To add - I think a lot of "Christianity" becomes too focused on the process instead of the end result. We get knit picky about doing every little thing right and getting lined up correctly at the Door and forget we're supposed to be inside the House, so to speak. Living the relationship. It's as if we want to be experts at the process, when the process is one that really involves living the reality we're in. Absent - present - all of that - if we're actually living and experiencing our relationship with God through Christ that doesn't make sense.
Even in the Old Testament, one finds that the Most High set his heart upon his people to treat them with lovingkindness and mercy. The Lord's portion is his people and he kept them as the apple of his eye. Living the relationship is one wherein Jehovah prepared for his own and desired for a relationship to be.
The living sacrifice of Christ, as the passover lamb for the beloved, took this relationship to another level. Behold, what manner of love the Father bestowed upon those who should be called, and are known as, the sons of God. The simplicity that is in this relationship, in Christ, is notably detailed in the gospel of John...
Experiencing the relationship
1) I am the bread of life [6:35]
2) I am the light of the world [8:12]
3) I am the door of the sheep [10:7]
4) I am the good shepherd [10:11]
5) I am the resurrection and the life [11:25]
6) I am the way, the truth, and the life [14:6]
7) I am the true vine and my Father is the husbandman [15:1]
Heavy emphasis on the law of believing, name it and claim it concepts. E.W. Kenyon is one of the originators. Much of it resembles the first few sessions of PFAL (IMO).
T-Bone, I understand what you're saying. And it's one of the most confounding things that in the midst of all of that read the bible, read the bible read the danged bible clatter that the very people saying it and reading it could become afraid that the "living" Christ will somehow possess them and be of the wrong "god", even a "Jesus" spirit speaking of the Advanced Class....
wow! a tremendous point Socks and very insightful !
....uhm... in defense of my rants i just gotta say....i've got a feeling i was probably a lot more way-brained than some folks
you talking about an Advanced-Class-based fear of a Jesus spirit - got me thinking about the challenge of thinking outside the box [the theological box that is]....a bigger obstacle than that is just being aware that there is a box....i wasn't very good at thinking outside the box in way days and used to believe the only outlook to have was the way mindset.
perhaps after leaving and then discovering a freedom to explore my faith it was maybe a little like a Lazarus experience - Jesus Christ was standing outside the box, addressing me by name and said "come forth !".
Great comments on this thread. It is a very telling contrast between what TWI teaches about the Word taking the place of the absent Christ, and the crux of Christianity being the very present Christ. It is absolutely the belief of the false prophets at the top of TWI that since the "Word" (i.e. their mandates) takes the place of Christ that is at the center of their abuse and control.
Their arrogance will be dealt with through Him to whom every knee shall bow and every tongue confess.
In our day and time let's enjoy the very present Christ.
Perhaps that A.C. stuff about the "Jesus" spirit, one that impersonates The Lord Jesus Christ, whispering false revelation in your ear, kept you from listening and obeying the very real revelation/inspiration/whatever you want to call it that Holy Spirit really was telling you, and listen to the "teacher" instead?
perhaps after leaving and then discovering a freedom to explore my faith it was maybe a little like a Lazarus experience - Jesus Christ was standing outside the box, addressing me by name and said "come forth !".
Now this is a bit of a digression, but not really "off topic" as this thread currently stands.
Hmm...I really don't remember this "absent Christ" stuff. To the best of my recollection, I heard it here. But no doubt a heap of you will tell me what session it appeared in, or some such. Was I actually asleep in class every time that bit came past? Was it more of a VPW thing than an LCM thing?
But...I do remember feeling I'd lost all "awareness" of Christ - of Jesus - of gospel stories. There surely was an "absence of Christ" within TWI. At some point I came to a realization that I knew very little about him...about his earthly life...as a coherent thing. Just the odd sliver like sending out two-by-two, or harvest is plenteous. I'm ashamed to say, I emerged from the Way Corps having almost completely forgotten about him in any real kind of sense. God-conscious, yes; Christ-conscious - no. Because the gospels were a bit of a no-go area, really, with the greatness of the epistles to be studied and expanded.... (yawn).
