geisha779

People can take scripture and make it mean anything. Take for example "I can do all things" well, can you? If you jumped off a ten story building. . . . could you fly? No. What you can do . . . is endure suffering, hardship and hunger, . . . . affliction is in the context. But, you wrote why would you question "I can do all things" Really, because I can't do all things. If I am told I can have a more abundant life. . . . why would I be suffering hardship, hunger, and affliction? You can't tell me Paul didn't have faith. There has to be something more to it than "I can do all things." More to what abundance means. It isn't common sense it is about the deep things of God. How many mountains have you cast into the sea or fig trees have you cursed? Is that what it really means? That you can actually do these things? Is that common sense? Or, is there another meaning? Would you know the difference if someone told you? BTW, Christian Seminaries and Bible Colleges are not exactly "worldly" insitutions. This is where Christians are trained to teach the bible.

That is true, but had I listened to those who told me TWI was a cult. . . . the quality of my life could have been much greater. I would not have had to be delivered out of such foolishness. You have a chance now. . . you should take it.

There is something that puzzles me about your confidence that error has been corrected and all is well in the land of Oz. . . . and that is. . . how would you know? Isn't this a foundational or introductory class? Are you an educated bible scholar? Have you been to seminary? Even to an accredited bible college? How about those who collaborated on the effort? What are their qualifications to teach a bible class? Who reviewed it? TWI does not qualify as an educational institution. Frankly, cults don't really qualify as places of higher learning. They are geared more toward indoctrination than education. If you took the material to a recognized scholar within the framework of the mainstream Christian community and to someone with academic accountability and have the material assesed, you might have some credibility. I would settle for Hank Hannegraff, The Bible Answer Man. I am not speaking of those on the fringes of aberrant faith. . . . . those who came out of other ciults such a COG. How do you know error as been corrected? You alluded to ultra dispensationalism. . . . Seems to me, I remember being told that once I took PFAL. . . . I would know more than most seminary grads. . . . it is just not true. Have someone with qualifications who is recognized look over the material and help you out.

Maybe there are, but I am not one of them. I was speaking of an element of betrayal. . . . not likening the entire act of being drugged and raped as equivelent to backstabbing a friend. Just tried to make a point. . . it was simple. Motorcoach as s symbol of betrayal. . . yep Drugging and rape equivalent to backstabbing a friend. . . . nope. Is all betrayal equal. . . nope Does it have to be to use a familar symbol of betrayal. . . nope. I understood the point without projecting a wealth of hidden meaning into his post. . . . not rocket science. . . . which btw he actually could have put in there.

No, I don't think so. People can have care, concern, and kindness for others without that dynamic present. . . . they can reasonably expect to not be betrayed by someone they have been friends with. . . . those are normal, grown-up expectations. Loyalty and trust are not things that have to be spun into some bizarre dynamic to be appreciated. The motor coach could be a symbol of betrayal of trust without the rest of the scenario present. Isn't that what it is among people here? It was a poor choice. . . . pointed. . . . but, I am not going to assume it was meant to hurt and used in any other way than as a symbol unless RR tells me otherwise. . . . and I don't think that Pawtucket needs to be a cult leader to be betrayed by a friend. In my world. . . . if you talk meanly behind my back after I have extended myself to you, cared, and offered myself as a friend. That is a betrayal. I will forgive you, but we will have to reconcile because something will have been broken. You keep doing it. . . . eventually I will figure out you don't really want to be a friend. Despite that I would probably still be there if you needed something. No hidden meaning. Just kindness and care with a reasonable expectation of reciprocity. Broken trust is a betrayal among friends. People who were once in a cult. . . . can be real friends to one another. :) My take and experience anyway.

Nearly to the Soap Opera forum. :) I think we may just read things differently. Here is the way I read his comment. . . . as a culmination of disgust with Excathedra's perceived betrayal of trust toward a friend(Paw) who has offered nothing but support and help. Wanna buy a motor coach and make your betrayal complete? A motor coach being the symbol of betrayal among the natives. Not really as sinister as you seem to believe. My take anyway. Seems there was a clear boundry on how you do and do not treat someone who has been a real friend. Poor choice of an example, but I don't think it qualifies him for flogging. I thought he backtracked well, for the sake of peace. . . and I do think he genuinely cares for excathedra. . . . again . . . just my take. We can surely use a different word than gift as I was sadly unaware of all the rules surrounding the giving and receiving of gifts. Although, I do think appreciation is not misplaced when someone freely offers us a place to speak our mind. Our focus is just different Brainfixed. We look at things from different angles.

