Nothing makes the whole Bible fit together ... the bible history has a very shady history ...
Silly TWI thought my research paper should be in GMIR ... it was just a rehash of Bullinger with a VPW variation (which made no sense ... except to distinguish him from Bullinger) ... and Rear hard or someone stole my intro for a SNS teaching, or did I steal it and he stole it from the same source, I forget. (I asked him and he said he never read my paper that he quoted almost verbatim)
THE Bible history is best studied with books penworks has suggested ... she researched and then went to college to find out what went wrong in her quest for TRUTH.
I respect that ... I came up with something without bothering to check academia ... but "THE BIBLE" is not what we were led to believe ... and if you want to bother with that line of inquisition, I'm pointing to her advice. (and she was second corps I think, if that helps ... )
I agree that there's more to it than what we were taught in TWI. But there is also more to it than what liberal scholars say about it. I would consider them alongside other more conservative scholarship that validates the Bible, even if they also adhere to the traditional doctrines. Both sides should be given consideration. Sean Finnegan wrote an excellent paper about this for a theological conference, which you can read here.
BTW, I don't claim that anyone has put the Bible together 100% perfectly, but this Gospel of the Kingdom is a way of seeing the whole picture, putting it together better than anything I've ever seen.
for your courteous and honest replies to my questions and to the posts of our fellow greasespotters on this thread.......it is most encouraging to know that civil discourse and respectful disagreement can be engaged in and enjoyed here at the greasespot, a website that is dear to each of us, and which remains so important in its mission of exposing twi and its offshoots to those who need or want to know "the other side of the story".
it is a pleasure to dialogue with you and agree to disagree in a mutual respectful and courteous discussion of issues and events of import and impact to ourselves and the greasespot community as a whole!......again, thank for your forthrightness and courteousness..................................peace.
Nothing makes the whole Bible fit together ... the bible history has a very shady history ...
Silly TWI thought my research paper should be in GMIR ... it was just a rehash of Bullinger with a VPW variation (which made no sense ... except to distinguish him from Bullinger) ... and Rear hard or someone stole my intro for a SNS teaching, or did I steal it and he stole it from the same source, I forget. (I asked him and he said he never read my paper that he quoted almost verbatim)
THE Bible history is best studied with books penworks has suggested ... she researched and then went to college to find out what went wrong in her quest for TRUTH.
I respect that ... I came up with something without bothering to check academia ... but "THE BIBLE" is not what we were led to believe ... and if you want to bother with that line of inquisition, I'm pointing to her advice. (and she was second corps I think, if that helps ... )
Since I'm being referred to here, I thought I'd chime in.
Just to clarify: I returned to college post-twi to get a liberal arts education (the word "liberal" in this case does not refer to any political left wing stance or religious stance, but that's another topic). I did read lots of English literature and philosophy etc. that helped me think clearly and logically and exercised my critical thinking capacities. I earned a B.A. in English. I did not get a degree in early Church history or Semetic languages, etc.
I just like to read. I've read things pertaining to the history of the Bible, etc. during and after college.
For a good overview I'd recommend Karen Armstrong's The Bible - A Biography, and her A History of God. Also, for those interested in what interpretation of texts, including the Bible, involves, pick up a copy of A Short Introduction to Hermeneutics by David Jasper. Hermenuetics is just a fancy word to describe our understanding of the nature of texts and how we interpret and use them.
The more important question is not "who is teaching the truth?" but "what IS the truth?"
I believe this is the crux of the matter - certain group's certainty of what IS the truth. For me, that sends up huge red flags, and should have nearly 30 years ago. Back then I believed it was possible to extract the truth from the Bible. Now I don't. Not only that, I think the point is missed when one spends too much time trying to do that.
Once I stepped back from the premise (and that's all it is) that the Bible is a "God breathed" collection of works that is infallible and inerrant, I quit searching for "the truth" in it.
There is a preponderance of wisdom contained within the pages, but 3 things stick out:
We see through a dark glass <== We don't get it.
We are to love one another <== Full time job.
We are to love our enemies <== Superhuman full time job.
These 3 things are enough to keep us all plenty busy and out of trouble.