...I emerged from the Way Corps having almost completely forgotten about him in any real kind of sense. God-conscious, yes; Christ-conscious - no. Because the gospels were a bit of a no-go area, really, with the greatness of the epistles to be studied and expanded.... (yawn).
And, that's why twi has Way Disciples......not Disciples of Christ.
Peter told Simon, "Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God . . . I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity" Pretty harsh words. If one believes we are harsh here about VP....check out Irenaeus sometime...I think he called Simon the father of all heretics.
Irenaeus said that? He lived about 100 years after Simon. Is this something you learned in a Church History course? I find that very interesting.
Now this is a bit of a digression, but not really "off topic" as this thread currently stands.
Hmm...I really don't remember this "absent Christ" stuff. To the best of my recollection, I heard it here. But no doubt a heap of you will tell me what session it appeared in, or some such. Was I actually asleep in class every time that bit came past? Was it more of a VPW thing than an LCM thing?
I remember if from the PFAL Book. The quote goes something like, "The Word takes the place of the absent Christ, and the spirit takes the place of...."(and I can't remember what it said after that). I'm not sure what session it's in. It's in other writings as well.
Irenaeus said that? He lived about 100 years after Simon. Is this something you learned in a Church History course? I find that very interesting.
I read it somewhere? He did not like him. It would not be too difficult to look it up and the writings are online if you are interested in them. Irenaeus had plenty to say about these guys...and none of it was forgiving, kind, charitable, or subtle. The same group of churches Simon started were still around when Iranaeus was around. Simon had students and followers. It was huge. Iranaeus was a student of Polycarp....Polycarp was with the Apostle John, so we are not talking about a long time here. It would be like your father passing on something your grandfather told you.
Then again, I could have it mixed up. :)
John Piper does a really nice job refuting the prosperity gospel...some here may disagree with him, but I think there are some good points in here. He makes a few leaps, but I identify with what he says.
"Battle of the Senses" Twinkster, senses versus faith.
The basis for the statement and the logic is around these statements -
that man needs a point of reference outside himself for learning - and that -
truth needs a center of reference which is not the man seeking- and -
the revelation of the Bible is necessary to the senses man to be complete.
The Word takes the place of the absent Christ.
The Holy Spirit takes the place of Christ in the Word in us.
...the second statement is out right strange both in it's use of upper case H and S (in light of what PFAL teaches to that topic) and "takes the place of Christ in the Word in us"...........dunno, it simply doesn't make sense. I never tried to understand them specifically because in the context of the material in that section it's not as pie-in-the-sky as that sounds. It's simply saying that a physical man needs a physical point of reference to go to, that speaks to him, that he can initially understand and relate to. Christ was a man, the Bible is a book - stuff, human stuff we see, read, hear, etc.
I guess it could be phrased - how does a human find out the kind of detail that they'd read in the Bible - without the Bible to state it?
To me it's not an unreasonable premise, it's really just restating the basis for the continuation of Christianity over the last several hundred years moving forward from the initial verbal witness of the first couple generations of followers that was passed on and written as time went on.
But - if that was the entire premise of PFAL it would be wrong, point blank. The bible is not all there is to this life in Christ - it's a part, an important essential part but if there was no Bible tomorrow God's hands wouldn't be tied. But there's other stuff in PFAL that speaks to the spiritual realities that exist and occur too.
I've said before it's convoluted - it is, partly because I think looking back that VPW went way out into areas he hadn't mastered himself. I give him more credit than is popular here - I feel he had a sense of what needed to be understood but took too much in too fast and ran it back out too fast in PFAL and his effort to have The Way ministry - once it was lodged in stone it didn't have the opportunity to improve and change in the fundamentals, he was simply to dogmatic in his desire to hold to certain things as "foundational principles" that had to be maintained or "the whole Bible would fall to pieces". That's not true at all.
That would give my old homies conniptions to read that I'm sure but I really don't mean it as an insult. Over 40 years on now many of us have had more time at it than he did, up to that point and had his stuff to start with and go forward from. So I don't think it's out of line at all, it's just honest. I'd expect understanding to increase, and if that changes what "VPW said", so be it.
