Oakspear

I agree with Mike that many of us in TWI didn't always remember exactly what we heard and when. I remember being very surprised, for example, when I couldn't find the whole "It's Christ in you!...what power we have if we only knew it" was not in the book. There were so many classes, commentaries and teachings based on the classes, advances, books, articles, tapes, etc, it's a wonder we could keep any of it straight. That's just the way human memory works, I don't care who you are. However does that mean that Mike is recalling them correctly? <_< Now, if Mike has a copy of the video or audio class (one & the same) or an dependable transcript, I would tend to believe him, but would feel better if an additional witness could verify what he's saying. I've not found Mike to be a liar, but he does tend to quote what backs up his position while ignoring the rest. What I don't agree with is that anyone who doesn't come to the same conclusions about PFAL as Mike did hasn't "mastered" the material. His stance that a different viewpoint is prima facie evidence of non-mastery is a circular argument.

Since I left in 2001 I have not had one single person that I mentioned it to have any idea who or what TWI was/is. Maybe that number would be different if I ran in evangelical Christian circles, maybe not. The other day a co-worker & I found out that we had an aquaintance in common: my last twig coordinator. All he asked me was if I had anything to do with "that church in his house". Every once in a while I respond to "So, what brought you to Nebraska?" with "I was in a religious cult" and watch the reaction. Most don't no what to say and seem to quickly forget about it.

Well bro', we agree for different reasons. The Oldiesman quote was from, I believe, The Way Living in Love. We disagree on the significance of that statement too. Frankly, I'm glad that you have found a solid relationship with your God, even if it is via PFAL At least you've never told me I'm going to hell...or was possessed

Sorry, this post was supposed to be part of the first post on the next page, but waysider was too fast

I just thought this statement deserved to be highlighted.

Along the lines of "God can only give that which he is...spirit" It falls apart with light prodding

IIRC the "mantle" kind of looked like a shawl. Early in my TWI career I was somewhat put off by all the ceremony in a supposedly non-religious "ministry". Why on earth did they think that they needed clerical robes for the people who were ordained? And the academic robes.

Upon reflection, I don't think it's so much that people pray for us disbelievers, but that they feel the neeed to tell us about it, which, to me, is close to "witnessing". It isn't so much that I think that a prayer on my behalf is going to have any effect, but the notion that someone thinks that I need to be interceded for that irks me just a little. But just a little. I don't sit up at night fuming over the Christians who are praying for my soul (or my foot :lol: ) - but I did think it was an interesting subject for a thread.

Dat's riiiight.

It's just a personal preference, you're right, it could go either way. It was just part of my sparring with Geisha. No, we're not posting on the same computer, but I was able to recognize that he was using "sale" figuratively without being part of a mind-meld, or being his wife. I think Garth's latest post bears out my observation.

Obviously those who are discussing it. Apparently not you. You seem to care enough to read and comment though.

I wasn't criticizing your spelling...just making a distinction...I am not without belief, I just don't believe what you do. It's not a common usage. I was pretty confident that the 'sorry soul" thing was meant in humor. Despite our fundamental and vociferous disagreements I actually get along with geisha pretty well. You don't recognize figurative language? :blink:

Thanks Good question. I for one will consider it :) How about other body parts? <_< Q. What do you call a contrite burro? A. A sorry foot

Actually, I think it's disbelief :)

I don't think you were unclear G, I just didn't answer the same question that you asked :blink: - not exactly anyway. To me, having any opinion about Jesus is like having an opinion about a fictional character...well not strictly fictional, more like one of those "historical dramas" that are "based on a true story"; I can have an opinion about what is presented, but it's not necessarily related to the real person behind the story.

Right after the Blue book :blink:

I agree with the second quote. What is this prayer supposed to accomplish? Cause my free will to be overridden? Sweep away some supposed fog or veil that is preventing me from seeing the truth? What would you think if a Witch told you that they were casting a spell to get you to reject Christianity and embrace the craft?