The reality is that none of us has "the truth." We are all too caught up in our own biases and our own thinking to ever get "the truth." Furthermore, anyone or any group who professes to be in possession of "the truth" is arrogant and deceptive to his/her/itself and to anyone he/she/it tries to convince. I believe the best we can do with what we have been given is to continue studying, keep an open mind, and live #2 and #3. NONE of the splinters live up to any of those notions, and furthermore, none of them try. Each of them brings disunity and disharmony to the body. They're heartburn. They're cancer. They're dis-ease. I'm not saying that denominations are necessarily better in this matter, they simply aren't as likely to provoke disharmony and disunity in the body as a whole.
And oh BTW, excellent non-denominational religious education is available at accredited universities, such as Harvard, Yale, University of Chicago, and Vanderbilt. Princeton, while being technically under the wing of the Presbyterian church, also has an open style of theological education. Then again, I'm referring to education as opposed to indoctrination and training.
thank you each and both for posting good information, and making good points well-taken. your input and opinions are certainly appreciated by me, and i always enjoy reading the posts you ladies contribute here at the greasespot!...........you gals rock 'n' rule!...........and you can sure boogie-woogie too!...........lol!.......................peace.
The reality is that none of us has "the truth." We are all too caught up in our own biases and our own thinking to ever get "the truth." Furthermore, anyone or any group who professes to be in possession of "the truth" is arrogant and deceptive to his/her/itself and to anyone he/she/it tries to convince.
I would agree, with the addition of one or two words. I believe it would be arrogant for any person or group to claim they have "all" the truth, or that they are the "only ones" with the truth. But I don't think it's impossible to have a good handle on the truth, as Jesus proclaimed it.
The thing IS Mark.... Having the *truth* doesn`t seem to have prevented these guys from being incredibly evil in the first place. Their new and better understanding doesn`t seem to have impressed upon them the need for Godly sorrow and repentance, much less making amends to those whom they have wronged.
One and all they seem to believe that their Knowledge makes it ok to erase history, to procede as if they have no responsibility to those whom they savaged and attempted to destroy, that the victims of their cruelty are owed nothing, not even an apology.
Thinking that one`s grasp of the truth is going to make one spiritual is, I believe a fallacy that is carried over from twi.
The Knowledge and the truth from what I have seen seems to only puff them up. They seem to have never lost their twi aquired arrogance.
Yet the churches that are so spurned because of their supposed lack of understanding seem to actually understand and operate *Love God and Love your neighbor*. They can walk as Christian`s, genuine and exhibiting the signs listed in Galatians as being *of the spirit*
They seem to function as men and women of the spirit, as opposed to digging out *truths* that supposedly dismiss them from the responsibility of having to behave as a genuine Christian, or exhibit the fruits.
The thing IS Mark.... Having the *truth* doesn`t seem to have prevented these guys from being incredibly evil in the first place. Their new and better understanding doesn`t seem to have impressed upon them the need for Godly sorrow and repentance, much less making amends to those whom they have wronged.
One and all they seem to believe that their Knowledge makes it ok to erase history, to procede as if they have no responsibility to those whom they savaged and attempted to destroy, that the victims of their cruelty are owed nothing, not even an apology.
Thinking that one`s grasp of the truth is going to make one spiritual is, I believe a fallacy that is carried over from twi.
The Knowledge and the truth from what I have seen seems to only puff them up. They seem to have never lost their twi aquired arrogance.
Yet the churches that are so spurned because of their supposed lack of understanding seem to actually understand and operate *Love God and Love your neighbor*. They can walk as Christian`s, genuine and exhibiting the signs listed in Galatians as being *of the spirit*
They seem to function as men and women of the spirit, as opposed to digging out *truths* that supposedly dismiss them from the responsibility of having to behave as a genuine Christian, or exhibit the fruits.
I agree this is the case with many, perhaps even most, of the TWI offshoots. But It's been my experience that it is not true of ALL of them.
my experience with ALL OF THE OFFSHOOTS OF TWI AND THEIR "LEADERS" has been that THEY ALL try to minimalize vic's "mistakes" by saying something along the lines of "that was over 20 years ago, and does not change what god is or what the truth of god's word is",..................
or, "i'm sorry you were hurt or abused by vic, or craig, or rosalie, or twi. but don't you think it's time to move on with your life?"............
or, "after all these years why are you still so angry and bitter about the sins of one man or other men? haven't you heard of 'forgiveness'?".................
or, "our 'ministry' has nothing to do with twi. besides, vic's dead.".................
or, "yes, vic and twi made a lot of mistakes, but i'll always be thankful for the 'truth of god's word" that i learned while i was there.".................
