A "splinter" is one that retains some of the qualities/doctrines of the original. If they hold fast to the old Way theology or promote a lifestyle that mimics The Way, to my thinking, that would qualify them as a splinter.
A "splinter" is one that retains some of the qualities/doctrines of the original. If they hold fast to the old Way theology or promote a lifestyle that mimics The Way, to my thinking, that would qualify them as a splinter.
So far, it seems every time someone ex-twi has set up another religious group,
it's resembled twi in any number of ALARMING things,
like the authoritative leader, lack of accountability,
making a profit, etc.
This shouldn't be terribly shocking. There's a reason that the saying is
well-known: Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who don't "purge their systems" of twi poison end up perpetuating
the system, like an abused child can become an abuser if they don't
get help and get rid of toxic ideas, toxic behavior....
I guess that accounts for some of the (seeming) blanket use of the term. It would appear that since doctrinal issues can be subjective to a marked degree, that criteria alone could cause the label to be applied by someone who disagrees with doctrinal points. I guess with me some biblical doctrines taught in TWI are acceptable since I can follow along in the bible and see the proof. Many things aren't and require significant scripture stretching to get them to "fit." I guess in the end it comes back to not really caring too much about labels because the fruit produced is the biggest indicator. VPW was a charlatan and worse. But he ripped off works that other very brilliant people produced. Bullinger is a prime example. Was he totally right? Nope. Was he brilliant in some topics? Yep. Can he be discounted because his ideals clash with others more established positions? Yep. Then it begs the question, was Charles Welsch a splinter group leader, and so it goes. I am of Paul, I am of Appolos.
The whole idea of committing myself to a ministry is in itself ant-Christian since Christians are suppose to make Christ Lord! I digress and ramble.
The whole idea of committing myself to a ministry is in itself ant-Christian since Christians are suppose to make Christ Lord!
I think that's more the point than doctrinally what they believe. There's a zillion (ok, that may be exaggerated there) different beliefs people end up coming to after leaving, but to start your own group.. Yeah.. That's divisive to start with. If there was anything I gained from my TWI experience, it was realizing that we are all accountable to God as an individual, and not men. And any man/woman trying to set themselves up as head over a group, just doesn't cut it when Christ SHOULD have taken that position.. For the head of man is Christ.. Not another man..
Matthew 20:25 "But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the rulers of the Gentiles have influence over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall NOT be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your servant; And whosoever will be first among you, let him be your servant: Even as the Son of man came not to be served, but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.
I think the kind of lifestyle we lived had a far greater impact on us than such things as the "4 crucified with Christ" type teachings we heard. All the talk about consequences from non-compliance. That's where the splinter label comes into play. They still teach "follow the leader" and promote an organizational form that is hierarchial by nature.
I guess some of the more non impacting doctrinal issues, such as 4 crucified, were like candy sprinkles on a cake. But boy were they dangled as being SO important.
I guess some of the more non impacting doctrinal issues, such as 4 crucified, were like candy sprinkles on a cake. But boy were they dangled as being SO important.
It may be interesting to note that the term "splinter" group also aligns with the analogy of TWI being structured like a tree, twigs, "I am a leaf on a mighty tree", etc., etc., etc.
My definition is a bit looser - anyone who was in TWI and went off an started their own group because they just couldn't deal with the doctrinal differences of already established churches.
A "splinter" is one that retains some of the qualities/doctrines of the original.
For that reason........I have often said that wierwille's twi is a SPLINTER of BG Leonard's ministry.
1) From Rev. Leonard, wierwille incorporated A CLASS-STRUCTURED MINISTRY.
2) From Rev. Leonard, wierwille stole the foundational class and taught it as his own.
3) From Rev. Leonard, wierwille focused more intently on the gifts/manifestations of holy spirit.
4) From Rev. Leonard's publications of Canadian Christian Press, wierwille goes with American Christian Press.
Class registration, class set-up, regulations and rules, class picture, etc......wierwille reframed his church approach to a class approach throughout his ministry. One could easily argue that BG Leonard's ministry and work was the prototype, of which, wierwille spent the rest of his life copying.
