of pfal doctrine but run our services closer to 'Hillsong' style, bless ya !
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
I always chuckle at these "offshoot" discussions. To me, it's like saying..............The Way Tree was the original and any and all who exited twi are "offshoots."
Twi was an offshoot of B.G. Leonard's ministry. Mrs. W's book spells it out plainly....after veepee returned from B.G's classes, twi was shortly thereafter incorporated in 1953.
So..........was twi successful as an offshoot...??? Hmmmmmmmm.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Yes, I'm part of a CG "offshoot" and we believe that VPW was a man of god who happened to sin in his flesh as opposed to a sexual predator who happened to have a bible ministry, which is what many GSers think. That's NOT idolatry just to respect someone for something.
Some of the double talk on GSC is very subtle. Some people say that it's possible to worship someone even if they're not God; that there are varying degrees of worship, and true there is some biblical evidence of this.
Then other threads accuse people of "worshipping" VPW, TWI, or PFAL with the connotation that ANYTHING that is "worshipped" other than God indicates "idolatry". Is there a difference between worship and respect or admiration?
I'm thinking of 2 particular OT idols that were worshipped to the eventual detriment of those who worshipped them...baal and dagon. Baal was a weather god who was worshipped in hopes that the weather would accomodate the growth of crops. I don't know for sure about dagon, but I do know that dagon was a fish and that the major cities in the Phillistines nation were all on the Mediterranian sea, so it's probable that dagon was worshipped so they'd hopefully catch a lot of fish.
In other words, these gods were expected to GIVE THE INCREASE. THAT'S what made it idolatry. Simply respecting a man's teaching or liking a musical group doesn't mean that I'm expecting any "increase" from the man or the group. However, if that respect or admiration turns into fear that bad things are going to happen to me if I don't ABS or something like that, THEN perhaps the line has been crossed over into idolatry and I know that this was happening a lot between 1994 and LCMs exile.
I have yet to see any evidence of idolatry at the CG fellowship I attend.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Simple --- we ate the fish, and spit out the bones. :)
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I wish I could charge money every time that saying
is used, and put it directly into the GSC operating fund.
Why do people keep using that same expression,
instead of just saying what they mean?
It is easy to confuse a slogan for an answer,
and I expect better than that from most people here,
because most people here know better.
Pending further information,
AFAIK,
the offshoots occasionally incorporate more ex-wafers in them,
and may increase thru the kids "taking the class",
but-other than that- don't significantly grow in membership numbers.
They don't generally appeal to the average Christian,
the average American.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: It would seem that the offshoots are not offering anything different that community churches already have in place. So, why would anyone be attracted to an offshoot of TWI?
I'll concede that churches have caught up with TWI in some major ways. Before TWI had large numbers of people joining them, churches all seemed to basically teach people they'd go to hell if they didn't stay "right with God" which really meant stay in the good graces of the church leadership. I think groups like TWI were a wake up call to the denominational churches. Hey! People need more from church than being told they could go to hell. Duh.
Yet TWI proved you could have church in the home without the financial backing of a denomination. They were so successful that the churches HAD to notice and give respect. Yeah, their lip service was "It's a cult! Run for it!", but they changed with the times didn't they? Having been in a few churches since leaving TWI, I'd say they've lightened up on the hell stuff quite a bit.
But those doctrinal issues are still there. Personally, I need certain things from a church's doctrine and I need certain things from the church's people. So...
Why shouldn't anyone be attracted to an offshoot of TWI?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pond
I believe TWI taught peole to NOT go to church after vpw died.
In the early eighties , many of us did go to church, while involved with twi.
believe it or not we would hold twigs and go together or alone to a service or a community thing and no one shunned the idea.
I spoke to a friend in about this the other day and he freaks and says it never happened but yes we did, he didnt maybe because he closed his mind the minute he joined twi and wanted to go that path exclusively.
many of us didnt tho back in the day, we went to church we attended family stuff went to parties given by unblelievers we lived a good life, how do you THINK so many got involed?
