Who the heck are you talking to, John? Are you talking to me? I don't wear any rings. What am I to make of your contributions to the conversation that goes on here? Do you have a bone to pick with somebody in particular that you aren't explicitly addressing your remarks to?
Who the heck are you talking to, John? Are you talking to me? I don't wear any rings. What am I to make of your contributions to the conversation that goes on here? Do you have a bone to pick with somebody in particular that you aren't explicitly addressing your remarks to?
...foxes have holes, - Luke 8:58
This is a typical response to expect from someone who has been conditioned by Way theology. Take a scripture out of context and use it to give an ambiguous, obtuse non-answer.
I remember the oral examination when I qualified in submarines and earned my dolphins. One of the things I was required to do was to explain how I would accomplish the boat's mission if various other people in the crew were dead or disabled. I'm sure you remember that as a part of leadership training in the submarine service, Galen. It was NEVER part of leadership training in the Way Corps.
If there was a casualty (fire, flooding, etc., small as well as large) aboard a submarine, one of the first things that had to be done was the senior qualified man on the scene had to declare himself "in charge at the scene" and report as much to the officer of the deck. From then on, all communication flowed through the man in charge at the scene, and there were various conditions where the upper levels of command had to trust the judgment of the man in charge at the scene. That was also a part of the exercise, as well as the training for leadership, aboard a submarine.
There were several other factors of naval leadership that were ignored in the Way Corps. According to Petty Officer 3&2 the three basic requirements of naval leadership are 1. good moral behavior, 2. personal example, and 3. administrative ability. The reasons were these: 1. if you lie and cheat, your followers will feel it's okay to lie and cheat on you, your followers will NOT treat you with respect if you treat them with disrespect, 2. you have to be able and willing to do yourself anything you ask your followers to do, and 3. administrative ability is tertiary and trainable.
There was another principle of leadership that was recognized and discussed in the Navy, but totally ignored in the Way Corps: you cannot delegate responsibility without delegating a corresponding authority, but ultimately, you are still responsible for the responsibilities you delegate. There were several times when I took responsibility as a coordinator for things my twiggies messed up. That was before I went in residence.
Leadership in TWI was NOTHING like the genuine leadership I experienced in the military, and Way Corps training I received had NO SUBSTANCE similar to the training I received in the Nuclear Power Program and the Submarine Service.
The scales fell from my eyes after Geer read The Passing of a Patriarch on Corps night. Martindale and the top "leadership" exhibited all the leadership skill of deer in the headlights. When Geer was finished, Martindale just dropped the phone lines without say anything memorable. All the Corps were wondering what the hell was going on, and what we needed to do to fix "the ministry". Martindale seemed to be silent about the whole thing for weeks. Finally word trickled down that the problem, according the President of the Way International, was that the people who were running the foundational classes out on the field were too slack.
Martindale flipped the responsibility UPSIDE DOWN! HE was the PRESIDENT! He was blaming the people who were FARTHEST from the center of power! The ONLY people who were actually doing ANYTHING to grow the organization!
Martindale had NO IDEA of the practical steps that were necessary to run a foundational class on the field, much less to accomplish the mission of taking the Word Over the World. Instead of fixing things in order to accomplish the mission, Martindale simply declared the mission accomplished. That, my friends, was the result of Wierwille's thinking.
When I saw that, I realized Wierwille had NEVER allowed real leaders into position near him, but only yes-men and yes-women.
I served under some jerks when I was in the Navy. I had to. I couldn't pick and choose. Sometimes ministers can be jerks, but Jesus Christ is NOT a jerk, and I don't think any of his genuine servants are the unmitigated kind of jerks Wierwille and his dedicated followers have been and continue to be.
Who the heck are you talking to, John? Are you talking to me? I don't wear any rings. What am I to make of your contributions to the conversation that goes on here? Do you have a bone to pick with somebody in particular that you aren't explicitly addressing your remarks to?
...foxes have holes, - Luke 8:58
Hey, John! Who the heck are you talking to? You quoted a post that I put up, but you do it in such a way that my name does NOT appear! Why? You quote Luke 8:38. Are you meaning to imply that you are a fox, being crafty and clever to have a hole to hide in? Howzabout Romans 12:7 or II Corinthians 8:21, providing things honest in the sight of all men?
The scales fell from my eyes after Geer read The Passing of a Patriarch on Corps night. Martindale and the top "leadership" exhibited all the leadership skill of deer in the headlights. When Geer was finished, Martindale just dropped the phone lines without say anything memorable. All the Corps were wondering what the hell was going on, and what we needed to do to fix "the ministry". Martindale seemed to be silent about the whole thing for weeks. Finally word trickled down that the problem, according the President of the Way International, was that the people who were running the foundational classes out on the field were too slack.
Geer claimed to have "the last will and testament of wierwille".....and his puffy piece of personal platitudes and 'the patriarch' who passed before us WAS a deer in the headlights moment for the trustees. The words of wierwille carrying THAT KIND OF POWER IN TWI. And, geer knew it. The power-grab was a set-up......and geer, supposedly, held all the aces in the deck. Supposedly, he (geer) was given the secret decoder ring to help twi "get back to the word." And, geer played it for all it was worth.