My definition is a bit looser - anyone who was in TWI and went off an started their own group because they just couldn't deal with the doctrinal differences of already established churches.
I also thing that there is a huge amount of ego at work within that idea...I dont know where people get off coming out of a failed system, and then deciding to start their own 'ministry' with only TWI's failed system as a point of reference....but they do.
IMO its basically egotism by people who are afraid to get real jobs.
I know that there are some who after TWI have gone to legitimate schools and seminaries and been ordained into different established denominations...(Plotinus who used to come here is a Presbyterian minister).. I can respect that and dont consider them splinters but they are the rare exceptions rather than the rule.
In my opinion a splinter or offshoot is founded by ex-twi folks with part of the motivation being to "get back to the Word" that supposedly was no longer part of twi proper. I would view a group as a splinter also if it was started as more a less a haven for people leaving twi. Due to these two foundations, a splinter would resemble twi in some fashion, either doctrinally or organizationally. While some of the splinters question twi doctrine and practice to some degree, some acceptance of twi's basics appears to be a given.
I would agree with Oakspear. It's not as if the new groups attempt to mimic the Roman Catholic church or some other "orthodox" group. Anyone who wanted to go back to that after leaving TWI would have no trouble finding a church to attend.
Well, as many bones as I have to pick with the way international, they are not 100% wrong. Their own teachings on how the "value and delusion of the counterfeit is increased by it's nearness to the likeness of the original" testify against them. I have narrowed my definition of splinter group a little to be a little more in line with what Wordwolf and waysider said to begin with. I don't expect everyone else to do the same. I also agree with Skyrider, that Wierwille is an off shoot of Leonard. I guess to me the fruits produced have to be the indicator of off shoot, since to me the term implies false ministry, led by false ministers. I respect others application of the definition and the differing view points in how it's applied.
I think that's one of the things that makes Grease Spot somewhat unique is many of us left the same way international mold and have gone in so many different directions. Yet we are still able to come together for a common good.
Well, as many bones as I have to pick with the way international, they are not 100% wrong. Their own teachings on how the "value and delusion of the counterfeit is increased by it's nearness to the likeness of the original" testify against them. I have narrowed my definition of splinter group a little to be a little more in line with what Wordwolf and waysider said to begin with. I don't expect everyone else to do the same. I also agree with Skyrider, that Wierwille is an off shoot of Leonard. I guess to me the fruits produced have to be the indicator of off shoot, since to me the term implies false ministry, led by false ministers. I respect others application of the definition and the differing view points in how it's applied.
I think that's one of the things that makes Grease Spot somewhat unique is many of us left the same way international mold and have gone in so many different directions. Yet we are still able to come together for a common good.
Of course TWI and the splinters are not 100% wrong - that would be (relatively) easy to spot. If one accepts TWI's basic premises in how it came to believe there were 4 others crucified and all the other "errors" in orthodox belief pointed out in the foundational class, it becomes pretty hard to deny that it's all there for the learning. Those points, which are rather trivial (IMO), are the bait that sucks one in. Bait doesn't have to be big - just enticing and enough to cover the hook. I don't know if it was all intentional or not, but once one starts down that path, it's pretty hard to extricate oneself from that line of thinking, particularly after the inevitable censoring of any sort of critical thinking.
This is what sucked me in and kept me in a splinter for a lot longer than I was ever in TWI - the premise that the NT was "scripture" and therefore "god-breathed" and "inerrant" and "can't contradict itself" and that orthodox churches had lost that connection - and here's the undeniable "proof". I firmly believed that until late 2002, even as I was actively attending a regular church. As I attended church, the differences became non-issues as I became less enamored with the need to feel like I had to be aligned with an organization who needed to be right at the expense of every other organization. For me that was the key - they ALL think they're right, but at least Presbyterians don't feel the need to continually castigate every other organization for perceived errors in understanding, and that was refreshing. It didn't hurt that CES became quirkier and more set in its ways as time went on. In the beginning there was a lot more freedom to think and speculate, but as it developed its own doctrines apart from TWI, it became more like TWI when defending its doctrines. I was done with all of that and I really didn't want to be around it anymore.