I put it in the wrong thread :) . . . . it was prompted by several posts in several threads . . . . I meant to put it in Critical Thinking.

Let me keep this straight.. . . . Way brained if you don't see things the way someone here thinks you should. . . . Not using "critical thinking" if you think there is enough evidence provided to consider the bible the words of God. Deluded and superstitious if you believe in God. Having cognitive dissonance if you pray for someone. . . . And my personal favorite. . . . the classic. . . . you can't declare your belief "truth" because it is just your belief. . . . . in other words . . . the person telling you that is actually declaring what is true. . . . . but, somehow THAT is acceptable. Got it.

Well, his point was not about a used motor coach and I referenced his point, I am sorry if that was unclear. As to the rest of what you said. . . . that is your perspective and I don't really relate to it. It is not that I don't respect your right to it. . . . I do, but, there is not much in there I accept. The point about gift to control to me seems a leap and is not one I make here or even see . . . . so to me it is a moot point. I was not being insulting when I mentioned grammar or spelling. . . . . reading my posts you must have picked up on the fact I eschew punctuation, go out of my way to begin a sentence with "but" and my spelling skills are often in question. I was at one time educated in the UK so it can be anyone's guess. Surprize. . . surprise. . . aeroplane. . . airplane. . . mum. . . mom. All depends. My point was actually that you don't need a post-grad degree to post here. . . . or debate skills. . . . people respond to heartfelt communication. This was in response to some frustration I have sensed in excathedra's posts. I never mentioned Mod-chat. . . . when I spoke of the cryptic nature of posts it was in reference to to ex's initial post about someone having a difficult time finding their voice and GSC not being helpful. I think I know what she is talking about, but it is unclear. As for the world we live in and growing a thick skin. . . . in my world it is a must. If you don't have to have a thick skin where you dwell. . . . great. But, this isn't the grocery store or employment. . . it is a discussion forum populated by ex-cultists. Some with agenda's . . . . some with anger. . . . and many who speak their minds. Doesn't help to take it too personally. Hope that clarifies.

Is that what I was referencing or just what you are highlighting for your purpose?

A month ago I asked Paw to remove my account from the site. Everyone has feelings and from time to time and they can get really hurt by others. I am glad he didn't remove the account, but gave me the space to step back and gain some perspective. While I am ill equipped emotionally or mentally to run this site or anything remotely like it. . . . . we do have someone amazingly able who is equipped and responsible. No one is forcing him to provide a place for ex-twi to discuss or meet. It is done out of a sense of purpose and responsibility. A thank-you seems appropriate and a bit of understanding in order. When someone gives me a gift. . . .I don't run around complaining about it. . . I either use it or I don't. . . .if I can't accept it graciously that speaks to me. . . . not the one who sacrificed to provide it. That being said. ______________________________ I think at times you do need a thick skin to post here. . . or you need to grow one. It also helps to be able to hold your own intellectually and to formulate coherent responses on this forum. But, that is true just about everywhere in life. . . .except of course in TWI. . . . where being a bully got you noticed. If that is a frustrating concept. . . .life must get pretty difficult. However, people also respond to genuine heartfelt communication. . . . even one laced with grammatical error and spelling mistakes. Some people even respond to those who express pain. . . and if they offer advice or counsel it seems a normal reaction. . . . not some throwback to cult think. If a person approaches me with a problem. . . . reveals a hurt. . . . has an issue. . . . my human response is to reach out and try to help. I can only help with the benefit of my own experience. I don't have to be a trained professional to respond in conversation. People deal with each other all the time on deeply human levels. Some shared experiences are unique. TWI is one of those unique shared experiences. Discussion a result of being on this forum. We don't have to accept someone's perspective. However, lashing out or responding with insults just perpetuates what the complaint about the site seems to be.. . . . a lack of compassion. Why bring something up for conversation if that is not what you want? If you want to rant. . . .rant. . . . or start a blog. . . Pawtucket even provided that option. Don't be taken aback when someone responds. Some people refuse to enable others to behave in certain ways. Thank-goodness.. . . but, is that really not being compassionate? I don't think so. . . . but it can be frustrating for the person acting out.. . . and looking for validation. Rumrunner spoke up at the start of this thread. . . . got his head handed to him. . . . the drama that followed his post. . . . really amazed me. When he gracefully tried to calm the situation. . . . wham. . . more was piled on. . . . his point was lost and he left the thread. Who can blame him. He doesn't seem to be an enabler. Some people just like to start trouble and keep it going. The twin to this thread is in the Soap Opera forum. Same thing. . . . new rehash. If there are issues.. . .be specific. . . articulate your needs. . . . reach out to this community and have a little faith in peoples responses, but it can't be some cryptic accusation with mysterious undercurrents of distant history that no one really gets. I am left to guess whose voice is lost. . . make assumptions and try to figure it all out. . . . just leads to speculation on my part.

