skyrider, a point worth remembering about the whole teaching of the tithe in Christianity is that it along with all of the specific observances in the Law of Moses were discussed in Acts, in chapter 15.
Those in the church that had been Jewish were learning that the law itself was no longer a requirement for the new church of Christ. Some, 15 mentions a sect of the Pharisees, apparently still held to it and were insisting that the new Gentile Christians take on the Jewish observances of the law (which they themselves must have been holding to still).
The decision of that council was to not impose ciccumcision or observation of the law upon the Gentiles. Some basic "rules" were outlined for them to keep to but they were surely things that had already come up in what they'd learned from the disciples.
The discussion as recorded by Luke is clear and implies a wide range of discussion took place. It was articulated as an "official" determination by James and the group and communicated by letter and people to deliver and reiterate it in person.
This is nearly always skipped over or overlooked when the tithe is taught as a continued observance of the law in the form of a "principle". Not only for the Jews at that time and definitely, clearly for the non-Jewish converts, it was determined that all of the law was not only unnecessary but not required as a part of salvation, pre or post.
Teaching tithing as a "key" to overall abundance and well being is dicey therefore if taught as a "requirement" for anything. It is often taught as a universal over arching "prinicple".
That principle could correctly be described as the answer to the eternal question "which came first, the chicken or the egg?"
In this context, it's the chicken. There has to be a reason for the egg, the fruit, to be brought forth. We don't puzzle over where the chicken came from because we would accept that it's in God's provison that we're blessed with life and the ability to produce. And with chickens. Tithing "The Principle" is recognition of God as Creator, Father, and Provider of all good things. So a tithe by the definition of a "biblical principle" is a gesture of that recognition. We got chickens, here's some of the eggs.
In actual fact then for us today, tithing or giving as that gesture has nothing to do with "getting" anything from God, or keeping to a required principle or with supporting any specific human agency. Giving to a group or church or effort that we support and want to be a part of is fine. It makes sense and could be the right thing for someone to do. It could be a part of that recognition.
I agree with you that PFAL and class revenue never funded the Way to any great extent. Funding came from the financial gifts of the members. The Way has business concerns and needs, goals. They, like lots of churches, twist and turn that into making themselves the required recipients of God's tithes instead of just saying they want to do such and such and need money to do it so can you give them some. Basically they don't want to ask for money so they make it a requirement of a person's spiritual life and well being. That's exactly what the guys in Acts 15 determined NOT to do.
It's a form of extortion, an "offer you can't refuse".Every new Christian should print Acts 15 and keep it with them to present whenver they're taught Tithing as a requirement. Sort of like a get out of jail card, pass go and don't give a 100 dollars when you do card.
skyrider, a point worth remembering about the whole teaching of the tithe in Christianity is that it along with all of the specific observances in the Law of Moses were discussed in Acts, in chapter 15.
Good point to remember, socks.........thanks.
v.12 The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabus and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them.
Now THAT is the kind of movement that I could easily throw my heart, soul, mind, strength and TITHE to support.
I agree with you that PFAL and class revenue never funded the Way to any great extent. Funding came from the financial gifts of the members. The Way has business concerns and needs, goals. They, like lots of churches, twist and turn that into making themselves the required recipients of God's tithes instead of just saying they want to do such and such and need money to do it so can you give them some. Basically they don't want to ask for money so they make it a requirement of a person's spiritual life and well being. That's exactly what the guys in Acts 15 determined NOT to do.
It's a form of extortion, an "offer you can't refuse".Every new Christian should print Acts 15 and keep it with them to present whenver they're taught Tithing as a requirement. Sort of like a get out of jail card, pass go and don't give a 100 dollars when you do card.
Yeah.......but UNLIKE churches, twi's hq is a behemoth, in-house staffed cult compound. In the mid-80s, the staff had swelled to something like 575.......security guys patrolling the grounds 24/7, personal housekeepers & nannies for the trustees, a valet for vp, a valet for lcm, a lady-staffer for mrs., a staff assistant for mrs. owens, a personal secretary (gate-keeper) for don & howie, 60-70 way builders, 18-25 bookstore personnel, etc. etc. etc. etc.
Yes........EXTORTION comes to mind. The field folk are supporting an ungodly system that funnels ALL MONIES to twi's hq and gives back nothing except script-read "teachings" (if one PAYS for the tape subscription). The way rag looks more like a children's publication with its cover of make-believe......and way productions is a rehashed lawrence welkish flavor that must appeal to the 60-year old crowd.
Comparing twi's behemoth plodding through the mud with the first century church men, like Paul & Barnabus..........is like comparing a hippopotamus with a squirrel.
GeorgeStGeorge - I hope it makes sense. I've studied Acts in light of "Church Administration" for years and years and at some point it hit me - oh yeah. That first determination was more than an internal peace-gesture between the old and new guard amongst the leaders. It was a pointed and clearly articulated statement as to what it meant to be "God's people". Teaching tithing today flies in the face of it. I could say they were wrong, amend the decision, ignore it, disobey it, but as a matter of church history it stands as one of the first "official" determinations they made as to who and what they were, and how they would conduct their faith moving forward. Here we are.
sky - I agree. In that regard The Way Nash is, or was, a bloated frog serving itself. And I think that's why, at least one reason, why so much of the doctrine that men like Paul and Barnabas taught is misunderstood, lost and/or ignored.
From that comfy throne of theirs verses like "I can do all things through Christ Who strengthens me" is filtered and the meaning lost. Segmented, sliced and diced to mean nothing more than being able to rub a sore brain cell. The context of passionate disciplined service at one's own expense is lost in lieu of a "key" to get more of what they want and already have enough of. It's like having a 10 pound hammer and a bag of nails but nothing to build worth keeping.
Ulitmately Christianity is more than a well ordered set of beliefs, rituals and timely observances to be taught and handed down generation to generation. It has that to it, we're humans and we like our branded t-shirts, hats and tatoos. We're born and we need to know. We forget, we need to remember, be reminded. But the Jews already had a bang-up version of that going in.
sky - I agree. In that regard The Way Nash is, or was, a bloated frog serving itself. And I think that's why, at least one reason, why so much of the doctrine that men like Paul and Barnabas taught is misunderstood, lost and/or ignored.
socks........in your studies of Acts in light of the *church administration* for years and years, isn't it quite clear that the Jerusalem early church leaders attempted to mix the new revelations with OT law under a centralized system......much like twi's failed attempt to centralize? Sure, the Jerusalem leaders in Acts spoke of new things.......but the power of God was dynamically moving in Paul's ministry to the Gentiles and other men who followed these post-pentecost revelations.
