But the fellowship is SOOOOOO GOOD! How could it be wrong!?!
Fake friends to fellowship with based on who is in good standing with the organization. When I left TWI I knew hundreds of people. I am not in contact with ANY of them today. They will have nothing to do with me. Good riddance at that.
Fake friends to fellowship with based on who is in good standing with the organization. When I left TWI I knew hundreds of people. I am not in contact with ANY of them today. They will have nothing to do with me. Good riddance at that.
Avast, ye sons of weevils! Money hungering sow's are they! All to a man!
If it's "God's Word", and it's "His Word" and the "Word of God" is what's being taught....
They why the F**K am I or anyone else charging money for it as if it were mine?
It's not mine to sell.
Commerce. It's all commerce. Bid'ness.
You can't say "donation" without saying do nat and that's just what you need to not do - do NAT do dat, sell it.
It's a moral and ethical dilemma, solved by doing the only thing you can do if you want to charge $ for "God's Word" and that is to ignore any and all semblance of honesty and just wallow in the ensuing filth that will be the product of your actions. You will suffer, drown, you will look morally deformed and physically twisted in the end, confused and sadly unable to understand what you did wrong which was no less than trampling on the very thing you sold as sacred. Pretzel logic, hold the salt.
Doesn't even matter if it was or not - selling it as the holy thing, made sacred by the value of those who held it to be so - you're chit up a creek heading for a puddle.
They get better at it though - Jim Bakker's selling generators to the apocalypse now people. Geez, the scrawny little rodent can still look people in the eye - amazing. Osteen's got it down cold. Best show in town. John Lynn - well gawsh, who ever had a bad time hearing Lynn mug his way through his latest 10-step program? Grab a metal chair or a yard of rug and sit your fat a sz down, you paid good money to hear this styro fomic puffed blow hard, so enjoy the blow.
Think right from the beginning when I was being nagged to take PFAL, I asked about this "donation" and said, a donation is a free-will, voluntary, payment. If I don't "donate" can I still take this class?
Of course the answer was no.
So I said, it's not a donation at all, then; it's a charge, a fee.
No, it's a donation.
I only took the class to shut up those pushing me.
And then I felt tricked into something.
And then I tricked myself into continuing for ... years.
"Donation" is now one of those words that causes me to look very narrow-eyed and carefully at what is actually going on. And at what is to become of my "donation." I have to say, I haven't come across it in the Christian context.
"Minimum donation" is perhaps the biggest lie in the game.
Donation, to donate to (something) or on behalf of something, is basically to give a gift. "Charitable donations".
There's as many ways to turn that phrase euphemistically and legally as there are tics on a politician but as widely understood by the average person on the street, it's not the same as a "charge" or a "fee", it's not something being paid in exchange for something else.
The religious casino's that register people for these classes and require a minimum donation of any amount are simply saying that 1. you will need to "donate" to our casino, and you will need to make it no less than a certain amount and you will need to do that before you can get this thing we're offering.
Selling - the correct word then would be that they're selling.
Which goes back to the other big lie, that of selling something that isn't yours. That's called stealing, again in common terms any normal person could understand.
The equation seems to go like this, some math is required:
Count the total number of times these words are used - "God's Word", "matchless", "principles you can use in your daily life from the Bible", "like no other" and "you can't hear this anywhere else"......
Multiply by the number of hours the matchless class runs.....
Add that total then to the number of times you're told how much you need it......
And that will always and without fail - as if by magic - always equal 100% BS.
Never fails.
The sad part of this is seeing how some of our old bud's and budettes have become so cute in their methods of doing this but are really running the same table, year after year. It's all talk though, no game. Somewhere, sometime, at some point, you're going to end up in a chair listening and watching them yap.
Thanks Steve. It's a nail that's gotten a lot of work over the years, that's for sure.
To the tune of "Nobody Does It Better".....Luke 24:
And he said unto them, O foolish men, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!Behooved it not the Christ to suffer these things, and to enter into his glory?And beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
Luke 24 describes the very human followers of Christ and their coming to grips with the resurrected Jesus Christ. Everything that happens after that in their story tells of a group of people who were forever changed. Absolutely, internally, intellectually and emotionally.
It's difficult to imagine them doing something as dishonorable as selling that information to others. Judas is the guy in the tale that sold what he knew and we see where that got him. As forgiven as all but part of a complex road down.
It's easy to accept forgiveness. It can be much more difficult to know what to do with it. I would advise all of us, certainly those making a living off of the Gospel, to give a great deal of thought to what we do in God's Name, and consider what we can learn from this first generation of followers of Christ.
I always bitch about this money deal. The last time I went on a rant about it here somebody wrote me and said I was too uptight about the money and class charges.
Hey - I believe Jesus died for me, my sins and is my Redeemer and very much alive today, albeit not as He was then. So yeah, they're g-dammed right - I get real serious about it.
I accepted this $$ process once as an acceptable means to an end. I stopped thinking that way and I don't do it anymore. It's wrong. Black and white. Boom, that's it. These money sucking tics can do what they want.
