Leaderboard

Sure, thanks. I've picked that up, yes. I think you're pretty astute in your estimation that all of this is different for those who had experience with how all this went down over the years we were involved. While that teaching is Vintage Way and actually fairly consistent with what is taught by many other non-Way sources, there's one part that is easy to gloss over and actually freaks a lot of old timers out when they hear that it might not state exactly what VPW taught about it, and that's his teaching on 2:15, "study to show yourself approved to God, a workman that doesn't need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of truth". Once I got it clear for myself my Bible didn't exactly "fall to pieces", simply because my understanding was different, rather it came together right in front of me. Whenever I hear Vintage VPW teachings being repeated, I'm reminded of this. Bear with me if you would. VPW taught 2:15 as a foundational scripture for every Christian, every believer, and his own research and teaching ministry. "Rightly cutting" the Word of truth, described by him as the exact "working" of scripture by the "workman" to properly "divide it", sort it out, parse it out to line up properly "just like in the original". 2:15 is carved in stone for those of us who took PFAL in the 60's and 70's, and who remember that story about Mrs. Dotsie VPW cuttin' that pie of hers so accurately. In fact, further study over the years has led me to some additional understanding on this - first that "study" means exactly what he taught, "spoudazo", or "earnestly endeavor".....so it isn't specifically saying crack open the books and start studying, Paul is saying to "Work hard" to do something......and to be a "workman".....the kind of workman referred to is someone like a laborer or a field worker. We already are told in 2:6 that "the husbandman that labors must be first partaker of the fruits". The workman is a farmer, vineyard tenders, laborers, those growing a crop, tending a field, bringing up a crop, fruit.......so we can read it as "Work hard to show yourself approved to God by being a worker that doesn't need to be ashamed (of his work)..... Rightly dividing is the single word orthotomounta, or orthotomeo per many sources and it means among other things "to make straight and smooth" as well as "to cut straight ways, to cut a straight path, to proceed by straight paths, hold a straight course, and equivalent to - to do right". So we have "Work hard to show yourself approved to God by being a worker that isn't ashamed of his work, making sure to hold to a straight, right course with the Word of truth"...... There's a better translation of that I've worked up, I'm doing this from memory, but that's the basic idea and if put forth that way is truer to the context of chapter 2, which is handling the behaviors and correct actions of a church leader in the church, with others. It's not talking about academic study, it's talking about accurately "handling" God's revealed Word, of how it's lived and taught - not a mechanical process of efforts to set it straight, separate it or literally "divide" it. To this we can consider Isaiah 40:3 "The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.", and then John 1:23, ""I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness: 'Make straight the way of the Lord"...... Here the word euthyno is used, meaning "to make straight, level, plain, to lead or guide straight, keep straight"....... I'd also have to consider the use in chapter 2's context the usage of the word "husbandman" - Jesus compared God to a husbandman in John 15 - “I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit” ........A husbandman cultivates the earth, his plants, and naturally expects them to produce fruit as a result of the amount of effort he has invested in them. Our heavenly Father, the divine Husbandman, seeks to produce fruit through us as we ... abide in Christ. All of which leads me to understand that ll Timothy 2:15 is talking about bringing people to God through Christ, "showing them the way", to make the way to Him clear, to help others through what we teach and what we do to come to Christ. As if to say "here He is, this is who He is, this is the Way".....Remove obstacles, clear the "way", make the path clear and open. Work hard to do that, be diligent in bringing forth fruit. This involves much much more from a person than teaching if they really want to have skin in the game. Timothy is told a lot about that, how to, what to do, what to look for, etc. etc. Teaching isn't excluded, far from it, but it's not limited to public speaking. I'm NOT saying that we should never study the Bible, or never attempt to do the work to allow it to be so clearly and plainly understood that it can literally "interpret itself", nor am I saying that there aren't many wrong interpretations of the Bible, resulting in wrong teaching that makes it hard and difficult if not impossible to come to God through Christ and that those do need to be handled as part of "making that way" straight - but all of this fits very well with the words of Jesus when He said "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, no man comes to the Father but through me"....

This is more a suspicion than an observation, so take it with a grain of salt. I think part of the problem in discussions about "critical thinking" is a lack of agreement on what "critical" means. It sounds to me like one person is using it to mean "searching for and finding fault," while another is using it to mean "examining the argument and determining whether its logical bases are flawed. Someone who is engaged in critical thinking is NOT looking to find flaws or fault. He's not being cynical. If you're not engaged in critical thinking, you can be suckered into anything. If you are engaged in cynical thinking, you won't believe the truth even when is is staring you in the face. Anyway, just a thought.