Just a point here. . . . . if you haven't read Surprised by Hope. . . . I highly recommend it. . . . but NT Wright's vision of what happens after death is not really like TWI's. It could be considered rest or sleep if you must. . . . compared to bodily life. . . . but his is much more complex understanding. Here he says he doesn't think we will be unconscious. . .. . just wanted to clarify this a bit. <object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value=" name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src=" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>Here is another little blurb where he speaks of his book: http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/nicholas_t_wright/2007/10/whispers_of_hope_from_the_dead.html I wrote a big book called "The Resurrection of the Son of God" (2003), and I have another one, smaller and more popular level, called "Surprised by Hope," coming out soon. Yes, of course I believe in life after death, but the New Testament is much more interested in life AFTER 'life after death' -- i.e. bodily resurrection following a period of being bodily dead. For that to happen, as all C1 Jews and Christians knew, meant that between bodily death and bodily resurrection there would be a period of 'life after death' in a disembodied state, for which e.g. Wisdom 3 uses the language of 'soul'. John Polkinghorne, that great scientist-turned-theologian, says somewhere that God will download our software onto his hardware until he gives us new hardware to run the software again for ourselves. All cultures, ancient as well as modern, have been more or less familiar with the fact (as I take it to be -- lots of empirical and cross-cultural evidence) that people we love who have died (sometimes when we don't even know yet that they have died) can and do appear to us. C.S. Lewis, famously, appeared like that to J.B. Phillips. I have a friend whose daughter was murdered, and her fiance a thousand miles away received a totally unexpected 'visit' from her before he'd heard the news. And so on. For many people, this is a hint, a nudge, that there is indeed 'something beyond'. But for Christians such experiences shouldn't be the decisive factor. And, after all, the genuine Christian hope -- of the whole world remade, reborn (Romans 8, Revelation 21, etc etc) -- indicates that God is passionately interested in THIS world, this cosmos of space, time and matter which he is redeeming, rather than encouraging us to discount it in pursuit of a nebulous afterlife which is as nothing compared to what we're promised after that again. Easter is the key to it all. And don't be fobbed off by those who say that we can't believe in it now that we know about modern science etc. Face it: Homer, Aeschylus, Pliny and the rest all 'knew' that dead people don't rise. We didn't need Galileo or Descartes or Voltaire or Darwin to teach us that. What matters is belief in the creator God who has promised to set the world right in the end -- and has begun to do it by raising Jesus from the dead.

Watered Garden, My post has nothing to do with your salvation. . . . it has nothing to do with you. . . . you are taking it way to personally. That is what I believe. If you don't, it doesn't bother or anger me. I don't care. You work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. . . . God bless you. I wish you goodwill. You obviously can't stand me or my opinion. . . . so I tell you what. . . . GSC is all yours. . . that is the Christian thing to do. . . . besides. . . I really am over TWI . . . it is well past time for me to move on. Enjoy the forums. . . . heal and I wish you well. I am asking Pawtucket to remove my name and cancel my account.

Lot's of non Christians speak in tongues. . . historically it predates Pentecost . . . is used by some pagan religions and is proof of nothing. Someone taught us with his "theology" that 1 Corinthians 12:3 meant SIT was the proof you were born again. . . . . then again. . . he also told women he could heal them with sex.