or, "don't you believe the bible is still the word of god?"....................
or, "so what are you doing for god these days?"
or, "are you still a christian? do you still believe in god?"
or, "our ministry researches the bible based on all the great biblical keys we learned from twi, but we disagree with lots of twi doctrines that our research has proven to be wrong."
or, "we think our classes, are more accurate than pfal, and we don't do the same things vic or twi did that hurt or used god's people."
or, "i don't have to listen to your lies."!
or, "i'm sorry you feel that way. call me when you want to believe god again."
and yada, yada, yada,and blah, blah, blah............denial of the facts.......refusal to engage in honest, self-examination,....... determined to continue "serving god" in a state of perpetual adolescence without seeing the glaring need to objectively identify the realities of their consciousness of self or god,...........fear of procuring for themselves a legitimate, accredited, useful, real education, or real job in the real world............and, persistent perpetuation of the lies, falsehoods, and superficial, phoney "intellectualism" of their twi-rooted religious systems that keep them in their houses, cars, and "jobs" as "christian leaders"!..................haven't you had enough already mark???.....................................peace.
I would agree, with the addition of one or two words. I believe it would be arrogant for any person or group to claim they have "all" the truth, or that they are the "only ones" with the truth. But I don't think it's impossible to have a good handle on the truth, as Jesus proclaimed it.
"the truth" seems to imply only and all. I have not been involved in one religious organization, who wasn't pretty sure they had all and they were the only. Mainstream religious dominations have agreed to agree on a few basics, but even each denomination thinks its version is the truth.
You are aware that Jesus didn't write down one word of what he said, and every last thing written in the NT was by someone who was writing on the basis of someone else's recollection, with the exception of Paul who did not ever have a personal relationship with Jesus, nor did he necessarily hang with anyone who did. All of his interaction was through visions.
The thing IS Mark.... Having the *truth* doesn`t seem to have prevented these guys from being incredibly evil in the first place. Their new and better understanding doesn`t seem to have impressed upon them the need for Godly sorrow and repentance, much less making amends to those whom they have wronged.
One and all they seem to believe that their Knowledge makes it ok to erase history, to procede as if they have no responsibility to those whom they savaged and attempted to destroy, that the victims of their cruelty are owed nothing, not even an apology.
Thinking that one`s grasp of the truth is going to make one spiritual is, I believe a fallacy that is carried over from twi.
The Knowledge and the truth from what I have seen seems to only puff them up. They seem to have never lost their twi aquired arrogance.
Yet the churches that are so spurned because of their supposed lack of understanding seem to actually understand and operate *Love God and Love your neighbor*. They can walk as Christian`s, genuine and exhibiting the signs listed in Galatians as being *of the spirit*
They seem to function as men and women of the spirit, as opposed to digging out *truths* that supposedly dismiss them from the responsibility of having to behave as a genuine Christian, or exhibit the fruits.
I know this was addressed to "Mark" but it is a great observation. Their "truth" seemed useless in preventing them from hurting people. Smart insight. Sums it up for me.
I think the difference you see in churches is the "brand" of Christianity they practice. It is an objective faith.
Jesus being the object. Less emphasis is placed on knowing all "truth" as a theological sport. More is placed on worship of the truth. Many Christian churches believe Jesus when he says "I am the way the truth. . . " The focus is on him as the only truth.
The ultimate goal is knowledge of him. It is not a blood sport.
In Christianity truth is a who. . . not a what. Christians who don't have a "Branch Leader" seek to please Jesus.
Why would anyone spend good money on an education that is not useful to further a career anywhere? We are still paying for my wife's education. School cost big bucks these days.
The thing IS Mark.... Having the *truth* doesn`t seem to have prevented these guys from being incredibly evil in the first place. Their new and better understanding doesn`t seem to have impressed upon them the need for Godly sorrow and repentance, much less making amends to those whom they have wronged.
One and all they seem to believe that their Knowledge makes it ok to erase history, to procede as if they have no responsibility to those whom they savaged and attempted to destroy, that the victims of their cruelty are owed nothing, not even an apology.
Thinking that one`s grasp of the truth is going to make one spiritual is, I believe a fallacy that is carried over from twi.
Yeah......wierwille begot another generation of "leaders" who are hell-bent on carrying forth "THE TRUTH" in all its twi-glory and arrogance.
* This "truth" has wheat AND tares growing together in its midst.