What happened was so many got stuck with the stuff twi was teaching and if it was brought up as a d8iscussion in many of the churches twi people would be asked to leave the church, it happened alot and that is why the group got so darn exclusive in its thinking and being together .
I know in the ninties it would have been thought of as a sin, and absolutely unheard of.
STF encourges church participation .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
IMO, twi did NOT prove you could have church in the home blah, blah, blah. It was the steady march of the pfal class, add the hype, the youth, the word-of-mouth campaign,......and you get about 35,000 - 40,000 faithful and attendance at the Rock of Ages hits an all-time high of around 24,000 (in 1984).
As far as "church in the home".............my grandparents HAD church in the home back in the 1920s.
IMO, way too much credit is given to twi, at times.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Linda Z
johniam, church in the home wasn't invented by twi, even if you don't count "church in the home" as mentioned in Acts. In fact, "Twig" was the third home fellowship I participated in, back in the late 60s, early 70s. Twi was just part of a movement in that direction, a movement that I think gained momentum because a lot of people were getting fed up with their churches during that time, particularly the young people.
I went to one class of one offshoot and found it to be pretty boring--regurgitated PFAL. But that's just me. Some people want to continue in twi doctrine (or something close to it) and twi practice minus the scandals. I say fine for them. I have no objection if that's what they want to do. It's just not for me.
As for growth, I'd ask some people who are involved in CFF. My impression (and I could be wrong) is that it's one of the larger spin-offs from twi.
Except for one Pentecostal church I attended before twi, and the Baptist churches I visited with friends, I never heard much hellfire and brimstone preached in church. I never heard much of anything preached in church, which is why I was searching for answers outside the "mainstream."
I'm not attending a church now myself, but from what many have posted and from what I've observed, it sounds like there are lots of churches that have a lot to offer in terms of different types of fellowships and activities. I wouldn't credit twi with that. Churches had to change because many of them were failing miserably.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
outofdafog
Churches have caught up with TWI - thats silly. I can't honestly say what alot of other churches teach on the different subjects because for most of my adult life I attended TWI. We were conditioned to believe what TWI wanted us to believe about other churches. Thats a pretty blanket statement to make if you haven't attended all the different churches and listened to their doctrine or read thier materials. How can you possibly know what "all" churches taught. Is that "all without exception or all "without distinction"?
Not trying to be a smart-foot, just curious how you could know so much about other churches. I went to a couple different home fellowships before I hooked up with TWI in 1975. And heard of many more when witnessing to others.
Edited by outofdafogLink to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: Not trying to be a smart-foot, just curious how you could know so much about other churches. I went to a couple different home fellowships before I hooked up with TWI in 1975. And heard of many more when witnessing to others.
No, I didn't personally ask all of them, but I grew up in Grand rapids, MI, or "little Jerusalem" as some church people called it. Tons of churches in GR. In my neighborhood, none of the other kids could play outside on Sunday except from 2 catholic families. All the Dutch reformed or Christian reformed kids told me they'd go straight to hell if they did that.
When I was in 8th grade the church I went to had us go to several other churches during that year. The one that was the most fun was a black Baptist church. That service was almost like the church service depicted in both Blues Bros. movies. But they treated us snot nosed 8th graders like we were royalty and this was less than a month after MLK got assassinated.
The dutch reformed church stuck us up in the balcony and hardly interacted with us. We were the "heathen church" y'know. So, no I didn't ask every church if they were into hell motivation, but what church experience I had made a solid impression on me. By the way, the church I grew up attending was a liberal church. The main minister was on the Today show in 1971 saying he did NOT believe in the literal, physical resurrection of Christ. They didn't teach about hell, but they didn't teach about Christ, either. Liberals can be just as self righteous and cruel as any fundamentalist.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Linda: I wasn't trying to infer that church is a bad choice and I admit that TWI taught us to be bigots about church people. I know church in the home was not originated by TWI, but I can't think of any other groups whose whole MO was church in the home. They put all their eggs in that basket and it worked. Today's TWI wouldn't exist if it weren't for the success of the 70s TWI.