I worked on staff at twi's hq for several years and.......imo, it was corporate business with "bless yous" mixed in. As a department coordinator, I was responsible to work with several departments weekly....and when big events rolled in, the planning and communication quadrupled. Sure, it was a mixture of challenge and excitement, wanting to be my best for God and all. But really..........THIS twi-corporate grind was very different that what I'd read in Acts, very different than the power and healing in action, whole cities turning from Satan to the power of God.
The "top leaders" stopped doing itineraries.....or, they had to have the pomp and trimmings of forerunners ahead of them to set up the big meeting. The region/limb/branch guys were out and about........but the corporate hub was a cesspool of
posturing and backbiting. In the end, twi's "headquarters" fell into the abyss of arrogance and self-absorption.
In retrospect, I tend to think that wierwille's pfal class (although basicly stolen and much plagiarized) had some truth and some error.......a mixed bag. But, God could STILL work with that. Heck, even H3fner & D00p saw some benefit to it..... in the beginning. But.........when wierwille added the centralization, the narcisstic control, the pyramid structure, the corps cloning, the squelching of individuality, the disdain for anything other than twi, etc........yeah, then, for sure, the message of the first century church and its dynamic operation was irredeemable of significant impact falling prey to the doctrines of men and seducing spirits.
I know it is a few years old.. but don't they still take an anual trip to a warmer place in the world?
yep,
and rosie's boating lessons. . .
the boat winters on grounds. . .
but who would want to spend most of their time running such a dump? She supposedly has money elsewhere anyway. Why run a cult? Something ain't right with her.
Well sky, adminstering the affairs of the new church took form pretty quickly, we know that. It was a work in progress that was "dynamic", it had the energy of the message of the risen Christ that was fresh and being delivered by first hand witnesses and their close friends and family. The receiving of pneuma hagion, and the immediate proliferation of the events of Pentecost by people from all over the geographical area who were there. Acts records a series of miracles and extraordinary events all occuring within a few years. Things were hoppin'.
Years and years of study pretty much yield x amount of information. I think there's a lot we don't know about the years in Acts, but a lot we do and can. In the end it's not another door and then another, there's a level of understanding that's fairly plain I think.
I don't completely subscribe to the view that the disciples in Acts were hunkered down, uninterested in spreading the message of Jesus Christ and serving only themselves. Chapters 2 - 6 indicate a group that was growing and learning together. By the time chapter 6 hits, the issue is largely one of growth and size and the need to expand the leadership and service group to accomodate the church, which both the people and the leaders recognized, embraced and resolved. And it's telling that the solution wasn't one of the existing leaders macro-managing that effort, rather they recommended that the church itself seek and select trusted qualified people to handle the expanding needs.
Also telling - after Paul's "conversion" later when he's in Jerusalem, it's the current group that selects Barnabas to go out and Pauls goes with him. Paul later goes again and goes with the blessing of the church in Jerusalem. Its in those travels that the churches are visited, taught and of course we see Paul reaching out to the non-Jewish peoples.
I can see it as an extremely diverse and eclectic mix in Jerusalem. Pharisees, Saducees - both were sects with a social, political origin. Rome governed. Groups like the Essenes were already established. The Christian message was spread throughout all of these people, and more.
James is clearly the "leader" at that time, his voice and authority seems to be assumed in the way it's recorded, no one questions him as it's written and he joins their minds and message into a statement at that Council in 15. He appears to be somewhere in the middle of this mix of Jewish tradition and Christian faith in accomodation yet understands what Peter, Paul, Barnabas and others give witness to. And he clearly supports the outreach of Christianity as it's born by Paul and others. Yet he urges Paul to give appearance to be respectful of the Jewish law and to not create dissension. Plus, there's people we see pop up that have no other record - Agabus is one. Acts give us a view into the events of that time in a way that paints a very diverse picture of the "church".
I don't see it as settled as I did at one time. Centralization over simplifies what was going on I think. It appears the churches Paul established were free to develop and work independently without coercion from Jerusalem, with the kind of pastoral support Paul and others brought. When we finally see Paul saying he's "alone" it's a statement of fact, due to his "house arrest" status, although he still had a fair amount of freedom much of the time it seems.
There was division over doctrine - lots of them. On the money standpoint I think it was still segmented and self-governing across the churches for the most part. Acts itself doesn't paint a picture or give details that indicate the church in Jerusalem was centralized and demanding authority over the new church's money or doctrine. If they had, they wouldn't have let Paul do what he did or support it nor recognzied at least officially that the new churches were free of the Mosaic Law. If they had wanted to maintain control the Law and Jewish birth right would have locked that down for them.
They held the core of people who were with Jesus, lived and learned first hand from Him and were present in Acts 2. It stands to reason that they would have held a strong leadership role. For better or worse.
I can see it as an extremely diverse and eclectic mix in Jerusalem. Pharisees, Saducees - both were sects with a social, political origin. Rome governed. Groups like the Essenes were already established. The Christian message was spread throughout all of these people, and more.
James is clearly the "leader" at that time, his voice and authority seems to be assumed in the way it's recorded, no one questions him as it's written and he joins their minds and message into a statement at that Council in 15. He appears to be somewhere in the middle of this mix of Jewish tradition and Christian faith in accomodation yet understands what Peter, Paul, Barnabas and others give witness to. And he clearly supports the outreach of Christianity as it's born by Paul and others. Yet he urges Paul to give appearance to be respectful of the Jewish law and to not create dissension. Plus, there's people we see pop up that have no other record - Agabus is one. Acts give us a view into the events of that time in a way that paints a very diverse picture of the "church".
I don't see it as settled as I did at one time. Centralization over simplifies what was going on I think. It appears the churches Paul established were free to develop and work independently without coercion from Jerusalem, with the kind of pastoral support Paul and others brought. When we finally see Paul saying he's "alone" it's a statement of fact, due to his "house arrest" status, although he still had a fair amount of freedom much of the time it seems.
There was division over doctrine - lots of them. On the money standpoint I think it was still segmented and self-governing across the churches for the most part. Acts itself doesn't paint a picture or give details that indicate the church in Jerusalem was centralized and demanding authority over the new church's money or doctrine. If they had, they wouldn't have let Paul do what he did or support it nor recognzied at least officially that the new churches were free of the Mosaic Law. If they had wanted to maintain control the Law and Jewish birth right would have locked that down for them.
