Twinky

:biglaugh:/> :biglaugh:/> :biglaugh:/> If pushed, no doubt VPW could call himself a farmer. Since he was raised on, and lived on, a farm. Then he gave it up, just like the apostles gave up fishing, because of the greatness of the ministerial call on his life. And that Paul? Obviously couldn't believe for the greatness of God's Word to support him hence he had to remain a saddle- or tent-maker (depending on your reading of his job title).

On second thoughts, I probably didn't have a copy - just notes of the teachings (video?? by LCM??). (All too long ago and I choose not to remember.) And lotsa other books, many of which I burned. I didn't' want them falling into someone else's hands and luring them to investigate / join TWI.

Johniam, she didn't say "tooth brush" but "bristle brush" - perhaps a standard size scrubbing brush. Now I have to say I did once brush the stonework outside my door - but that was a one-off because the person who sold to me had had a party and got sticky green stringy stuff all over the stonework. On a regular basis? At Anderson? Talk about make-work. At least they let us cut the grass with mowers - not with nail scissors. And Rottie and John - I think I burned that VP & Me book. Creep creep suck up suck up vomit.

The chairs have to be strung in perfectly straight lines both across and from front to back. Perfect grids. God forbid that any chair should be out of alignment and harmony with the other chairs. Of course, there are chairs that have hoops at their feet (TWI would be far too mean to pay for those at HQ) so that they can easily be hooked together and put in straight lines. If you did have any of those in a meeting place - using the feet was a form of cheating.

Outie...I thought "love" was all about confronting weakness and being spiritually angry about it? :unsure:/>

Funny how the emotion Anger was acceptable - even desirable, as it showed how "spiritual" you are. As long as you were angry at the "right" things, like the sloppiness of the Household. Not at the injustice of the world, or the latest war, or suchlike. Oh no. But emotions like Joy, Happiness, Sorrow, Remorse, Excitement - were all dismissed. Unless it was the Joy of serving in some way task like dishroom, event set-up, snow clearance,etc. These are of course to be enjoyed without question. But the Joy of living in a beautiful sunshiny day, or just smelling the flowers...you must have something better to do! My Corps sis was allowed to go someplace (Florida?) for her grandfather's funeral - as long as she took someone from HQ with her. Another Corps sis was not allowed to go to her sister's wedding (somewhere nearer than Florida). She'd have plenty of opportunity to see her sis and her new husband when she'd finished her in rez training. (In retrospect - yeah right, sure she would.) Great witness, huh? Even Jesus took time to go to a wedding; and there's no indication he went because he was related or even friends with the wedding party - it seems more the cultural thing of inviting the whole village.

Sounds just like how I spend my time. Washing people, their feet, their clothes, their houses. Looking out for what might make their lives more bearable. That's what I get paid for, very modestly - I'm self-employed. Many of my clients are very elderly. And that's how I spend time doing voluntary work with three different organisations, two Christian (check out Street Pastors), and one secular (but there are a lot of compassionate people, some Christians, also involved with that one.) Think I have to agree with you on that, WW. What it takes, really, is thinking about other people and what they might need to make their lives easier.

Too many red flags in PFAL to count!! But I gave the man the benefit of the doubt, knowing that men don't know everything ... and he's American ... therefore knowing how old English works might not be quite his thing. Certainly his knowledge of grammar was appalling. ... little did I know that VPW and through him TWI did think they know everything. Even in the face of experts. Here's a red flag. The Lord's Prayer. As I recall, there was one of those Listen with Understanding or Reading with a Purpose questions at the end of that video section - "Why can we not pray this prayer?" Answer: we can't pray to be forgiven as we forgive others - because we're already forgiven. Basically that mocks the rest of the prayer and discourages the faithful from saying it, remembering it, bringing it to mind, bringing the order of the prayer to mind by recognising God's awesomeness first and foremost. It would have been better if he'd decided to change the line (give it a literal according to meaning, or some such) that says, "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespass against us," to say "And having freely forgiven us our trespasses, help us just as freely to forgive them that trespass against us." But that might have raised too many red flags for other people. So - just diss the whole prayer and make people forget it. I've just started reading a book by RT Kendall entitled "The Lord's Prayer" wherein he examines the prayer line by line, word by word, thought by thought, to endeavour to build a deeper spiritual understanding amongst those who pray this prayer. Right in his introductory chapter, RT Kendall, quoting Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones, states: "It is spiritual pride, if not arrogance, to refuse to pray the Lord's Prayer with others." That smote me in the heart. Spiritual pride ... arrogance ... typifying TWI and passing on, to this day, through too many of its adherents. :CUSSING:/>

:offtopic:/> WW, stop attacking John, please just address the topic. If you don't like what John says, either ignore it or address it briefly and stick to the topic. While you make good points (sometimes), you can be awfully pompous :) (Cue an attack on Twinky)

A seller in Dallas, Tx, is offering on ebay for a mere $132 the following by Weirwille: The Living Word speaks: Studies in Biblical Research, Teaching, and Fellowship. Plus shipping. You have 11 days left in which to snap up this bargain.