I'm much more open to churches now than I ever have been, but they're still not the only game in town.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolchef1248 @adelphia.net
johniam
your statement about twi promoting self supporting in home churches is imo
not so
self supporting?
i wish i had the money it cost me over the 10 or so years i was a twig leader
for the coffee,cream,snacks,etc etc
and not to mention the beer for the elite few after twice weekly twiig.
all the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ went down to a corn field in ohio so the elite there could and and did live the more than abundant life
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Ok -- I can do that. :)
Instead of eating fish and spitting out bones,
let's just say I took in what was good, and got rid of the refuse.
Since I am in accordance with SOME of the beliefs taught in twi, and
since MOST of the beliefs I am in accordance with are found in off-shoots,
and since SOME the off-shoots (so far) have not seen fit to micro-manage,
I have no problem with off-shoots, and prefer the teachings I find there --
over those found in community churches --
(although I have gone to a few of them as well).
I'm not denigrating community churches here by any means.
I have heard many a good sermon at a few, and the folks there were stellar.
Genuine, caring, friendly, and given my experiences at these places --
I would attend again.
So -- in essence -- it is the teachings offered by off-shoots
(minus the *iron-fisted* authority evinced by twi) that is *attractive*.
They are offering *fish* -- (food for thought) --
twi offers *bones* -- skeletal remains, worthy of spitting out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
outofdafog
I am thinking that during the 70's (which was the hippie, anti-establishment era) there were alot of these "home based fellowships" around. It was yet another way of striking at the establishment and people doing their own thing to rebel against the established churches and dogma. I know I liked the home based fellowships because I was "free" from some of the rigid standards taught in churches. This is what initially attracted me to TWI.
I had attended a couple of others though prior to my involvement - I even moved into a house and lived with some "believers" and that became rather rigid. Kinda like a Way Home, it was not to my liking and shortly thereafter was witnessed to by someone and started going to twig. This was in the early 70's. I liked the "free" atmosphere.
Edited by outofdafogLink to comment
Share on other sites
pond
coffe houses were popular in the 70's .
teens and young adults would listen to music , talk and maybe a witness and a small teaching of some sort from the bible.
we had them all over the place.
I still go to the the christian coffee houses they are gaining in popularity again with rock or heavy rock bands of several sorts playing in the background in a relaxed large room that offers free coffee tea and pizza for 50 a slice.
we have manyl here .
the night I first went to twi it was a "coffe house," honestly thousand had atttended it was in a very large motel in the city.
Edited by pondLink to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
I think it's worth mentioning that as far as twi's impact on the Christian world...twi was barely a small blip on the radar screen...most church people had never heard of them, or if they did, they considered twi a cult.
Wierwille's impact was marginal at best. Outside of twi, he was barely a footnote and had no real "impact" on Christian churches...
...As far as the offshoots go, they exist because of the egos of former twi leaders and the need (real or imagined) of some former twi members to continue with what they find to be familiar and comfortable.
All that being said...The body of Christ is a spiritual church with only one head...
As soon as someone starts a church/organization, they give it a name, appoint leaders, hoist their flag, and figure out a way to collect money...it then becomes political.
To each his own...As for me, I don't like to "clutter up" my personal faith with the politics of organizations.
Edited by GrouchoMarxJrLink to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
I can't speak from experience, but from what I recall reading and observing here through the years, the offshoots were considered something like a "halfway house" for people who left TWI, especially those who were unjustly kicked out. Sort of like "TWI Light", if you will.
Those people who still subscribe to TWI doctrine and who are more comfortable with the "familiar-ness" of the organization are generally the ones who are attracted to the offshoots.
