Twinky, all are sinners. We all are swift to sin; are hypocrites. In other words we all stink. That's why I continue to believe the emphasis should be on the greatness of God and his son's accomplishments;
*checks armpits* *snnnniffffffff..*
I dunno, speak for yourself..
as far as hypocrisy goes.. I think the "uber conquerer, all nine all the time" claim is the height of it..
I dunno.. is redemption THAT powerless? So helpless, that a man experiences it, and goes on, just as evil, or worse than before?
For some, redemption's only valid use is an excuse..
and.. the purity of the teaching of the teacher doesn't rise above his hypocrisy, either..
if vic's version of redemption was SO poweless, I don't want it.
I'd want something that actually WORKS.
so far, all I've heard for vic are EXCUSES. Excuses to be a drambuie guzzling, womanizing (pretty mild as to the truth) abusive sonofabitch..
and let's bring it back to the subject of the thread.. the founder of a system based on an abusive hierarchy, demanding far more of his subjects than he himself could even dream of giving..
I'd like to see HIM forced to hitchhike accross country, with a fiver, or twenty in his pocket.. and come back with it on time or else..
I'd like to see HIM put together a class on the field..
I'd like to see HIM sit quietly while the mogster in charge goes on a profanity laced drunken rage..
But in context this is getting at those who set out to teach one thing whilst deliberately doing something different. We're not talking about the occasional falling short of the mark but a persistent abuse, a failure to even try to live up to the standard, a teaching of that which the teacher knows in no way matches his lifestyle.
Yeah I saw that... you mean stuff like this from our friendly Roman Catholic Church...
It happens that, as in the human body, some member may be cut off – a hand, a finger, a foot. Does the soul follow the amputated member? As long as it was in the body, it lived; separated, it forfeits life. So the Christian is a Catholic as long as he lives in the body: cut off from it he becomes a heretic – the life of the Spirit follows not the amputated member.
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 5), June 29, 1896
He who neglects the service of the Blessed Virgin will die in his sins. He who does not invoke thee, O Lady, will never get to heaven. Not only will those from whom Mary turns away her eyes of mercy not be saved, but there will be no hope of their salvation. No one can be saved without the protection of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
I seem to recall Jesus having something to say about the Pharisees being hypocrites. Ummmmm.... they made laws that they themselves couldn't follow.
So vp handed out a two drink limit - but did he follow it?
He told the in-rez corps they couldn't smoke if their tuition wasn't paid (this started with the 10th) and then smoked in front of the corps...while he lived lavishly on abundant sharing.
Then...hmmmm... I seem to remember a teaching about being a tupos...an impression made by repeated blows. What kind of example was vp with his lifestyle? What did he teach by the lessons he had others see? Afterall, he was oh so fond of that poem that began with the first line,
I'd rather see a sermon than hear one anyday
Oldies - vp's actions were his teachings.
doojable...........some really good points. Thanks.
Maybe, THAT'S IT...........while some hold to the "wierwille of pfal lore".............many CORPS have these visual re-runs of wierwille's hypocrisy parading in front of us during those in-rez years.
When wierwille spoke against smoking...........he took those looong drags on his shorties right in front of us.
When wierwille spoke on the 2-drink limit.......he sipped his drambuie/coffie in his fine china cup.
When wierwille lectured about discipline.........he relied heavily on his research team to do the work.
When wierwille taught his literal usages..........he took plenty of liberties in private interpretation.
When wierwille hugged the corps girls............NOW, we know that he fell prey to lustful temptations.
Yeah, for some of us corps...............HIS actions were HIS teachings.
Actually I clicked on it OM and it is, hold your breath...a class! Yup a seven day class that tells you the seven misconceptions about modern religions. Of course I signed up...it was free!
The hypocrisy of the preacher doesn't negate the truth in the preaching.
Again with that nonsense! So I'll bring my post # 107 here again:
In my humble opinion, I think the Bible set a higher standard of criteria for judging someone's teachings. A biblical viewpoint takes in the wordsANDworks of the person: As in Matthew 5:19 [Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven].
And by the bad example one sets – how they "follow" the Scriptures – acts like an active ingredient to poison their teaching – to render it a doctrine of hypocrisy – see Matthew 16:12 and Luke 12:1.