At twi, the trustees scrambled to make concessions for geer to come to hq and help them "get back to the word." Trailer 5 was given top priority by Way Builders to equip it with all the European a/v fixtures/outlets for geer's convenience when he came to hq. The trailer unit was upgraded and totally designed "the Chris Geer unit." Within weeks, it was done.......and then, as the weeks and months passed GEER NEVER SPENT ONE NIGHT IN THAT UNIT EQUIPPED FOR HIM.
Another thing......geer was in coomunication with Donna Martindale, but not Craig. It was like he was deliberately injecting strife and separation into the martindale marriage.
The egos of martindale and geer were so immense that those guys couldn't function together on the same continent! Some have said that these two men were competing for wierwille's approval thru the years......and martindale wrote that little booklet "VP and Me" and Geer was sent to run the European Corps program and European Outreach. Then, when vpw died,
all this ego and strife boiled to the surface. Anyhoo......most of us saw the power-struggle that erupted. Some blame martindale. Some blame geer. I tend to think that wierwille was the culprit.
When I saw that, I realized Wierwille had NEVER allowed real leaders into position near him, but only yes-men and yes-women.
Wierwille never wanted leaders.......he wanted followers.
In my opinion, the corps program was instigated to raise up dedicated, class instructors. Nothing more.
The egos of martindale and geer were so immense that those guys couldn't function together on the same continent! Some have said that these two men were competing for wierwille's approval thru the years......and martindale wrote that little booklet "VP and Me" and Geer was sent to run the European Corps program and European Outreach. Then, when vpw died,
all this ego and strife boiled to the surface. Anyhoo......most of us saw the power-struggle that erupted. Some blame martindale. Some blame geer. I tend to think that wierwille was the culprit.
[snip]
I agree 100% Wierwille WAS the culprit. To me it seemed that Geer and Martindale were fighting to demonstrate which one of them could best kiss the dead man's a$$!
Galen....I find it rather interesting that your response to sock's statement "All men are liars that's what the big book says"
is to first address it by saying "I have seen, a few 'hints' in the New Testament that Paul may have been a womanizing scoundrel as well."
WOW, just WOW --- hints....may......womanizing.....scoundrel......as well.
On one hand, you subtly induce doubt about the character and integrity of the Apostle Paul....
Subtly induce doubt? Let me say it louder for you.
ALL MEN ARE SINNERS.
WE ALL SIN.
WE ARE FALL SHORT OF RIGHTEOUSNESS.
... you mention that a couple people in the twig you attend "worship VPW." So, have you taken them aside and taught them the more perfect way, the Lord Jesus Christ?
Yes, I have. It upset him very much, caused doubt and anguish, in that broken man's soul.
I have spoken with the coordinator. We decided that this guy needs time. He was gone for a long time, and only recently returned. He has much to assimilate.
That may have been a true statement. A very sad statement about that person's life, if true.
I agree.
I remember the oral examination when I qualified in submarines and earned my dolphins. One of the things I was required to do was to explain how I would accomplish the boat's mission if various other people in the crew were dead or disabled. I'm sure you remember that as a part of leadership training in the submarine service, Galen. It was NEVER part of leadership training in the Way Corps.
Of course I remember. And yes, I agree with you.
I have stated this same thing many times.
Thank you for agreeing.
... There were several other factors of naval leadership that were ignored in the Way Corps. According to Petty Officer 3&2 the three basic requirements of naval leadership are 1. good moral behavior, 2. personal example, and 3. administrative ability. The reasons were these: 1. if you lie and cheat, your followers will feel it's okay to lie and cheat on you, your followers will NOT treat you with respect if you treat them with disrespect, 2. you have to be able and willing to do yourself anything you ask your followers to do, and 3. administrative ability is tertiary and trainable.
I am well verse with the US Navy's methodology of 'leadership'.
I also see the leadership requirements as listed in Timothy and in Titus. I have brought these up in Twigs. I have even taught these in Twigs.
Yet TWI was not formed in a manner to accept, or utilize Biblical leadership principles.
What the Navy does, works for the Navy. Keep in mind that the Navy destroys a lot of men's lives. Their system works for mission accomplishment. That does not mean it should be mimicked anywhere else.
IMHO, in a godly organization, Biblical leadership principles should be used. :)
... Leadership in TWI was NOTHING like the genuine leadership I experienced in the military, and Way Corps training I received had NO SUBSTANCE similar to the training I received in the Nuclear Power Program and the Submarine Service.
Galen, I seem to remember awhile back in one of your posts you appeared to espouse the thought that it's o.k. for a guy to have multiple wives ? Just wondering if you still ascribe to that thinking...and is that one of the deciding factors in your going back to twi ? Just wondering, coz where I came from, the leadership there now appear to condone having 'concubines'.
And yet somehow in TWI it always comes around to the leadership never admitting they sin, and the cover-up of apparent sin, all along with the abusive judgment of those under their authority. It kind of reminds me of the parable of the unjust ruler. Except in the end of that parable justice is served, yet in TWI somehow the abusers continue to remain in power and the blind do nothing about it.
Yes, I have. It upset him very much, caused doubt and anguish, in that broken man's soul.
I have spoken with the coordinator. We decided that this guy needs time. He was gone for a long time, and only recently returned. He has much to assimilate.