Soome people who leave TWI and move to the offshoots find that the group IS too much like TWI for them or they start having the same questions they had about the doctrine and practices of the group and end up leaving. Most of those have had their share of drama and soap operas, some very similar to TWI's.
I'm not saying they are bad or good. It's not for me, but it does meet the needs of some people. I like having many choices of things to get involved with. I like having a "building" and not having to scrounge around for places to hold big meetings. I like a lot of "church" things that these kinds of groups can't provide. I like knowing where my money is going and how it's being spent. :)
Success is a relative term and would vary according to the person asked. Apparently they are doing well enough for them to have people living nicely off the money of those who attend and their overhead is very low because of the "home" aspect. They do help some people and would probably tell you that "size doesn't matter"
And it doesn't. My church is relatively small, especially for a thriving area like Orlando.
Just my two cents.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
igotout
Concerning the Geerite spinoffs I have a pressing question. Why no websites or Internet presence by CG and some of the other CG affiliates? Something to hide perhaps? Afraid of what might be posted about you?
It's very telling in my opinion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
igotout,
I've noticed for many years now that the Geer Network TOTALLY denies that it is a network, and very vehemently at times too!
There were times when I tried all sorts of vocabulary words, and respectful ones too, to describe their network, only to get viciously chewed out over it.
I gave up and now just call them the GRRR ministry. It seems to fit them best.
This odd policy gives rise to what you wondered over. Now you have somethig new to wonder about, maybe?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: Concerning the Geerite spinoffs I have a pressing question. Why no websites or Internet presence by CG and some of the other CG affiliates? Something to hide perhaps? Afraid of what might be posted about you?
It's very telling in my opinion.
Telling of what? Did Jesus have a website? or Paul?
quote: I'm not saying they are bad or good. It's not for me, but it does meet the needs of some people. I like having many choices of things to get involved with. I like having a "building" and not having to scrounge around for places to hold big meetings. I like a lot of "church" things that these kinds of groups can't provide. I like knowing where my money is going and how it's being spent.
I agree totally. Like I said, churches aren't the only game in town, but neither are home fellowships. Interestingly, in TWI 85% of ABS went to HQ with 15% staying in the limb. With CG it's the opposite. Every so often we have big gatherings and ABS money pays for food, rented rooms, etc. so to an extent, I DO know where my money is going. Back to me.
Belle, you might remember from that thread about John Hendricks that I recounted leaving and posted that we started looking for a church. Remember? At the time we thought as you just posted that a church would be better equipped to deal with our kids than a ex way spinoff. Well, we went to six churches, a mid week meeting and a Sunday service plus a one on one with a pastor or asst pastor. Someone from the CG fellowship called me about something non biblical related not knowing we weren't with John H anymore. One thing led to another and we started going to that fellowship which has been refreshingly absent of the kinds of pressure TWI and some spinoff leadership have put on people. We probably could've been happy in any of the churches we looked at, but this CG fellowship is working out for us.
By the way, are you even aware that I actually apologized to you on the JH thread for a couple of remarks I made to you?
quote: Wierwille's impact was marginal at best. Outside of twi, he was barely a footnote and had no real "impact" on Christian churches...
Oh, and THAT's why every time I went to a Christian book store their cult section had all kinds of books that usually listed TWI 3rd or 4th most "dangerous cult". It was about money, not doctrine. They figured TWI was stealing people from them. "Mind control", right? TWI "possessed" people against their will to sign those green cards. Yeppur! But to me, this indicates IMPACT.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
That question is more foolish than I am.
Was the internet available? Was there electricity?
Of course they didn't have websites... but they used whatever means was available to them 'back in the day'.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Why SHOULD CG have a website? Means to do WHAT? Anything you could forecast is just speculation.
This is another double standard. Back in TWI somebody once asked Donnie Fugit "JEEEZUS didn't have a motorcoach. Why does VP have one?" But if I say Jesus didn't have a website, that's a foolish question.
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.