They held the core of people who were with Jesus, lived and learned first hand from Him and were present in Acts 2. It stands to reason that they would have held a strong leadership role. For better or worse.
That's a good synopsis of the early church's beginnings, socks. Thanks.
I don't think centralization characters the early church either.........and certainly, not in the aspects of Paul's ministry. The point I was attempting to make.......twi equates itself as "the first century church in the present," BUT the pyramid structure and heavy-handed control that wierwille built in twi stands in opposition to the revelation of the Acts of the Apostles. Sure, the doctrine had to be set forth, but much of the teaching revolved around a dynamic freedom in Christ and holy spirit power and open dialogue and living epistle known and read of all men........not the week after week droning, no questions asked, that twi embraced.
Even the transition from Peter to Paul......God's energizing was at work to bring the church along, as a father careth for his children, according to His heart and His timetable.
.twi equates itself as "the first century church in the present," BUT the pyramid structure and heavy-handed control that wierwille built in twi stands in opposition to the revelation of the Acts of the Apostles.
Agreed. I doubt the profile of "Paul" we see in the epistles would recognize The Way as Christianity, to be completely honest. Even if there are doctrinal points and characteristics that are based on the same thing, the epistles don't deal with the same issues the same way. F'rinstance Paul made it clear that the social caste system the Corinthian church was putting into play was way off base. He openly debated and argued the case for Christ with any and all comers and beliefs. He personally travelled, lived and supported himself while teaching and preaching in order to witness Christ and pursued his life's passion at his own expense, with or without the support of his peers, family or anyone else. VPW lived a traditional minister's life, teaching and holding services and collecting money to support himself and fund what he wanted to do, relied on family, surrounding himself with a group of people that even he didn't want to be around the last days of his life. There are significant differences.
Imagine the reaction of someone like Paul finding out that his letters had been purloined and rewritten into a "new reissued" teaching and sold for money.
I'm not totally critical of "all things Way and VPW" but for my own part, it was what it was. Lipstick on the pig won't make it prettier. It doesn't mean I hate it or despise it. Nothing in this life is perfect and failure is common. There were successes however. There always are.
Agreed. I doubt the profile of "Paul" we see in the epistles would recognize The Way as Christianity, to be completely honest. Even if there are doctrinal points and characteristics that are based on the same thing, the epistles don't deal with the same issues the same way. F'rinstance Paul made it clear that the social caste system the Corinthian church was putting into play was way off base. He openly debated and argued the case for Christ with any and all comers and beliefs. He personally travelled, lived and supported himself while teaching and preaching in order to witness Christ and pursued his life's passion at his own expense, with or without the support of his peers, family or anyone else. VPW lived a traditional minister's life, teaching and holding services and collecting money to support himself and fund what he wanted to do, relied on family, surrounding himself with a group of people that even he didn't want to be around the last days of his life. There are significant differences.
Imagine the reaction of someone like Paul finding out that his letters had been purloined and rewritten into a "new reissued" teaching and sold for money.
On so many levels, I think that Paul, had he seen the operational structure and caste system of twi, would have confronted these issues in a "I New Knoxville" epistle much like the first epistle to the Corinthians. If no true repentance, then there'd be no need for a "II New Knoxville" epistle.
Some issues to address:
1) Why a class system? When people are spiritually in need..........feed them NOW.
2) Go, Stand and Speak..........the "come and see" version was more OT version, the days of God's Temple.
3) Itineraries, more itineraries........get to the people. And, don't send out novice "wows" who are vulnerable.
4) Corps training is jaded.......it's simply indoctrinating people into a system, no real *walking by holy spirit* growth.
5) Church leaders need to be blameless......no adultery. Wierwille you are out!
6) Why this bloated compound in ohio? Elevates pride, not love. .....what about more support in regions?
7) Let my people go. Don't oppress them with man-made policies. Let them live and breath, love and laugh.
As far as VPW living a traditional minister's life.......I'd have to disagree with you there. I suppose for about 25 years he would fit that category, but the last 15 years (1970-1985) he was catapulted into cult leader/celebrity status. What wierwille wanted.....wierwille got.
I'm not totally critical of "all things Way and VPW" but for my own part, it was what it was. Lipstick on the pig won't make it prettier. It doesn't mean I hate it or despise it. Nothing in this life is perfect and failure is common. There were successes however. There always are.
Socks, I certainly appreciate your position. Your posts always are thought-provoking and have a nice blend of respectful flavor to them.
I don`t believe that weirewille ever led a traditional ministers life. He told us once how he snuck off and married Mrs. when they were in college ...him to be a minister so the their folks wouldn`t know. (edited to say that *rumour s have it*) he was thrown out of his church for an affair with his secretary. There are accounts of him being sneaky and a bit of a bully all the way back to high school. I just don`t think it was ever about being a minister, but about researching sources that would make the scriptures agree with what wierwille thought or wanted. A way of making him *right*
Opera Buff, are you serious? Does the giant fore head not give it away?
OK, break it to me gently. Who was that in the Paul of Tarsus halloween costume?
it was.. it was..
*drumroll*
the guy in the middle of the other photo wearing what looks like designer khaki's
what I wonder is..
if the "women" in his life (rosie, donna..) told him it was a good idea..
I think he even masqueraded as Joshua once..
yep,
and rosie's boating lessons. . .
the boat winters on grounds. . .
but who would want to spend most of their time running such a dump? She supposedly has money elsewhere anyway. Why run a cult? Something ain't right with her.
I dunno.. maybe she gets a kick out of running something that resembles to me, for lack of better words, a "looney bin".
One could cast her as a pretty wicked looking nurse Ratched..
Thank sky. Ditto. By traditional I mean financially. Most ministers take the job of heading, leading, pastoring a church and are paid to do it. They're supported by the church, and by the gifts of others. Taking away the characteristics of the job performed, they're similar IMO. I'm not talking about the quality of the performance or whether it's right or wrong to do that, rather that the job of ministry is a salaried position. Right or wrong would be more of an individual issue I think. VPW did what he did on his own for awhile, but he quickly approached it as a supported enterprise, using a business model that included capitalization by family funding and gifts. Long term it was paid for by others. YET- we see that the "outreach" of the Way was planned and executed by a self-financed program, "WOW Amabassadors", where in fact each person went on their own dime and did what they did at their own expense. Interesting dynamic going on there and it ran on it's own steam with a little push and shove here and there for a long time.