* This "truth" is supposedly rightly-divided......and stands on its own (as long as one doesn't oppose it).
* This "truth" is "the gold of Egypt"......yet JAL admits that much of it is was "fool's gold."
* This "truth" sets the leaders free.......but holds captive the followers in destructive abuse.
* This "truth" is first-century truth........yet, stolen from stiles, bullinger and vpw's contemporaries.
* This "truth" teaches the nine fruit of the spirit.....yet, only carnal fruit is found in these "leaders."
* This "truth" opens wide the doors of arrogance and elitism........to have "THE answers."
* This "truth" keeps the pied-piper in the lead......not the Lord Jesus Christ.
I know this was addressed to "Mark" but it is a great observation. Their "truth" seemed useless in preventing them from hurting people. Smart insight. Sums it up for me.
Unproven theory one could argue that they had the choice to adhere to the truth or not, their choice does not make the truth useless. No more so than our choice does not make useless the morals that our parents taught us. We all have free will to choose, that does not mysteriously negate truth.
Christians who don't have a "Branch Leader" seek to please Jesus.
Maybe Yes maybe No many please their pastor,priest,elder.... Should we write off that system by the same logic? I'd submit churches need leaders call them what you like, but they all have them.
I think the difference you see in churches is the "brand" of Christianity they practice. It is an objective faith.
Jesus being the object. Less emphasis is placed on knowing all "truth" as a theological sport. More is placed on worship of the truth. Many Christian churches believe Jesus when he says "I am the way the truth. . . " The focus is on him as the only truth.
And then again some churches follow this verse ........
Mark 10:18
And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
The point is that we don't need to focus on JESUS , it is not something he directed others to do. He directed people to his Father, who he also prayed to as well by the way. he told of the parable of the forgiving Father ,not the forgiving JESUS. His focus was quite clear just as the church today should be .
For a good overview I'd recommend Karen Armstrong's The Bible - A Biography, and her A History of God. Also, for those interested in what interpretation of texts, including the Bible, involves, pick up a copy of A Short Introduction to Hermeneutics by David Jasper. Hermenuetics is just a fancy word to describe our understanding of the nature of texts and how we interpret and use them.
Happy reading/learning/living,
penworks
I love that people are interested and have looked at these issues. TZ you brought up points I often hear. Jesus never recorded a word. . . . Paul's visions. . . . . Well reasoned points I might add--this is such a deep topic--layer upon layer to be uncovered in working it out. I admire that you are objectively looking at it and really thinking it through.
There are many things to agree with Karen Armstrong on and a great deal I take some issue with. Her definition of religion--is supported by her work--alas, I take exception with her definition. To transcend something means exceeding usual limits : surpassing -extending or lying beyond the limits of ordinary experience --being beyond the limits of all possible experience and knowledge --being beyond comprehension.
In many religions this is true--however, Christianity is not a religion. It is a relationship. It is also a reasonable faith. Meaning, there is enough evidence to reasonably accept it as true. I am not saying there is proof positive, I am aware that their is a strong argument to be made against the Christian faith, but reasonable, intellegent people can believe with some degree of confidence.
Christianity is unique from other systems of belief-- a clearer understanding of this can only help one with questions and nagging doubts. There are similarities as well---an example of this appeared on this thread--Someone mentioned that Jesus prayed to God. --there are also examples of God praying in Islam and Judaism.
For a balanced perspective, along side Armstrong's book, I would suggest picking up Lee Strobel's
The Case for Christ or Josh McDowell's New Evidence that Demands a Verdict. Much like Mark suggested.
I would in no way discourage anyone from reading Armstrong's books. I actually encourage it. Also, I do think Christians really should take a look at historical critism of the bible. Warning, without a balance and historical understanding, this can lead some to abandon the faith completely! However, to have some confidence in your belief--it really should be looked at. A bit ironic really.
Historical critism is nothing new-but it has really grown in the last three centuries. It grew from a rationalistic approach to critique. Some may say--great--makes sense. Well, yes and no, a commitment to a mindset that completely dismisses the supernatural is actually a limited scope. Think about it.