And this is a perfect example of a cult mind-set and how abuse begins. You are evaluating a man not based upon Christianity, but rather on his proximity to the cult. "Gone for a long time, and only recently returned, with much to assimilate". What does that have to do with anything? And yet you and the leadership in charge have already discussed this and labeled the man.
Why would you not come from the perspective that someone who has been "gone for a long time" is actually living an equally Christ-like lifestyle to you who "have remained"????? "Much to assimilate?" Only if you are talking about making sense of the sinful behavior of the 3 Presidents of TWI and why you should remain under the latest's authority. Not much else to assimilate other than that.
IMHO, in a godly organization, Biblical leadership principles should be used. :)/>
I agree with you. Perhaps this is the problem - that TWI is not a godly organization. The behavior of those in power is self-serving rather than Christ-serving. So Biblical leadership principles are twisted around the politics of the paranoid few in power rather than truly being Christ-centered.
Hey, John! Who the heck are you talking to? You quoted a post that I put up, but you do it in such a way that my name does NOT appear! Why? You quote Luke 8:38. Are you meaning to imply that you are a fox, being crafty and clever to have a hole to hide in? Howzabout Romans 12:7 or II Corinthians 8:21, providing things honest in the sight of all men?
Love,
Steve
Uh, that's Luke 8:58, not 38. Although 38 is interesting. Luke 8:58 is advanced class material. Sort of. This girl twig at my AC (Emporia '84) called themselves the something or other foxes and Luke 8:58 was their twig scripture. Sounds spiritual to me. Wonder if that was Rascal's twig/ she was at that AC I'm pretty sure. That scripture didn't have anything to do with your quote, but IMO your quote didn't have anything to do with anything. At least I got your name in it this time.
This girl twig at my AC (Emporia '84) called themselves the something or other foxes and Luke 8:58 was their twig scripture. Sounds spiritual to me.
Wow, how utterly clever...using sexual innuendo at a class that's supposed to be about learning leadership skills for Christian ministry. Yep, that's spiritual, alright.
Subtly induce doubt? Let me say it louder for you.
ALL MEN ARE SINNERS.
WE ALL SIN.
WE ARE FALL SHORT OF RIGHTEOUSNESS.
I think one really has to read into the scriptures with a skewed reasoning to deduce Paul might have been a womanizer and although it is true all of us are sinners....Paul did say he had lived in a clean conscience before God and all the Church. I agree with Skyrider when he says "WOW" really just wow. I am gobsmacked. I would say that kind of reading of scripture reveals more about the person who puts it forth than it does the Apostle Paul.
Impugn Paul's character so VP doesn't look so bad in comparison?
Paul in all likely hood gave his life for the gospel and he was who Jesus hand selected to basically finish His ministry.
Galen, I seem to remember awhile back in one of your posts you appeared to espouse the thought that it's o.k. for a guy to have multiple wives ? Just wondering if you still ascribe to that thinking...and is that one of the deciding factors in your going back to twi ? Just wondering, coz where I came from, the leadership there now appear to condone having 'concubines'.
I can not see forbidding things that God does not forbid. Nor discouraging things that God commands.
The only thing I ever heard on this topic was VPW teaching that polygamists were sex perverts [ which includes nearly all OT prophets].
So....I ask you to please elaborate and THIS is your answer? A vague generalization that all men sin?
I was hoping that is was not vague. That was why I put it in capital letters.
Is there a better method?
Do I repeat it a hundred times, before it grows to more than a vague generalization?
Paul [a divorcee] traveled a lot. His recorded traveling companions were named men. In one passage Paul defends his associating with women.
1Cor9:3 indicates that he was being accused of mischief.
4 Have we not power to eat and to drink?
5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and [as] the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
6 Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?
7 Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?
8 Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
10 Or saith he [it] altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, [this] is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.
11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, [is it] a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?
If this passage were strictly about him being an hireling, then there was no need to mention females in the passage.
He could freely eat of the harvest, the carnal things of the harvest. The harvest was not money from which to pay an hireling. The harvest was the 'babe's in the word that followed him.
I suspect that VPW used this passage, in his own reasoning to justify his actions.
... Well, in my opinion.....willful, deliberate sinning on his motorcoach between campuses and then, arriving to "teach the word" (cough, cough) to more gullible youth is outside the boundaries of "we all sin."
Easier to justify than killing fellow christians right?
But, hey I got my pension. So killing a few dozen Christian Forces in Kosovo was worth it right? :)
And yet somehow in TWI it always comes around to the leadership never admitting they sin, and the cover-up of apparent sin, all along with the abusive judgment of those under their authority. It kind of reminds me of the parable of the unjust ruler. Except in the end of that parable justice is served, yet in TWI somehow the abusers continue to remain in power and the blind do nothing about it.
I have participated in this being discussed in Twig.
A great many of the 'old timers' have been on this forum, or one of the previous forums, and are aware of what happened.
When I first began attending this Twig, the Coordinator [Ex-Corpse] and I had a number of conversations about his insistence on willful blindness. At times he had to go to great lengths, just to retain his 'positive attitude' and refuse to admit that wrong doing had happened. I rather enjoyed correcting him at times.
Our last Region Coordinator, follows this forum as well. He and I have spoken a few times about the things I post here. :)
... I agree with you. Perhaps this is the problem - that TWI is not a godly organization. The behavior of those in power is self-serving rather than Christ-serving. So Biblical leadership principles are twisted around the politics of the paranoid few in power rather than truly being Christ-centered.