The contrast between that and what the early discipiles did isn't black and white but those first people appeared to band together and share as a community There's very little information that implies they all went on salary and were paid to do what they did, in Jerusalme or elsewhere.
Supporters of the traditional financial church ministry system that go to the bible point to Paul and some of the statements about workers being worthy, etc. Thats fine but it only paints part of the picture. The rest of it is that Paul (and others then) supported themselves and did what they did because they wanted to do it, paid or not. Another common implication, The Way fronted this, is that they worked that way "until" the churches could support them as if to say that end was the normal and correct end. I disagree.
For the early church the end result was two-fold, spread the gospel of Christ and continue living as a community around that gospel.
To me Acts and the epistles are a snapshot of what happened and don't always give a pattern for exactly what to do, forever, no matter who you are, where or when. It's a specific group of people in a time and place, and through those records we can see, start to anyway, how God and Christ work. It doesn't establish final definitive patterns we can look to today and faultlessly compare then with now and draw conclusions about events and patterns today. Some yes. We get information, wisdom from the past and what was learned and taught. But following the records slavishly without thought and prayer will produce a copy of what (we think) happened then and not what might be possible to happen now. To that end, I think the "traditional" view of financially, tax-exempted, board oriented and tithe supported ministry work is a crippled model. If we can only do what we do when others pay and there's a tax write off - we're screwed before we start. Metphorically speaking.
To me Acts and the epistles are a snapshot of what happened and don't always give a pattern for exactly what to do, forever, no matter who you are, where or when. It's a specific group of people in a time and place, and through those records we can see, start to anyway, how God and Christ work. It doesn't establish final definitive patterns we can look to today and faultlessly compare then with now and draw conclusions about events and patterns today. Some yes. We get information, wisdom from the past and what was learned and taught. But following the records slavishly without thought and prayer will produce a copy of what (we think) happened then and not what might be possible to happen now. To that end, I think the "traditional" view of financially, tax-exempted, board oriented and tithe supported ministry work is a crippled model. If we can only do what we do when others pay and there's a tax write off - we're screwed before we start. Metphorically speaking.
That's my take anyway.
Socks.....drawing on the Acts as a blueprint for christian outreach and christian living, I see a pattern of believers/disciples who, mostly, STAYED PUT in their areas and witnessed God's power and deliverance. Sure, the scriptures keynote the lead men, like Peter & James & Paul & Silas etc. etc.....but the MULTITUDES weren't in outreach programs leaving their families and livelihood behind. The men with gift ministries were on the move, yes.......but these local areas and cities where the craftsmen, tradesmen, businessmen, fishermen, etc rose up to lead their extended families and such.
In retrospect......I think that the WOW Ambassador program was built on false premises of "moving the word." By using isolated scriptures, wierwille led us to believe that this was God's plan for outreach......when, in fact, the scriptures do NOT endorse this setup. For many, it took a majority of the year to gain support and trust in these new areas. Needless to say, many WOWs succombed to the challenges of vulnerability and temptation and isolation that crippled their growth for years, or worse. Interesting to think that today's twi does NOT send "way disciples" far and away..........hmmmmmm???
And, the corps program...........maybe corps 1-5 had some resemblance to "the school of Tyrannus" but as the corps numbered into the 300-375, it seemed more like a herding process and a cloning factory, imo. Heck, even meal time evolved into *announcement time*.....there were just too many sub-meetings all the time. No allowances for one to attend funerals/weddings/thanksgiving......it was manipulating and controlling and isolating. The underlying emphasis was always on "listen, remember and obey"........NOT LEADING.
Even ordination and new corps assignments every three years........if I recall correctly, Philip the evangelist moved over to Caesarea and raised his family [four daughters who later prophesied that Paul not go to Jerusalem]. Yet, twi never taught us scriptures like THAT.......why?? Because there was an a-g-e-n-d-a.
Certain scriptures were lauded to the skies.....other scripture got the silent treatment.
SO MANY LEFT TWI.......seeing through the cloak of deceitfulness. Men like Rev. L0nnell J0hnson saw thru this manipulation and left twi around 1984/85.......and LOOK where he is today?? STILL very active in Christian work and got his doctorate.....and authored a book or two.
Yeah......it's been a wild and crazy ride, but the long detour is over. Hopefully, I'm regaining the proper perspective of the Acts of the Apostles and God's intent for Christian living. Uprightness of heart is a good start.
drawing on the Acts as a blueprint for christian outreach and christian living, I see a pattern of believers/disciples who, mostly, STAYED PUT in their areas and witnessed God's power and deliverance.
I don't see Acts as a blueprint. I see it as a record of what happened. But I could see it as providing some direction and perspective. From that we could draw any number of blueprints usable in a place and time. :)
"Stayed put" is a reasonable outcome of the efforts of the guys and gals in Jerusalem. Some people would determine to "go", be involved in "outreach" efforts as they were inspired to do so. The vast majority of people would stay right where they were and form the church communities we see forming, Corinth, Ephesus, etc. etc. The passion to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ would reach out to the individual first and then out from them as a natural result. That's what seemed to be in high profile in Acts.
In retrospect......I think that the WOW Ambassador program was built on false premises of "moving the word." By using isolated scriptures, wierwille led us to believe that this was God's plan for outreach......when, in fact, the scriptures do NOT endorse this setup.
I don't see that they do or they don't. For a time, many possibilities could be appropriate or even just worth trying if that's what someone wanted to do. As a final, one-way only modus operandi, no. Right for everyone regardless - no. It's clearly not an exact replication of anything we see in the New Testament so to promote is as such would be wrong.
And, the corps program...........maybe corps 1-5 had some resemblance to "the school of Tyrannus"
Tyrannus and what Paul and the people did there is an interesting effort and time to examine. Low-cost, low-overhead, a regular daily concentrated effort amongst a group of interested people. From out of that the entire province heard the gospel, so it's reasonable to assume there was some coming and going over the two year span of time. I agree it was based locally, a community effort rooted in a location and people. They "reasoned", disputed. Something like the Way Corps would be similar but not the same.
There's no indication that people quit something, left what they were doing and signed on to a program for a period of time to a selective program of study or work. For some that may have been the case, it would be hard to say. They did leave one environment that wasn't conducive to continued focused endeavor and set up in another that was, we know that. The "hall" of Tyrannus seems to have been a lecture hall for open discussion and rhetorical debate in the city of Ephesus. Paul in fact left the synagogue, a closed environment that was resistant to what he was doing and took his work into the public eyes and minds of the world at that time. So, there are definite contrasts to that and the Farm in New Knoxville. He started with a "core" group of people that wanted to pursue their work, together.
