waysider

Most of us have probably lost touch with current events at The Way. Is that what really matters? The Way is still essentially the same organization at its core structure. Its system of operation, as we remember it, is still intact. It's still corrupt at the management level and that corruption has an effect on the rank and file members who may not be aware of the true nature of the beast. That's what we continue to expose here.

Here is the "aforementioned criteria" we (students of PFAL/Way theology) were taught to use. "The Way Ministry focused primarily on study of The Pauline Epistles. This was a precedent that was established early in the PFAL class via the introduction of Biblical administrations (Dispensationalism), the concept of observing "To Whom It Is Written" and the idea behind all people belonging to three specific categories. ("Jew, Gentile or Church of God") In addition, it was established early in the PFAL class that what "Holy Men of God" spoke or wrote was tantamount to words directly from God, himself. Thus, we were to consider the contents of The Church Epistles to be equivalent to words from God (Holy Men Of God Spoke.), directly to us (To The Church of God)" This is the criteria we used to evaluate scripture relevance. (not the same thing as whether or not Paul was a con-man) My apologies for not stating that in a clearer fashion. As to "Why would Paul have disingenuous motives"? (paraphrased) Who knows? I don't think we could have candidly answered that question a mere 40 years ago, had it been asked of us regarding Wierwille. In fact, when we were confronted with it, we had ready made rationalization near at hand to fire back. Then again, even if Paul's motives were altruistic, that doesn't guarantee they were wrought in a sane mind. When you accept that Paul's admonition regarding speaking in tongues is Theopneustos, you are making a huge assumption that is based, once again, on another facet of the "aforementioned criteria".

Roy Yes, we are all in a constant state of learning (hopefully) and it would, indeed, be a better world if there was harmony among the various and diverse "sects". Consider this. There are people who are rocked to their very souls, steeped in denial and painfully hurt when they discover the man whose teachings they followed for decades (VPW) was, in fact, a self-centered, drunken, sexual predator and religious fraud. Remember how people would say "Dr. says this." or "Dr. said that."? It was as if it had to be "right on" if it came from "Dr.". Like a surrogate spokesperson for God. So, now, here, we have this man, Paul, whose words have been revered, not for decades, but, for millenia. So very many things we consider to be things that "God said", are really things that Paul said. (Refer to my example: "I would that ye all spake in tongues."------Thus saith Paul)

Yeah, except there are at least weather records on file that refute Wierwille's gas pump Stowwwry. We don't even have any traffic logs for Damascus Road.

Some good commentary here, for sure. Here's the thing. It's like the old circular logic exercise that proves the existence of God. (ie: "The Bible says there is a God and since God wrote the Bible----there must be a God.") What do we really know about this cat named Paul? I mean, he had a pretty lengthy rap sheet before he made the old switchola. Personal credibility does not work heavily in his favor. As far as that goes, what do we even know about the practice of writing letters to churches during his lifetime? Weren't these just letters that he wrote to particular churches and individuals, addressing specific problems and situations? Did he ever intend for them to serve any purpose beyond their original intent? If he did, why didn't he convey that intent to the recipients before they filed them away with the rest of their letters? Why is it that Ephesians, which TWI heralded as the greatest epistle of all, is considered by many scholars to be the product of an author other than Paul and dated later than the rest? If Paul was a flim-flam man on the order of VPW, maybe the comparisons are warranted.

Does this mean they'll have to unsubscibe to Second Life?

Maybe it was just some bad chicken salad.