I agree.
It is generally my turn once a month to share a teaching. I do simple 'word studies'. As we were taught years ago. As I have always done. [Pick a passage, look for figures of speech, examine the original words used, with deeper insight reexamine the context to see how this changes the flavor of the context.] They all know how to do this. But it seems, that after many years of micromanagement, they have lost the ability. The others will read a magazine article, or a passage from some other book, reading around the Bible rarely the Bible itself.
... Impugn Paul's character so VP doesn't look so bad in comparison?
I had not thought to impugn Paul.
No one on this forum [that I am aware[ of has done anything to make VPW look less bad. Certainly not I.
Interesting that you wish to paint me in such a manner.
I can not see forbidding things that God does not forbid. Nor discouraging things that God commands.
The only thing I ever heard on this topic was VPW teaching that polygamists were sex perverts [ which includes nearly all OT prophets].
I was hoping that is was not vague. That was why I put it in capital letters.
Is there a better method?
Do I repeat it a hundred times, before it grows to more than a vague generalization?
Paul [a divorcee] traveled a lot. His recorded traveling companions were named men. In one passage Paul defends his associating with women.
1Cor9:3 indicates that he was being accused of mischief.
4 Have we not power to eat and to drink?
5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and [as] the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
6 Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?
7 Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?
8 Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
10 Or saith he [it] altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, [this] is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.
11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, [is it] a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?
If this passage were strictly about him being an hireling, then there was no need to mention females in the passage.
He could freely eat of the harvest, the carnal things of the harvest. The harvest was not money from which to pay an hireling. The harvest was the 'babe's in the word that followed him.
I suspect that VPW used this passage, in his own reasoning to justify his actions.
I had not thought to impugn Paul.
No one on this forum [that I am aware[ of has done anything to make VPW look less bad. Certainly not I.
Interesting that you wish to paint me in such a manner.
Well, then, stop doing it. You say Paul was divorced, yet scripture never mentions Paul was divorced. He could have been widowed. We are not even 100% sure he had to be married and YES I know his resume and that he was a member of the Sanhedrin. However, we may not know all the particulars of Paul's experience with the Sanhedrin. We do know he had a nephew and a sister because scripture tells us plainly. All Paul is saying here in this passage is that he could be married if he wanted to....why is that so difficult to see as it is fairly plain and straight forward. This passage has nothing to do with womanizing.....
Might I gently point out that Jesus also traveled with women and some of them actually financially supported Him. Jesus was accused of all kinds of nefarious things.....as was Paul....and we are free to think what we will, but I think what we read into scripture speaks more to our own character .
I may be accused of being to doctrinal here, but I just hope you reconsider your interpretation and maybe better bible tools and teachers could help.
If Jesus had been reaping the "harvest" of his women followers, you can be absolutely certain that would appear in the "evidence" against him. The Pharisees would have loved it. Real evidence against him. Real contradiction of OT rulings.
If Paul had been reaping the "harvest" of his women followers, there would surely be a record of the accusations against him. That he didn't practice what he preached.
Don't you think this "leading about" of women and having authority over them is more a comment on the patriarchal society in which Paul found himself operating? In the same way that Arab women EVEN NOW have to have a male with them to do certain things, or at least have male consent? In Saudi Arabia women aren't even allowed to drive a car, much less go out without some male's company. Women have very few rights in some Arab countries. They have to be "led" because they're not seen as independent responsible citizens. Elsewhere Paul writes about men having power to deal with "virgins" - virgin daughters to be given (or not) in marriage. He isn't talking about "babes" that could be passed around. Nor "babes" that Paul himself helped himself to.
Talk about twisting the scriptures... :confused:/>
Thanks Twinky! I never thought about that aspect of their lives. I just thought that meant Paul was "in charge". These little details never dawned on me so I'm glad you pointed them out.
Now I understand why he was not married at this point in is life. How could he take care of the new and blossoming church and a wife?! I don't think he could have completed any of his ministry with a wife (at that time).
And I remember reading years ago that the Sanheddrin council could make exceptions to the 'married' rule, if the man in question was an exceptional figure....
Thought for the day....I know VP was everything people express here (and probably worse )....but I cant help thinking that without the VP's and the Kenneth Copelands and Joel ( mr. plastic} Osteen and Joyce Meyers and yes, even the Benny ( am I still married ) Hinn's...whether Christianity today would be almost dead in the water...so droll and lifeless without these marketing gurus ?? I know VP rehashed BG Leonards work, but as someone pointed out, BG Leonard was no evangelist/marketer ! The people mentioned above make/made Gods' Word come alive for a lot of folks, something I think even the honourable Billy Graham would struggle to do today.
Thought for the day....I know VP was everything people express here (and probably worse )....but I cant help thinking that without the VP's and the Kenneth Copelands and Joel ( mr. plastic} Osteen and Joyce Meyers and yes, even the Benny ( am I still married ) Hinn's...whether Christianity today would be almost dead in the water...so droll and lifeless without these marketing gurus ?? I know VP rehashed BG Leonards work, but as someone pointed out, BG Leonard was no evangelist/marketer ! The people mentioned above make/made Gods' Word come alive for a lot of folks, something I think even the honourable Billy Graham would struggle to do today.