Here's something I posted on another thread yesterday:
Here is an excerpt from the Didache, a rule of faith that was very probably composed BEFORE some of the material that made it into the New Testament:
"Chapter 11. Concerning Teachers, Apostles, and Prophets. Whosoever, therefore, comes and teaches you all these things that have been said before, receive him. But if the teacher himself turns and teaches another doctrine to the destruction of this, hear him not. But if he teaches so as to increase righteousness and the knowledge of the Lord, receive him as the Lord. But concerning the apostles and prophets, act according to the decree of the Gospel. Let every apostle who comes to you be received as the Lord. But he shall not remain more than one day; or two days, if there's a need. But if he remains three days, he is a false prophet. And when the apostle goes away, let him take nothing but bread[no money] until he lodges. If he asks for money, he is a false prophet. And every prophet who speaks in the Spirit you shall neither try nor judge; for every sin shall be forgiven, but this sin shall not be forgiven. But not every one who speaks in the Spirit is a prophet; but only if he holds the ways of the Lord. Therefore from their ways shall the false prophet and the prophet be known. And every prophet who orders a meal in the Spirit does not eat it, unless he is indeed a false prophet.[ If a prophets says "The Lord tells me you guys need to provide food", and the guys eats the food he told you to provide, he is a false prophet] And every prophet who teaches the truth, but does not do what he teaches, is a false prophet. And every prophet, proved true, working unto the mystery of the Church in the world, yet not teaching others to do what he himself does, shall not be judged among you, for with God he has his judgment; for so did also the ancient prophets. But whoever says in the Spirit, Give me money, or something else, you shall not listen to him. But if he tells you to give for others' sake who are in need, let no one judge him."
We all know we're human, and the Christian doctrines speaks to sin and the products of it. We believe this life is not the end of the line nor the total sum of the effort.
So - knowing that we are imperfect, saved by grace, new people in Christ and in this life will still see our physical natures tend towards weakness and failure, we - let's say - build a life to strengthen it, protect it and to pursue the best life we can, knowing all the good stuff and all the bad stuff to. Or, knowing what we know, let's say.
No one says anyone has to be a teacher, or a prophet or anything at all. We see these as "callings", opportunities to serve, responses to God's purposes. Not something people dream up, something that God directs and that serves His purposes, which always have an eternal characteristic to them, a here and now and a then and coming perspective.
Added responsibility. Not for the faint of heart. Not for everyone, to be sure. Not even for some for their whole lives. The gifts and callings of God are without repentance but they're also with purpose, both for the individual as well as the church.
Thus - the things we read of qualifications and standards like those in the didache as well as the N.T. can't be dismissed as contrary to God's grace and mercy nor moral religious judgements of no authority. They are requirements - honesty is a huge on present in there, as well as Timothy and Titus. Both in character as well as actions.
We know there will be challenges - that's why there have to be safeguards and boundaries - not the least of which would be sound counsel, accountability and communication with others. Those kinds of things would simply be the product of the kinds of standards and qualifications we read there.
The tendency in the 20th century in the evangelical movement has been to generate single owner, standalone organizations that only work in cooperation with others by choice. Kind of an mildly organized chaos. Tradition and dogma call the shots with each sect determining their own organic essence being the most "truthful". If someone decides they don't like something or disagree with something, they start their own sect, splinter, church, ministry, what have you. Technology has served this very well too.
Mixed into that you get a lot of people (I think) who get in the kitchen, can't stand the heat and so move the oven. They run their own shows, they make the rules and thus they will say they "only answer to God" - which is absolute BS.
Those who serve God's people answer to those people and will to their Shepherd and their Father. It's not a do - as - you - believe - is - right calling.
We need accountability - it was baked into the very life of Jesus Christ, what He taught His followers, their efforts following the resurrection and the ensuing growth in numbers.
But Linda, if you don't go, you can't grow! If you don't sit, you can't sh....uh, never mind.
It's true though, isn't it? Best example - the commodity that Lynn has started to sell is - Lynn! He's finally gotten at least half way honest about the product - it's him, the Lynnster, the JAL-Man himself. He's circulated that tripe about - "when have you ever had a bad time listening to me?"......................
As the great Peter Green wrote - don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to.
In his case, I can't recall that much of significance that he ever said while I was seated. He was great at repeating material and rewording it. Kind of a soap sales guy, give him the product and he can come up with a rap to wrap around it. I've known many people who do that, and do it for free, no charge. Mo' meaningful the first 1000 times I heard it but like you my tail's not what it once was and I like to keep it moving unless the yap is REALLY good. I mean REALLY good. Hell, half the people I work with are better and more convincing presenters than Lynn and it's not even the bible we're presentin'. Maybe he just needs to get out more, or his followers do, dunno.
Oddly and interestingly, Doctah Weirwille covered the foundations for this in PFAL, and when it's looked at from an internal PFAL validation it's very clear that behavioral ethics are mandated in the bible - thus, something like charging for the time and materials that God's Teacher uses to teach that which hasn't been known since the first century - just look at what the Way did with the money. Coaches and apple trees are minor expenses compared to the larger investments - Emporia, Gunnnison, Rome City, Tinny.
The growth of the Way ministry needed constant growth to support itself so there was never going to be a time that priming the pump wasn't first on the agenda - that's the only way it could be sustainable.
For example Emporia spent money - the Way Corps sponsorship $ never fully paid for the program once they paid off the initial investment in the property - It was underwritten by the Way Nash, Inc. So the Way Nash Inc. had to have increasing income to support it - and the other locations and programs that were developed. Thus it needed mo' $$ coming in.
Mo' new grads, mo' people going through the programs, mo' expense - and during the time the people are going through the programs they aren't earning income to tithe to the Way.
The life cycle of a person in the Way going through it's classes and programs, plus what the Way Nash spent on it's staffing of headquarters itself to maintain a central location to manage from - required more "New" people to be coming in - basically "new money", year after year.