I read it somewhere? He did not like him. It would not be too difficult to look it up and the writings are online if you are interested in them. Irenaeus had plenty to say about these guys...and none of it was forgiving, kind, charitable, or subtle. The same group of churches Simon started were still around when Iranaeus was around. Simon had students and followers. It was huge. Iranaeus was a student of Polycarp....Polycarp was with the Apostle John, so we are not talking about a long time here. It would be like your father passing on something your grandfather told you.
Then again, I could have it mixed up. :)
John Piper does a really nice job refuting the prosperity gospel...some here may disagree with him, but I think there are some good points in here. He makes a few leaps, but I identify with what he says.
Thanks for your long post, Socks. Funny what you forget. I remember this :
that man needs a point of reference outside himself for learning - and that -
truth needs a center of reference which is not the man seeking- and -
But not this:
the revelation of the Bible is necessary to the senses man to be complete.
The Word takes the place of the absent Christ.
The Holy Spirit takes the place of Christ in the Word in us.
Perhaps that "absent Christ" stuff simply got "mislaid" because I heard so many times, "Christ in you, the hope of glory" so I never formed a sense of "absent Chjrist." I would imagine Jesus sitting beside me or walking beside me at times of difficulty. Explaining a better way to do things.
You also said this:
I've said before it's convoluted - it is, partly because I think looking back that VPW went way out into areas he hadn't mastered himself. I give him more credit than is popular here - I feel he had a sense of what needed to be understood but took too much in too fast and ran it back out too fast in PFAL and his effort to have The Way ministry - once it was lodged in stone it didn't have the opportunity to improve and change in the fundamentals, he was simply to dogmatic in his desire to hold to certain things as "foundational principles" that had to be maintained or "the whole Bible would fall to pieces". That's not true at all.
This from a "research" ministry that claimed it would change if Bible research showed errors in what they taught. We all know that didn't happen. No meekness - despite demanding that of others.
There are aspects here that I am still confused about but I don't find much help from Church theology.
But when it all gets too complicated, I just think, God looks on the heart, and as long as I keep it simple and try to do the best I can and try not to disappear into flights of "head knowledge" - God'll cover for where I'm wrong and will show me sooner or later where I'm wrong.
I heard something startling recently. Might start a topic in Doctrinal about it.
I've said before it's convoluted - it is, partly because I think looking back that VPW went way out into areas he hadn't mastered himself. I give him more credit than is popular here - I feel he had a sense of what needed to be understood but took too much in too fast and ran it back out too fast in PFAL and his effort to have The Way ministry - once it was lodged in stone it didn't have the opportunity to improve and change in the fundamentals, he was simply to dogmatic in his desire to hold to certain things as "foundational principles" that had to be maintained or "the whole Bible would fall to pieces". That's not true at all.
Mrs. Wierwille's book, Born Again to Serve, details many of the events, and people, and situations that helped to build wierwille's mystique and ministry.
IMO...."it's convoluted" (twisted/irregular) for several reasons: 1) Much of vpw's research was plagairized/stolen and cherry-picked, 2) After BG's class in 1953, wierwille was still on church payroll until 1957, 3) The "India Itinerary" took a huge chunk of time in planning and traveling (Sept 1955-Apr 1956) and reorientation after, 4) Too many balls in the air to juggle, and 5) Left church pastorate (1957).....five kids, wife, employment?, moved in 1962 to wierwille farm.....and a class-based ministry (pfal) was wierwille's plan for his future.
Therefore.....by 1967, pfal was "etched in stone." The class WAS the foundation of vpw's ministry....and no future research was going to undo it. But if it was "so great"....one has to wonder why did Dr. EE Higgins split? Rosalind Rinker? neighbors? relatives?
Personally, I think those of us that got caught up in the early '70s youth movement, the music, the relationships, the mystique......never REALLY did our own research. Yeah, there was some wheat with the weeds, but the interwoven complexity of disowning our families and "connecting" with twi was based on deception.
