oldiesman

I'm a dummy and I read this stuff way back in 1973, before the Information Age. The statement "lots of the stuff I teach is not original" is from the Way Living in Love, published 1972. The statement he "sought enlightenment from men of God scattered across the continent" was from some of the collaterals of PFAL. I suppose there are some folks who haven't heard or read this stuff. But I also think there are lots of folks who know exactly what I am talking about, who post here.

I agree, and he made it clear that lots of the stuff he taught was not original. Not only was that in written form in 1972, from a popular book in the twi bookstore, but he said it to folks for years. I guess I should cut some slack for folks who just came aboard in the 1990s.. maybe they didn't read it and know VP. But someone whos been around for 20-30 years? Been in the corps? Also written in the books he "sought enlightenment from men of God scattered across the continent". A person who receives all his stuff from revelation, who researches independently apart from anyone else, doesn't need to do that. He's already enlightened, directly, from God. Nah, I stand by my belief. Maybe if he said "I received all the stuff I teach from my own independent research". But he didn't say that. He did say he researched independently... but then folks read into that statement and assume that means all his stuff was original. It wasn't. He told us it wasn't. But you know what happens when we assume stuff? Still waiting to hear back from John. Dummies need enlightenment.

This may be a good time to break out some of my Way Memorabilia letters from twi leaders regarding questions I had on tithing. :) Before I start re-typing these letters, a question ... Are we allowed to post communications of this nature?

I see what you're saying and it was definitely wrong for twi to teach that God would abandon us if we didn't give money. I was repulsed by those thoughts, and in fact actually proved otherwise when I deliberately stopped tithing to see if I'd get abandoned. I didn't, and still had pleasurable participation in twi.

Really has nothing to do with Piffle. Piffle doesn't set the twi policies, the BOD does. I would like to know, myself. So far, haven't heard they do.

Yes that's right. There was some fear motivation associated with it. Christians Should Be Prosperous even said something like "tithing is the minimum health, accident insurance".... But I learned quickly in twi that God blesses folks with good health and accident prevention, anyway. Bottom line, it was/is up to the individual whether they wanted to tithe in twi, or not. It was not a requirement to participate, except in classes in the later years, as you pointed out.

John, you're an intelligent guy so perhaps you can answer this question from a Dummy: If Dr. Wierwille wanted to portray to us folks that all his teachings were received by revelation, and he researched these concepts on all his own independent from others, why did he say in 1972 "lots of the stuff I teach is not original"?

I'm glad you're so happy.

Using your definition of "expected", this is what I know so far: twi didn't/doesn't expect folks to tithe in order to participate in fellowships. They DO expect folks to tithe to participate in classes, as shared by some folks during their experience of the more recent years. You really can't say it was required. Paying the mortgage is required, or you lose the house. Paying the car payment is required, or you lose the car. Paying the grocery bills is required, or you don't eat. Paying the tithe was not required... because folks still got to participate if they didn't do it.

I am a lazy person, I admit that. Especially in this heat. "Roll out those lazy hazy crazy days of summer..."

Expected, yes. Required, no. I liken a "requirement" to something like the paying of dues. If one is a member of a club or association, one may have dues, and if those dues are mandatory, the failure to pay them results in the mandatory cancellation of one's participation.

Are you asking me, huh? :D I don't know, perhaps it was a way of finding out where one's commitment was at? I don't condone it.

Sharon you are a genius. If you love Malamutes and Huskies, Eight Below is your film. :)

I know that. But let's be accurate with our terminology, ok? A requirement is a requirement. If there was a requirement to keep on tithing in order to take some classes in the '90's, then let's use that qualifier and be accurate.

If someone asks for a check instead of cash, and you do it, it doesn't prove much. What proves something, I believe, would be if someone DIDN'T write the check after being asked, and then see if there are any consequences, such as being kicked out of twig, and so forth. No doubt there were some folks in twi that, if you let them push you around, they will gladly.

Not mine. I first took the Advanced Class in March of 1978 and just before then, hadn't gone to fellowship for 6 months.

I suspected this too. I knew all along that giving money was expected, even in the early days; but never an actual requirement to participate.

I think the concept was first discussed in PFAL and Christians Should be Prosperous. As far as it becoming law and "required", I haven't a clue. I was under the impression that giving money in twi wasn't ever "required", but I could be wrong as I wasn't around past 1991. I never heard of anyone actually getting booted out for not throwing money in the horn of plenty, which case may indicate it being an actual "requirement".

Your talk of callousness contributed to the derail. You are always free to start a new topic on it, if you want. :)

I don't know Tom, when twi does it, some folks might refer to that as "loving bombing" to get your loot. Can't you SEE the evil decepting of those WOWS? Seriously, thanks for the nice word about the WOWs. :)

When someone has opinions and ideas and won't accept anything different, we call that having opinions and ideas and their "take" on things. When twi has opinions and ideas and won't accept anything different, we call that brainwashing.

I might agree with your assessment had I not added the smileys.

You have no sense of humor. And I think John Juedes is a Spin Doctor. For instance, he doesn't allow any opinions other than his own. Doesn't have any use for them.

How would you know that my memory is selective, if I say the sole context of the statement made was what I recollected?