This hit me like a ton of bricks around 1980 and a couple of trusted peeps I kicked it around with helped me to validate it - the math would never work if it kept growing and it needed to keep growing to support the...growth.
Weirwille's set up was like a company CEO who gets paid a dollar a year - but lives in the company condo, gets driven in the company limousine, eats on per diem and has signature authority for purchases that get approved. By people that work for him.
Fast forward to today. Look at the Way now and the way they're set up. Badda bing.
Apparently Martindale missed the memo - "you can do whatever you want but whatever you do do NOT stop the train from moving down the track, DO NOT alienate your core members to the point they break down and leave - or you will WILL be riding around in a used Toyota in 5 years. :biglaugh:
Apparently Martindale missed the memo - "you can do whatever you want but whatever you do do NOT stop the train from moving down the track, DO NOT alienate your core members to the point they break down and leave - or you will WILL be riding around in a used Toyota in 5 years. :biglaugh:
Rosalie, in all of her arrogance, has missed the memo as well. She considers small numbers easily micromanaged. And afterall, God's people are a remnant. I only wish I was making it up, that's her attitude towards their failure at retaining existing followers and drawing new ones.
Well sure, OSk. Smaller numbers work well - there's no more spends, no funding. Bare bones maintenance. I'd call it a society, a closed one but largely a social circle, with it's own culture, traditions, practices and observances. Kind of like the Amish but without the cool outfits and sense of humor.
I think it was 1985 or so - the state of Florida announced it had hit the million dollar mark for that year, in ABS. I'm sure it wasn't the first or the only one.
You know - you KNOW there isn't a million dollars a year coming in from the entire country now.
They've lowered the bar by claiming to raise their standards to only those who are "faithful ones" to the "prevailing Word" and the "true household" and all of that baloney.
Success at the Way isn't whether anyone actually buys or uses what they're selling, if anything has actual practical value in real time, ongoing and consistently - it's that they are still there at all, simply - that they exist, the remnant, the faithful few.
That's some mighty bright lipstick on that pig, y'know?
I'd call it a society, a closed one but largely a social circle,
I would call it more a playground designed for close inbreeding. There have been places like that, and still are in the world..
Some of my ancestors came and settled the land. Not too many other folks around..
Not much travel. It was a big deal to get where you were at to begin with.. not much socializing.. other than with the local tribe.. first and second cousins and the like.
one farming settlement died out mainly because the men were susceptible to heart failure at a young age. Like 39, 42, and not many lived passed 55. It wasn't until they dispersed and mixed with the rest of the population that their offspring started living just a *tad* longer.
When my dad was able to leave the little community..
sure, he loved the place. He'd go back to visit with his mother and others he loved.. but when the war hit.. and he was in the first draft.. he never really went back. He chose to raise his two sons at least three hundred miles away, and in a city.
The old homestead was regarded as a "camp".. a place you go to hunt and fish, enjoy the surroundings without too many modern conveniences, swim and take baths in the river, and then come back..
very interesting.
I think that WWII, and the G.I. bill brought a lot of people out of these static, isolated places..
so what does this have to with good old J.L.?
I dunno. I think maybe.. he's looking for others like him.. maybe in a spiritual sense, he wants to marry his sister..
or at least to sell her his "newfangled"(?) class..
Sorry, I hadn't read this entire thread until today. Much of what I've posted is peat and repeat, so I'll try to move to another of the sub topics.
I noticed this statement from an earlier post of shiftthis, restating something that another person he understood to have a close relationship with the Way had told him:
" he did say that maybe VP had some sex back in the free love of the 70's before he became a minister and so what "if" vp did."
Amongst all the rest of the discussion on this thread I think this highlights a reality - and that is, people can indeed say anything they want now, and there are probably 100's, 1000's of versions of the Way, VPW and the history involved.
VPW was a denominational minister long before the 70's. He didn't use the ministerial designation after he went on his own, no "Rev." used at all by the time he firmed up PFAL on film. "Dr.", yes.
The "free love" era is the 60's - by the 70's, I think they were charging for it.
If VPW maybe had some sex in the 60's or the 70's with women that weren't his wife, that's not good. That would be considered a problem that he would need to work out. There might be situations and circumstances, fine - doesn't make it right and long term - that's a no go in God's Word, that disqualifies a man from ministry in the body of Christ if they can't get their minds right - and even the laws of the land frown on it. Shiftthis's friend is wrong.
But hopefully VPW had more than some maybe-sex back in the 70's - he was married and had children. I'd think - well, that's really more of a private area of one's life, usually.
If shiftthis's buddy meant that maybe VP had some sex in the 70's - that was long after he'd completed the process to form the Way International, Inc. and would have been right in the middle of a period in the Way when he was most active in travel and site building (Emporia, Gunnison, Rome City). The Way Corps program was fully realized, WOW Ambassador program, etc. etc.
VPW was in Christian ministry for decades before the 70's. As those years and later ones fade into the mist of time, decades from now it may be that no one's going to care one way or the other. It behooves us today to get our hearts and minds right however and in our best interests, as God has set them out for us to live.
" he did say that maybe VP had some sex back in the free love of the 70's before he became a minister and so what "if" vp did."
The way international desensitizes their followers to sin. And they especially remove/ignore basic qualifications from the Bible that detail how a man of God is to conduct themselves, unless of course it can be used against someone who has fallen out of favor - but that is another post. There is nothing that would excuse a married man, with several children who was a Reverend, supposed Dr., had spent DECADES in the church, etc. from participating in any way in the "free love of the 70s." Nothing. If anything it goes to show how perverted the Dr. really was and how willing his followers were/are to ignore common decency in following this creep.