In a way though he left one group of adamantly opposed people and opened the doors to another, but one that wouldn't oppose his teaching on a strict religious foundation. But it wasn't done behind a curtain or behind closed doors, it was in the open for the world to see, hear, listen, discuss and judge for themselves. It's basic, common sense. If you're not making any headway in one place, try another. In that way God's inspiration to Paul might have been more to overcome his personal inclination to go to the Jews first and foremost and fully embrace the world as his field to work in.
Tyrannus and what Paul and the people did there is an interesting effort and time to examine. Low-cost, low-overhead, a regular daily concentrated effort amongst a group of interested people. From out of that the entire province heard the gospel, so it's reasonable to assume there was some coming and going over the two year span of time. I agree it was based locally, a community effort rooted in a location and people. They "reasoned", disputed. Something like the Way Corps would be similar but not the same.
There's no indication that people quit something, left what they were doing and signed on to a program for a period of time to a selective program of study or work. For some that may have been the case, it would be hard to say. They did leave one environment that wasn't conducive to continued focused endeavor and set up in another that was, we know that. The "hall" of Tyrannus seems to have been a lecture hall for open discussion and rhetorical debate in the city of Ephesus.
Yeah.......the study of Paul and Tyrannus is intriguing.
Open discussion and rhetorical debate in Paul's day, where interested participants could freely come and go at will.......is MILES APART from twi's confining, legalistic, regimentation of a "spiritual" marine corps. Perhaps, the first three or four corps had limited access to *open discussion* with wierwille, but I seriously doubt it. Notwithstanding the fact that as the corps numbers swelled to say, 345..........by 1980, the corps program was a herding process, imo.
It's clear to me............EVERYTHING I LEARNED FROM TWI IS SUSPECT.
And, in the latest attempt at "tyrannus"........the S.O.W.E.R.S program, linked to CFF, is trying to re-address the wierwille model of corps "training" and do it right this time. Yet, the isolated farm in the state of Mississippi....far from the concept of a "lecture hall" in tyrannus....should send red flags to anyone who knows scripture.
Maybe.........GreaseSpot Cafe is the nearest thing I'm ever going to find in OPEN DISCUSSION and DEBATE.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
15
7
5
11
Popular Days
Feb 11
15
Feb 14
12
Feb 15
9
Feb 12
9
Top Posters In This Topic
skyrider 15 posts
socks 7 posts
Ham 5 posts
Bolshevik 11 posts
Popular Days
Feb 11 2009
15 posts
Feb 14 2009
12 posts
Feb 15 2009
9 posts
Feb 12 2009
9 posts
socks
skyrider, a point worth remembering about the whole teaching of the tithe in Christianity is that it along with all of the specific observances in the Law of Moses were discussed in Acts, in chapter 15.
Those in the church that had been Jewish were learning that the law itself was no longer a requirement for the new church of Christ. Some, 15 mentions a sect of the Pharisees, apparently still held to it and were insisting that the new Gentile Christians take on the Jewish observances of the law (which they themselves must have been holding to still).
The decision of that council was to not impose ciccumcision or observation of the law upon the Gentiles. Some basic "rules" were outlined for them to keep to but they were surely things that had already come up in what they'd learned from the disciples.
The discussion as recorded by Luke is clear and implies a wide range of discussion took place. It was articulated as an "official" determination by James and the group and communicated by letter and people to deliver and reiterate it in person.
This is nearly always skipped over or overlooked when the tithe is taught as a continued observance of the law in the form of a "principle". Not only for the Jews at that time and definitely, clearly for the non-Jewish converts, it was determined that all of the law was not only unnecessary but not required as a part of salvation, pre or post.
Teaching tithing as a "key" to overall abundance and well being is dicey therefore if taught as a "requirement" for anything. It is often taught as a universal over arching "prinicple".
That principle could correctly be described as the answer to the eternal question "which came first, the chicken or the egg?"
In this context, it's the chicken. There has to be a reason for the egg, the fruit, to be brought forth. We don't puzzle over where the chicken came from because we would accept that it's in God's provison that we're blessed with life and the ability to produce. And with chickens.
Tithing "The Principle" is recognition of God as Creator, Father, and Provider of all good things. So a tithe by the definition of a "biblical principle" is a gesture of that recognition. We got chickens, here's some of the eggs.
In actual fact then for us today, tithing or giving as that gesture has nothing to do with "getting" anything from God, or keeping to a required principle or with supporting any specific human agency. Giving to a group or church or effort that we support and want to be a part of is fine. It makes sense and could be the right thing for someone to do. It could be a part of that recognition.
I agree with you that PFAL and class revenue never funded the Way to any great extent. Funding came from the financial gifts of the members. The Way has business concerns and needs, goals. They, like lots of churches, twist and turn that into making themselves the required recipients of God's tithes instead of just saying they want to do such and such and need money to do it so can you give them some. Basically they don't want to ask for money so they make it a requirement of a person's spiritual life and well being. That's exactly what the guys in Acts 15 determined NOT to do.
It's a form of extortion, an "offer you can't refuse".Every new Christian should print Acts 15 and keep it with them to present whenver they're taught Tithing as a requirement. Sort of like a get out of jail card, pass go and don't give a 100 dollars when you do card.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
Interesting point, Socks. I hadn't thought of the Council of Jerusalem in that context.
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Good point to remember, socks.........thanks.
v.12 The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabus and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them.
Now THAT is the kind of movement that I could easily throw my heart, soul, mind, strength and TITHE to support.
Yeah.......but UNLIKE churches, twi's hq is a behemoth, in-house staffed cult compound. In the mid-80s, the staff had swelled to something like 575.......security guys patrolling the grounds 24/7, personal housekeepers & nannies for the trustees, a valet for vp, a valet for lcm, a lady-staffer for mrs., a staff assistant for mrs. owens, a personal secretary (gate-keeper) for don & howie, 60-70 way builders, 18-25 bookstore personnel, etc. etc. etc. etc.
Yes........EXTORTION comes to mind. The field folk are supporting an ungodly system that funnels ALL MONIES to twi's hq and gives back nothing except script-read "teachings" (if one PAYS for the tape subscription). The way rag looks more like a children's publication with its cover of make-believe......and way productions is a rehashed lawrence welkish flavor that must appeal to the 60-year old crowd.