Though I understand your point, Allan, you have to ask yourself how much of it was "God's Word"? Much of what we marveled at, back in the day, as being earth shattering new information has been shown to be nothing more than shoddy "research", laden with error. I don't think that presents us with cause to celebrate.
Thought for the day....I know VP was everything people express here (and probably worse )....but I cant help thinking that without the VP's and the Kenneth Copelands and Joel ( mr. plastic} Osteen and Joyce Meyers and yes, even the Benny ( am I still married ) Hinn's...whether Christianity today would be almost dead in the water...so droll and lifeless without these marketing gurus ?? I know VP rehashed BG Leonards work, but as someone pointed out, BG Leonard was no evangelist/marketer ! The people mentioned above make/made Gods' Word come alive for a lot of folks, something I think even the honourable Billy Graham would struggle to do today.
A few weeks ago we finished reading Matthew Avery Sutton's Aimee Semple McPherson and the Resurrection of Christian America (2007). McPherson was probably the most effective, yet also the most human in every sense of the word, evangelist in the twentieth century, including Billy Graham. Without McPherson's Four Square Gospel, it's hard to see how evangelism could have stayed as lively as it did, though I think Graham would still have had a lot of influence. In a sense, McPherson kept evangelism from dying out with the fundamentalist movement after 1925,and Graham brought it back to a degree of genuine respectability.
VP himself has had a minimal effect on Christianity as a whole. His depredations wreaked havoc in the lives of far too many individuals, but from an organizational point of view, The Way International was as evanescent as a breeze. In terms of doctrine, he turned out a mish-mash of plagiarized ideas that could not hold together under anything more than the most sophomoric analysis. There is NO Wierwillian school of thought. Organizationally, TWI probably stopped running on anything other than momentum even before Wierwille retired, and it commenced to disintegrate within a year of his death. What's left is a miserable retirement scam for a few crooks and their blind toadies rotting away in an Ohio cornfield.
As cults go, the Mormons, the Moonies and Scientology have had more real influence, and the People's Temple, Jim and Tammy Fay Baker, Jimmy Swaggart, the Branch Davidians and Heaven's Gate have been more spectacular. The Raelians seem to be on the rise now.
How exceedingly strange it is that TWI's lecturing drones on and on, long after all other signs of life have dried up and blown away!
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
19
16
9
14
Popular Days
May 9
15
Apr 21
13
Apr 25
12
May 6
8
Top Posters In This Topic
skyrider 19 posts
Allan 16 posts
Steve Lortz 9 posts
waysider 14 posts
Popular Days
May 9 2013
15 posts
Apr 21 2013
13 posts
Apr 25 2013
12 posts
May 6 2013
8 posts
Popular Posts
Ham
I think God has allowed him to walk in the shadow of the valley of malignant evil..
GeorgeStGeorge
That may have been a true statement. A very sad statement about that person's life, if true. George
excathedra
very very sad, george
johniam
quote:
Who the heck are you talking to, John? Are you talking to me? I don't wear any rings. What am I to make of your contributions to the conversation that goes on here? Do you have a bone to pick with somebody in particular that you aren't explicitly addressing your remarks to?
...foxes have holes, - Luke 8:58
Edited by johniamLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
This is a typical response to expect from someone who has been conditioned by Way theology. Take a scripture out of context and use it to give an ambiguous, obtuse non-answer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
I remember the oral examination when I qualified in submarines and earned my dolphins. One of the things I was required to do was to explain how I would accomplish the boat's mission if various other people in the crew were dead or disabled. I'm sure you remember that as a part of leadership training in the submarine service, Galen. It was NEVER part of leadership training in the Way Corps.
If there was a casualty (fire, flooding, etc., small as well as large) aboard a submarine, one of the first things that had to be done was the senior qualified man on the scene had to declare himself "in charge at the scene" and report as much to the officer of the deck. From then on, all communication flowed through the man in charge at the scene, and there were various conditions where the upper levels of command had to trust the judgment of the man in charge at the scene. That was also a part of the exercise, as well as the training for leadership, aboard a submarine.
There were several other factors of naval leadership that were ignored in the Way Corps. According to Petty Officer 3&2 the three basic requirements of naval leadership are 1. good moral behavior, 2. personal example, and 3. administrative ability. The reasons were these: 1. if you lie and cheat, your followers will feel it's okay to lie and cheat on you, your followers will NOT treat you with respect if you treat them with disrespect, 2. you have to be able and willing to do yourself anything you ask your followers to do, and 3. administrative ability is tertiary and trainable.
There was another principle of leadership that was recognized and discussed in the Navy, but totally ignored in the Way Corps: you cannot delegate responsibility without delegating a corresponding authority, but ultimately, you are still responsible for the responsibilities you delegate. There were several times when I took responsibility as a coordinator for things my twiggies messed up. That was before I went in residence.
Leadership in TWI was NOTHING like the genuine leadership I experienced in the military, and Way Corps training I received had NO SUBSTANCE similar to the training I received in the Nuclear Power Program and the Submarine Service.