VPW would have been in his 50s in the 70s. I am pushing 40 and the thought of taking advantage of young ladies in their early twenties is repulsive. I mean there is no attraction there at all. And I am married with a child, I am not a minister or preacher and I do not support or work for any Church. How much more would moral accountability be leveraged against a supposed man of God who behaved this way. It's nothing short of using position to satisfy guttural lusts.
And in my opinion, anyone (including John Lynn) who propagates Wierwille in anyway is guilty of covering his true nature for their own gain. There are no redeeming qualities to PFAL that excuse this man. PFAL is riddled with error and is not "truth." It's as if all this truth supposedly taught by Wierwille excuses all the wrongs he committed. So his works excuse his sin. It doesn't work that way.
Abusing one's authority (teacher, minister, therapist, etc.) to persuade someone to engage in sexually activity is rape...plain and simple.
Wierwille had a serial history of engaging in this type of behavior.
Ergo, he was a serial rapist by definition.
People who choose to defend his actions usually aren't satisfied to simply excuse his behavior, they typically engage in a discourse that blames the victims, instead.
I believe we have come to a point in time, as demonstrated by Shiftthis's comment, that we acknowledge Wierwille did these things.
It's no longer a question of WHETHER Wierwille acted as he did but, WHY people continue to blame the victims in order to rationalize VPW's actions. This, perhaps, is the crucial question that needs to be answered by the various off-shoot leaders and proponents.
Until they (off-shoots) can tackle that issue head-on, I really couldn't care less about their latest "research discovery" or so-called classes.
For anyone who genuinely desires to more fully understand this process, I highly recommend Losing The Way.
The way international desensitizes their followers to sin. And they especially remove/ignore basic qualifications from the Bible that detail how a man of God is to conduct themselves, unless of course it can be used against someone who has fallen out of favor - but that is another post. There is nothing that would excuse a married man, with several children who was a Reverend, supposed Dr., had spent DECADES in the church, etc. from participating in any way in the "free love of the 70s." Nothing. If anything it goes to show how perverted the Dr. really was and how willing his followers were/are to ignore common decency in following this creep.
VPW would have been in his 50s in the 70s. I am pushing 40 and the thought of taking advantage of young ladies in their early twenties is repulsive. I mean there is no attraction there at all. And I am married with a child, I am not a minister or preacher and I do not support or work for any Church. How much more would moral accountability be leveraged against a supposed man of God who behaved this way. It's nothing short of using position to satisfy guttural lusts.
And in my opinion, anyone (including John Lynn) who propagates Wierwille in anyway is guilty of covering his true nature for their own gain. There are no redeeming qualities to PFAL that excuse this man. PFAL is riddled with error and is not "truth." It's as if all this truth supposedly taught by Wierwille excuses all the wrongs he committed. So his works excuse his sin. It doesn't work that way.
Our understanding of the doctrine of salvation is always the basis for understanding sin - Christ redeems from the 'curse of the law', the consequences of sin, death. Christianity believes the death of the physical life is not the death of our life, but we are 'new' people, in Christ, through Him. Both the natural state of man and the actions that come from it are 'redeemed'.
There should be a fundamental understanding of who we are in that mix - anyone who considers it will realize that 1. they didn't decide to be born and 2. given the decision they might not actually decide to have 'sin', to be sinful or to have an 'enmity' between them and God. One might also say that of course they're not going to always be perfect or do the right thing and that it's unrealistic for anyone, particularly their Creator, to expect that. We find in Jesus Christ however that it is.
So, mankind finds themselves in this situation of separation from God. The Christian doctrine is of Jesus Christ, the 'logos of God, a redeemer and perfect expression of God's heart and intent. Love factors into that - in a big way and a new way, that we see in Jesus Christ. Less now the 'letter' of a law but rather the heart of the intent of a person.
That then leads to the correct - call them 'behaviors' - not the incorrect ones. The love of God leads us to repentance, the love of God leads us to believe and accept His salvation, the love of God leads and inspires us to live 'godly' in our lives. Not ungodly.
We learn, yes. We will do those things that Jesus Christ redeemed us from - before we know and 'believe' - and after. All of it, our whole lives. This assurance of our salvation is basic - grace and mercy, all of that.
It is not sound Christian thought - to accept that our sin is of no consequence however - we do have to recognize that our calling is to a 'walk' that represents our faith. We're going to do those things, that's a gimme, we know that. But there has to be - call it a consistent - recognition of the who/what/when of all this.
If we don't we risk ending up thinking 'so what?' - all men are sinners, that's no big deal, it doesn't matter what I do. But it does, the N.T. speaks to that extensively - that to survive and thrive in this life we must consistently come back to God for our salvation, our fulfillment.
I think it's basic to building a strong Christian community to understand those basic things and then to understand that not all, not everyone, and not everyone all the time anytime, are going to be best suited to taking additional 'responsibility' within that community.
All can help, all can give, all will have needs. A community works together around their fellowship in Christ. Not all are going to be 'leaders' or 'teacher's - not all should be. But everyone can serve and be served.