The mental gymnastics that it takes to accept the "can't contradict itself" part forces one into leaning on others for the necessary understanding of all the other crap TWI and the splinters teach, because even a non-critical reader can see that the text contradicts itself all over the place, which is vehemently denied by TWI and every splinter. It takes someone who is really good at bending logic without making it obvious to keep people blind to the glaring inconsistencies. VPW was really good at it; LCM was not. CES is pretty good at it until one strips away all the premises that must be adhered to in order to accept the logic.
None of that matters anymore. For me, it all boils down to how people are treated. I can't speak about any other splinter, but how TWI and then CES treated people was what ultimately turned me against them. When the idea of being "Christlike" is basically treating everyone else (including followers) like idiots or moneychangers, that's the kind of "Christ" I can do without.
None of that matters anymore. For me, it all boils down to how people are treated. I can't speak about any other splinter, but how TWI and then CES treated people was what ultimately turned me against them. When the idea of being "Christlike" is basically treating everyone else (including followers) like idiots or moneychangers, that's the kind of "Christ" I can do without.
EXACTLY. If an organization treats people (the children of God) like crap it's a pretty good indicator that the place isn't godly. I got out of twi for precisely that reason. I decided then and there that if twi treated people that way then there had to be something fundamentally wrong with their doctrine - even if it was just that they didn't LOVE THEIR NEIGHBOR AS THEMSELVES. Therefore, if any group was based on twi doctrine (which was fundamentally flawed) then that doctrine had to be flawed as well. And if the doctrine is that wrong, then the way they treated people had to be screwed up.
Bottom line for me: Love God, love your neighbor... you do those two things, the rest doesn't really matter. twi didn't follow those two commandments - and it doesn't look like their splinters do either.
This might sound a bit familiar: but "what's the heart behind it?"
If genuinely to help and genuinely to instruct and explore the Bible and its application, does that make it a splinter? Especially if, as one explores, one allows one's mind to change? And what is the attitude towards others of the wider Christian body?
If it's to show off one's own views/knowledge and appear more superior to some people, that's different, isn't it?
And what about ... money? Is it demanded - offered - accepted? What is any money used for?
Others above have commented on the way the group treats people. So important! Does it compel, or does it guide and exhort? Is there a sense of guilt in doing or not doing something? Or is genuine choice acceptable? Are participants free to leave if they want? Or are their activities subtly or not so subtly controlled (ie, beyond the bounds of reasonable)?
There were some genuinely good people in TWI, often trained as Corps, but without the meanness some here have endured. If those people start fellowships in their homes, are those groups "splinters" or are they just - church in the home?
Recommended Posts
waysider
A "splinter" is one that retains some of the qualities/doctrines of the original. If they hold fast to the old Way theology or promote a lifestyle that mimics The Way, to my thinking, that would qualify them as a splinter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
So far, it seems every time someone ex-twi has set up another religious group,
it's resembled twi in any number of ALARMING things,
like the authoritative leader, lack of accountability,
making a profit, etc.
This shouldn't be terribly shocking. There's a reason that the saying is
well-known: Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who don't "purge their systems" of twi poison end up perpetuating
the system, like an abused child can become an abuser if they don't
get help and get rid of toxic ideas, toxic behavior....
Edited by WordWolfLink to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Thanks again!
I guess that accounts for some of the (seeming) blanket use of the term. It would appear that since doctrinal issues can be subjective to a marked degree, that criteria alone could cause the label to be applied by someone who disagrees with doctrinal points. I guess with me some biblical doctrines taught in TWI are acceptable since I can follow along in the bible and see the proof. Many things aren't and require significant scripture stretching to get them to "fit." I guess in the end it comes back to not really caring too much about labels because the fruit produced is the biggest indicator. VPW was a charlatan and worse. But he ripped off works that other very brilliant people produced. Bullinger is a prime example. Was he totally right? Nope. Was he brilliant in some topics? Yep. Can he be discounted because his ideals clash with others more established positions? Yep. Then it begs the question, was Charles Welsch a splinter group leader, and so it goes. I am of Paul, I am of Appolos.
