Leaderboard

In December 1957.....when wierwille started his independent undertaking of The Way, Inc., he was stumbling into the unknown. For 10 years (1957-1967), wierwille drove from city to city teaching B.G. Leonard's class, The Gifts of the Spirit, to mostly church people. By teaching 9-12 classes a year, wierwille was reaching an estimate of 200-275 new people each year. Yet, in 1960......the Troy/Piqua followers wanted vpw to move his operation from Van Wert to their area, NOT the wierwille farm. So, when Vic and Harry decided that the wierwille homestead was going to be the new headquarters of twi........a Troy/Piqua exodus was their response. Wierwille ran class after class in the 60's..............and the percentages of who committed to wierwille's "ministry" were dismal. Notice: Neither vpw or mrs. w document any signs, miracles or wonders from God during these early-to-mid 1960s. They have to reach back to the India trip or Van Wert days to fabricate anything of substance that would indicate the working of holy spirit. Seems like 1960-1967.........wierwille was in the wilderness [until the filming of pfal]. The filming of pfal in 1967 was wierwille's attempt to stay relevant. Wierwille NEEDED a steady stream of money (tithing)......or else, failure was imminent. This new pfal class was designed with a subliminal, subterfuge agenda.......to strip new students from their family, church, higher education and community and set up a new cult family. All of the support systems were to be undermined and eliminated.....and replaced. No, wierwille did not have some devious master plan behind this........just a narcissistic appetite that needed fed and the exploitation of the youth was a means to that end. Was wierwille planting a garden? Nope. Wierwille was planting a cult........one deceptive weed at a time.

Hey T-Bone, Cool thoughts. I enjoy reading your posts they are full of deep thought. I also personally enjoy when deep thought leaves to simple conclusions. Sometimes truth is complicated, but often times truth is simple and humans are what are complicated. I like your 2 points on approaching scripture. On the point 1 I also have adopted more of that viewpoint. It more closely aligns with Occam's Razor which to me when we are approaching text with that many variants is a reasonable place to start. What is the most obvious meaning of the text? Could we break that down further? What are possible meanings of the text? Usually won't they classify into just a few buckets at most? Concordances and lexicons attempt this called "usages". But it's real hard to track through all of the fragments of texts they are finding in different languages - Greek and Aramaic and derivatives. And at its extreme I think you have the "How the Word Interprets Itself" types of teachings and approaches like Bullinger originated and VP purloined and we used in the Way, where we are closer to feeding the text through machine language analysis and coming up with patterns than we are looking at it from the perspective of how it impacts humans. Bu when you consider the Way to be a training ground for Scribes and Pharisees it all starts to make more sense. That is where your Point 2 comes in, and I think for myself and most people whether they want to admit it or not there is an element of a "common sense" evaluator that we have in our makeup. "Does it make sense to me?" is good from a number of perspectives. First, as a personal faith, if it doesn't then how can you commit to it? So in a way we can view this in a personal scriptural journey perspective. Next, it places some form of a constraint upon extreme behavior. But of course where there is constraint there is a cult to test that constraint. But what about collectives? Churches? Fellowships? Body of Christ? Can "we" understand scripture together? In law they have a constraint where they evaluate things against what they would consider the "average man". What would an "average man" do in this situation? What is an "average" response? So I think to come to a collective agreement in Point 2 we are going to have to start talking in terms of shades as opposed to extremes.