I have great respect for the Bible and anyone who wants to study it and teach it. And all the basics of Christian faith apply to all. Paul is the iconic example form the N.T. - we don't know what all he did - he seems to have been a very human character - but we do know from the information in the N.T. that he painted a clear picture of how to behave in the church, that community and what was required of a pastor, a person who served. There's no question about that and no one, including Paul himself, rises above that.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
19
28
24
23
Popular Days
Jul 30
30
Aug 1
15
Jul 31
12
Jul 24
9
Top Posters In This Topic
Steve Lortz 19 posts
waysider 28 posts
shiftthis 24 posts
OldSkool 23 posts
Popular Days
Jul 30 2012
30 posts
Aug 1 2012
15 posts
Jul 31 2012
12 posts
Jul 24 2012
9 posts
Popular Posts
Steve Lortz
Well, I went to the TLTF website and found out about their "The End Times" seminar (!?!), eight 40-minute segments on dispensationalism. I just finished two semesters of Constructive Theology, in w
Steve Lortz
I think you hit the nail on the head, OldSkool, when you used the phrase "extreme highmindedness". Romans 11:20 says "Be not highminded, but fear:" Wierwille expressly taught in foundational PFAL tha
Steve Lortz
I've been giving this some more thought. After I took Power for Abundant Living, I thought that I was a better Christian. Whether or not I really was is something for the Lord Jesus Christ to judge,
Posted Images
waysider
PFAL = Pay For Absconded Lessons.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
But the fellowship is SOOOOOO GOOD! How could it be wrong!?!
I have also had good fellowship playing D&D. The difference between TWI and D&D is that in D&D, the monsters, deception and rapine are imaginary.
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Fake friends to fellowship with based on who is in good standing with the organization. When I left TWI I knew hundreds of people. I am not in contact with ANY of them today. They will have nothing to do with me. Good riddance at that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
"We sure do love you." :o
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Avast, ye sons of weevils! Money hungering sow's are they! All to a man!
If it's "God's Word", and it's "His Word" and the "Word of God" is what's being taught....
They why the F**K am I or anyone else charging money for it as if it were mine?
It's not mine to sell.
Commerce. It's all commerce. Bid'ness.
You can't say "donation" without saying do nat and that's just what you need to not do - do NAT do dat, sell it.
It's a moral and ethical dilemma, solved by doing the only thing you can do if you want to charge $ for "God's Word" and that is to ignore any and all semblance of honesty and just wallow in the ensuing filth that will be the product of your actions. You will suffer, drown, you will look morally deformed and physically twisted in the end, confused and sadly unable to understand what you did wrong which was no less than trampling on the very thing you sold as sacred. Pretzel logic, hold the salt.
Doesn't even matter if it was or not - selling it as the holy thing, made sacred by the value of those who held it to be so - you're chit up a creek heading for a puddle.
They get better at it though - Jim Bakker's selling generators to the apocalypse now people. Geez, the scrawny little rodent can still look people in the eye - amazing. Osteen's got it down cold. Best show in town. John Lynn - well gawsh, who ever had a bad time hearing Lynn mug his way through his latest 10-step program? Grab a metal chair or a yard of rug and sit your fat a sz down, you paid good money to hear this styro fomic puffed blow hard, so enjoy the blow.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
where's the "clap-clap" face for socksie?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
I prefer "donuts" to "donate"!
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Think right from the beginning when I was being nagged to take PFAL, I asked about this "donation" and said, a donation is a free-will, voluntary, payment. If I don't "donate" can I still take this class?
Of course the answer was no.
So I said, it's not a donation at all, then; it's a charge, a fee.
No, it's a donation.
I only took the class to shut up those pushing me.
And then I felt tricked into something.
And then I tricked myself into continuing for ... years.
"Donation" is now one of those words that causes me to look very narrow-eyed and carefully at what is actually going on. And at what is to become of my "donation." I have to say, I haven't come across it in the Christian context.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Absolutely!
"Minimum donation" is perhaps the biggest lie in the game.
Donation, to donate to (something) or on behalf of something, is basically to give a gift. "Charitable donations".
There's as many ways to turn that phrase euphemistically and legally as there are tics on a politician but as widely understood by the average person on the street, it's not the same as a "charge" or a "fee", it's not something being paid in exchange for something else.
The religious casino's that register people for these classes and require a minimum donation of any amount are simply saying that 1. you will need to "donate" to our casino, and you will need to make it no less than a certain amount and you will need to do that before you can get this thing we're offering.
Selling - the correct word then would be that they're selling.
Which goes back to the other big lie, that of selling something that isn't yours. That's called stealing, again in common terms any normal person could understand.
The equation seems to go like this, some math is required:
Count the total number of times these words are used - "God's Word", "matchless", "principles you can use in your daily life from the Bible", "like no other" and "you can't hear this anywhere else"......
Multiply by the number of hours the matchless class runs.....
Add that total then to the number of times you're told how much you need it......
And that will always and without fail - as if by magic - always equal 100% BS.
Never fails.
The sad part of this is seeing how some of our old bud's and budettes have become so cute in their methods of doing this but are really running the same table, year after year. It's all talk though, no game. Somewhere, sometime, at some point, you're going to end up in a chair listening and watching them yap.
How much is that worth? Only you can decide
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
You hit the nail on the head, Socks!
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Thanks Steve. It's a nail that's gotten a lot of work over the years, that's for sure.
To the tune of "Nobody Does It Better".....Luke 24:
And he said unto them, O foolish men, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Behooved it not the Christ to suffer these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
Luke 24 describes the very human followers of Christ and their coming to grips with the resurrected Jesus Christ. Everything that happens after that in their story tells of a group of people who were forever changed. Absolutely, internally, intellectually and emotionally.
It's difficult to imagine them doing something as dishonorable as selling that information to others. Judas is the guy in the tale that sold what he knew and we see where that got him. As forgiven as all but part of a complex road down.