Anyhoo......few really care to untangle it all anymore and see it for what it really was. Life moves one..... people move on..... the mystique is all but dead
Acts 8:13 says Simon believed. When Peter said thy money perish with thee in v.20, is it possible that Simon's physical death was to happen not long after? Why would Peter give Simon the option to repent, and why would Simon ask Peter to pray for him if Simon was not saved? Peter was not as merciful with Ananias and Saphirra in Acts 5, who were also saved.
The Holy Spirit takes the place of Christ in the Word in us.
It's obvious that VP meant BODILY absent, not totally absent, and he IS! He told his disciples that it was expedient that he go away. The word that takes the place of the absent Christ includes Jesus, in fact, he's the lynch pin; no Jesus, no salvation. No access to God. No gift of holy spirit. No miracles, no healings.
VP was exhorting us as Christians to get in 'proactive mode' and get ready to go, stand, and speak God's word rather than sit on their butts like the Christians he saw. The world is always coming up with ways to scare Christians out of speaking the word.
In Acts, Peter and John were told not to speak or teach in Jesus' name. This is STILL the devil's will for God's people. They weren't told not to read their bibles. They weren't told not to fellowship together. They weren't told not to pray. They weren't told not to ABS. They were told not to speak.
I think the real aim of the advanced class was to give us the tools to walk with God when speaking the word to others, new people or grads. THAT'S the part that didn't connect. I wasn't around when the word supposedly moved so powerfully in California, New York, Indianapolis, etc. Some of you guys were there. Was there ANYTHING different that stands out? Did the increased numbers just cause everybody to become complacent?
Acts 8:13 says Simon believed. When Peter said thy money perish with thee in v.20, is it possible that Simon's physical death was to happen not long after? Why would Peter give Simon the option to repent, and why would Simon ask Peter to pray for him if Simon was not saved? Peter was not as merciful with Ananias and Saphirra in Acts 5, who were also saved.
Well, you can find people in the church, who do believe the gospel is true, but who do not have faith. One can believe something is true, make a mental assent, agree with all the facts, and yet not have faith. Not be saved. Remember Jesus' warning in Matthew 7:22? It is possible to believe and to even do things in the name of the Lord, miracles even...and still not be known by Him. That is a very sobering passage of scripture. I understand that what I am saying may seem confusing, especially given our foundational understanding of believing vs faith, however, it is all tied into who we place our faith in.
Simon did not die shortly after his encounter with Peter. Simon went on to other things. He started his own group and took many people from the church with him. Even separating myth from history, we do know a bit about Simon Magus. The father of gnosticism? We can actually piece together some of his doctrine. His following was huge. Looking at his doctrine, at what Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian and others wrote about him....we can at the least begin to understand he was not a church member in good standing. Simon and his followers were a very strong presence and they were despised.
It is actually an interesting thing to look at the heresies of the early church and compare them to what we were taught in PFAL. It causes one to evaluate what team we were batting for. Those heresies have not disappeared...they just get repackaged.
Simon was not saved, but we can ALWAYS repent Johniam. God is merciful and gracious. Of course what Peter said unnerved Simon. It was harsh, but it was also merciful. I would be asking for an Apostle who said that directly to me to pray for me. Yikes!
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
17
12
15
12
Popular Days
Mar 20
26
Mar 28
18
Mar 21
14
Mar 22
12
Top Posters In This Topic
johniam 17 posts
T-Bone 12 posts
geisha779 15 posts
waysider 12 posts
Popular Days
Mar 20 2011
26 posts
Mar 28 2011
18 posts
Mar 21 2011
14 posts
Mar 22 2011
12 posts
Popular Posts
hiway29
I have to say that in my experience, sitting through pfal over an absurd 50 times, 'instructing' 2 classes, 'undersheperding' I forget how many people,-the overwhelming atmosphere through the vast ma
Broken Arrow
Well, for starters Jesus lives in those who are born again, "Christ in you..."; He is also with us, "I am with you always" and "I will never leave you or forsake you", he is seated at the right hand
socks
I don't understand why anyone (like the examples you gave johniam) would follow the same series format as PFAL or would have something like an "advanced class". Advanced - compared to what? At what?