Steve, would that be "holy spirit" not "Holy Spirit"? :rolleyes:/> I look forward to your further commentary on this doctrine. First time I've ever heard of two trinities. What does your third para mean? That is, what are the supposed meanings in the 4C and 5C?

Thank God for Greasespot. Who knows how many ruined lives have been prevented and how many ruined lives have been healed when the truth has been exposed! Thank God too that the Pope is finally tackling the problem of abuse in the RC church, which for decades has been covered up with offending priests simply transferred to other areas. Pope tackles sex abuse in RC church and he has appointed a survivor of 1960s abuse to be on his commission of enquiry: Marie Collins

Not saying anything is going along with it and not far from stealing stuff yourself. if people are stealing from the workplace, the costs have to be covered somehow =>higher costs to oncharge to customers. Or loss of profits, which ultimately means there is likely to be job cuts - which might include your own job.

Haven't posted on this thread before but thought you might like this one: Singer was on Book of the Week, his serialised autobiography.

Mark, your article quite rightly makes the point: "Reverend" simply means "respected" or "revered" - which all Christians should be - that's what got the attention of the non-believers when the early Christian church was becoming established. Those early believers (saints!) were respected for the way they treated other people. For anyone who's interested, here's a Wikipedia article about the honorific "Reverend" and its various permutations: The Reverend I have difficulty with the passage in Acts that states that the early apostles gave themselves to prayer, etc, and declined to serve at tables. Sounds a bit like they were "too good" to do menial tasks like that - although, to be fair, I have heard jolly good explanations about that passage - and it also says the congregation was pleased at the outcome. I can certainly see that some ordained clergymen and -women would have difficulty in undertaking menial roles. I also know a fair few who actually do undertake such roles, and do so with enthusiasm and joy at serving. God bless them richly.

Ham, that has nothing to do with what I posted. It's something that I have pondered a while. I think church hierarchies do get carried away at times with the title not the serving.

Don't you sometimes think that the titles given to those who serve in the church sometimes encourage a feeling of superiority? A "minister" is one who serves, or ministers, to the congregation. A deacon, bishop, cardinal, archbishop, etc etc? Or in TWI terminology, twig leader, branch leader, limb leader, etc? Jesus said: We see Jesus being what TWI called the lowliest of all servants in Eastern culture, the foot washer. Wouldn't "servant names" be more appropriate? Starting with "butler" and ending with "under footman" - or for women, "cook" (a highly respected position) and ending with "scullery maid" (the humblest and lowliest starting grade for female servants) - which would emphasise the "servant" quality and the higher the rank, the lower the servant-grade? You can find out more about servant-rankings by googling "servant hierarchy." I'm not just commenting on TWI hierarchy but on the hierarchy of established churches as well. The Pope (normally) lives in a fancy gilded apartment with loads of servants for himself (the current Pope refuses to move into that fancy residence). Cardinals have fancy clothes and residences. Archbishops have palaces and gorgeous robes. I have no idea what sort of hierarchy US mega-churches might have, but one thing I'm certain of is that none of the head honchos entitles himself the "scullery maid" or the "under groom" or "foot washer." And with the fancy titles and the fancy dress comes a sense of entitlement and lordship that should never be found in God's chosen ones.

Newlife, you said on a different thread that you were finding it hard to develop a relationship with God. I think by seeing what you are now seeing, you're well on your way. Another context you should be aware of is the OT setting. Sometimes a line is quoted in the NT that refers to quite a lengthy section in the OT. Just as a few words or a one-liner for us brings to mind a whole teaching, so it did in OT times. Significant parts of Romans are like that.- see for example Rom 8 to 11, which includes our "foundational" text of Rom 10:9,10. If you don't look at the parts of the OT that these chapters quote from, you miss a lot of depth of meaning. Paul was a highly educated Pharisee. Knowing where he "came from" and all the wealth of knowledge he encapsulates in a phrase, helps us better understand some of what he writes to the new Christians, many of whom were themselves of Jewish background. Some of what he writes is new, of course, but there is still that legalistic OT background that he has thought through in great depth to "see the heart (grace) behind it."

Newlife, sometimes I think we try too hard on our relationship with God, instead of just "being." Just enjoy His creation and give thanks as often as you can. See beauty where you can, see need where you can (and do something about it if possible), just relax, be thankful, and "be." He will find you, in your quiet times of contemplation.

Chosen? When I was in rez, LCM announced that he had nominated her as his successor, should he die (all of the trustees had, quite appropriately, nominated substitutes). It is considered - here - that he nominated her because she knew too many of his secrets. She certainly knew of his physical abuse of women (read the legal papers), facilitated some of his physical abuse - and stopped him assaulting some women who might make trouble. The blackmail price for her collusion and silence? The prezzzidency. :sleep1:/> She wanted the pension pot. She doesn't want TWI's demise, just doesn't care whether it happens - after her lifetime.