The scales fell from my eyes after Geer read The Passing of a Patriarch on Corps night. Martindale and the top "leadership" exhibited all the leadership skill of deer in the headlights. When Geer was finished, Martindale just dropped the phone lines without say anything memorable. All the Corps were wondering what the hell was going on, and what we needed to do to fix "the ministry". Martindale seemed to be silent about the whole thing for weeks. Finally word trickled down that the problem, according the President of the Way International, was that the people who were running the foundational classes out on the field were too slack.
Martindale flipped the responsibility UPSIDE DOWN! HE was the PRESIDENT! He was blaming the people who were FARTHEST from the center of power! The ONLY people who were actually doing ANYTHING to grow the organization!
Martindale had NO IDEA of the practical steps that were necessary to run a foundational class on the field, much less to accomplish the mission of taking the Word Over the World. Instead of fixing things in order to accomplish the mission, Martindale simply declared the mission accomplished. That, my friends, was the result of Wierwille's thinking.
When I saw that, I realized Wierwille had NEVER allowed real leaders into position near him, but only yes-men and yes-women.
I served under some jerks when I was in the Navy. I had to. I couldn't pick and choose. Sometimes ministers can be jerks, but Jesus Christ is NOT a jerk, and I don't think any of his genuine servants are the unmitigated kind of jerks Wierwille and his dedicated followers have been and continue to be.
Love,
Steve
Edited by Steve LortzLink to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
Hey, John! Who the heck are you talking to? You quoted a post that I put up, but you do it in such a way that my name does NOT appear! Why? You quote Luke 8:38. Are you meaning to imply that you are a fox, being crafty and clever to have a hole to hide in? Howzabout Romans 12:7 or II Corinthians 8:21, providing things honest in the sight of all men?
Love,
Steve
Edited by Steve LortzLink to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Geer claimed to have "the last will and testament of wierwille".....and his puffy piece of personal platitudes and 'the patriarch' who passed before us WAS a deer in the headlights moment for the trustees. The words of wierwille carrying THAT KIND OF POWER IN TWI. And, geer knew it. The power-grab was a set-up......and geer, supposedly, held all the aces in the deck. Supposedly, he (geer) was given the secret decoder ring to help twi "get back to the word." And, geer played it for all it was worth.
At twi, the trustees scrambled to make concessions for geer to come to hq and help them "get back to the word." Trailer 5 was given top priority by Way Builders to equip it with all the European a/v fixtures/outlets for geer's convenience when he came to hq. The trailer unit was upgraded and totally designed "the Chris Geer unit." Within weeks, it was done.......and then, as the weeks and months passed GEER NEVER SPENT ONE NIGHT IN THAT UNIT EQUIPPED FOR HIM.
Another thing......geer was in coomunication with Donna Martindale, but not Craig. It was like he was deliberately injecting strife and separation into the martindale marriage.
The egos of martindale and geer were so immense that those guys couldn't function together on the same continent! Some have said that these two men were competing for wierwille's approval thru the years......and martindale wrote that little booklet "VP and Me" and Geer was sent to run the European Corps program and European Outreach. Then, when vpw died,
all this ego and strife boiled to the surface. Anyhoo......most of us saw the power-struggle that erupted. Some blame martindale. Some blame geer. I tend to think that wierwille was the culprit.
Wierwille never wanted leaders.......he wanted followers.
In my opinion, the corps program was instigated to raise up dedicated, class instructors. Nothing more.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
I agree 100% Wierwille WAS the culprit. To me it seemed that Geer and Martindale were fighting to demonstrate which one of them could best kiss the dead man's a$$!
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
Subtly induce doubt? Let me say it louder for you.
ALL MEN ARE SINNERS.
WE ALL SIN.
WE ARE FALL SHORT OF RIGHTEOUSNESS.
Yes, I have. It upset him very much, caused doubt and anguish, in that broken man's soul.
I have spoken with the coordinator. We decided that this guy needs time. He was gone for a long time, and only recently returned. He has much to assimilate.
I agree.
Of course I remember. And yes, I agree with you.
I have stated this same thing many times.
Thank you for agreeing.
I am well verse with the US Navy's methodology of 'leadership'.
I also see the leadership requirements as listed in Timothy and in Titus. I have brought these up in Twigs. I have even taught these in Twigs.
Yet TWI was not formed in a manner to accept, or utilize Biblical leadership principles.
What the Navy does, works for the Navy. Keep in mind that the Navy destroys a lot of men's lives. Their system works for mission accomplishment. That does not mean it should be mimicked anywhere else.
IMHO, in a godly organization, Biblical leadership principles should be used. :)
I am certain you are correct.
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
Galen, I seem to remember awhile back in one of your posts you appeared to espouse the thought that it's o.k. for a guy to have multiple wives ? Just wondering if you still ascribe to that thinking...and is that one of the deciding factors in your going back to twi ? Just wondering, coz where I came from, the leadership there now appear to condone having 'concubines'.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Galen said:
"I also see the leadership requirements as listed in Timothy and in Titus."
.............................................................................
A large segment of modern Christianity, TWI especially, is built on "what Paul said", the Pauline Epistles.
Curiously, many scholars are of the opinion that someone other than Paul authored these two epistles.
I'm not sure what my point is there. I just find it curious.
............................................................................................
We return you now to your regularly scheduled program.....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
So....I ask you to please elaborate and THIS is your answer? A vague generalization that all men sin?
