waysider

Maxx has been one mighty lucky dog to have found a home with people who have shown him the love that you have. Y'all are in my prayers.

part 3

Part 2

Head 'em off at the past----part 1

I took the AC in 1973. I don't remember taking any special exam. Of course, I don't remember what I had for breakfast yesterday either. If I did take it, it must not have made a very big impression on me. We did have to complete the home studies and there was a long list of classes that had to be completed before acceptance. There was also a questionnaire that had to be completed. I don't recall the contents. There was a seperate table at the bookstore, during the AC, where all the non-Way materials, such as Angels Of Light, were sold. For a while, these books were also available in the branch bookstore(Cleveland) but only available to AC grads. The purpose of reading the book was to encourage the reader not to have any involvement with anything "spiritual" no matter how good it appeared to be. In other words, if you didn't hear it from TWI, it's probably "from the pit". That was a popular expression used to describe activities that appeared wholesome, but, supposedly, were rooted in devil spirits. "Devil spirits that do good works" would be another way to put it.

Have you consulted with an allergist? Maybe there is a shot you can get. Just a thought?

I saw the book Angels Of Light mentioned in an earlier post. I read that book back in the 1970s. It was part of the bookstore assortment available at the Advanced Class. The premise for the title was II Cor. 11:14&15 " And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light." " Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works." The book was written by someone who had been involved in seances, tarot cards, spirit readings, etc. and then converted to Christianity. According to the author, there are spirits that present themselves as having benevolent motives but have sinister plans instead, including leading people unwittingly into new birth by the "wrong seed". Supposedly they present a front of goodness in order to ensnare their victims. I believe it was in this book that there was elaboration on the seed of the serpent. I think VPW may have even used passages from this book when he taught that subject. He did not use this book to teach that devil spirits could be recognized by the five senses. He used it to illustrate that people could look righteous, act religious, do good works and present an overall "clean" appearance while at the same time be actually motivated by devil spirits or even be " born of the wrong seed." (Hence: angels of light) He went on to say that many of the great historical figures, religious leaders and people in the world today who appear to be benevolent are actually "angels of light". He said that great religious leaders fell into this category as did great humanitarians. The purpose of the book was not so much to identify devil spirits but rather to dissuade people from participating in seemingly harmless spiritual activities. Personally, the only thing I got out of it was a feeling of paranoia and distrust for people who were actually involved in doing good things for their fellow man. It (the book) also served to widen the chasm between us (TWI) and them (other religions who were involved in good works) by creating an air of suspicion about them.

Sounds like maybe The 4 seasons. No idea on the title. ps. Could find the falsetto option so I had to post this in my regular voice.

You're speakin' my language, Brother D.!!

Still nothin' Got any more clues?

Robin Lacy

Do you mean one of these?

I don't recall where I heard it taught, but in some formal setting such as a class or Sunday Night Service(SNS), it was stated that "All prayer is believing." Not only do I no longer think this is accurate, I think it is a harmful perspective from which to consider the meaning of prayer. It suggests that the results of our prayer will be determined by the believing we apply to it. In other words, it implies that we, not God, determine the outcome of our prayers. Regarding the use of the word "hope": I was taught as early as the early 1970s that the word "hope" reflected an attitude of uncertainty and as such was seen as a form of "negative believing". We were never to use the word "hope" unless we were talking about The Hope of Christ's return. We were told it was OK to use HOPE in this context because---" All the negative believing in 'the world' can't can't stop him from coming back as King of Kings, Lord of Lords and Lord God Almighty."(VPW) There was frequently this sort of attitude that we could alter the course of history by simply thinking about it. That kind of thinking is self delusional and potentially very harmful, sometimes even lethal.

Reading this thread has given me a much deeper understanding of how terribly wrong we were to use God's Word to rationalize behaviors we knew in our hearts were wrong.

Banana fana fo fieving. Now lets do "Chuck"------ ANECDOTES! WE NEED ANECDOTES!------------ "It was a dark and dreary night---------------------"

Larry If you will just take a deep breath and pause for a moment, you will see that Hamm already stated right there in the post you quoted that he was not stating it in a context of sexual intimacy. Those were not his exact words but the gist of his post makes that clear.

You said a mouthful, kiddo.

Well, I'm sittin' her with my grandson Cletus(That's his name) along with his brother Cleophus(he's the ornery one) and their sister Clara Belle(That's short for Helen). They all seem to agree that this here idea of a fella(or gal) bein' more than one personality is really "fascinating". Jeepers!---You would think that three kids on the cuttin' edge of "hipdom" would be able to find a more "up to date" word to use than "fascinating". I guess that's youngin's fer ya.

The Word doesn't say it's wrong to eat tuna salad sandwiches on Tuesday nights, either, but I fail to see the relevance. Right or wrong, Excellor sessions are not to be found in The Word. If they are, someone please point me in the direction of that scripture. Wierwille himself was fond of saying that if something is not mentioned in the scriptures, it's probably not important. Yeah, I know, now someone chimes in and says something like. "Oh, Golly!, What SNS tape is that reference from?" And so I pose the question again, Where in the scriptures do we find mention of these "excellor sessions" and the need to develop our fluency? After we have done that, maybe we could look at some more first hand accounts of VPW speaking in tongues and interpreting. If you think my asking that the thread stay on topic is "directing traffic" , toss me a whistle and a tin star.

You never quit with this question nonsense, do you?

I believe you may be confusing VPW's sarcastic, derogatory barbs with the process of paraphrasing.

Again with the "women keep silent" thing. What's up with that? Can we get back to excellor sessions? That was the topic being currently discussed. Maybe you can at least show how the "silent" thing is relevant to the validity of excellor sessions. Better yet, maybe we can hear from some more folks who heard VPW SIT, since that was the subject that started this thread. If what he taught us about being zealous to excel in spiritual matters is something he practiced himself, there ought to be page after page of eyewitness accounts. ps---Jesus Wept.( Now that really IS relevant!)

"Always answer a question with a question." Seems like I've heard this technique before. "Twist a person's words into some convoluted form in an effort to completely change the subject and divert it from its intended meaning and into something completely different." Seems like I've heard that one before as well. Now if I could only remember where it was I learned about those techniques-------------------

Pardon me. I did not realize the subtopic at hand had changed from scriptural support of excellor sessions to women keeping silence in the church

I Cor. 14:27. And the scripture that supports your POV?