This approach would eschew the resurrection. Without which, Christianity becomes a nice philosophy--and Jesus just a cool guy. Examples of those who believed this way--Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, products of . . . the rationalistic thought process of the day! Take a look at what Thomas Jefferson did to his bible--took out all miracles and any indication of the supernatural. Ended up with a really awesome man--Jesus. One whose philosophy of life was to be admired. No resurrection
In fact, the bible says--without the resurrection--it is foolish to believe. (1Co 15:12-19)
Another thing to really keep in mind is that often a held conviction of one century is blown from the water the next--new evidence uncovered--scholarship turned on its ear. F.C Baur--and Wellhausen are examples of this--and Baur actually posed a small threat to the faith of 19th century believers.
The bible itself is such a unique book--however, the canon was not infallible--they were just men. But, its death knell has been rung so many times. God's funeral has been held, . . . . . . He remains. Some faith in the providence of God is required. That comes from a careful and honest look at the entire picture.
God still lives in the hearts of those who believe. . Many who have proclaimed His death--are dust.
Questions DO remain. Many have been answered, and that should give one some confidence that as evidence presents itself--we are able to answer them.
Before the mod's catch me. . . . and. . . .
Now that I have taken this way off topic--my speciality--I would just add this--I have many conversations here with people who are really nervous about putting down their King James bible. A real fear that they will lose the truth--words added--confusion in translation. It was an astounding product of scholarship of the day--but, we have more manuscripts now, and there is careful work in textual criticism--have some confidence in the newer versions.
What does this have to do with Vp's real remnant? Nothing. Sorry--saw a book I know and comments about the bible I recognize and I really wanted to chime in. It is a very deep subject--and at some point--we make a decision as to what we are going to believe--it really is so good to carefully look at this stuff.
I agree with penworks-Happy reading/learning/living,--it is a blast!!
As another group -- S.O.W.E.R.S. -- embarks on their journey to "train 12 disciples with grandpa wierwille's tutelage of the five corps principles" ...... I find it quite amusing that these guys haven't figured out that THE FIRST TRAIN WRECKED.
Same corps principles. Same work/study program. Same isolation techniques. Same hype and mantra. So, how is this going to "turn the corner"??.......or is that NOT even a consideration at this time? Hopefully, it's not just another sect of wierwille-adulatory cloning on the rise..........AGAIN.
I guess that I'm outta the loop on this one. I just don't get it. How on God's green earth can THIS have any resemblance of the first century church? of unifying the small churches in common bond as in the Book of Acts? of the One Body working together?
And, another question.......Will the REAL vpw-ministry remnant please stand up?
Name-Recognition is a big thing in marketing....and, seemingly, in small-fringe sects as well. Cgeer went immediately into editing posthumously the works of wierwille.......Lyyn recently wrote his lengthy letter to the CES group and wanting to make his mogship proud ........ and CFF clings to the wierwille-adulation, as well.
Heck, I remember seeing some "real-deal-vpw-apologists" back in the early 80s......who felt that LCM WAS THE WRONG CHOICE AND WANTED TO MAINTAIN THE WAYS OF WIERWILLE. Thus, these "fortified outposts of followers" would keep to themselves and hold to the vpw-spiel of "see you at the rock"......"word over the world"......"you are the best." One small group of say 3 couples........drank drambuie.
I guess if you hang around long enough...........you've just about SEEN IT ALL.
But imho........the scriptures clearly show that such work comes to nought. Besides, to me, when one "follows the money trail" and "praise of men trail" these groups expose their true motives and intent.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
10
21
8
8
Popular Days
Sep 14
11
Sep 8
11
Sep 15
11
Sep 9
10
Top Posters In This Topic
skyrider 10 posts
Mark Clarke 21 posts
Ham 8 posts
geisha779 8 posts
Popular Days
Sep 14 2008
11 posts
Sep 8 2008
11 posts
Sep 15 2008
11 posts
Sep 9 2008
10 posts
Mark Clarke
I agree that there's more to it than what we were taught in TWI. But there is also more to it than what liberal scholars say about it. I would consider them alongside other more conservative scholarship that validates the Bible, even if they also adhere to the traditional doctrines. Both sides should be given consideration. Sean Finnegan wrote an excellent paper about this for a theological conference, which you can read here.
