oldiesman

Some items I consider to be "The Baby": Jesus is the Messiah, the son of God, confess the Lord Jesus and believe God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved (Rom. 10:9) 5 Sonship Rights: Righteousness, Sanctification, Justification, Redemption, Ministry of Reconciliation Salvation by Grace, not of works Power of Attorney -- Claiming Your Sonship Rights in Christ's Name. Believing it's "Christ in You, the Hope of Glory" Being Born Again of Incorruptible Seed, heaven bound, no power from hell can stop you from going Dead are not alive now It's possible to operate all nine "manifestations", and they are manifestations, not gifts of the spirit. Speaking in tongues is a real biggie here. The Word of God is the Will of God ... ever abiding respect for the scriptures.Some items I consider to be "The Bathwater": Tithing for Prosperity The Law of Believing, especially on the negative side (fear is believing, etc.) Unclear doctrine on adultery and fornication Way Corps caste system and egotism and its detrimental effects on Joe Believers all over the ministry. I'm sure there's a whole lot more, that's all I can think of right now. :)-->

Song, we learned in PFAL that those who are born again are members of the body of Christ. So what Craig said, if he said it, was wrong. I got out in 1990, so I can't speak for what happened after that. I hear a few strange things every now and then .... Craig saying that TWI was the "only true body of Christ" is one of them. :)-->

sky4it, I agree with your viewpoints here. Thanks for sharing. ... :)-->

I wholeheartedly agree, it's a lame claim. I think forum postings are nothing more than opinions. Only exception I would make is that if you personally know the person posting, and know they are absolutely truthful in real life, then you can take what they say as being truthful. :)-->

"We got the Word over the Word already" :)-->

JustThinking, The biblical concepts I believe from twi mean a whole lot to me. Give me some good reasons why I ought to throw the baby out with the bathwater ... :)-->

Funny thing is, he never had to lie about anything, to prove that his good works had an impact on folks. For a moment, throw out the instances he lied and look at it ... look at his life without those, and still, he contributed significantly and meaningfully. VPW didn't promote a scam. Many many folks got born again, and came to a more accurate knowledge of the truth, through VPW's efforts. That's not a definition of a scam. :)-->

If there's anyone out there who initially got involved with twi, or stayed involved with twi, because of "Dr. Wierwille's Educational Background" please raise your hand. I'd be very interested in hearing about your stowry, and how that matters any with one's spiritual life ... As far as I'm concerned, he could have been a high school dropout ... wouldn't matter one bit. In fact, if he WAS a highschool dropout, some might say that what he achieved later in life proves that formal schooling means little or nothing. Check this out, here's some famous high school dropouts: H.G. Wells Jim Clark Jimmy Dean Andrew Jackson Ray Charles Maurice Chevalier Ellen Burnstyn Raymond Burr Glen Campbell Dizzy Gillespie Patrick Henry Julie Andrews Louis Armstrong Lucille Ball Patrick Stewart Roy Rogers Alfred E. Smith Sonny Bono Cher And the Beat Goes On! Have a great weekend, one and all! :)-->

Sadie, back in 1948, it was a little different stowry ... :)-->

Sadie, saying you're a group that proclaims the truth, and saying you're the ONLY group that proclaims the truth, are two different claims. :)-->

Wordwolf: Wierwille and twi never said we were the ONLY bearers of truth. We knew that what we learned was a compilation of teachings from all sources and we thought that was the best truth there was available. But the only group that had the truth? Hardly. Learning from "men of God scattered across the continent" means that others had the truth, as well. We readily acknowledged that on individual teachings, other groups were "right on" as well. How about the Mormons, on tithing? How about the Jehovah's Witnesses, on JCING?And many times, during my witnessing stints, when I'd come across someone who believed exactly what I did on a certain topic, I'd rejoice that others were taught and believed the same thing. :)-->

JustThinking: And I am asking what Wierwille's fudging his credentials have to do with one's spiritual life? Yes, he fudged. He accepted the term "Dr.", without properly earning it. So what? Does that effect your spiritual life? Does that effect how God worked, or works, in your life, then and now? The question is already answered. Wierwille isn't a real Doctor. So yes, I am trying to redirect the conversation into asking, what is the point of asking the question?Does Wierwille not being a doctor matter ANY in one's spiritual life? :)-->

My opinion, which is pure speculation, is that at the time, he was either too poor, or too lazy, or a mixture of both.