I completely agree. I recently did a study on this verse and reached the same conclusion. All my reference sources were NOT from TWI. It's amazing the depth of the Word that is available when one looks elsewhere. I'm not big on bible commentaries, but for this study I utilized two of them. This is from one of them. Vincent’s Word Studies: “The thought is that the minister of the gospel is to present the truth rightly, not abridging it, not handling it as a charlatan (see on 2Co_2:17), not making it a matter of wordy strife (2Ti_2:14), but treating it honestly and fully, in a straightforward manner.” My opinion of commentaries has changed drastically.

okay, ...I clicked on it. (thinking, it's really bad, it shouldn't take too long to figure it out.) and yep... less that a minute into it, and it was pretty clear. (and a few minutes more of it was all I could stomach...) In short, if you are convinced (or persuaded) that the church (i.e., the called out) of the body of Christ start on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), I suppose it's a piece of cake for certain talented or charismatic leaders to likewise convince or persuade you - in one way or another - of incorporating and equating certain portions and aspects of the law into your own senses driven servitude. In other words, your obedience to the spirit of God within you is thwarted and/or replaced with an obedience to the spirit in others. Seriously now... merely try looking up the word "obedience" in the church epistles, and see for yourself who or what it refers to. Obedience to... some certain household ? Surely you jest, if you say that is something aligned with what is written. Ah, but this "teaching" was no joke. He was as serious as a heart attack when he equated it with your "obedience to God."

Taxidev, I've spoken to a couple people who were at the Florida Labor Day conference. As to the teachings, I doubt the majority of what was taught would seem foreign to anyone who dates back to VPW's early ministry years, specifically the early Way Corps that were centered at the Farm and heard him in various settings settings ranging from the BRC, "Night Owls" in the Woods, under the "Apple Trees", Corps teachings and the many times he taught on other occasions and I'd also include Walter Cummins' teaching in that mix. The content followed a similar path that he took on the topic of "the Hope" and the presentations themselves, while unique to the individuals presenting, were very similar to his style and the style that was developed later by Craig Martindale, WITH THE EXCEPTION that there's a noticeable lack of the insulting, degrading motor-mouth childish imprecation and meaningless innuendo that he developed in his latter years at the lectern. For example Moynihan's teaching on ll Tim 2:8-19. He held forth in a very compact 30". It's a very simple setting forth of those verses, and in the context of the theme of the weekend, "the Hope", carries some significant, relevant points. It carries the context of what VPW taught to the 4th Corps, in his Timothy teachings, which I was there for as were the Moynihan's who were also in residence at that time. A minor point but worth noting about those Timothy teachings is that the 4th Crops started as a 2 year program and early in the first year the 3 year program was put in motion (which eventually became a full 4 year plan, including a pre-Corps year, a res-year, field "Interim" year and then a final year in res.) The original intention was to complete the study with VPW of both l and ll Timothy with the majority of it being done in the first year, but it extended out over the entire 2 in res years. Walter Cummins handled a lot of material too. My point is that from my standpoint, hearing what Moynihan taught, it's a pretty systematic rendering of what VPW taught, with an emphasis on the 5, arguably 6, encouragements that Paul gives Timothy in that chapter. My point - I'm not a fan of the Moynihan I knew years ago or have heard about from others more recently but I don't really know him at this point and arguably would have to give him the benefit of at least recognizing he finally left/got booted by/extricated himself from that snake pit at the Way. Saying that, I wouldn't have any problem with anything he taught, as one example of what was set forth that weekend. In fact, it's a teaching that nearly any Christian, AKA "Mystery minded" believer as he called it, or "those faithful followers in the household" or whatever context they choose to put it into, would benefit from hearing. Aside from that his presentation style is one that is respectful of both material and audience. What's not to like? It's certainly not the only place that could be heard, but it was the place it was heard that day, there. I do want to also note, I heard a Pastor of a church who is completely disconnected from any Way history, people or teachings - no exposure whatsoever - teach essentially the same thing a few years ago. In fact, I've heard that taught and taught it myself, many times, and covered the same ground, without any specific adherence to anything VPW taught. That's because what he taught, what I've studied, what others have studied, will be pretty much the same in those verses if they're just read and not interpreted or placed into a self serving context to make a point. I've spot checked some of the others earlier that I was interested in, I don't have anything to add really, other than the "simplicity" of God's Word, salvation through Christ, is a living simplicity, not a doctrinal exposition. It's very very simple to understand what we are to do if we simply see what Jesus Christ did and bring the message to others by being the ones who don't simply talk to them or shun them when we think it's necessary but rather prepare, engage and support, which is what Jesus Christ did for the many weak, suffering, hurting people of His time, and for all time.

That’s a lot of teachings - and don’t think it would be a fair assessment on my part unless I listened to them all - and to be honest, i think it would be a waste of my time - I mean, the topics look like they’re about the hope - I’m not that interested in some feel-good-pablum over one interpretation of the return of Christ...been there done that... ...my intention in referring to Rico’s teaching on the household of faith was to point out the same captivating or ensnaring technique that wierwille used to make “true followers “ feel duty bound to stick with his group. Manipulative! My point was when a teaching or doctrine is put into practice- when the rubber meets the road - when a theory or teaching is put to the test...how do they handle it when their teachings don’t jive with the real world or that their teachings are hypocritical? Or for that matter - how about asking if what they teach is consistent with the biblical data? Do they get into dispensationalism? I know this is not the doctrinal forum - but I think there’s a lot more debatable issues than what’s been lightly touched upon on this thread. I don’t want to steer you one way or the other on what to think...I’m merely pointing out something obvious in Rico’s teaching. Another thing that occurred to me by you wanting my feedback - I was wondering what other churches or teachings, Bible studies, etc. that you have checked out besides stuff from TWI or former TWI personnel.