Before I reply...I saw the smiley, and understood the (lame attempt at) humor <_< - better start praying for 'dem knees though...you're going to be on 'em for a while longer. :B) As far as the serious part of you praying for me...I'm going to start another thread in order to keep this one on track. In order for me to give my opinion on Jesus, I first need to give my opinion on the bible. I see no reason to believe that it was directly inspired by God, that it is infallible or inerrant. I believe that, at best, it was an honest attempt to put in writing what was known or guessed about this mysterious Jesus guy. At worst it is a series of pamphlets designed to push the writers' points of view. The way that I look at it there are conflicting theologies, as well as internal contradictions. Certain parts of it seem to be written as refutations to theologies that did not "make the cut". There are numerous disagreements among the different manuscripts, some trivial, some major. That all being said, I personally believe that there was an historical Jesus that the gospels in some fashion refer back to. I also personally believe that he probably bore little resemblence to the Jesus of the bible. I believe that it is possible that the Jesus of the bible is a composite of various roughly contemporary figures. The different gospel writers appear to have very different agendas and views of Jesus. Supposed fullfillments of Jewish prophecies are intermixed with the mythos of the mother goddess and the slain god. So, in short, I don't think that the real Jesus (or Jesuses) made it through the editing process.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that one. Seems like pretty slim pickin's to build a whole mythology on, but more enduring myths have been built on less. As far as The DaVinci Code, I enjoyed it, but it was fiction for the most part. Thanks for the reference.

I don't think that, even in the gnostic gospels or the so-called apocryphal or pseudopigraphical (sp?) writings from the early days of Christianity is there any suggestion that Jesus and Mary had any kind of sexual relationship or that Mary had any kind of "special" relationship or position at all. Some folks will postulate that such writings existed but that the "patriarchal" church leaders destroyed them to subjugate women or some such argument, but there's no evidence of that either. I would think that writings of this kind would have left some trace, if only the writings of those who wished to refute them. Most of you know that I am not a Christian, much less a believer in the inerrancy of the bible, but I think that any information about Jesus needs to come from the existing documentary evidence, of which the bible is one of the main sources, and not speculation or chanelling of some kind.

Not only was he not a doctor, but I find refering to him simply as"doctor", (you know, as in 'when Doctor taught us such-and-such') as opposed to "doctor Wierwille" somewhat creepy.

Since it didn't snow on those gas pumps, the problem is solved: he didn't ask for a sign and there is no need for a facile distinction between revelation/miracle and phenomena.

Right on waysider...I agree. I think that Wierwille only pushed those he knew that he had a hold on, like the time he told an entire Way Corps group that they were thrown out, but later relented if they would...I forget what they had to do, but they all came back. Could he have done that with "the ministry" at large? No way! You wanted to put up a Christmas tree? Skip the Rock of Ages? Play banjoes during twig? No problem, just keep the money coming!

On several threads over the last month I'd find myself surprised at ex-wayfers talking about how they didn't buy into an aspect of TWI, or chose not to take such-and-such "recommended" action. I'd find myself somewhat skeptical, until I thought about when I spent most of my time in TWI: 1978 - 1980: newbie 1980 - 1982: WOW and inmate in a WOWvet Way Home 1983 - 1990: not involved 1991 - 2001: twig coordinator, assistant twig coordinator, active wayfer Most of the time that I was involved actively was during Martindale's reign of paranoia. It seems to me that outside of Way Corps and other leadership, to a certain extent Wierwille didn't want to know about activity that was, according to him, "off the Word". People weren't hounded to speak a certain way, do certain things and march in lockstep, as long as the money kept flowing. He wanted the control, the power and the glory, but he also was smart enough to know when to back off to keep from losing his meal ticket. Martindale wasn't as bright. He really believed that he was the MOG, that the Word was Over the World, that TWI was God's ministry, etc. He stupidly believed the press releases and ran us all off.

Hmmm...I always interpreted it as Household with capital "H", as in one, true, rather than back home with the "earthly" family. But you know, so many things were left unsaid in TWI that it was easy for different interpretations to arise.The first time I recall hearing "Ho-Ho" was as part of HOHoReLo - Household Holiday Relocation for the Corps.