I have been thinking more about this topic. Do I agree with the mainstream Christianity assessment that there are only prophets in the OT and the apostles were Peter and Paul, and the others describe functions not gifts? I'm not 100% sold on that. I do see in the scriptures special energizings by God. What I don't see is the attached pyramid scheme sold by the Way International in conjunction with it. For example, those apostles and prophets along with the helps and governments "specialty" lifetime functions in positions the Way does. Tiered salary structures according to the supposed importance of the gift, like corporate business. Machiavellian activity. Basically the type of morality that I would see Jesus confronting by kicking over the money tables in the temple. People selling their souls for a morsel of bread. Former janitors and window cleaners now large and in charge and their head inflates and what becomes most important is not "it is written", it is "it is position". Policies are decided according to quotes from "Louis Columbo 3:16" (RFR's BFF lawsuit lawyer) as opposed to scriptural teachings by Jesus or Paul or Peter. "The gifts and calling of God are without repentance". Rom. 11:29 IMO there is a tinfoil hat version of understanding this verse, and a logical common man way of understanding this verse: Tinfoil: I was subjected to a corporate hazing for 4 years that left me with a nametag and an assignment and a position and a title. I heard prophecy spoken over me that contained some qualities. Thus I am entitled to a ring for people to kiss, a position, a salary, and servants. Thus throughout my lifetime I will also be entitled to all of this, and people are responsible to provide it for me. I am cemented in to a corporate cultural hierarchy of absolute obedience, or shunning if I break ranks. Common Logic: I grew up with natural talents in areas. Or at least one, and hopes to have talent in one other or something. God helps me develop them and energizes me and inspires me as I do. As I grow older these don't depart. I do believe in special energizings of God in individuals. I don't believe in pyramid schemes.

Thinking over my navigation of a personal journey I wanted to make mention of a change in how I usually approach the lofty, heavy, “spiritual “, and - dare I say it - existential concerns. It has been a shift from using a theological approach to more of a philosophical approach. To me “philosophical “ means more than just the study of knowledge, reality , and existence. It also refers to my attitude toward the difficult, unfathomable, mystifying or disappointing issues...basically I try to be patient and unruffled through it all...accepting the way things are and the idea that I may never find a definitive answer on many things. Having dabbled in theology for a long spell I’ve noticed my tendency - when having a strictly theological approach - that one way or another I could squeeze some answers out of the Bible - which is indeed a very malleable resource. At this stage of my journey if i had to list my most essential criteria for interpreting a passage of the Bible - it would be : Point 1: What is the most obvious meaning of the text? Point 2: Does it make sense to me? Now I don’t mean to oversimplify this - for me point 1 takes into account biblical languages / syntax / historical, cultural & geographical context, etc. - I did say at this stage of my journey - so by now I’ve learned some of the nuts & bolts of the biblical data. Point 2 - i consider more than the few systematic theologies and commentaries I’ve studied on the particular passage - I look at all the details from point 1 and see if it resonates with me as far as experiences in my life - can I wrap my mind around it ? Does it satisfy some question I have? Is it something I need to do ...or stop doing? Can I connect or relate to it somehow? Having said all that I should also mention there’s a lot of things in the Bible that still elude me...intellectually, where do you go if your answer to point 1 is “i don’t know” or “not sure”? I don’t know ...maybe speculate...philosophize...not sure. and what if your answer to point 2 is “nope”? I am not a theologian and don’t feel the pressure or see the need to formulate an answer for everything; I’m perfectly happy being a long-and-winding-roads-scholar - enjoying this strange journey called life.

yeah in PFAL – didn’t wierwille say something along the lines of if you could do that it meant you’re going to heaven and all hell can’t stop you from going...well, he lived like the devil so he certainly practiced what he preached.

Grace, I’ve already apologized to TLC – see here and on that note (my post of apology to TLC) without reiterating the whole thought process that brought on a change of heart - I’d just like to say I’m learning to really appreciate the divergent thinking that TLC (and so many others) bring to Grease Spot. I realize in casting a wide net (as Raf described it) this thread was bound to generate some friction in the diverse haul. I tend toward a synthesis of various thoughts from others…but when being too critical of others I guess I forget how much donkey dung that I generate by being verbose, contentious and stubborn…there’s no point in that…life is too short…love and peace !

Well, if you think I’m gonna do an encore of my self-flagellation routine…you’re crazy ! Just kidding Moderators, you all have done a great job of keeping Grease Spot on point with its mission…thanks so much…I might say something there if I can keep it from straying too off topic…I mean, the tag on this thread does say “CONFESSIONS of a former fundamentalist”…interesting problem though…explaining how my apology was prompted by things going on in more than one thread…this may wind up being a “what-came-first-the-chicken-or-the-egg” scrambled up mess – so I’m entertaining the idea of starting a new thread to show the timeline of it all…just kidding! there i did it - intergalactic travel is possible!