Comparing twi's behemoth plodding through the mud with the first century church men, like Paul & Barnabus..........is like comparing a hippopotamus with a squirrel.
<_<
Edited by skyriderLink to comment
Share on other sites
socks
GeorgeStGeorge - I hope it makes sense. I've studied Acts in light of "Church Administration" for years and years and at some point it hit me - oh yeah. That first determination was more than an internal peace-gesture between the old and new guard amongst the leaders. It was a pointed and clearly articulated statement as to what it meant to be "God's people". Teaching tithing today flies in the face of it. I could say they were wrong, amend the decision, ignore it, disobey it, but as a matter of church history it stands as one of the first "official" determinations they made as to who and what they were, and how they would conduct their faith moving forward. Here we are.
sky - I agree. In that regard The Way Nash is, or was, a bloated frog serving itself. And I think that's why, at least one reason, why so much of the doctrine that men like Paul and Barnabas taught is misunderstood, lost and/or ignored.
From that comfy throne of theirs verses like "I can do all things through Christ Who strengthens me" is filtered and the meaning lost. Segmented, sliced and diced to mean nothing more than being able to rub a sore brain cell. The context of passionate disciplined service at one's own expense is lost in lieu of a "key" to get more of what they want and already have enough of. It's like having a 10 pound hammer and a bag of nails but nothing to build worth keeping.
Ulitmately Christianity is more than a well ordered set of beliefs, rituals and timely observances to be taught and handed down generation to generation. It has that to it, we're humans and we like our branded t-shirts, hats and tatoos. We're born and we need to know. We forget, we need to remember, be reminded. But the Jews already had a bang-up version of that going in.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
so... what does the tithe supposedly provide FOR?
I know it is a few years old.. but don't they still take an anual trip to a warmer place in the world?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Provided for .. for the lack of better words.. "nutcases"..
did he REALLY think he was Paul of Tarsus?
Maybe he thought that was his "day job"..
but- what the tithe really SHOULD HAVE provided for...
a shave, and a half way decent haircut..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
socks........in your studies of Acts in light of the *church administration* for years and years, isn't it quite clear that the Jerusalem early church leaders attempted to mix the new revelations with OT law under a centralized system......much like twi's failed attempt to centralize? Sure, the Jerusalem leaders in Acts spoke of new things.......but the power of God was dynamically moving in Paul's ministry to the Gentiles and other men who followed these post-pentecost revelations.
I worked on staff at twi's hq for several years and.......imo, it was corporate business with "bless yous" mixed in. As a department coordinator, I was responsible to work with several departments weekly....and when big events rolled in, the planning and communication quadrupled. Sure, it was a mixture of challenge and excitement, wanting to be my best for God and all. But really..........THIS twi-corporate grind was very different that what I'd read in Acts, very different than the power and healing in action, whole cities turning from Satan to the power of God.
The "top leaders" stopped doing itineraries.....or, they had to have the pomp and trimmings of forerunners ahead of them to set up the big meeting. The region/limb/branch guys were out and about........but the corporate hub was a cesspool of
posturing and backbiting. In the end, twi's "headquarters" fell into the abyss of arrogance and self-absorption.
In retrospect, I tend to think that wierwille's pfal class (although basicly stolen and much plagiarized) had some truth and some error.......a mixed bag. But, God could STILL work with that. Heck, even H3fner & D00p saw some benefit to it..... in the beginning. But.........when wierwille added the centralization, the narcisstic control, the pyramid structure, the corps cloning, the squelching of individuality, the disdain for anything other than twi, etc........yeah, then, for sure, the message of the first century church and its dynamic operation was irredeemable of significant impact falling prey to the doctrines of men and seducing spirits.
<_<
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
yep,
and rosie's boating lessons. . .
the boat winters on grounds. . .
but who would want to spend most of their time running such a dump? She supposedly has money elsewhere anyway. Why run a cult? Something ain't right with her.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Well sky, adminstering the affairs of the new church took form pretty quickly, we know that. It was a work in progress that was "dynamic", it had the energy of the message of the risen Christ that was fresh and being delivered by first hand witnesses and their close friends and family. The receiving of pneuma hagion, and the immediate proliferation of the events of Pentecost by people from all over the geographical area who were there. Acts records a series of miracles and extraordinary events all occuring within a few years. Things were hoppin'.
Years and years of study pretty much yield x amount of information. I think there's a lot we don't know about the years in Acts, but a lot we do and can. In the end it's not another door and then another, there's a level of understanding that's fairly plain I think.
I don't completely subscribe to the view that the disciples in Acts were hunkered down, uninterested in spreading the message of Jesus Christ and serving only themselves. Chapters 2 - 6 indicate a group that was growing and learning together. By the time chapter 6 hits, the issue is largely one of growth and size and the need to expand the leadership and service group to accomodate the church, which both the people and the leaders recognized, embraced and resolved. And it's telling that the solution wasn't one of the existing leaders macro-managing that effort, rather they recommended that the church itself seek and select trusted qualified people to handle the expanding needs.
Also telling - after Paul's "conversion" later when he's in Jerusalem, it's the current group that selects Barnabas to go out and Pauls goes with him. Paul later goes again and goes with the blessing of the church in Jerusalem. Its in those travels that the churches are visited, taught and of course we see Paul reaching out to the non-Jewish peoples.
I can see it as an extremely diverse and eclectic mix in Jerusalem. Pharisees, Saducees - both were sects with a social, political origin. Rome governed. Groups like the Essenes were already established. The Christian message was spread throughout all of these people, and more.
James is clearly the "leader" at that time, his voice and authority seems to be assumed in the way it's recorded, no one questions him as it's written and he joins their minds and message into a statement at that Council in 15. He appears to be somewhere in the middle of this mix of Jewish tradition and Christian faith in accomodation yet understands what Peter, Paul, Barnabas and others give witness to. And he clearly supports the outreach of Christianity as it's born by Paul and others. Yet he urges Paul to give appearance to be respectful of the Jewish law and to not create dissension. Plus, there's people we see pop up that have no other record - Agabus is one. Acts give us a view into the events of that time in a way that paints a very diverse picture of the "church".
I don't see it as settled as I did at one time. Centralization over simplifies what was going on I think. It appears the churches Paul established were free to develop and work independently without coercion from Jerusalem, with the kind of pastoral support Paul and others brought. When we finally see Paul saying he's "alone" it's a statement of fact, due to his "house arrest" status, although he still had a fair amount of freedom much of the time it seems.