Ham
I think in the old *ministry*.. it wasn't an absent Christ doctrine. Perhaps He was just not welcome at da way..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Even in the Old Testament, one finds that the Most High set his heart upon his people to treat them with lovingkindness and mercy. The Lord's portion is his people and he kept them as the apple of his eye. Living the relationship is one wherein Jehovah prepared for his own and desired for a relationship to be.
The living sacrifice of Christ, as the passover lamb for the beloved, took this relationship to another level. Behold, what manner of love the Father bestowed upon those who should be called, and are known as, the sons of God. The simplicity that is in this relationship, in Christ, is notably detailed in the gospel of John...
Experiencing the relationship
1) I am the bread of life [6:35]
2) I am the light of the world [8:12]
3) I am the door of the sheep [10:7]
4) I am the good shepherd [10:11]
5) I am the resurrection and the life [11:25]
6) I am the way, the truth, and the life [14:6]
7) I am the true vine and my Father is the husbandman [15:1]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Word_of_Faith
Heavy emphasis on the law of believing, name it and claim it concepts. E.W. Kenyon is one of the originators. Much of it resembles the first few sessions of PFAL (IMO).
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
....uhm... in defense of my rants i just gotta say....i've got a feeling i was probably a lot more way-brained than some folks
you talking about an Advanced-Class-based fear of a Jesus spirit - got me thinking about the challenge of thinking outside the box [the theological box that is]....a bigger obstacle than that is just being aware that there is a box....i wasn't very good at thinking outside the box in way days and used to believe the only outlook to have was the way mindset.
perhaps after leaving and then discovering a freedom to explore my faith it was maybe a little like a Lazarus experience - Jesus Christ was standing outside the box, addressing me by name and said "come forth !".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Great comments on this thread. It is a very telling contrast between what TWI teaches about the Word taking the place of the absent Christ, and the crux of Christianity being the very present Christ. It is absolutely the belief of the false prophets at the top of TWI that since the "Word" (i.e. their mandates) takes the place of Christ that is at the center of their abuse and control.
Their arrogance will be dealt with through Him to whom every knee shall bow and every tongue confess.
In our day and time let's enjoy the very present Christ.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
Perhaps that A.C. stuff about the "Jesus" spirit, one that impersonates The Lord Jesus Christ, whispering false revelation in your ear, kept you from listening and obeying the very real revelation/inspiration/whatever you want to call it that Holy Spirit really was telling you, and listen to the "teacher" instead?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
This made me smile. How wonderfully stated....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Cool, T-Bone! :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Now this is a bit of a digression, but not really "off topic" as this thread currently stands.
Hmm...I really don't remember this "absent Christ" stuff. To the best of my recollection, I heard it here. But no doubt a heap of you will tell me what session it appeared in, or some such. Was I actually asleep in class every time that bit came past? Was it more of a VPW thing than an LCM thing?
But...I do remember feeling I'd lost all "awareness" of Christ - of Jesus - of gospel stories. There surely was an "absence of Christ" within TWI. At some point I came to a realization that I knew very little about him...about his earthly life...as a coherent thing. Just the odd sliver like sending out two-by-two, or harvest is plenteous. I'm ashamed to say, I emerged from the Way Corps having almost completely forgotten about him in any real kind of sense. God-conscious, yes; Christ-conscious - no. Because the gospels were a bit of a no-go area, really, with the greatness of the epistles to be studied and expanded.... (yawn).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
i was lucky enough to hear his voice thank you
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Session #5, if I remember correctly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
And, that's why twi has Way Disciples......not Disciples of Christ.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I hope I can claim the same..
I was "lucky" enough to see everything dissolved, once..
where do we go from here..
am I headed toward the eternal ash heap?
:)
maybe just towards another assignment..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Irenaeus said that? He lived about 100 years after Simon. Is this something you learned in a Church History course? I find that very interesting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
I remember if from the PFAL Book. The quote goes something like, "The Word takes the place of the absent Christ, and the spirit takes the place of...."(and I can't remember what it said after that). I'm not sure what session it's in. It's in other writings as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
I read it somewhere? He did not like him. It would not be too difficult to look it up and the writings are online if you are interested in them. Irenaeus had plenty to say about these guys...and none of it was forgiving, kind, charitable, or subtle. The same group of churches Simon started were still around when Iranaeus was around. Simon had students and followers. It was huge. Iranaeus was a student of Polycarp....Polycarp was with the Apostle John, so we are not talking about a long time here. It would be like your father passing on something your grandfather told you.