The "nostalgia for research" article/thread prompted me to contemplate the significance of "inerrancy". The Way Ministry focused primarily on study of The Pauline Epistles. This was a precedent that was established early in the PFAL class via the introduction of Biblical administrations (Dispensationalism), the concept of observing "To Whom It Is Written" and the idea behind all people belonging to three specific categories. ("Jew, Gentile or Church of God") In addition, it was established early in the PFAL class that what "Holy Men of God" spoke or wrote was tantamount to words directly from God, himself. Thus, we were to consider the contents of The Church Epistles to be equivalent to words from God (Holy Men Of God Spoke.), directly to us (To The Church of God), At one point during the course of the Fellow Laborer program, we were to read Ephesians a minimum of once a day. Then, we were to rehash it at our night twigs every night. Given the rigidness of the schedule we observed, this didn't last long nor were people very consistent in their diligence. That, however, is probably fodder for another topic. Here is were it gets sticky. Using the aforementioned criteria, it became an accepted "given" that whatever Paul said in Ephesians, Corinthians, etc was the same thing as God saying it directly to us. Suppose for a moment, though, that Paul was, perhaps, the VPW of his day. (So often, people would put forth the inverse idea that VPW was the Apostle Paul of our day and time.) Even now, years after his death, with the advent of the internet and the plethora of information it puts at our fingertips, some people still aren't able to see that VPW was really a con-man. People in the first century did not have access to resources that could prove or disprove Paul's legitimacy. We have heard people say that it's God's will we all speak in tongues (one example) because God said so in "His Word". Did He? Or, was it Paul who made that statement? Question five, of "listening with a purpose", in session eleven, poses the question, "Is it God's will that we all speak in tongues?" According to the answer key, the correct answer is "Yes". But think about it. Who really said "I would that ye all speak in tongues."? Wasn't it, in fact, Paul? Did he really say that "to us" or to a specific group of people two thousand years ago? There are many, many more examples of places where you could insert "Thus Saith Paul." What if Paul was really a forerunner of what we now call "con men"? What if Paul was the VPWFHDAT? (VPW for his day and time) It certainly shines a very different light on the importance and "inerrancy" of The Epistles.

"Music is a gift-------you give it away and you get to keep it forever." HERE (For enhanced appreciation, be sure to watch the video clip, as well.)

<object width="425" height="344"><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="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Off Topic Alert!! Speaking of misunderstood lines: How about this one from Groovin' by The Young Rascals. Life will be ecstasy, you and me and Lesley. (Life will be ecstasy, you and me endlessly)

<object width="425" height="344"><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="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I'm sittin' in a railway station, got ticket for my destination....

<object width="425" height="344"><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="425" height="344"></embed></object>

"Other cults have survived over a hundred years without the original leader. The Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Seventh Day Adventists to name a few. I don't understand why they keep propagating while others flash out in less than 20 years." Maybe they just have better marketing techniques.

I was just kiddin' around when I made the musician comment. A "gig", in musician-speak, is a job. ex: "I have a gig this weekend at Louie's Bar and Grill." (Or maybe the gig is at Dooj's House of Rum & Pasta.)

Have you ever noticed that, when a dog chases its tail, the result is zero?

"zero is the key that unlocks all numbers and value." From the standpoint of mathematical history, that is simply not accurate.

Yep!

Source please?

Come. And talk of all the things we did today.

<object width="425" height="344"><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="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><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="425" height="344"></embed></object>

When division is explained at the elementary arithmetic level, it is often considered as a description of dividing a set of objects into equal parts. As an example, consider having ten apples, and these apples are to be distributed equally to five people at a table. Each person would receive 10/5 = 2 apples. Similarly, if there are 10 apples, and only one person at the table, that person would receive 10/1 = 10 apples. So for dividing by zero – what is the number of apples that each person receives when 10 apples are fairly distributed amongst 0 people? Certain words can be pinpointed in the question to highlight the problem. The problem with this question is the "when". There is no way to distribute 10 apples amongst 0 people. In mathematical jargon, a set of 10 items cannot be partitioned into 0 subsets. So 10/0, at least in elementary arithmetic, is said to be meaningless, or undefined. Similar problems occur if we have 0 apples and 0 people, but this time the problem is in the phrase "the number". A partition is possible (of a set with 0 elements into 0 parts), but since the partition has 0 parts, vacuously every set in our partition has a given number of elements, be it 0, 2, 5, or 1000. If there are, say, 5 apples and 2 people, the problem is in the word "fairly". In any partition of a 5-set into 2 parts, one of the parts of the partition will have more elements than the other. In all of the above three cases, 10/0, 0/0, and 5/2, one is asked to consider an impossible situation before deciding what the answer will be, and that is why the operations are undefined in these cases. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_by_zero

The History of Zero Our name "zero" derives ultimately from the Arabic sifr which also gives us the word "cipher". ... the mathematical conception of zero ... was also present in the spiritual form from 17 000 years back in India.