Well, in my opinion.....willful, deliberate sinning on his motorcoach between campuses and then, arriving to "teach the word" (cough, cough)
to more gullible youth is outside the boundaries of "we all sin." But hey, if you can justify that in your brain and wholeheartedly support
vpw's pfal class stuff....go for it.
The numerous errors have been pointed out on this forum for years. And, Albert Cliffe, an occultist, was the one who taught wierwille about
"the law of believing" where you could live forever if your believing didn't falter. Wierwille really chummed with Al, because he [Al] was a
cigarette-smoking believer, also. Albert went so far as to title his topic, "The Miracle of Believing." See, its all within you.....you just
got to believe.
Check out Mrs. W's book. It's in there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Expand on this please Sky. How do you know this - what did you see? Who talked with you?
Sometime one could wonder how much of a marriage it really was. Maybe in the early days, when the children were small.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
And yet somehow in TWI it always comes around to the leadership never admitting they sin, and the cover-up of apparent sin, all along with the abusive judgment of those under their authority. It kind of reminds me of the parable of the unjust ruler. Except in the end of that parable justice is served, yet in TWI somehow the abusers continue to remain in power and the blind do nothing about it.
And this is a perfect example of a cult mind-set and how abuse begins. You are evaluating a man not based upon Christianity, but rather on his proximity to the cult. "Gone for a long time, and only recently returned, with much to assimilate". What does that have to do with anything? And yet you and the leadership in charge have already discussed this and labeled the man.
Why would you not come from the perspective that someone who has been "gone for a long time" is actually living an equally Christ-like lifestyle to you who "have remained"????? "Much to assimilate?" Only if you are talking about making sense of the sinful behavior of the 3 Presidents of TWI and why you should remain under the latest's authority. Not much else to assimilate other than that.
I agree with you. Perhaps this is the problem - that TWI is not a godly organization. The behavior of those in power is self-serving rather than Christ-serving. So Biblical leadership principles are twisted around the politics of the paranoid few in power rather than truly being Christ-centered.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote:
Hey, John! Who the heck are you talking to? You quoted a post that I put up, but you do it in such a way that my name does NOT appear! Why? You quote Luke 8:38. Are you meaning to imply that you are a fox, being crafty and clever to have a hole to hide in? Howzabout Romans 12:7 or II Corinthians 8:21, providing things honest in the sight of all men?
Love,
Steve
Uh, that's Luke 8:58, not 38. Although 38 is interesting. Luke 8:58 is advanced class material. Sort of. This girl twig at my AC (Emporia '84) called themselves the something or other foxes and Luke 8:58 was their twig scripture. Sounds spiritual to me. Wonder if that was Rascal's twig/ she was at that AC I'm pretty sure. That scripture didn't have anything to do with your quote, but IMO your quote didn't have anything to do with anything. At least I got your name in it this time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Wow, how utterly clever...using sexual innuendo at a class that's supposed to be about learning leadership skills for Christian ministry. Yep, that's spiritual, alright.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
I think one really has to read into the scriptures with a skewed reasoning to deduce Paul might have been a womanizer and although it is true all of us are sinners....Paul did say he had lived in a clean conscience before God and all the Church. I agree with Skyrider when he says "WOW" really just wow. I am gobsmacked. I would say that kind of reading of scripture reveals more about the person who puts it forth than it does the Apostle Paul.
Impugn Paul's character so VP doesn't look so bad in comparison?
Paul in all likely hood gave his life for the gospel and he was who Jesus hand selected to basically finish His ministry.
Carry on.
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
I can not see forbidding things that God does not forbid. Nor discouraging things that God commands.
The only thing I ever heard on this topic was VPW teaching that polygamists were sex perverts [ which includes nearly all OT prophets].
I was hoping that is was not vague. That was why I put it in capital letters.
Is there a better method?
Do I repeat it a hundred times, before it grows to more than a vague generalization?
Paul [a divorcee] traveled a lot. His recorded traveling companions were named men. In one passage Paul defends his associating with women.
1Cor9:3 indicates that he was being accused of mischief.
4 Have we not power to eat and to drink?
5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and [as] the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
6 Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?
7 Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?
8 Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
10 Or saith he [it] altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, [this] is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.
11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, [is it] a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?
If this passage were strictly about him being an hireling, then there was no need to mention females in the passage.
He could freely eat of the harvest, the carnal things of the harvest. The harvest was not money from which to pay an hireling. The harvest was the 'babe's in the word that followed him.
I suspect that VPW used this passage, in his own reasoning to justify his actions.
Easier to justify than killing fellow christians right?
But, hey I got my pension. So killing a few dozen Christian Forces in Kosovo was worth it right? :)
I have participated in this being discussed in Twig.
A great many of the 'old timers' have been on this forum, or one of the previous forums, and are aware of what happened.
When I first began attending this Twig, the Coordinator [Ex-Corpse] and I had a number of conversations about his insistence on willful blindness. At times he had to go to great lengths, just to retain his 'positive attitude' and refuse to admit that wrong doing had happened. I rather enjoyed correcting him at times.
Our last Region Coordinator, follows this forum as well. He and I have spoken a few times about the things I post here. :)
I agree.