It's easy to accept forgiveness. It can be much more difficult to know what to do with it. I would advise all of us, certainly those making a living off of the Gospel, to give a great deal of thought to what we do in God's Name, and consider what we can learn from this first generation of followers of Christ.
I always bitch about this money deal. The last time I went on a rant about it here somebody wrote me and said I was too uptight about the money and class charges.
Hey - I believe Jesus died for me, my sins and is my Redeemer and very much alive today, albeit not as He was then. So yeah, they're g-dammed right - I get real serious about it.
I accepted this $$ process once as an acceptable means to an end. I stopped thinking that way and I don't do it anymore. It's wrong. Black and white. Boom, that's it. These money sucking tics can do what they want.
Peace out!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
Here's something I posted on another thread yesterday:
Here is an excerpt from the Didache, a rule of faith that was very probably composed BEFORE some of the material that made it into the New Testament:
"Chapter 11. Concerning Teachers, Apostles, and Prophets. Whosoever, therefore, comes and teaches you all these things that have been said before, receive him. But if the teacher himself turns and teaches another doctrine to the destruction of this, hear him not. But if he teaches so as to increase righteousness and the knowledge of the Lord, receive him as the Lord. But concerning the apostles and prophets, act according to the decree of the Gospel. Let every apostle who comes to you be received as the Lord. But he shall not remain more than one day; or two days, if there's a need. But if he remains three days, he is a false prophet. And when the apostle goes away, let him take nothing but bread [no money] until he lodges. If he asks for money, he is a false prophet. And every prophet who speaks in the Spirit you shall neither try nor judge; for every sin shall be forgiven, but this sin shall not be forgiven. But not every one who speaks in the Spirit is a prophet; but only if he holds the ways of the Lord. Therefore from their ways shall the false prophet and the prophet be known. And every prophet who orders a meal in the Spirit does not eat it, unless he is indeed a false prophet.[ If a prophets says "The Lord tells me you guys need to provide food", and the guys eats the food he told you to provide, he is a false prophet] And every prophet who teaches the truth, but does not do what he teaches, is a false prophet. And every prophet, proved true, working unto the mystery of the Church in the world, yet not teaching others to do what he himself does, shall not be judged among you, for with God he has his judgment; for so did also the ancient prophets. But whoever says in the Spirit, Give me money, or something else, you shall not listen to him. But if he tells you to give for others' sake who are in need, let no one judge him."
(Italics and bold emphases added by me. - Steve)
Love,
Steve
Edited by Steve LortzLink to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Great reference Steve.
It underscores some things, I think.
We all know we're human, and the Christian doctrines speaks to sin and the products of it. We believe this life is not the end of the line nor the total sum of the effort.
So - knowing that we are imperfect, saved by grace, new people in Christ and in this life will still see our physical natures tend towards weakness and failure, we - let's say - build a life to strengthen it, protect it and to pursue the best life we can, knowing all the good stuff and all the bad stuff to. Or, knowing what we know, let's say.
No one says anyone has to be a teacher, or a prophet or anything at all. We see these as "callings", opportunities to serve, responses to God's purposes. Not something people dream up, something that God directs and that serves His purposes, which always have an eternal characteristic to them, a here and now and a then and coming perspective.
Added responsibility. Not for the faint of heart. Not for everyone, to be sure. Not even for some for their whole lives. The gifts and callings of God are without repentance but they're also with purpose, both for the individual as well as the church.
Thus - the things we read of qualifications and standards like those in the didache as well as the N.T. can't be dismissed as contrary to God's grace and mercy nor moral religious judgements of no authority. They are requirements - honesty is a huge on present in there, as well as Timothy and Titus. Both in character as well as actions.
We know there will be challenges - that's why there have to be safeguards and boundaries - not the least of which would be sound counsel, accountability and communication with others. Those kinds of things would simply be the product of the kinds of standards and qualifications we read there.
The tendency in the 20th century in the evangelical movement has been to generate single owner, standalone organizations that only work in cooperation with others by choice. Kind of an mildly organized chaos. Tradition and dogma call the shots with each sect determining their own organic essence being the most "truthful". If someone decides they don't like something or disagree with something, they start their own sect, splinter, church, ministry, what have you. Technology has served this very well too.
Mixed into that you get a lot of people (I think) who get in the kitchen, can't stand the heat and so move the oven. They run their own shows, they make the rules and thus they will say they "only answer to God" - which is absolute BS.
Those who serve God's people answer to those people and will to their Shepherd and their Father. It's not a do - as - you - believe - is - right calling.
We need accountability - it was baked into the very life of Jesus Christ, what He taught His followers, their efforts following the resurrection and the ensuing growth in numbers.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Linda Z
Socksness said (and I am totally taking it out of context because it just struck me as funny):
Nuh uh! Not me. No way. Never again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
But Linda, if you don't go, you can't grow! If you don't sit, you can't sh....uh, never mind.
It's true though, isn't it? Best example - the commodity that Lynn has started to sell is - Lynn! He's finally gotten at least half way honest about the product - it's him, the Lynnster, the JAL-Man himself. He's circulated that tripe about - "when have you ever had a bad time listening to me?"......................
As the great Peter Green wrote - don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to.