BTW, I don't claim that anyone has put the Bible together 100% perfectly, but this Gospel of the Kingdom is a way of seeing the whole picture, putting it together better than anything I've ever seen.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DontWorryBeHappy
thank you mark!
for your courteous and honest replies to my questions and to the posts of our fellow greasespotters on this thread.......it is most encouraging to know that civil discourse and respectful disagreement can be engaged in and enjoyed here at the greasespot, a website that is dear to each of us, and which remains so important in its mission of exposing twi and its offshoots to those who need or want to know "the other side of the story".
it is a pleasure to dialogue with you and agree to disagree in a mutual respectful and courteous discussion of issues and events of import and impact to ourselves and the greasespot community as a whole!......again, thank for your forthrightness and courteousness..................................peace.
Edited by Don'tWorryBeHappyLink to comment
Share on other sites
penworks
Since I'm being referred to here, I thought I'd chime in.
Just to clarify: I returned to college post-twi to get a liberal arts education (the word "liberal" in this case does not refer to any political left wing stance or religious stance, but that's another topic). I did read lots of English literature and philosophy etc. that helped me think clearly and logically and exercised my critical thinking capacities. I earned a B.A. in English. I did not get a degree in early Church history or Semetic languages, etc.
I just like to read. I've read things pertaining to the history of the Bible, etc. during and after college.
For a good overview I'd recommend Karen Armstrong's The Bible - A Biography, and her A History of God. Also, for those interested in what interpretation of texts, including the Bible, involves, pick up a copy of A Short Introduction to Hermeneutics by David Jasper. Hermenuetics is just a fancy word to describe our understanding of the nature of texts and how we interpret and use them.
Happy reading/learning/living,
penworks
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
I believe this is the crux of the matter - certain group's certainty of what IS the truth. For me, that sends up huge red flags, and should have nearly 30 years ago. Back then I believed it was possible to extract the truth from the Bible. Now I don't. Not only that, I think the point is missed when one spends too much time trying to do that.
Once I stepped back from the premise (and that's all it is) that the Bible is a "God breathed" collection of works that is infallible and inerrant, I quit searching for "the truth" in it.
There is a preponderance of wisdom contained within the pages, but 3 things stick out:
These 3 things are enough to keep us all plenty busy and out of trouble.
The reality is that none of us has "the truth." We are all too caught up in our own biases and our own thinking to ever get "the truth." Furthermore, anyone or any group who professes to be in possession of "the truth" is arrogant and deceptive to his/her/itself and to anyone he/she/it tries to convince. I believe the best we can do with what we have been given is to continue studying, keep an open mind, and live #2 and #3. NONE of the splinters live up to any of those notions, and furthermore, none of them try. Each of them brings disunity and disharmony to the body. They're heartburn. They're cancer. They're dis-ease. I'm not saying that denominations are necessarily better in this matter, they simply aren't as likely to provoke disharmony and disunity in the body as a whole.
And oh BTW, excellent non-denominational religious education is available at accredited universities, such as Harvard, Yale, University of Chicago, and Vanderbilt. Princeton, while being technically under the wing of the Presbyterian church, also has an open style of theological education. Then again, I'm referring to education as opposed to indoctrination and training.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DontWorryBeHappy
hiya penworks and tzaia!
thank you each and both for posting good information, and making good points well-taken. your input and opinions are certainly appreciated by me, and i always enjoy reading the posts you ladies contribute here at the greasespot!...........you gals rock 'n' rule!...........and you can sure boogie-woogie too!...........lol!.......................peace.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
I would agree, with the addition of one or two words. I believe it would be arrogant for any person or group to claim they have "all" the truth, or that they are the "only ones" with the truth. But I don't think it's impossible to have a good handle on the truth, as Jesus proclaimed it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
The thing IS Mark.... Having the *truth* doesn`t seem to have prevented these guys from being incredibly evil in the first place. Their new and better understanding doesn`t seem to have impressed upon them the need for Godly sorrow and repentance, much less making amends to those whom they have wronged.
One and all they seem to believe that their Knowledge makes it ok to erase history, to procede as if they have no responsibility to those whom they savaged and attempted to destroy, that the victims of their cruelty are owed nothing, not even an apology.
Thinking that one`s grasp of the truth is going to make one spiritual is, I believe a fallacy that is carried over from twi.
The Knowledge and the truth from what I have seen seems to only puff them up. They seem to have never lost their twi aquired arrogance.