Then again, I could have it mixed up. :)
John Piper does a really nice job refuting the prosperity gospel...some here may disagree with him, but I think there are some good points in here. He makes a few leaps, but I identify with what he says.
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/jLRue4nwJaA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
"Battle of the Senses" Twinkster, senses versus faith.
The basis for the statement and the logic is around these statements -
that man needs a point of reference outside himself for learning - and that -
truth needs a center of reference which is not the man seeking - and -
the revelation of the Bible is necessary to the senses man to be complete.
The Word takes the place of the absent Christ.
The Holy Spirit takes the place of Christ in the Word in us.
...the second statement is out right strange both in it's use of upper case H and S (in light of what PFAL teaches to that topic) and "takes the place of Christ in the Word in us"...........dunno, it simply doesn't make sense. I never tried to understand them specifically because in the context of the material in that section it's not as pie-in-the-sky as that sounds. It's simply saying that a physical man needs a physical point of reference to go to, that speaks to him, that he can initially understand and relate to. Christ was a man, the Bible is a book - stuff, human stuff we see, read, hear, etc.
I guess it could be phrased - how does a human find out the kind of detail that they'd read in the Bible - without the Bible to state it?
To me it's not an unreasonable premise, it's really just restating the basis for the continuation of Christianity over the last several hundred years moving forward from the initial verbal witness of the first couple generations of followers that was passed on and written as time went on.
But - if that was the entire premise of PFAL it would be wrong, point blank. The bible is not all there is to this life in Christ - it's a part, an important essential part but if there was no Bible tomorrow God's hands wouldn't be tied. But there's other stuff in PFAL that speaks to the spiritual realities that exist and occur too.
I've said before it's convoluted - it is, partly because I think looking back that VPW went way out into areas he hadn't mastered himself. I give him more credit than is popular here - I feel he had a sense of what needed to be understood but took too much in too fast and ran it back out too fast in PFAL and his effort to have The Way ministry - once it was lodged in stone it didn't have the opportunity to improve and change in the fundamentals, he was simply to dogmatic in his desire to hold to certain things as "foundational principles" that had to be maintained or "the whole Bible would fall to pieces". That's not true at all.
That would give my old homies conniptions to read that I'm sure but I really don't mean it as an insult. Over 40 years on now many of us have had more time at it than he did, up to that point and had his stuff to start with and go forward from. So I don't think it's out of line at all, it's just honest. I'd expect understanding to increase, and if that changes what "VPW said", so be it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Thank you, Geisha. I'll check that out. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Thanks for your long post, Socks. Funny what you forget. I remember this :
that man needs a point of reference outside himself for learning - and that -
truth needs a center of reference which is not the man seeking - and -
But not this:
the revelation of the Bible is necessary to the senses man to be complete.
The Word takes the place of the absent Christ.
The Holy Spirit takes the place of Christ in the Word in us.
Perhaps that "absent Christ" stuff simply got "mislaid" because I heard so many times, "Christ in you, the hope of glory" so I never formed a sense of "absent Chjrist." I would imagine Jesus sitting beside me or walking beside me at times of difficulty. Explaining a better way to do things.
You also said this:
This from a "research" ministry that claimed it would change if Bible research showed errors in what they taught. We all know that didn't happen. No meekness - despite demanding that of others.
There are aspects here that I am still confused about but I don't find much help from Church theology.
But when it all gets too complicated, I just think, God looks on the heart, and as long as I keep it simple and try to do the best I can and try not to disappear into flights of "head knowledge" - God'll cover for where I'm wrong and will show me sooner or later where I'm wrong.
I heard something startling recently. Might start a topic in Doctrinal about it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Mrs. Wierwille's book, Born Again to Serve, details many of the events, and people, and situations that helped to build wierwille's mystique and ministry.
