JustThinking

Chas, I forgot about "Sing it Dave." Thank you. Mike Martin did not put out a CD of his own. "Alvin Chipmonk?" :D-->

Steve!, :D--> My not so favorite: "Wow, that teaching really changed my life." (Said over coffee 10 minutes after completion of teaching)

My3cents, Yeah, it's a good thing he's the only one on either side of the political spectrum to stick his nose into religious affairs. JT -->

ex70s, "Any bets on how hard hes trying to get back in control." I have no doubt. Without TWI, he is a nobody. What else does he have?

It really was a problem for TWI into the early 90s. The "old wine skin" teaching was not just used on old VPW stuff. Music was a BIG focus too. Branded tapes, etc. were pushed off the radar. When Dave Lutz and two others guys came out with the first new tape in years (late 80s, early 90s?) they played it to death. We were told clearly "there is no reason to play that old stuff any more. It only hurts people's hearts." The implication being that we all missed these performers or it brought up bad memories.

socks, going to borrow your verse. Hope you don't mind. JT's translation of the song: "We go to the bookstore and we Read from the pages all the quotes that are there and then We know what we read is what We read when we read and because We read it and now the BOD said it And that settles that we read it Since it said what we read and then we...." Ugh! Those words were terrible! Who's second grade kid wrote them?! It is almost a sick joke to call them lyrics. They are hardly lyrical. Actually, they're dumb enough that almost any wayferism fits. "We go to the bible and we BELIEVE from the pages all the Words that are there and then We know what we BELIEVE is what We BELIEVE when we BELIEVE and because We BELIEVE it and now we said it And that settles that we BELIEVE it Since it said what we BELIEVE and then we...." Confess works too because the verse really says nothing at all. Songs by Jabberwocky, Inc.

socks posted some of the "it took us 5 minutes and a napkin" lyrics. If you change every occurrence of the word "read" to "repeat" it is actually more accurate. JT

socks, All of the CDs were just collections of songs by the Swinging ladies of the Way or WayProd. One or two actually included the Snorus Choir. ZZZzz.... No new groups or individual performers. No one is allowed to stand out in any way. JT

Oh boy, here we go... :-)

Ahhh... outandabout remembers VPs spiritual lesson from PFAL about the Devil being able to read papers in your drawers. ;-)

Socks wrote: "Now that I've watched these videos over a period of time, I've nailed down something I couldn't quite articulate upon first viewing. It's what seems to be the primary message of the performances - absence of individuality and identity. Anyone else notice this?" On a similar note, the TCs were told in the early 90s that there would be no more tapes (now CDs) by individuals. Groups only. They were tired of people wanting to hear old TWI music like Lisa Lockridge Tracy. (Was that it?) Plus if that person left, their music wasn't usable anymore. A group could replace people and it wouldn't be noticed on an audio tape. Sad? You betcha! It shows how paranoid they could be. The solution to their dilemna? Roll in Swinging Ladies Of The Way...

igotout, I think that quote was mine. Longgoone hasn't been here yet. No worries though. :-) JT

Ugh, the dreaded scheduler. My FAVORITE example of this stupidity was a guy in our branch who drove a delivery truck to grocery stores. They told him he should have his days mapped out a week in advance. The problem? He never knew one day to the next what he'd be doing! Well, they said "figure it out!" To this he replied "how?! I don't know until they tell me." The solution? No kidding Wait for it Fill it out with your best guess as to which stores they'll send you to and when. Then send a corrected one at the end of the week with what you actually did. No, really! LMAO! JT

A la, ROTFLMAO! JT

I don't recall getting a response to any of the points listed above.