Only in the twisted Wierwille-centric logic can a sexual predator quote unto the pure all things are purewhile he's molesting a woman…Let's see now, his sin of molesting her doesn't make his teaching wrong? What about how he's teaching her to apply that verse?....How does this scene stack up to the words of Jesus in Matthew 5:19? Let's try a couple more on for size, shall we? I've so renewed my mind that __ __ [fill in the blank with the sin of your choice] doesn't bother me. ..... If you're spiritually mature you can handle __ __ [fill in the blank with the sin of your choice].
Hypocrisy has the power to nullify any truth!
Twinky made a valid point about the difference between the occasional sin and persistent sinning. Your reference to Romans 3 addresses the human condition – that we are ALL fallen creatures…Move on to Romans 6, 7 & 8 that speaks of the battle within, our struggles against sinful tendencies, and the choice to be a slave to serve sin or righteousness. It's obvious to some folks the choice ol' vic made.
So you want to cut him some slack over personal struggles with sin. Well…wasn't he such a big proponent of the renewed mind? Just renew your mind to overcome a difficulty. What a cop out! I've got no problem cutting him or anyone some slack over personal struggles – let's just be honest about the whole thing – he had no business being the CEO of a supposedly Christian organization – preaching things like the renewed mind is the key to power and you are today where you are because of you're believing…He should have stepped down and sought professional help. And vp-defenders ought to quit whitewashing a miserable excuse of a minister that has brought shame on the name of Jesus Christ. And speaking of being a minister – that's a whole other issue to address in Scripture – ministers are held to a higher standard:
I Timothy 1:3-11 NIV
3 As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer 4 nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God's work—which is by faith. 5 The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6 Some have wandered away from these and turned to meaningless talk. 7 They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.
8 We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
I Timothy 3:1-7 NIV
1 Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. 5 (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7 He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap.
He was a con man. Is that so hard to understand? You were tricked! Is that such a hard pill to swallow? He wasn't struggling to be the best man of god for our day and time. The only thing he worked hard at was making sure his con game wasn't exposed.
Twinky made a valid point about the difference between the occasional sin and persistent sinning. Your reference to Romans 3 addresses the human condition – that we are ALL fallen creatures…Move on to Romans 6, 7 & 8 that speaks of the battle within, our struggles against sinful tendencies, and the choice to be a slave to serve sin or righteousness. It's obvious to some folks the choice ol' vic made.
The persistent sinning of the teacher and choice to be a slave to serve sin doesn't negate the truth in the teachings.
Wellllllll....evaluation of "truth" and identification of "truth" is rather subjective, isn't it? Oldiesman, you make a very good point, one I would agree with "in theory", but until we recognize that our own selections can be flawed, we won't get off first base. In other words - you saying the truth of PFAL is true regardless of VPW's lifestyle already assumes that you know what's true in it and what isn't. What you really mean I think is - what you've chosen to be true is true regardless of, etc. etc.
What's true and what isn't would be effected by VPW's motivation. If he knew he was swiping someone else's stuff who wouldn't like it if they knew it, and he did some quick editing of the information to make it appear differently - that taints the information.
It's like stealing a car and changing the plates and giving it a quick paint job and retooling a few of the part around. The "truth" of the car is still there but it's been changed. There's parts of PFAL where I think that's very much what VPW did - he didn't change parts of the Holy Spirit sections based on years of additional work, he changed parts around based on a quick reassemly of the material of B.G Leonard's class, and to fit in parts he wanted to emphasize re: free will, and the "Christ in you" section.
I do think he added to it from his own work, yes - but he presents the information as god given truth - he would have served the material better by presenting it working from his own foundation. That's why PFAL is kind of tweezey in parts, it's forcing pieces together that don't quite fit - "things equal to the same things are equal to each other etc. " - or whatever it is, that comes to mind.
Assuming that this kind of re engineering of material was done - and I'm convinced he did some of that, although not as much as generally accepted on GS - you're actually getting your "truth" that's true no matter what from a flawed source, one that wanted to lay claim to full ownership of the material as revealed to him "by God" - soooooo there were some unkosher things goin' on there IMO .
PFAL isn't important though - the information is. Y'know, the "true" stuff.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
46
28
47
24
Popular Days
Mar 21
55
Mar 19
50
Mar 25
39
Mar 27
31
Top Posters In This Topic
skyrider 46 posts
oldiesman 28 posts
WhiteDove 47 posts
waysider 24 posts
Popular Days
Mar 21 2008
55 posts
Mar 19 2008
50 posts
Mar 25 2008
39 posts
Mar 27 2008
31 posts
Posted Images
oldiesman
Focusing on vp's sins doesn't make the word any less true.
