Mark Clarke

Exactly, T-bone! We weren't even aware, in many cases, what other viewpoints existed. And those we were aware of were not presented to us with a logical reason why they were wrong, they were just mocked and belittled. I've found out since that many of those views that we were taught to laugh at are actually more Biblical. I've made a point on my website to present what other views I know of, along with the logic of why I think they're wrong.

Strange. That even contradicts what other TWI leaders taught. Particularly at the ROA, there was the concept of first, second, and third aid. First aid was praying, second was getting somebody else to pray for you, and then they would provide basic medical things like aspirin as third aid. But it wasn't "forbidden" as I remember. Maybe Rome City was a different administration.

Good point! I would even go so far as to say that the Scripture doesn't ALWAYS pit faith against even the five senses. God gave us many signs we could observe with our senses in order to help our faith, the chiefest of them being the Resurrection. Christianity is not "blind" faith but a reasonable faith based on God's having moved in history. I remember W@lt3r C*mm!ns saying the same thing in a Keys to Research class. But it's not so much that the typical TWI follower couldn't think. It's that we were so indoctrinated with the idea that VP had "done the hard work for us" so we didn't need to redo it.

What gets me is that many of us (myself included) actually thought we were researching the Bible, when in fact we were just "working" VPW's writings. I, and others, even commented on how VP taught us to search the Scriptures for ourselves and not take his word for it. When I do that now, I see the error of his logic and doctrines. I'm amazed that I didn't see it before.

It's funny, but kind of sad that so many marriages are like that.

So, is the girl going to take the Class now? <_< Just kidding, but isn't it nice to be able to have such an experience and not have to have some other motive (like getting them into the Class)? BTW, my wife finds things all the time. When she loses something, if she stays calm, God shows her a little mental picture of where it is, and sure enough, it's there!

TWI taught that when Adam and Eve lost their spirit, God had to come into concretion and speak to them through their five senses. This was rather vague in TWI, but to them it was more an impersonal force or power. They would probably say we were never "really" saved to begin with! Most Christians today consider the Holy Spirit to be the third person of the Trinity. They also consider the "spirit of man" to be part of the human being. TWI said the "spirit of man" was another name for the "soul" and not the same as "holy spirit" which was a gift from God and gave us communication with Him.I believe the Jews and first century Christians understood man's spirit as the life force which made him alive, and that man was a living soul, or creature (not so much that he "had" a soul). They also considered the spirit of God to be the operational power and presence of God, which after Pentecost was also called the spirit of Christ. It isn't a completely impersonal force, like TWI taught, but it isn't a separate person, like Trinitarians think. Yes. TWI didn't like using the word "demon" because they thought it sounded too "cute" like a little guy with a pitchfork. They called them "devil spirits" which is based on the KJV translation, but actually isn't accurate.As for angels, it was like Waysider said. TWI said angels protected those who were going to be born again, but after they got born again angels were no longer needed. This is based on a misunderstanding of one verse (which is not unusual for TWI).

Sure. Skeptics use that reasoning all the time. But their examples of the inaccuracies are nearly always based on misunderstanding the Scripture in the first place. On the other hand, many who believe in the Bible can tell you that while what we have may not be "perfect" in the sense of "without corruption," the overall message is better preserved and more intact, than any other ancient writing, by far. BTW, the Way's idea of explaining inconsistancies was to "twist" it till it fit. On the other hand sound Biblical scholars are not afraid to say "I don't know, the Bible isn't as clear on that." This doesn't mean there was anything wrong with the Bible, or even with the translation. In many cases, it simply is misunderstood because it's not being read in light of the culture in which it was written. Socks said, That was the typical approach of TWI, and may be the approach of some fundamentalists, but not all. More often, the approach is more like, "The Bible must be the Word of God BECAUSE so many of the inconsistancies can be explained, and because the message is verified." But we don't have to have it restored to "perfect" state in order to begin to understand it. And the more we understand things in ways that fit, the greater the understanding begins to open up. We will never understand it all perfectly till Christ returns, but we can be a lot more sure of the message than many skeptics think we can.

That would only be true if TWI had actually adhered to the Bible. But those of us who have left TWI but not the Bible have found that "real" Biblical research is so far from what TWI did that it's not even comparable. Excie, Care to elaborate on that? (I wonder how many other Corps grads feel that way about their research papers.)

My advice would be to balance Bart Ehrman's writing with that of others who may not agree with him. There are scholars (such as Ehrman) who are liberal enough to not be swayed by "orthodox" views, but they tend to go too far in that direction. On the other hand, evangelical scholars, while they may be too inclined to try to support "established" doctrines like the Trinity, nevertheless have done quite a bit of worthwhile work establishing the trustworthiness of the scriptures, among other things. Sean Finnegan (Vince's son) has written an excellent paper on finding this balance. You can click here to read it. One particular quote from it that is relevant is this: So don't limit yourself to Ehrman, but balance him with Timothy P. Jones, Craig L. Blomberg, and others (who are also quoted in Sean's paper). Even Josh McDowell, despite being a Trinitarian, makes a good case for the reliability of the Scriptures. Perhaps spiritual immaturity is not the desire to be right, but rather the claim that one IS right while everyone else is wrong. I think we should all strive for the truth, but not be so convinced that we have it that we don't even consider what someone else is saying.