There was division over doctrine - lots of them. On the money standpoint I think it was still segmented and self-governing across the churches for the most part. Acts itself doesn't paint a picture or give details that indicate the church in Jerusalem was centralized and demanding authority over the new church's money or doctrine. If they had, they wouldn't have let Paul do what he did or support it nor recognzied at least officially that the new churches were free of the Mosaic Law. If they had wanted to maintain control the Law and Jewish birth right would have locked that down for them.
They held the core of people who were with Jesus, lived and learned first hand from Him and were present in Acts 2. It stands to reason that they would have held a strong leadership role. For better or worse.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
That's a good synopsis of the early church's beginnings, socks. Thanks.
I don't think centralization characters the early church either.........and certainly, not in the aspects of Paul's ministry. The point I was attempting to make.......twi equates itself as "the first century church in the present," BUT the pyramid structure and heavy-handed control that wierwille built in twi stands in opposition to the revelation of the Acts of the Apostles. Sure, the doctrine had to be set forth, but much of the teaching revolved around a dynamic freedom in Christ and holy spirit power and open dialogue and living epistle known and read of all men........not the week after week droning, no questions asked, that twi embraced.
Even the transition from Peter to Paul......God's energizing was at work to bring the church along, as a father careth for his children, according to His heart and His timetable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Agreed. I doubt the profile of "Paul" we see in the epistles would recognize The Way as Christianity, to be completely honest. Even if there are doctrinal points and characteristics that are based on the same thing, the epistles don't deal with the same issues the same way. F'rinstance Paul made it clear that the social caste system the Corinthian church was putting into play was way off base. He openly debated and argued the case for Christ with any and all comers and beliefs. He personally travelled, lived and supported himself while teaching and preaching in order to witness Christ and pursued his life's passion at his own expense, with or without the support of his peers, family or anyone else. VPW lived a traditional minister's life, teaching and holding services and collecting money to support himself and fund what he wanted to do, relied on family, surrounding himself with a group of people that even he didn't want to be around the last days of his life. There are significant differences.
Imagine the reaction of someone like Paul finding out that his letters had been purloined and rewritten into a "new reissued" teaching and sold for money.
I'm not totally critical of "all things Way and VPW" but for my own part, it was what it was. Lipstick on the pig won't make it prettier. It doesn't mean I hate it or despise it. Nothing in this life is perfect and failure is common. There were successes however. There always are.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OperaBuff
My eyes!! My eyes!!
***
OK, break it to me gently. Who was that in the Paul of Tarsus halloween costume?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
On so many levels, I think that Paul, had he seen the operational structure and caste system of twi, would have confronted these issues in a "I New Knoxville" epistle much like the first epistle to the Corinthians. If no true repentance, then there'd be no need for a "II New Knoxville" epistle.
Some issues to address:
1) Why a class system? When people are spiritually in need..........feed them NOW.
2) Go, Stand and Speak..........the "come and see" version was more OT version, the days of God's Temple.
3) Itineraries, more itineraries........get to the people. And, don't send out novice "wows" who are vulnerable.
4) Corps training is jaded.......it's simply indoctrinating people into a system, no real *walking by holy spirit* growth.
5) Church leaders need to be blameless......no adultery. Wierwille you are out!
6) Why this bloated compound in ohio? Elevates pride, not love. .....what about more support in regions?
7) Let my people go. Don't oppress them with man-made policies. Let them live and breath, love and laugh.
As far as VPW living a traditional minister's life.......I'd have to disagree with you there. I suppose for about 25 years he would fit that category, but the last 15 years (1970-1985) he was catapulted into cult leader/celebrity status. What wierwille wanted.....wierwille got.
Socks, I certainly appreciate your position. Your posts always are thought-provoking and have a nice blend of respectful flavor to them.
Edited by skyriderLink to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
I don`t believe that weirewille ever led a traditional ministers life. He told us once how he snuck off and married Mrs. when they were in college ...him to be a minister so the their folks wouldn`t know. (edited to say that *rumour s have it*) he was thrown out of his church for an affair with his secretary. There are accounts of him being sneaky and a bit of a bully all the way back to high school. I just don`t think it was ever about being a minister, but about researching sources that would make the scriptures agree with what wierwille thought or wanted. A way of making him *right*
Opera Buff, are you serious? Does the giant fore head not give it away?
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
it was.. it was..
*drumroll*
the guy in the middle of the other photo wearing what looks like designer khaki's
what I wonder is..
if the "women" in his life (rosie, donna..) told him it was a good idea..
I think he even masqueraded as Joshua once..
I dunno.. maybe she gets a kick out of running something that resembles to me, for lack of better words, a "looney bin".
One could cast her as a pretty wicked looking nurse Ratched..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I'm wondering where Don got the tan.
Must be from working the fields at The Kipp Farm.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OperaBuff
Oh sheeesh.
For a minute there, I thought it was Franco Harris.
LCM apparently had a thing for wearing girly clothes. That, or clothes from The Sopranos.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Thank sky. Ditto. By traditional I mean financially. Most ministers take the job of heading, leading, pastoring a church and are paid to do it. They're supported by the church, and by the gifts of others. Taking away the characteristics of the job performed, they're similar IMO. I'm not talking about the quality of the performance or whether it's right or wrong to do that, rather that the job of ministry is a salaried position. Right or wrong would be more of an individual issue I think. VPW did what he did on his own for awhile, but he quickly approached it as a supported enterprise, using a business model that included capitalization by family funding and gifts. Long term it was paid for by others. YET- we see that the "outreach" of the Way was planned and executed by a self-financed program, "WOW Amabassadors", where in fact each person went on their own dime and did what they did at their own expense. Interesting dynamic going on there and it ran on it's own steam with a little push and shove here and there for a long time.
The contrast between that and what the early discipiles did isn't black and white but those first people appeared to band together and share as a community There's very little information that implies they all went on salary and were paid to do what they did, in Jerusalme or elsewhere.
Supporters of the traditional financial church ministry system that go to the bible point to Paul and some of the statements about workers being worthy, etc. Thats fine but it only paints part of the picture. The rest of it is that Paul (and others then) supported themselves and did what they did because they wanted to do it, paid or not. Another common implication, The Way fronted this, is that they worked that way "until" the churches could support them as if to say that end was the normal and correct end. I disagree.
For the early church the end result was two-fold, spread the gospel of Christ and continue living as a community around that gospel.