I can't imagine why scripture would tell you to examine yourself if doubt is from the pit of hell. All Christians have doubt at one time or another. . . I thought I was responding to your needs. Forgive me. I was extremely foolish in my attempt to reach out. I have read post after post of people doing the same only to be called names and insulted. I really thought what I said would offer you comfort. I don't know a Christian who has not had doubts. . . . or of one I have read from the past without them. I have never known one to say nah-nah-nah. Faith is sometimes a challenge. We can pray for faith and it was from a Calvinist that I learned the term "Saving Faith" John MacArthur. http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/90-21.HTM James is all about trials revealing your faith. . . . he spoke of dead faith. . . Never mind. . . . . . it really doesn't really matter. :(

I can just feel the love. . . . If you have concerns about a theology because it makes you question your salvation. . . . don't immediately lash out at the theology. . . examine yourself to see if you are actually in the faith. Take time to pray for saving faith. One thing I do know for SURE about God. . . is that He is faithful. Like no one else. In a temporal world filled with fallen creatures it is difficult to understand just how faithful He really is. You can completely count on Him and He does NOT let you down. Time and time again I am awed by this, because I would have walked out on me years ago. We came out of an ear tickling cult, with a skewed gospel. If a person or a PASTOR or a church cause you to have doubts. . . it may be warranted. . . . . . and instead of getting angry. . . . go to God and ask Him. Maybe those questions are there because we need to reflect, self-examine and be corrected. They are probably God. But, He is NOT going to turn you away. He may actually be lovingly calling you. What exactly is the correct doctrine for salvation? The bible says everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. . . . but, Jesus says not everyone who says Lord, Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven. Now, there is either a contradiction or something deeper to be understood. You can train a parrot to say Jesus is Lord. It is the Holy Spirit who makes known to us all things. . . . we don't quench Him because we think we already know. . . . doubts can serve a purpose. Great is the mystery of Godliness and there is something we missed in TWI involved in salvation. Maybe God is calling us to saving faith with some of these doubts.

No, I don't think they are modern day gnostics. I think there is an element of gnosticism. . . . which is also found in the foundation of the Faith movement. TWI is an odd mix of Orthodox and mysticism as is Word of Faith. (see article) Some think there is an element of gnoticism in Paul's epistles. It is really difficult to pin down TWI theology. It is so eclectic. Which I think is T-Bone's point. :) pretentious eclectic slipshod patchwork systematic theology of dubious production by a deluded theologian-wannabe. Some Charismatic leanings. . . . Speaking in tongues was taken to a whole new level. Kind of strange how our only rule of faith and practice was not actually the scriptures themselves, but was in large part VP's revelatory understanding of scripture. The whole thing began with an audible revelation. . . . or story of one. The Man of God for our day and time is very Word of Faith based as is not questioning him. Though shall not commit adultery or Matthew 5:28. . . . but, for the few who were initiated and spiritual enough to have the knowledge. . . . God said it was okay. The Advanced Class was full of secret knowledge for the few. Remember, we were not to go back and speak about it? What I wonder about is where did they get all this knowledge? Scripture is not replete with information on Satan. . . it is about Jesus Christ. Where did it come from? Satan/devil is mentioned about 107 in the whole bible. . . . much of what I heard in the Advanced class was from the occult. From outside of scripture. We thought God gave us revelation on which devils indwelt our "brothers and sisters" in Christ. Who in theory were also indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Crowded in there. Where are the examples of believers being possessed in the bible? I did listen to some of what STF had posted on You-Tube. After I got past the sweeping hand gestures and voice cadence. . . . it seemed the substance of what I heard was rooted in Faith theology. Many Word of Faith teachers don't believe God is sovereign. Seems it is another eclectic mish mash. Esoteric in nature.

It really is a loaded phrase. It also assumes a great deal about all Christians past and present. . . it is the beginning of separation from them and setting us up as the elite one's who finally believed it. Finally got the truth. From Rejoices post in the BOD thread. This New Testament, the Revised English Version® (REV®), is the version that we are developing. We call it the REV because we are presenting a revised version of earlier English versions, primarily the American Standard Version of 1901 (ASV), which we have used as the base text for our work, modifying it when WE feel it is appropriate. Our goal is to eventually have an "essentially literal" translation of the Bible that more closely represents biblical truth than any other translation currently on the market, and also one that is written in today's English. We think we can do that because we believe a person has to understand the meaning of the text correctly to be able to translate it correctly. Furthermore, one's theology always affects the way that person will translate the text. It is our assertion that there are theological issues that we understand more correctly than most translators, and thus our translation will reflect that theology. You don't have to wonder where the hubris of this assertion or JAL's letter comes from. They really would make VP proud.