The sins of the preacher doesn't negate the truth in the preaching.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
*checks armpits* *snnnniffffffff..*
I dunno, speak for yourself..
as far as hypocrisy goes.. I think the "uber conquerer, all nine all the time" claim is the height of it..
I dunno.. is redemption THAT powerless? So helpless, that a man experiences it, and goes on, just as evil, or worse than before?
For some, redemption's only valid use is an excuse..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
The hypocrisy of the preacher doesn't negate the truth in the preaching.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Oldies -
The hypocrisy of the preacher was the preaching. He taught by example.
Sermons We See
by Edgar Guest
I'd rather see a sermon
than hear one any day;
I'd rather one should walk with me
than merely tell the way.
The eye's a better pupil
and more willing than the ear,
Fine counsel is confusing,
but example's always clear;
And the best of all the preachers
are the men who live their creeds,
For to see good put in action
is what everybody needs.
I soon can learn to do it
if you'll let me see it done;
I can watch your hands in action,
but your tongue too fast may run.
And the lecture you deliver
may be very wise and true,
But I'd rather get my lessons
by observing what you do;
For I might misunderstand you
and the high advice you give,
But there's no misunderstanding
how you act and how you live.
When I see a deed of kindness,
I am eager to be kind.
When a weaker brother stumbles
and a strong man stays behind
Just to see if he can help him,
then the wish grows strong in me
To become as big and thoughtful
as I know that friend to be.
And all travelers can witness
that the best of guides today
Is not the one who tells them,
but the one who shows the way.
One good man teaches many,
men believe what they behold;
One deed of kindness noticed
is worth forty that are told.
Who stands with men of honor
learns to hold his honor dear,
For right living speaks a language
which to every one is clear.
Though an able speaker charms me
with his eloquence, I say,
I'd rather see a sermon
than to hear one, any day.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
and.. the purity of the teaching of the teacher doesn't rise above his hypocrisy, either..
if vic's version of redemption was SO poweless, I don't want it.
I'd want something that actually WORKS.
so far, all I've heard for vic are EXCUSES. Excuses to be a drambuie guzzling, womanizing (pretty mild as to the truth) abusive sonofabitch..
and let's bring it back to the subject of the thread.. the founder of a system based on an abusive hierarchy, demanding far more of his subjects than he himself could even dream of giving..
I'd like to see HIM forced to hitchhike accross country, with a fiver, or twenty in his pocket.. and come back with it on time or else..
I'd like to see HIM put together a class on the field..
I'd like to see HIM sit quietly while the mogster in charge goes on a profanity laced drunken rage..
too late for that, I'm sure.
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
And repeating once again! Very well said Twinky.
And not to belittle this little gem from Dooj:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Romans 2:23 (again)
Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?
24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.
You aren't arguing with me, Oldies, when you say that the preacher's lifestyle doesn't negate the message preached.
Seems to me that a higher authority has rather strong words to say about it.
(edited for emphasis)
Edited by TwinkyLink to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
For I might misunderstand you
and the high advice you give,
But there's no misunderstanding
how you act and how you live.
All the women in the kingdom belong to the King...
Keep it in your pants...unless you're spiritual enough to handle it...
Take credit for work you haven't done...
This list can go on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
Hey did you all notice the add at the top of the page? "Religion run Amok" Kind of ironic...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Yeah I saw that... you mean stuff like this from our friendly Roman Catholic Church...
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 5), June 29, 1896St. Bonaventure (+1260)
Edited by oldiesmanLink to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Was St Bonaventure a Way Corps Vet too?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
doojable...........some really good points. Thanks.
Maybe, THAT'S IT...........while some hold to the "wierwille of pfal lore".............many CORPS have these visual re-runs of wierwille's hypocrisy parading in front of us during those in-rez years.
When wierwille spoke against smoking...........he took those looong drags on his shorties right in front of us.
When wierwille spoke on the 2-drink limit.......he sipped his drambuie/coffie in his fine china cup.
When wierwille lectured about discipline.........he relied heavily on his research team to do the work.
When wierwille taught his literal usages..........he took plenty of liberties in private interpretation.
When wierwille hugged the corps girls............NOW, we know that he fell prey to lustful temptations.