In his case, I can't recall that much of significance that he ever said while I was seated. He was great at repeating material and rewording it. Kind of a soap sales guy, give him the product and he can come up with a rap to wrap around it. I've known many people who do that, and do it for free, no charge. Mo' meaningful the first 1000 times I heard it but like you my tail's not what it once was and I like to keep it moving unless the yap is REALLY good. I mean REALLY good. Hell, half the people I work with are better and more convincing presenters than Lynn and it's not even the bible we're presentin'. Maybe he just needs to get out more, or his followers do, dunno.
Oddly and interestingly, Doctah Weirwille covered the foundations for this in PFAL, and when it's looked at from an internal PFAL validation it's very clear that behavioral ethics are mandated in the bible - thus, something like charging for the time and materials that God's Teacher uses to teach that which hasn't been known since the first century - just look at what the Way did with the money. Coaches and apple trees are minor expenses compared to the larger investments - Emporia, Gunnnison, Rome City, Tinny.
The growth of the Way ministry needed constant growth to support itself so there was never going to be a time that priming the pump wasn't first on the agenda - that's the only way it could be sustainable.
For example Emporia spent money - the Way Corps sponsorship $ never fully paid for the program once they paid off the initial investment in the property - It was underwritten by the Way Nash, Inc. So the Way Nash Inc. had to have increasing income to support it - and the other locations and programs that were developed. Thus it needed mo' $$ coming in.
Mo' new grads, mo' people going through the programs, mo' expense - and during the time the people are going through the programs they aren't earning income to tithe to the Way.
The life cycle of a person in the Way going through it's classes and programs, plus what the Way Nash spent on it's staffing of headquarters itself to maintain a central location to manage from - required more "New" people to be coming in - basically "new money", year after year.
This hit me like a ton of bricks around 1980 and a couple of trusted peeps I kicked it around with helped me to validate it - the math would never work if it kept growing and it needed to keep growing to support the...growth.
Weirwille's set up was like a company CEO who gets paid a dollar a year - but lives in the company condo, gets driven in the company limousine, eats on per diem and has signature authority for purchases that get approved. By people that work for him.
Fast forward to today. Look at the Way now and the way they're set up. Badda bing.
Apparently Martindale missed the memo - "you can do whatever you want but whatever you do do NOT stop the train from moving down the track, DO NOT alienate your core members to the point they break down and leave - or you will WILL be riding around in a used Toyota in 5 years.
:biglaugh:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Rosalie, in all of her arrogance, has missed the memo as well. She considers small numbers easily micromanaged. And afterall, God's people are a remnant. I only wish I was making it up, that's her attitude towards their failure at retaining existing followers and drawing new ones.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
oh my goodness i just don't know what to say
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Well sure, OSk. Smaller numbers work well - there's no more spends, no funding. Bare bones maintenance. I'd call it a society, a closed one but largely a social circle, with it's own culture, traditions, practices and observances. Kind of like the Amish but without the cool outfits and sense of humor.
I think it was 1985 or so - the state of Florida announced it had hit the million dollar mark for that year, in ABS. I'm sure it wasn't the first or the only one.
You know - you KNOW there isn't a million dollars a year coming in from the entire country now.
They've lowered the bar by claiming to raise their standards to only those who are "faithful ones" to the "prevailing Word" and the "true household" and all of that baloney.
Success at the Way isn't whether anyone actually buys or uses what they're selling, if anything has actual practical value in real time, ongoing and consistently - it's that they are still there at all, simply - that they exist, the remnant, the faithful few.
That's some mighty bright lipstick on that pig, y'know?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I would call it more a playground designed for close inbreeding. There have been places like that, and still are in the world..
Some of my ancestors came and settled the land. Not too many other folks around..
Not much travel. It was a big deal to get where you were at to begin with.. not much socializing.. other than with the local tribe.. first and second cousins and the like.
one farming settlement died out mainly because the men were susceptible to heart failure at a young age. Like 39, 42, and not many lived passed 55. It wasn't until they dispersed and mixed with the rest of the population that their offspring started living just a *tad* longer.
Edited by HamLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
When my dad was able to leave the little community..
sure, he loved the place. He'd go back to visit with his mother and others he loved.. but when the war hit.. and he was in the first draft.. he never really went back. He chose to raise his two sons at least three hundred miles away, and in a city.
The old homestead was regarded as a "camp".. a place you go to hunt and fish, enjoy the surroundings without too many modern conveniences, swim and take baths in the river, and then come back..
very interesting.
I think that WWII, and the G.I. bill brought a lot of people out of these static, isolated places..
so what does this have to with good old J.L.?
I dunno. I think maybe.. he's looking for others like him.. maybe in a spiritual sense, he wants to marry his sister..
or at least to sell her his "newfangled"(?) class..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Sorry, I hadn't read this entire thread until today. Much of what I've posted is peat and repeat, so I'll try to move to another of the sub topics.
I noticed this statement from an earlier post of shiftthis, restating something that another person he understood to have a close relationship with the Way had told him:
" he did say that maybe VP had some sex back in the free love of the 70's before he became a minister and so what "if" vp did."
Amongst all the rest of the discussion on this thread I think this highlights a reality - and that is, people can indeed say anything they want now, and there are probably 100's, 1000's of versions of the Way, VPW and the history involved.
VPW was a denominational minister long before the 70's. He didn't use the ministerial designation after he went on his own, no "Rev." used at all by the time he firmed up PFAL on film. "Dr.", yes.
The "free love" era is the 60's - by the 70's, I think they were charging for it.
If VPW maybe had some sex in the 60's or the 70's with women that weren't his wife, that's not good. That would be considered a problem that he would need to work out. There might be situations and circumstances, fine - doesn't make it right and long term - that's a no go in God's Word, that disqualifies a man from ministry in the body of Christ if they can't get their minds right - and even the laws of the land frown on it. Shiftthis's friend is wrong.