WW, In this case, I don't mind you throwing me into the fracas. If that's the worst you say about me... :-) IMO, useless (at best) and harmful (at worst) discussions start with vague questions. OM started with: "I just don't get it, so I'd like to know if there are any biblical or logical viewpoints out there that throwing the baby out with the bathwater is something God expects of us" As I pointed out before, the word "bathwater" doesn't actually appear in the KJV Bible. So... we get to try to interpret OM's questions. If done unintentionally, it is just confusing and likely to lead to misunderstandings. If it is done on purpose, it allows the one who poses the question to "reinterpret" what was meant when it is convenient. I stand by what I said at the start of thread: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wow, one loaded or misleading question or statement after another: "We learned God's Word in TWI." First, not everyone agrees with you. Second, "God's Word" is a wayferism that means different things to different people. Does that mean the printed Bible, the Bible as interpreted (or whatever you want to call it) by Vic Weirwille's borrowed material or something else? "Not everything we were taught is the truth, but what is truth, is truth, and is God's will for us to know and believe. There are some basic truths we learned in twi that are common Christian beliefs." Here again, I'm sure you believe you learned truth in TWI. For me, I probably got more wrong information than right. It has taken a lot to sift through it and am still going. PJ is right, IMO, that it can be almost impossible to pull out all the weeds because there were so many. As for them being common Christian beliefs, there does not seem to be one other Christian group that agrees with them. Which Christians do you mean exactly? "And so I wonder why some folks find it wrong that some folks cling on to these truths, even though mindful of sins committed in twi." I can't speak for others but I personally don't care what you believe or don't. "I think some folks think we who still believe these truths, should renounce them, because of the evil deeds of some in twi. Are folks like myself being selfish because we refuse to renounce our beliefs?" Nice trick question. Ask in such a way as to only allow an answer that appears to back you up. If I say you are selfish: I would be saying you should give up your beliefs because I say so. Hardly defensible. If I say you are not selfing: I appear to be supporting your views. Very good! You win either way. "I just don't get it, so I'd like to know if there are any biblical or logical viewpoints out there that throwing the baby out with the bathwater is something God expects of us? That we should renounce our beliefs because of the evils of twi? I checked my concordance and the word "bath water" does not appear to be in there. Another trick question but not nearly as good as the others. Who is really going to say "I think we should throw the baby out with the bathwater?" They may agree with your view or, as PJ said, feel that there is either no baby there or it is hopelessly intermixed. Regardless, I doubt anyone has actually said that to you. It is more likely simply your interpretation of their view. If you can point to a response to you where someone has actually recommended that in those words, please do so. "That those folks who choose to do so, should feel ashamed, for retaining and being thankful for learning the Wuuuuuurd, even though others got hurt in twi ... " I can't remember anyone here ever saying you should feel ashamed for having a particular belief. Could you please point us to a thread where someone said exactly that? Not something you took that way but was exactly put to you that way? Your interpretation would be unfair to attribute to someone so a link to their post would be better. JT

Wayfer cliches and their tranlations: "Go till you hear glass" = Be a bull in a china shop like me! "You just have to believe for it." = I don't know how do it either. "Stay tight with the household." = Stick with the other social misfits.

Another factor is the "barely there" types. These functions are like Christmas and Easter for the occasional christian. It would be wrong to measure attendance just on those days. TWI was allowing a lot of attendance flexibility to keep their numbers up when I bailed. Just subscribing to something was enough to keep you in good standing. A head count of people actually showing up in person in any given week is likely to be half of that "about" 5000 or less. Kids don't come frequently (school work, doncha know) and many adults come once per week, tops. (As of about two years ago) The truly hardcore headcount therefore is probably less than two thousand total.

I still say Trinitarians taste like chicken...

"Home is where the Word is." What DOES that mean?!

I have learned about TWI's real behavior here but not to hate them. That, imo, is a real compliment to those who were here and helped me when I left.

Pat, I see this differently now after looking at this as a step in a process. TWI is so used to having total control that someone fighting them is just what is needed. You did well. JT

Oldies original quote: "We learned God's Word in TWI. Not everything we were taught is the truth, but what is truth, is truth, and is God's will for us to know and believe. There are some basic truths we learned in twi that are common Christian beliefs." johniam, If you take out VPs writings, how much of TWI do you think you have left? JT

I fail to see where Pat *won* anything here. What am I missing?

Since those calls are just about mandatory, I think we have a headcount for the Way Irrational.