It is generally my turn once a month to share a teaching. I do simple 'word studies'. As we were taught years ago. As I have always done. [Pick a passage, look for figures of speech, examine the original words used, with deeper insight reexamine the context to see how this changes the flavor of the context.] They all know how to do this. But it seems, that after many years of micromanagement, they have lost the ability. The others will read a magazine article, or a passage from some other book, reading around the Bible rarely the Bible itself.
I had not thought to impugn Paul.
No one on this forum [that I am aware[ of has done anything to make VPW look less bad. Certainly not I.
Interesting that you wish to paint me in such a manner.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
Well, then, stop doing it. You say Paul was divorced, yet scripture never mentions Paul was divorced. He could have been widowed. We are not even 100% sure he had to be married and YES I know his resume and that he was a member of the Sanhedrin. However, we may not know all the particulars of Paul's experience with the Sanhedrin. We do know he had a nephew and a sister because scripture tells us plainly. All Paul is saying here in this passage is that he could be married if he wanted to....why is that so difficult to see as it is fairly plain and straight forward. This passage has nothing to do with womanizing.....
Might I gently point out that Jesus also traveled with women and some of them actually financially supported Him. Jesus was accused of all kinds of nefarious things.....as was Paul....and we are free to think what we will, but I think what we read into scripture speaks more to our own character .
I may be accused of being to doctrinal here, but I just hope you reconsider your interpretation and maybe better bible tools and teachers could help.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
"The only thing I ever heard on this topic was VPW teaching that polygamists were sex perverts.".....Galen
According to the definition of polygamy, as VPW presented it in CF&S, he, himself, was a polygamist.
Where does that leave us?
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
If Jesus had been reaping the "harvest" of his women followers, you can be absolutely certain that would appear in the "evidence" against him. The Pharisees would have loved it. Real evidence against him. Real contradiction of OT rulings.
If Paul had been reaping the "harvest" of his women followers, there would surely be a record of the accusations against him. That he didn't practice what he preached.
Don't you think this "leading about" of women and having authority over them is more a comment on the patriarchal society in which Paul found himself operating? In the same way that Arab women EVEN NOW have to have a male with them to do certain things, or at least have male consent? In Saudi Arabia women aren't even allowed to drive a car, much less go out without some male's company. Women have very few rights in some Arab countries. They have to be "led" because they're not seen as independent responsible citizens. Elsewhere Paul writes about men having power to deal with "virgins" - virgin daughters to be given (or not) in marriage. He isn't talking about "babes" that could be passed around. Nor "babes" that Paul himself helped himself to.
Talk about twisting the scriptures... :confused:/>
Link to comment
Share on other sites
krys
Thanks Twinky! I never thought about that aspect of their lives. I just thought that meant Paul was "in charge". These little details never dawned on me so I'm glad you pointed them out.
Now I understand why he was not married at this point in is life. How could he take care of the new and blossoming church and a wife?! I don't think he could have completed any of his ministry with a wife (at that time).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
And I remember reading years ago that the Sanheddrin council could make exceptions to the 'married' rule, if the man in question was an exceptional figure....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
Thought for the day....I know VP was everything people express here (and probably worse )....but I cant help thinking that without the VP's and the Kenneth Copelands and Joel ( mr. plastic} Osteen and Joyce Meyers and yes, even the Benny ( am I still married ) Hinn's...whether Christianity today would be almost dead in the water...so droll and lifeless without these marketing gurus ?? I know VP rehashed BG Leonards work, but as someone pointed out, BG Leonard was no evangelist/marketer ! The people mentioned above make/made Gods' Word come alive for a lot of folks, something I think even the honourable Billy Graham would struggle to do today.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Though I understand your point, Allan, you have to ask yourself how much of it was "God's Word"? Much of what we marveled at, back in the day, as being earth shattering new information has been shown to be nothing more than shoddy "research", laden with error. I don't think that presents us with cause to celebrate.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
A few weeks ago we finished reading Matthew Avery Sutton's Aimee Semple McPherson and the Resurrection of Christian America (2007). McPherson was probably the most effective, yet also the most human in every sense of the word, evangelist in the twentieth century, including Billy Graham. Without McPherson's Four Square Gospel, it's hard to see how evangelism could have stayed as lively as it did, though I think Graham would still have had a lot of influence. In a sense, McPherson kept evangelism from dying out with the fundamentalist movement after 1925,and Graham brought it back to a degree of genuine respectability.
VP himself has had a minimal effect on Christianity as a whole. His depredations wreaked havoc in the lives of far too many individuals, but from an organizational point of view, The Way International was as evanescent as a breeze. In terms of doctrine, he turned out a mish-mash of plagiarized ideas that could not hold together under anything more than the most sophomoric analysis. There is NO Wierwillian school of thought. Organizationally, TWI probably stopped running on anything other than momentum even before Wierwille retired, and it commenced to disintegrate within a year of his death. What's left is a miserable retirement scam for a few crooks and their blind toadies rotting away in an Ohio cornfield.
As cults go, the Mormons, the Moonies and Scientology have had more real influence, and the People's Temple, Jim and Tammy Fay Baker, Jimmy Swaggart, the Branch Davidians and Heaven's Gate have been more spectacular. The Raelians seem to be on the rise now.
How exceedingly strange it is that TWI's lecturing drones on and on, long after all other signs of life have dried up and blown away!
Love,
Steve
Edited by Steve LortzLink 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.