Zshot, did she happen to write any books of her own? I'd like to try seeing how a motivational book written by a real Doctor motivates one more. Perhaps there's something in the title "Dr." that works magically on the human psyche?

Coolwaters: So then, Doctors can't have flawed mentalities?When someone tried to tell you Wierwille had a flawed mentality, you said "no way, cause he's a Doctor"!?? One cannot understand the finer details about the bible, like JCING, without being a Doctor? If he went by "Rev. Wierwille", his teachings wouldn't have been valid, or as valid?If you were learning under a "Rev. Wierwille", you wouldn't have stayed as long? What does his name/title have to do with the content and application of his teachings in your life? He had to be a doctor for you to apply the principles? I guess I've known that all along, cause him being a "Doctor" was irrelevant in my spiritual life. I had been going to twig and got born again for months before I took PFAL, and even then, his so-called doctorate was irrelevant. I hung around that long, cause I thought twi was the best, and I wanted to "do the word", just like most everyone else.I submit to you that most folks probably didn't even hang around because of "Dr." Wierwille at all; but that's for others to say, I can't speak for everyone.

If there's anyone out there who initially got involved with twi, or stayed involved with twi, because "Dr." Wierwille had a "Dr." in front of his name, please raise your hand. I'd be very interested in hearing about your stowry, and how that matters any with one's spiritual life ... :)-->

Steve, that's your mistaken interpretation of what I've been saying. I never excused anyone's adultery. Rather I've stated over and over again that sin is sin. But what I have objected to on this topic is a seeming double standard, why some folks seem to be so quick to exonerate "the victim" (which indeed, in some cases, may not be a victim at all), while at the same time, being so unforgiving and so unrelentingly harsh and critical towards the minister. Yes, the minister should know better and do better, that's for sure. But I sometimes feel the seeming double standard as unbalanced and unfair. I don't worship Wierwille, but neither do I hate his guts. :)-->

Great news! Happiness always for Danny & family. :)-->

I don't think it should be assumed that, just because someone is a clergyman, that the congregant is automatically considered "emotionally dependent" upon them. I think substantive and relevant facts would have to weigh in as well, corroborating same. :)-->

Thanks Raf. Excathedra and Steve, I agree with what Raf just said. Well said, Raf. Thanks. :)-->

JAL said: How true this is, for me at least! I think JAL is doing a good job of making a case that CES is different from TWI, in practice at least. A lot of the doctrines are obviously the same, true, which won't change, unless the folks advocating change come across with some extra heavy beef that makes more sense than already researched doctrines most of us believe is the truth. Those who don't believe these doctrines are always free to go elsewhere and enjoy other doctrines if they feel the other doctrines are more correct. I don't sense any condemnation or arrogance from JAL in that light, even though he still believes he's right. I don't have a problem with him believing he's right and saying so. He's got that right, just like anyone else. :)-->

Ok thanks. :)-->

Yup, Simonzelotes, like toothpaste that's out of the tube and can't be undone, it's too late, you said what you said. Sorry about that, I shouldn't have put the whammy on you. :D-->

Simonzelotes, I agree completely, and couldn't have said it any better. Thank you. :)-->

dmiller, I think I do see things as they are and believe these things happened, so I don't know exactly what you're talking about. My comment before was about this 37-page letter only. I don't see it as specific at all, all I read about is 37 pages of how the Trustees aren't spiritual people and are blowing it, with no specifics. It seems a tad condescending. Like spouting spiritual principles and realities, without really saying anything meaningful the Trustees can use "to change". I question from this letter, what are they supposed to stop, to change from, if there are no specifics? In this context, I think telling these people they are evil, without getting specific, is worthless. No wonder why they canned his butt shortly after this. It may have been canned anyway, even if they got specific, but I see no profit from this letter as it stands.Do you have that tape set by JAL where he gets real specific? I'd love to hear that, and any other information you may have, so that I may be properly informed. :)-->