I like opinionated. . . it shows you are your own person! Thank goodness. What did we lose being caught up in TWI at such a vulnerable time in our personal development?? We lost our true historical self. . . and for people to go back into that system because they are kinder. . . indicates many have never begun to recover themselves. Off-shoots perpetuate that personality change which occurred in TWI. . . . the subtle persuasion. . . .the altered worldview. . . . it is insidious. Thank-you for the disclaimer that TWI may not Christian. It is an imperative distinction for people to make. TWI's roots are mysticism and spiritualist, with some gnostic leanings. People hate hearing this. . . I get mail! However, if we want to be informed, we have to look at who influenced our fearless MOG VP and what he adopted as "lost Christianity". There is nothing new under the sun. Who were Kenyon, Stiles, and Leonard? What influenced them. Might be helpful to know. They were not really Orthodox guys. This also helps if one decides to reject Christianity. It is good to know just what it is we are rejecting. TWI is one thing. . . the Christian faith another. It helps when we are studying the first century church. . . . the break off sects, the why of divisions. . . and what historical Christianity does mean. Do you realize this is nearly impossible to do if we are still caught up in the idea that the metaphysical and occult based garbage VP passed off as Christianity is still our foundation for what it means to be Christian? No wonder people chuck the whole thing all together. . . . it is such a tangled web of deceit and psychological abuse packaged so prettily under the guise of biblical research. . . .it is nearly impossible to untangle alone. Thank goodness for GSC. . . and while I am thinking of it. . . it is no wonder you have people posting some 20 years out. . . . healing from this can take years. They messed with the deepest part of our psyche. Who we really are. . . . and most of us got caught up when our relationship to self was developing. . . . geeze talk about ugly. Christianity is about relationship BTW. It does not discount uniqueness of self in relation to God. . . . If people want that Word of Faith . . . occult influenced belief system for themselves. . . no problem. . . that isn't the point. . . . . Shouldn't we at the least know what we are embracing and why we are so convinced it is the "truth"? How we were so persuaded, influenced and fundamentally changed? We were in a cult. . . . we need to know what kind of cult. . . . how it worked. . . and the residual influence on our lives. Or. . . we can just go back because they are nicer now.

Yes. . . . . and much of it was heavily influenced by the Word of Faith Movement. Which makes sense given the time frame. . . . http://www.gospelout...twordfaith.html I think you are seeing some of the spill over or second generation revelations in groups like STF with its Personal Prophecy and God not being completely in control. That too makes perfect sense given what the leaders of STF came from. . . . . it is that special knowledge that no one else understands. . . they hold the keys to God's Kingdom. . . . so to speak.

Wow. . Who knew?. . Someone had better call the actual recognized world's leading biblical scholars and tell them to push over. . . . Robert Alter, James Dunn, Phillip J King, NT Wright, Daniel B. Wallace to just name a few off the top of my head. . . . . . you know. . . the guys who were NOT in a cult started by a "mean-spirited, alcoholic, narcissistic, sociopathic, serial sexual predator ." Guess people should chuck their brand new ESV bibles in favor of this one. . . that only had 95 of the world's leading scholars contribute. http://www.esvstudybible.org/ I always think to myself. . . what more can surprise me? Silly question.

Why are you involved with a so-called Christian organization that has dirty little secrets hiding in the closet? Don't you know better? Shame on you. I am assuming you are a grown-up.

don't people make that determination themselves by what they decide to believe? If you don't believe in God. . . . it is not very likely you will be a follower of Christ who claimed to be His Son.

The "I's" have it. . . . John Lynn and his "Traveling Church of the Great Me, My, Mine, Myself, I AM!"

I thought it was a really nice post too. No malice in it. . . . thank-you Research Geek for sharing your perspective with us. For me, and probably many others, we didn't go into TWI because we truly loved God. . . . TWI was a rejection of Christianity, Christ, and the church. It was embracing something where we didn't have to count the cost and we followed a man and his easy prosperity gospel with a gnostic bent. Rejecting Christianity didn't happen post TWI. . . . it happened all along. We mocked Christians remember? We sang songs about it. We looked at them with scorn and ridicule and we rejected the Jesus of the Church and mocked Him too. Anyone remember that? What we didn't consider is that Jesus is with His church. . .and we followed a man who came out of there in disgrace. We built our own church with our own Jesus based on one mans vision of a God who didn't get in the way of his desire to sin. Isn't that obvious now? An offshoot of such a church? No thank-you. A rejection of that kind faith is healthy IMO. The thing about Job. . . . My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you. Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes. Job never got the answer to why. He got greater than a why. . . . He got the who. What was the cost to get there? And. . . he was a righteous man. It is more than just praying for your friends. . . . it all has to get stripped away IMHO. Seems some of that can happen here.