The whole idea of committing myself to a ministry is in itself ant-Christian since Christians are suppose to make Christ Lord! I digress and ramble.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TrustAndObey
I think that's more the point than doctrinally what they believe. There's a zillion (ok, that may be exaggerated there) different beliefs people end up coming to after leaving, but to start your own group.. Yeah.. That's divisive to start with. If there was anything I gained from my TWI experience, it was realizing that we are all accountable to God as an individual, and not men. And any man/woman trying to set themselves up as head over a group, just doesn't cut it when Christ SHOULD have taken that position.. For the head of man is Christ.. Not another man..
Matthew 20:25 "But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the rulers of the Gentiles have influence over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall NOT be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your servant; And whosoever will be first among you, let him be your servant: Even as the Son of man came not to be served, but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I think the kind of lifestyle we lived had a far greater impact on us than such things as the "4 crucified with Christ" type teachings we heard. All the talk about consequences from non-compliance. That's where the splinter label comes into play. They still teach "follow the leader" and promote an organizational form that is hierarchial by nature.
Oh, and don't forget to send money.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Great points!
I guess some of the more non impacting doctrinal issues, such as 4 crucified, were like candy sprinkles on a cake. But boy were they dangled as being SO important.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
It may be interesting to note that the term "splinter" group also aligns with the analogy of TWI being structured like a tree, twigs, "I am a leaf on a mighty tree", etc., etc., etc.
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
My definition is a bit looser - anyone who was in TWI and went off an started their own group because they just couldn't deal with the doctrinal differences of already established churches.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
For that reason........I have often said that wierwille's twi is a SPLINTER of BG Leonard's ministry.
1) From Rev. Leonard, wierwille incorporated A CLASS-STRUCTURED MINISTRY.
2) From Rev. Leonard, wierwille stole the foundational class and taught it as his own.
3) From Rev. Leonard, wierwille focused more intently on the gifts/manifestations of holy spirit.
4) From Rev. Leonard's publications of Canadian Christian Press, wierwille goes with American Christian Press.
Class registration, class set-up, regulations and rules, class picture, etc......wierwille reframed his church approach to a class approach throughout his ministry. One could easily argue that BG Leonard's ministry and work was the prototype, of which, wierwille spent the rest of his life copying.
<_<
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
I also thing that there is a huge amount of ego at work within that idea...I dont know where people get off coming out of a failed system, and then deciding to start their own 'ministry' with only TWI's failed system as a point of reference....but they do.
IMO its basically egotism by people who are afraid to get real jobs.
I know that there are some who after TWI have gone to legitimate schools and seminaries and been ordained into different established denominations...(Plotinus who used to come here is a Presbyterian minister).. I can respect that and dont consider them splinters but they are the rare exceptions rather than the rule.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
In my opinion a splinter or offshoot is founded by ex-twi folks with part of the motivation being to "get back to the Word" that supposedly was no longer part of twi proper. I would view a group as a splinter also if it was started as more a less a haven for people leaving twi. Due to these two foundations, a splinter would resemble twi in some fashion, either doctrinally or organizationally. While some of the splinters question twi doctrine and practice to some degree, some acceptance of twi's basics appears to be a given.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
I would agree with Oakspear. It's not as if the new groups attempt to mimic the Roman Catholic church or some other "orthodox" group. Anyone who wanted to go back to that after leaving TWI would have no trouble finding a church to attend.
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Well, as many bones as I have to pick with the way international, they are not 100% wrong. Their own teachings on how the "value and delusion of the counterfeit is increased by it's nearness to the likeness of the original" testify against them. I have narrowed my definition of splinter group a little to be a little more in line with what Wordwolf and waysider said to begin with. I don't expect everyone else to do the same. I also agree with Skyrider, that Wierwille is an off shoot of Leonard. I guess to me the fruits produced have to be the indicator of off shoot, since to me the term implies false ministry, led by false ministers. I respect others application of the definition and the differing view points in how it's applied.