But hopefully VPW had more than some maybe-sex back in the 70's - he was married and had children. I'd think - well, that's really more of a private area of one's life, usually.
If shiftthis's buddy meant that maybe VP had some sex in the 70's - that was long after he'd completed the process to form the Way International, Inc. and would have been right in the middle of a period in the Way when he was most active in travel and site building (Emporia, Gunnison, Rome City). The Way Corps program was fully realized, WOW Ambassador program, etc. etc.
VPW was in Christian ministry for decades before the 70's. As those years and later ones fade into the mist of time, decades from now it may be that no one's going to care one way or the other. It behooves us today to get our hearts and minds right however and in our best interests, as God has set them out for us to live.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
The way international desensitizes their followers to sin. And they especially remove/ignore basic qualifications from the Bible that detail how a man of God is to conduct themselves, unless of course it can be used against someone who has fallen out of favor - but that is another post. There is nothing that would excuse a married man, with several children who was a Reverend, supposed Dr., had spent DECADES in the church, etc. from participating in any way in the "free love of the 70s." Nothing. If anything it goes to show how perverted the Dr. really was and how willing his followers were/are to ignore common decency in following this creep.
VPW would have been in his 50s in the 70s. I am pushing 40 and the thought of taking advantage of young ladies in their early twenties is repulsive. I mean there is no attraction there at all. And I am married with a child, I am not a minister or preacher and I do not support or work for any Church. How much more would moral accountability be leveraged against a supposed man of God who behaved this way. It's nothing short of using position to satisfy guttural lusts.
And in my opinion, anyone (including John Lynn) who propagates Wierwille in anyway is guilty of covering his true nature for their own gain. There are no redeeming qualities to PFAL that excuse this man. PFAL is riddled with error and is not "truth." It's as if all this truth supposedly taught by Wierwille excuses all the wrongs he committed. So his works excuse his sin. It doesn't work that way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Abusing one's authority (teacher, minister, therapist, etc.) to persuade someone to engage in sexually activity is rape...plain and simple.
Wierwille had a serial history of engaging in this type of behavior.
Ergo, he was a serial rapist by definition.
People who choose to defend his actions usually aren't satisfied to simply excuse his behavior, they typically engage in a discourse that blames the victims, instead.
I believe we have come to a point in time, as demonstrated by Shiftthis's comment, that we acknowledge Wierwille did these things.
It's no longer a question of WHETHER Wierwille acted as he did but, WHY people continue to blame the victims in order to rationalize VPW's actions. This, perhaps, is the crucial question that needs to be answered by the various off-shoot leaders and proponents.
Until they (off-shoots) can tackle that issue head-on, I really couldn't care less about their latest "research discovery" or so-called classes.
For anyone who genuinely desires to more fully understand this process, I highly recommend Losing The Way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Our understanding of the doctrine of salvation is always the basis for understanding sin - Christ redeems from the 'curse of the law', the consequences of sin, death. Christianity believes the death of the physical life is not the death of our life, but we are 'new' people, in Christ, through Him. Both the natural state of man and the actions that come from it are 'redeemed'.
There should be a fundamental understanding of who we are in that mix - anyone who considers it will realize that 1. they didn't decide to be born and 2. given the decision they might not actually decide to have 'sin', to be sinful or to have an 'enmity' between them and God. One might also say that of course they're not going to always be perfect or do the right thing and that it's unrealistic for anyone, particularly their Creator, to expect that. We find in Jesus Christ however that it is.
So, mankind finds themselves in this situation of separation from God. The Christian doctrine is of Jesus Christ, the 'logos of God, a redeemer and perfect expression of God's heart and intent. Love factors into that - in a big way and a new way, that we see in Jesus Christ. Less now the 'letter' of a law but rather the heart of the intent of a person.
That then leads to the correct - call them 'behaviors' - not the incorrect ones. The love of God leads us to repentance, the love of God leads us to believe and accept His salvation, the love of God leads and inspires us to live 'godly' in our lives. Not ungodly.
We learn, yes. We will do those things that Jesus Christ redeemed us from - before we know and 'believe' - and after. All of it, our whole lives. This assurance of our salvation is basic - grace and mercy, all of that.
It is not sound Christian thought - to accept that our sin is of no consequence however - we do have to recognize that our calling is to a 'walk' that represents our faith. We're going to do those things, that's a gimme, we know that. But there has to be - call it a consistent - recognition of the who/what/when of all this.
If we don't we risk ending up thinking 'so what?' - all men are sinners, that's no big deal, it doesn't matter what I do. But it does, the N.T. speaks to that extensively - that to survive and thrive in this life we must consistently come back to God for our salvation, our fulfillment.
I think it's basic to building a strong Christian community to understand those basic things and then to understand that not all, not everyone, and not everyone all the time anytime, are going to be best suited to taking additional 'responsibility' within that community.
All can help, all can give, all will have needs. A community works together around their fellowship in Christ. Not all are going to be 'leaders' or 'teacher's - not all should be. But everyone can serve and be served.
I have great respect for the Bible and anyone who wants to study it and teach it. And all the basics of Christian faith apply to all. Paul is the iconic example form the N.T. - we don't know what all he did - he seems to have been a very human character - but we do know from the information in the N.T. that he painted a clear picture of how to behave in the church, that community and what was required of a pastor, a person who served. There's no question about that and no one, including Paul himself, rises above that.
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.