To me Acts and the epistles are a snapshot of what happened and don't always give a pattern for exactly what to do, forever, no matter who you are, where or when. It's a specific group of people in a time and place, and through those records we can see, start to anyway, how God and Christ work. It doesn't establish final definitive patterns we can look to today and faultlessly compare then with now and draw conclusions about events and patterns today. Some yes. We get information, wisdom from the past and what was learned and taught. But following the records slavishly without thought and prayer will produce a copy of what (we think) happened then and not what might be possible to happen now. To that end, I think the "traditional" view of financially, tax-exempted, board oriented and tithe supported ministry work is a crippled model. If we can only do what we do when others pay and there's a tax write off - we're screwed before we start. Metphorically speaking.
That's my take anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Socks.....drawing on the Acts as a blueprint for christian outreach and christian living, I see a pattern of believers/disciples who, mostly, STAYED PUT in their areas and witnessed God's power and deliverance. Sure, the scriptures keynote the lead men, like Peter & James & Paul & Silas etc. etc.....but the MULTITUDES weren't in outreach programs leaving their families and livelihood behind. The men with gift ministries were on the move, yes.......but these local areas and cities where the craftsmen, tradesmen, businessmen, fishermen, etc rose up to lead their extended families and such.
In retrospect......I think that the WOW Ambassador program was built on false premises of "moving the word." By using isolated scriptures, wierwille led us to believe that this was God's plan for outreach......when, in fact, the scriptures do NOT endorse this setup. For many, it took a majority of the year to gain support and trust in these new areas. Needless to say, many WOWs succombed to the challenges of vulnerability and temptation and isolation that crippled their growth for years, or worse. Interesting to think that today's twi does NOT send "way disciples" far and away..........hmmmmmm???
And, the corps program...........maybe corps 1-5 had some resemblance to "the school of Tyrannus" but as the corps numbered into the 300-375, it seemed more like a herding process and a cloning factory, imo. Heck, even meal time evolved into *announcement time*.....there were just too many sub-meetings all the time. No allowances for one to attend funerals/weddings/thanksgiving......it was manipulating and controlling and isolating. The underlying emphasis was always on "listen, remember and obey"........NOT LEADING.
Even ordination and new corps assignments every three years........if I recall correctly, Philip the evangelist moved over to Caesarea and raised his family [four daughters who later prophesied that Paul not go to Jerusalem]. Yet, twi never taught us scriptures like THAT.......why?? Because there was an a-g-e-n-d-a.
Certain scriptures were lauded to the skies.....other scripture got the silent treatment.
SO MANY LEFT TWI.......seeing through the cloak of deceitfulness. Men like Rev. L0nnell J0hnson saw thru this manipulation and left twi around 1984/85.......and LOOK where he is today?? STILL very active in Christian work and got his doctorate.....and authored a book or two.
Yeah......it's been a wild and crazy ride, but the long detour is over. Hopefully, I'm regaining the proper perspective of the Acts of the Apostles and God's intent for Christian living. Uprightness of heart is a good start.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
And there was Fellow Laborers.
Not only were we supposed to be doing an in-depth study of Acts, we were supposedly living a lifestyle that was PATTERNED after Acts!
What a disappointment. :(
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
What? You didn't get beaten by unbelievers and thrown out from town to town?
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Nah, we just lived in a commune like a bunch of celibate, non-toking hippies.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
I don't see Acts as a blueprint. I see it as a record of what happened. But I could see it as providing some direction and perspective. From that we could draw any number of blueprints usable in a place and time. :)
"Stayed put" is a reasonable outcome of the efforts of the guys and gals in Jerusalem. Some people would determine to "go", be involved in "outreach" efforts as they were inspired to do so. The vast majority of people would stay right where they were and form the church communities we see forming, Corinth, Ephesus, etc. etc. The passion to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ would reach out to the individual first and then out from them as a natural result. That's what seemed to be in high profile in Acts.
I don't see that they do or they don't. For a time, many possibilities could be appropriate or even just worth trying if that's what someone wanted to do. As a final, one-way only modus operandi, no. Right for everyone regardless - no. It's clearly not an exact replication of anything we see in the New Testament so to promote is as such would be wrong.
Tyrannus and what Paul and the people did there is an interesting effort and time to examine. Low-cost, low-overhead, a regular daily concentrated effort amongst a group of interested people. From out of that the entire province heard the gospel, so it's reasonable to assume there was some coming and going over the two year span of time. I agree it was based locally, a community effort rooted in a location and people. They "reasoned", disputed. Something like the Way Corps would be similar but not the same.
There's no indication that people quit something, left what they were doing and signed on to a program for a period of time to a selective program of study or work. For some that may have been the case, it would be hard to say. They did leave one environment that wasn't conducive to continued focused endeavor and set up in another that was, we know that. The "hall" of Tyrannus seems to have been a lecture hall for open discussion and rhetorical debate in the city of Ephesus. Paul in fact left the synagogue, a closed environment that was resistant to what he was doing and took his work into the public eyes and minds of the world at that time. So, there are definite contrasts to that and the Farm in New Knoxville. He started with a "core" group of people that wanted to pursue their work, together.
In a way though he left one group of adamantly opposed people and opened the doors to another, but one that wouldn't oppose his teaching on a strict religious foundation. But it wasn't done behind a curtain or behind closed doors, it was in the open for the world to see, hear, listen, discuss and judge for themselves. It's basic, common sense. If you're not making any headway in one place, try another. In that way God's inspiration to Paul might have been more to overcome his personal inclination to go to the Jews first and foremost and fully embrace the world as his field to work in.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Yeah.......the study of Paul and Tyrannus is intriguing.
Open discussion and rhetorical debate in Paul's day, where interested participants could freely come and go at will.......is MILES APART from twi's confining, legalistic, regimentation of a "spiritual" marine corps. Perhaps, the first three or four corps had limited access to *open discussion* with wierwille, but I seriously doubt it. Notwithstanding the fact that as the corps numbers swelled to say, 345..........by 1980, the corps program was a herding process, imo.
It's clear to me............EVERYTHING I LEARNED FROM TWI IS SUSPECT.
And, in the latest attempt at "tyrannus"........the S.O.W.E.R.S program, linked to CFF, is trying to re-address the wierwille model of corps "training" and do it right this time. Yet, the isolated farm in the state of Mississippi....far from the concept of a "lecture hall" in tyrannus....should send red flags to anyone who knows scripture.
Maybe.........GreaseSpot Cafe is the nearest thing I'm ever going to find in OPEN DISCUSSION and DEBATE.
:)
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.