I think that's one of the things that makes Grease Spot somewhat unique is many of us left the same way international mold and have gone in so many different directions. Yet we are still able to come together for a common good.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
Of course TWI and the splinters are not 100% wrong - that would be (relatively) easy to spot. If one accepts TWI's basic premises in how it came to believe there were 4 others crucified and all the other "errors" in orthodox belief pointed out in the foundational class, it becomes pretty hard to deny that it's all there for the learning. Those points, which are rather trivial (IMO), are the bait that sucks one in. Bait doesn't have to be big - just enticing and enough to cover the hook. I don't know if it was all intentional or not, but once one starts down that path, it's pretty hard to extricate oneself from that line of thinking, particularly after the inevitable censoring of any sort of critical thinking.
This is what sucked me in and kept me in a splinter for a lot longer than I was ever in TWI - the premise that the NT was "scripture" and therefore "god-breathed" and "inerrant" and "can't contradict itself" and that orthodox churches had lost that connection - and here's the undeniable "proof". I firmly believed that until late 2002, even as I was actively attending a regular church. As I attended church, the differences became non-issues as I became less enamored with the need to feel like I had to be aligned with an organization who needed to be right at the expense of every other organization. For me that was the key - they ALL think they're right, but at least Presbyterians don't feel the need to continually castigate every other organization for perceived errors in understanding, and that was refreshing. It didn't hurt that CES became quirkier and more set in its ways as time went on. In the beginning there was a lot more freedom to think and speculate, but as it developed its own doctrines apart from TWI, it became more like TWI when defending its doctrines. I was done with all of that and I really didn't want to be around it anymore.
The mental gymnastics that it takes to accept the "can't contradict itself" part forces one into leaning on others for the necessary understanding of all the other crap TWI and the splinters teach, because even a non-critical reader can see that the text contradicts itself all over the place, which is vehemently denied by TWI and every splinter. It takes someone who is really good at bending logic without making it obvious to keep people blind to the glaring inconsistencies. VPW was really good at it; LCM was not. CES is pretty good at it until one strips away all the premises that must be adhered to in order to accept the logic.
None of that matters anymore. For me, it all boils down to how people are treated. I can't speak about any other splinter, but how TWI and then CES treated people was what ultimately turned me against them. When the idea of being "Christlike" is basically treating everyone else (including followers) like idiots or moneychangers, that's the kind of "Christ" I can do without.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JavaJane
EXACTLY. If an organization treats people (the children of God) like crap it's a pretty good indicator that the place isn't godly. I got out of twi for precisely that reason. I decided then and there that if twi treated people that way then there had to be something fundamentally wrong with their doctrine - even if it was just that they didn't LOVE THEIR NEIGHBOR AS THEMSELVES. Therefore, if any group was based on twi doctrine (which was fundamentally flawed) then that doctrine had to be flawed as well. And if the doctrine is that wrong, then the way they treated people had to be screwed up.
Bottom line for me: Love God, love your neighbor... you do those two things, the rest doesn't really matter. twi didn't follow those two commandments - and it doesn't look like their splinters do either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
This might sound a bit familiar: but "what's the heart behind it?"
If genuinely to help and genuinely to instruct and explore the Bible and its application, does that make it a splinter? Especially if, as one explores, one allows one's mind to change? And what is the attitude towards others of the wider Christian body?
If it's to show off one's own views/knowledge and appear more superior to some people, that's different, isn't it?
And what about ... money? Is it demanded - offered - accepted? What is any money used for?
Others above have commented on the way the group treats people. So important! Does it compel, or does it guide and exhort? Is there a sense of guilt in doing or not doing something? Or is genuine choice acceptable? Are participants free to leave if they want? Or are their activities subtly or not so subtly controlled (ie, beyond the bounds of reasonable)?
There were some genuinely good people in TWI, often trained as Corps, but without the meanness some here have endured. If those people start fellowships in their homes, are those groups "splinters" or are they just - church in the home?
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.