Yeah, for some of us corps...............HIS actions were HIS teachings.
<_<
Edited by skyriderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
Actually I clicked on it OM and it is, hold your breath...a class! Yup a seven day class that tells you the seven misconceptions about modern religions. Of course I signed up...it was free!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Again with that nonsense! So I'll bring my post # 107 here again:
Hypocrisy has the power to nullify any truth!
Twinky made a valid point about the difference between the occasional sin and persistent sinning. Your reference to Romans 3 addresses the human condition – that we are ALL fallen creatures…Move on to Romans 6, 7 & 8 that speaks of the battle within, our struggles against sinful tendencies, and the choice to be a slave to serve sin or righteousness. It's obvious to some folks the choice ol' vic made.
So you want to cut him some slack over personal struggles with sin. Well…wasn't he such a big proponent of the renewed mind? Just renew your mind to overcome a difficulty. What a cop out! I've got no problem cutting him or anyone some slack over personal struggles – let's just be honest about the whole thing – he had no business being the CEO of a supposedly Christian organization – preaching things like the renewed mind is the key to power and you are today where you are because of you're believing…He should have stepped down and sought professional help. And vp-defenders ought to quit whitewashing a miserable excuse of a minister that has brought shame on the name of Jesus Christ. And speaking of being a minister – that's a whole other issue to address in Scripture – ministers are held to a higher standard:
I Timothy 1:3-11 NIV
3 As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer 4 nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God's work—which is by faith. 5 The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6 Some have wandered away from these and turned to meaningless talk. 7 They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.
8 We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
I Timothy 3:1-7 NIV
1 Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. 5 (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7 He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap.
He was a con man. Is that so hard to understand? You were tricked! Is that such a hard pill to swallow? He wasn't struggling to be the best man of god for our day and time. The only thing he worked hard at was making sure his con game wasn't exposed.
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
I saw this post the other day......BUT everytime it resurfaces, I can't stop laughing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
yeah good one waysider !!!!!!
of couse how could they not be ?????
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
The persistent sinning of the teacher and choice to be a slave to serve sin doesn't negate the truth in the teachings.
Edited by oldiesmanLink to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
i can't wrap my mind around that one, as they say
and i would not (anymore) listen to such a "teacher"
i think it's quite simple but i'm simple minded
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
I think those early cassettes are excellent. But to each his own. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Yeah – if it were teachings on how to be a great hypocrite!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
T-Bone........your posts are ALWAYS a great read.
Thanks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
i guess. maybe that's why i don't trust cassettes anymore
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Wellllllll....evaluation of "truth" and identification of "truth" is rather subjective, isn't it? Oldiesman, you make a very good point, one I would agree with "in theory", but until we recognize that our own selections can be flawed, we won't get off first base. In other words - you saying the truth of PFAL is true regardless of VPW's lifestyle already assumes that you know what's true in it and what isn't. What you really mean I think is - what you've chosen to be true is true regardless of, etc. etc.
What's true and what isn't would be effected by VPW's motivation. If he knew he was swiping someone else's stuff who wouldn't like it if they knew it, and he did some quick editing of the information to make it appear differently - that taints the information.
It's like stealing a car and changing the plates and giving it a quick paint job and retooling a few of the part around. The "truth" of the car is still there but it's been changed. There's parts of PFAL where I think that's very much what VPW did - he didn't change parts of the Holy Spirit sections based on years of additional work, he changed parts around based on a quick reassemly of the material of B.G Leonard's class, and to fit in parts he wanted to emphasize re: free will, and the "Christ in you" section.
I do think he added to it from his own work, yes - but he presents the information as god given truth - he would have served the material better by presenting it working from his own foundation. That's why PFAL is kind of tweezey in parts, it's forcing pieces together that don't quite fit - "things equal to the same things are equal to each other etc. " - or whatever it is, that comes to mind.
Assuming that this kind of re engineering of material was done - and I'm convinced he did some of that, although not as much as generally accepted on GS - you're actually getting your "truth" that's true no matter what from a flawed source, one that wanted to lay claim to full ownership of the material as revealed to him "by God" - soooooo there were some unkosher things goin' on there IMO
.
PFAL isn't important though - the information is. Y'know, the "true" stuff.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
I could never use someone's sins or hypocrisy as a pretext to abandon the truth. God forbid.
soundgood to me socks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.