Newlife, I so identify with what you say in your first post. You don't want to be in TWI, you recognise the (let's be kind) problems, but you don't feel you "fit" elsewhere. I have been blessed to have found an awesome church and the teachings from the minister who was there when I first went were so healing. I would sit there with tears pouring from my eyes. His words were healing, soothing and I felt welcomed back and hugged and tucked in under a big snuggly blanket by my Father. This (silent) weeping lasted 4 or 5 months. I needed to be there then. That minister has now moved on. I still go to the same church, or rather, to an offshoot (church plant). I don't find the same satisfying teaching and frequently find myself at odds with what is said and of course they are all very Trinitarian. I find myself unpicking the theology at times, rather than listening to the essence of the message. What I do do is enjoy fellowship and real friendship with the people there. There are some awesome giving people, mature Christians, who are always doing something within the community to help others. They are genuinely caring, genuinely giving of time and resources, and I don't detect any hypocrisy between words and actions. I enjoy them as my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, as fellow-workers, as joint heirs. It's fun. What I don't do is get involved in any theological discussions. I am thought to be a bit strange and to have some odd ideas. People don't understand "where I'm coming from." But nonetheless everyone is kind and despite the occasional raised eyebrows, no-one gets in my face, beats on me, or threatens to throw me out. I serve in several roles within my local church community and also in the wider city-wide church community. Generally I keep my views to myself, agree on basic Godly principles, and enjoy my own growing relationship with God. I like looking to see how He is working in the lives of other committed people too. Especially where their views differ from mine (and sometimes from each other's). I also know some ex-Wayfers. Initially these were good - at least in the TWI sense - but now there seems to be little in common except that we understand each other when certain phrases (jargon) are used. Some of those people I can't stand being near at all. But some have thought things through, learned from other escapees, and developed their own relationships with God. You can see the difference. Newlife, it's your relationship with God that matters. You can develop that if you find some mature Christians to learn from - Christians from diverse backgrounds and church theologies. It's helpful to have someone to talk things over with. They (and you) don't have to go to a church. That's only a starting point for you. :knuddel:/> Twinx

Don't you mean, string them up? :biglaugh:/>

It wasn't just picking up the trash - it was everything. Meticulous - you might say fanatical - cleanliness outwardly - but the dirtiest filthiest rankest vileness within. Everything outwardly dusted, washed, vacuumed, etc. Inwardly - a cesspit. It was earlier than 1993 - I remember some intense Corps Night teachings on this, 1990 onwards. I have thought about those (alleged) forms of evil occasionally, since then. I can see that there are different forms of "evil" if that's how you want to call it - actively doing wrong, failing to do right even when "doing nothing", neglecting to ensure that something was or was not done, etc. ( I have stripped the words and alleged definitions from my mind along with as much other TWI teaching as I can.) I have, however, pondered on Martindale's actions and considered these in the light of his "active" evil and "harassing" evil and non-active evil. I think he himself epitomised each of these aspects. He destroyed lives, relationships, integrity; he hounded and publicly vilified those who objected to his methods; and he did not take any stand against any kind of evil. He set himself up as a false god - made his commands required to be obeyed and himself to be idolised and worshiped, graciously lowering himself to our level from time to time - as long as we grovelled at his feet. I wonder if he has ever considered his own actions in relation to this line of teaching, and in what way he would categorise his own actions and behaviour. I wonder if he can see his destructiveness, his harassing evil, his lazy attitude to letting standards (proper Godly standards, that is) go to hell in a too-tight jockstrap. I wonder if he knew he was lying to himself then. I wonder if he is still lying to himself. But this didn't start with Martindale. He was just building upon the foundation laid by Our Faker in the Word. Matt 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in . 14 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer : therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation. 15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves. Twofold more the child of hell... that's what Wierwille did to Martindale - made him twice as bad as himself. And that's what Martindale was doing with others who came along after him - tried to make them twice as bad as himself. That's a significant escalation of destructive evil to those people who were groomed to follow in his footsteps - and of harassing evil to others who weren't in the chosen ones.

What's this about your navel, Steve? Are you planning to change your name to Adam? Did Adam have a navel? ... And other deep questions of that type... Plastic abs, I like that, I could do with some plastic to hold my flab in. Not that there's much, but things are going south a little bit.

What they "forgot" was that the gathering of abundance was to prepare for lean times. Some paid for Levites and their families in OT times. But in NT times, abundance was gathered so that it could be shared with those in need ... those [ordinary believers] who were experiencing famine; others who were in need because of illness, imprisonment, or widowhood. Of the disciples and apostles who remained in Jerusalem, do we hear of them claiming to be entitled to a tithe or any other money? No! I should be interested to know whether LCM still "abundantly shares" or even tithes to any organisation, and whether he lives on a "need" basis only, from whatever his income stream now is, and gives all the rest to some religious organisation of his choice...or enforced upon him. Does he drive a ratty old car? Wear clothes that are passed down from who knows how many other people? Have the burden of enforced journeys on a regular basis, and enforced (and chargeable) attendance at events where he hears the same old thing again and again? The whole bloody show took away any "joy of giving." But then, that's par for the course. Which took away all the "joy of living."