IMO...."it's convoluted" (twisted/irregular) for several reasons: 1) Much of vpw's research was plagairized/stolen and cherry-picked, 2) After BG's class in 1953, wierwille was still on church payroll until 1957, 3) The "India Itinerary" took a huge chunk of time in planning and traveling (Sept 1955-Apr 1956) and reorientation after, 4) Too many balls in the air to juggle, and 5) Left church pastorate (1957).....five kids, wife, employment?, moved in 1962 to wierwille farm.....and a class-based ministry (pfal) was wierwille's plan for his future.
Therefore.....by 1967, pfal was "etched in stone." The class WAS the foundation of vpw's ministry....and no future research was going to undo it. But if it was "so great"....one has to wonder why did Dr. EE Higgins split? Rosalind Rinker? neighbors? relatives?
Personally, I think those of us that got caught up in the early '70s youth movement, the music, the relationships, the mystique......never REALLY did our own research. Yeah, there was some wheat with the weeds, but the interwoven complexity of disowning our families and "connecting" with twi was based on deception.
Anyhoo......few really care to untangle it all anymore and see it for what it really was. Life moves one..... people move on..... the mystique is all but dead
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
the way international is all but dead...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: ....no wonder VP said Simon was saved.
Acts 8:13 says Simon believed. When Peter said thy money perish with thee in v.20, is it possible that Simon's physical death was to happen not long after? Why would Peter give Simon the option to repent, and why would Simon ask Peter to pray for him if Simon was not saved? Peter was not as merciful with Ananias and Saphirra in Acts 5, who were also saved.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote:
The Word takes the place of the absent Christ.
The Holy Spirit takes the place of Christ in the Word in us.
It's obvious that VP meant BODILY absent, not totally absent, and he IS! He told his disciples that it was expedient that he go away. The word that takes the place of the absent Christ includes Jesus, in fact, he's the lynch pin; no Jesus, no salvation. No access to God. No gift of holy spirit. No miracles, no healings.
VP was exhorting us as Christians to get in 'proactive mode' and get ready to go, stand, and speak God's word rather than sit on their butts like the Christians he saw. The world is always coming up with ways to scare Christians out of speaking the word.
In Acts, Peter and John were told not to speak or teach in Jesus' name. This is STILL the devil's will for God's people. They weren't told not to read their bibles. They weren't told not to fellowship together. They weren't told not to pray. They weren't told not to ABS. They were told not to speak.
I think the real aim of the advanced class was to give us the tools to walk with God when speaking the word to others, new people or grads. THAT'S the part that didn't connect. I wasn't around when the word supposedly moved so powerfully in California, New York, Indianapolis, etc. Some of you guys were there. Was there ANYTHING different that stands out? Did the increased numbers just cause everybody to become complacent?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
Well, you can find people in the church, who do believe the gospel is true, but who do not have faith. One can believe something is true, make a mental assent, agree with all the facts, and yet not have faith. Not be saved. Remember Jesus' warning in Matthew 7:22? It is possible to believe and to even do things in the name of the Lord, miracles even...and still not be known by Him. That is a very sobering passage of scripture. I understand that what I am saying may seem confusing, especially given our foundational understanding of believing vs faith, however, it is all tied into who we place our faith in.
Simon did not die shortly after his encounter with Peter. Simon went on to other things. He started his own group and took many people from the church with him. Even separating myth from history, we do know a bit about Simon Magus. The father of gnosticism? We can actually piece together some of his doctrine. His following was huge. Looking at his doctrine, at what Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian and others wrote about him....we can at the least begin to understand he was not a church member in good standing. Simon and his followers were a very strong presence and they were despised.
It is actually an interesting thing to look at the heresies of the early church and compare them to what we were taught in PFAL. It causes one to evaluate what team we were batting for. Those heresies have not disappeared...they just get repackaged.
Simon was not saved, but we can ALWAYS repent Johniam. God is merciful and gracious. Of course what Peter said unnerved Simon. It was harsh, but it was also merciful. I would be asking for an Apostle who said that directly to me to pray for me. Yikes!
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.