Yet the churches that are so spurned because of their supposed lack of understanding seem to actually understand and operate *Love God and Love your neighbor*. They can walk as Christian`s, genuine and exhibiting the signs listed in Galatians as being *of the spirit*
They seem to function as men and women of the spirit, as opposed to digging out *truths* that supposedly dismiss them from the responsibility of having to behave as a genuine Christian, or exhibit the fruits.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
I agree this is the case with many, perhaps even most, of the TWI offshoots. But It's been my experience that it is not true of ALL of them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
Which ones?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DontWorryBeHappy
my experience with ALL OF THE OFFSHOOTS OF TWI AND THEIR "LEADERS" has been that THEY ALL try to minimalize vic's "mistakes" by saying something along the lines of "that was over 20 years ago, and does not change what god is or what the truth of god's word is",..................
or, "i'm sorry you were hurt or abused by vic, or craig, or rosalie, or twi. but don't you think it's time to move on with your life?"............
or, "after all these years why are you still so angry and bitter about the sins of one man or other men? haven't you heard of 'forgiveness'?".................
or, "our 'ministry' has nothing to do with twi. besides, vic's dead.".................
or, "yes, vic and twi made a lot of mistakes, but i'll always be thankful for the 'truth of god's word" that i learned while i was there.".................
or, "don't you believe the bible is still the word of god?"....................
or, "so what are you doing for god these days?"
or, "are you still a christian? do you still believe in god?"
or, "our ministry researches the bible based on all the great biblical keys we learned from twi, but we disagree with lots of twi doctrines that our research has proven to be wrong."
or, "we think our classes, are more accurate than pfal, and we don't do the same things vic or twi did that hurt or used god's people."
or, "i don't have to listen to your lies."!
or, "i'm sorry you feel that way. call me when you want to believe god again."
and yada, yada, yada,and blah, blah, blah............denial of the facts.......refusal to engage in honest, self-examination,....... determined to continue "serving god" in a state of perpetual adolescence without seeing the glaring need to objectively identify the realities of their consciousness of self or god,...........fear of procuring for themselves a legitimate, accredited, useful, real education, or real job in the real world............and, persistent perpetuation of the lies, falsehoods, and superficial, phoney "intellectualism" of their twi-rooted religious systems that keep them in their houses, cars, and "jobs" as "christian leaders"!..................haven't you had enough already mark???.....................................peace.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
"the truth" seems to imply only and all. I have not been involved in one religious organization, who wasn't pretty sure they had all and they were the only. Mainstream religious dominations have agreed to agree on a few basics, but even each denomination thinks its version is the truth.
You are aware that Jesus didn't write down one word of what he said, and every last thing written in the NT was by someone who was writing on the basis of someone else's recollection, with the exception of Paul who did not ever have a personal relationship with Jesus, nor did he necessarily hang with anyone who did. All of his interaction was through visions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Maybe it's not so easy to glimpse into that level of "darkness"..
a *real* friend of mine asked me.. "what if you found out that everything you believe is .. wrong.."
It was all just a step, along the way..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spoudazo
I know this was addressed to "Mark" but it is a great observation. Their "truth" seemed useless in preventing them from hurting people. Smart insight. Sums it up for me.
I think the difference you see in churches is the "brand" of Christianity they practice. It is an objective faith.
Jesus being the object. Less emphasis is placed on knowing all "truth" as a theological sport. More is placed on worship of the truth. Many Christian churches believe Jesus when he says "I am the way the truth. . . " The focus is on him as the only truth.
The ultimate goal is knowledge of him. It is not a blood sport.
In Christianity truth is a who. . . not a what. Christians who don't have a "Branch Leader" seek to please Jesus.
Why would anyone spend good money on an education that is not useful to further a career anywhere? We are still paying for my wife's education. School cost big bucks these days.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I thought this was worth repeating.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Yeah......wierwille begot another generation of "leaders" who are hell-bent on carrying forth "THE TRUTH" in all its twi-glory and arrogance.
* This "truth" has wheat AND tares growing together in its midst.
* This "truth" is supposedly rightly-divided......and stands on its own (as long as one doesn't oppose it).
* This "truth" is "the gold of Egypt"......yet JAL admits that much of it is was "fool's gold."
* This "truth" sets the leaders free.......but holds captive the followers in destructive abuse.
* This "truth" is first-century truth........yet, stolen from stiles, bullinger and vpw's contemporaries.
* This "truth" teaches the nine fruit of the spirit.....yet, only carnal fruit is found in these "leaders."
* This "truth" opens wide the doors of arrogance and elitism........to have "THE answers."
* This "truth" keeps the pied-piper in the lead......not the Lord Jesus Christ.