Sudo, I'm not offended, I just wanted to set the record straight. A lot of people lump the Old Testament in with things like the Flat Earth Society or Scientology's beliefs about space aliens. But there is actually quite a bit of scientific validation for the Old Testament that many people don't even realize, and so don't have an answer when such comparisons are made. The fact is, I've found that it's not necessary to "check your brain at the door" in order to believe in the Bible, contrary to what often happened in the so-called "research" of TWI.

Happy Running!

In my opinion, they were searching for texts or versions that backed up their pre-conceived doctrines. Walter Cummins spent some time in Germany examining manuscripts, but as I remember, he and VP had determined that there must be a text somewhere that reads such-and-such because that's what would fit.

Hey LOOOOOOOOCY! Happy Birthday!

You don't point out anything that disproves the flood story. You only question and mock it because you start from the position of not believing in it. To answer your points: It doesn't say every animal in the world, just every kind. The animals could have gotten to the other continents in many of the same ways which non-believers in the flood suggest - it doesn't disprove the flood. You're not offending my religious sensibilities so much as making an inaccurate comparison. Concrete proof that establishes that the earth is round has been presented, yet the Flat Earth Society simply claims the proof was faked, and explains everything away with conspiracy theories. While I know there are a few who make similar claims trying to prove the Bible, serious scholars do not. Think of this: If there was no flood, how did all those sea-animal fossils end up in the middle of continents, hundreds of miles from the sea? And also, how would one explain the fact that so many ancient cultures had legends of a worldwide flood with an individual being saved in an ark-like craft? Wouldn't that suggest that something like that happened? Studies have been done on the feasibility of the flood and the ark, and nothing that disproves it has been presented. All you're going on is that you don't believe it for whatever reason. And the other reason it is an inaccurate comparison is simply the number of people who accept it. Not that that proves whether it's true or not, but a large portion of our society believes in the Old Testament, while very few would accept the flat earth idea.

You really can't compare the Old Testament with this Flat Earth Society. Concrete proof has been available to all that the earth is round. The only answer they have is that the proof was faked, with no proof of the fakery. In contrast, there is nothing in the Old Testament that can be so disproved. Neither creation nor evolution can be proved or disproved scientifically, as we can't observe what happened then, nor recreate what happened in a lab. It is a matter of interpreting the data. And there are even things in the OT that used to be considered implausible that archaeology and other sciences has since confirmed. There is no comparison.

You know what happens when you don't pay your exorcist? You get repossessed!

Go away, little girl Go away, little girl I'm not supposed to be alone with you I know that your lips are sweet But our lips must never meet I belong to someone else And I must be true (Too bad VP didn't have that attitude!)

Well she was just seventeen If you know what I mean And the way she looked was way beyond compare

The thing about TAKIT was that they were an experiment. They wanted to try reaching the young people with general positive messages, without specifically mentioning God or Jesus. Then when kids wanted to know more, they'd witness to them. They were actually well received in the ministry at the time, and they put on a heck of a live performance, as I recall. After a couple of years they went to southern California to try and break into the secular music business. I heard they built up a pretty fair local following in LA, but didn't get beyond that.

Since you brought the Beatles up, another comparison of VPW could be to the Maharishi. John Lennon wrote Sexy Sadie about him, only changing the name so as not to be too blatant. I suggest another name change (all the other words are the same): “Doctor” Wierwille what have you done You made a fool of everyone You made a fool of everyone “Doctor” Wierwille ooh what have you done. “Doctor” Wierwille you broke the rules You laid it down for all to see You laid it down for all to see “Doctor” Wierwille ooh you broke the rules. One sunny day the world was waiting for a lover He came along to turn on everyone “Doctor” Wierwille the greatest of them all. “Doctor” Wierwille how did you know The world was waiting just for you The world was waiting just for you “Doctor” Wierwille ooh how did you know. “Doctor” Wierwille you'll get yours yet However big you think you are However big you think you are “Doctor” Wierwille ooh you'll get yours yet. We gave him everything we owned just to sit at his table Just a smile would lighten everything “Doctor” Wierwille he's the latest and the greatest of them all. He made a fool of everyone “Doctor” Wierwille. However big you think you are “Doctor” Wierwille.

They mentioned it on Wait Wait Don't Tell Me, and the host commented that what actually wakes you up is your dog running over your face to try and eat your alarm clock!

A man called 911 and said, "Someone come quick! My wife fell asleep on the couch with her mouth open and a mouse ran down her throat!" The operator replied, "Calm down, sir. Wave a piece of cheese over her mouth and maybe the mouse will come out. An ambulance is on the way." When the ambulance arrived, the EMT found the man waving a fish over his wife's mouth. "What on earth are you doing?" exclaimed the EMT. "Didn't the 911 operator tell you to wave a piece of cheese over your wife's mouth?" "Yes," the man replied. "But I gotta get the cat out first." :o

Wouldn't that be 'cyn'? You also misspelled 'grieving' in the slide show. Remember, 'I' before 'E' except after 'C'... But spelling aside, I liked it!

No, I had never heard of it before. When I said it was circulating, I meant it must have been at least a little for John Reynolds to have heard it and told you. But however much it was around, the PFAL lights story would have been better for his image. The fact that he had trouble with his eyes filming PFAL was known since the early seventies when The Way Living in Love came out. When the connection between that and his eye beng removed was first made I'm not sure.