<_<
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spoudazo
I am not following. Are you saying there are churches built on the idea that Jesus is no good? Even the Way was not that bad. Absent yes-NO GOOD- no.
I guess there could be.
You can find a church for anything if you look hard enough. Could be a church built on "The rings and nose jewels" for all we know.
Did you have a point? I missed it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
I think his point may be that we don't need to follow Jesus Christ but look straight at God.
Yeah, I thought it was an odd comment, too. Is this a verse TWI uses to justify the "absent Christ"?
Spoudazo, love your expression, "'truth' as a theological sport."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
The point is that we don't need to focus on JESUS , it is not something he directed others to do. He directed people to his Father, who he also prayed to as well by the way. he told of the parable of the forgiving Father ,not the forgiving JESUS. His focus was quite clear just as the church today should be .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spoudazo
Waysider,
Well done and I thank you.
That said it all for me.
Edited by SpoudazoLink to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
I love that people are interested and have looked at these issues. TZ you brought up points I often hear. Jesus never recorded a word. . . . Paul's visions. . . . . Well reasoned points I might add--this is such a deep topic--layer upon layer to be uncovered in working it out. I admire that you are objectively looking at it and really thinking it through.
There are many things to agree with Karen Armstrong on and a great deal I take some issue with. Her definition of religion--is supported by her work--alas, I take exception with her definition. To transcend something means exceeding usual limits : surpassing -extending or lying beyond the limits of ordinary experience --being beyond the limits of all possible experience and knowledge --being beyond comprehension.
In many religions this is true--however, Christianity is not a religion. It is a relationship. It is also a reasonable faith. Meaning, there is enough evidence to reasonably accept it as true. I am not saying there is proof positive, I am aware that their is a strong argument to be made against the Christian faith, but reasonable, intellegent people can believe with some degree of confidence.
Christianity is unique from other systems of belief-- a clearer understanding of this can only help one with questions and nagging doubts. There are similarities as well---an example of this appeared on this thread--Someone mentioned that Jesus prayed to God. --there are also examples of God praying in Islam and Judaism.
For a balanced perspective, along side Armstrong's book, I would suggest picking up Lee Strobel's
The Case for Christ or Josh McDowell's New Evidence that Demands a Verdict. Much like Mark suggested.
I would in no way discourage anyone from reading Armstrong's books. I actually encourage it. Also, I do think Christians really should take a look at historical critism of the bible. Warning, without a balance and historical understanding, this can lead some to abandon the faith completely! However, to have some confidence in your belief--it really should be looked at. A bit ironic really.
Historical critism is nothing new-but it has really grown in the last three centuries. It grew from a rationalistic approach to critique. Some may say--great--makes sense. Well, yes and no, a commitment to a mindset that completely dismisses the supernatural is actually a limited scope. Think about it.
This approach would eschew the resurrection. Without which, Christianity becomes a nice philosophy--and Jesus just a cool guy. Examples of those who believed this way--Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, products of . . . the rationalistic thought process of the day! Take a look at what Thomas Jefferson did to his bible--took out all miracles and any indication of the supernatural. Ended up with a really awesome man--Jesus. One whose philosophy of life was to be admired. No resurrection
In fact, the bible says--without the resurrection--it is foolish to believe. (1Co 15:12-19)
Another thing to really keep in mind is that often a held conviction of one century is blown from the water the next--new evidence uncovered--scholarship turned on its ear. F.C Baur--and Wellhausen are examples of this--and Baur actually posed a small threat to the faith of 19th century believers.
The bible itself is such a unique book--however, the canon was not infallible--they were just men. But, its death knell has been rung so many times. God's funeral has been held, . . . . . . He remains. Some faith in the providence of God is required. That comes from a careful and honest look at the entire picture.
God still lives in the hearts of those who believe. . Many who have proclaimed His death--are dust.
Questions DO remain. Many have been answered, and that should give one some confidence that as evidence presents itself--we are able to answer them.
Before the mod's catch me. . . . and. . . .
Now that I have taken this way off topic--my speciality--I would just add this--I have many conversations here with people who are really nervous about putting down their King James bible. A real fear that they will lose the truth--words added--confusion in translation. It was an astounding product of scholarship of the day--but, we have more manuscripts now, and there is careful work in textual criticism--have some confidence in the newer versions.
I agree with penworks-Happy reading/learning/living,--it is a blast!!
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
star_is_born
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.