As far as I know, Oral Roberts was the first to teach it in the 1950's as part of his famous "The Fourth Man" sermon.
You can listen to it HERE. The Red Thread begins at about 37:30.
It may very well predate Oral Roberts but I'm not aware of any evidence to that effect.
edit: I remember Wierwille teaching this sermon at the Advanced Class in 1973 as if it was his own. I don't recall him ever giving credit to Roberts. Maybe he did and I missed it. It was along time ago.
Oral Roberts taught it first. OR started teaching it with his teaching called "The Fourth Man." He taught that one from at least the 1950s onward because there's a YT video of him teaching on it listed as from the 1950s. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHnniRcNjN4
"Charges that “the Master teacher” V.P. Wierwille plagiarized large sections of other authors’ books also occupy many conversations. This writer published the first examples in 1980, showing that in his Receiving the Holy Spirit Today Wierwille plagiarized sections of E.W. Bullinger’s The Giver and His Gifts.1 By 1987 Jay Valusek and I had also published excerpts showing Wierwille had plagiarized portions of The Gift of the Holy Spirit by J.E. Stiles, The Father and His Family by E.W. Kenyon, and Selected Writings, The Church Epistles, The Mystery, How to Enjoy the Bible, and Figures of Speech Used in the Bible by Bullinger.2 Recently, more examples have been uncovered, including (but not limited to) Wierwille’s use of:
· Bullinger in his University of Life course on Thessalonians.
· B.G. Leonard’s The Gifts of the Spirit in his Receiving the Holy Spirit Today and the Intermediate and Advanced Power for Abundant Living courses.
· Oral Roberts’s The Red Thread in his Lifestyle of God’s Word."
========================================
DWBH, Feb 26, 2016.
"Good post WordWolf.
At the advanced class 1972 in Rye, NY, vic played the tape of Oral Roberts' preaching on The Red Thread. After the tape, Vic got into a rap about how he almost got hooked up with Oral and Billy Graham. His plan was for them to do the evangelizing and then send all their converts to vic to be under the Teacher at The Way. Vic said evangelism was not his "long suit" but t it was Graham's and Roberts.
He said the thwarting point was the Trinity. The usual excuse for his obnoxiousness and pugnacity, which turned off everyone who wasn't in vic's
Way. Lazy back then already expecting everyone else to evangelize as WordWolf posted, and then send all those new students Vic's way. I'll be the apostle, prophet and teacher, the pope of New Knoxville hanging out at the family farm where he was born. Handy dandy, eh?"
==========================================
skyrider, Oct 28, 2015.
"Rev. Oral Roberts' teaching on "The Fourth Man" schooled wierwille
on the full exhaustive, expansive and exalted Jesus Christ.
In Genesis, he is.........The seed of the woman
In Exodus, he is..........The Passover lamb
In Leviticus, he is.......Our High Priest
In Numbers, he is.........Pillar of Cloud by Day, Pillar of Fire by Night
In Deuteronomy, he is.....The Prophet like unto Moses
In Joshua, he is..........The Captain of our salvation
In Judges, he is..........The Lawgiver
In Ruth, he is............Our Kinsmen Redeemer
.............<snip>
In Revelation, he is......The King of kings and Lord of lords
=====================================
OperaBuff, Oct 3, 2011.
You can listen to Oral Roberts delivering his teaching called "The Fourth Man" here:
"The Red Thread" was always one of my most favorite VPW teachings. It's on STS tape number 904, recorded in March 1978. Until I read this thread, I had no idea he stole it from Oral Roberts.
P.S. STS tape number 763, titled "Our God Is Able" contains much of this Oral Roberts teaching as well. sheeesh."
I'm glad to know that. Something I can accept, then, as not a VPW invention.
The arrogance of that PoS wanting reputable preachers to evangelize and then send their converts to him (gag!) to corrupt and ruin. I don't think many church-attending people are aware of the Red Thread; it doesn't seem familiar to them when I've "tested the waters" previously.
Yes.......The Red Thread was Oral Robert's teaching on "The Fourth Man."
What I find interesting is that after some 40 years.......the plagiarist wierwille is still hiding in the shadows by wierwille-apologists and sycophant cultists. This dynamic teaching was skewed by Mr. Tweak Man......wierwille, a fitting example to everything else he did.
In this thread, The Game of Incrementalism.......(page 2) the fawning wierwille-admirer says ".......so what?" He didn't care that wierwille stole it, nor had he ever heard the original. So, how does one know if wierwille's plagiarized teaching is the best......if he had never heard the original?
In a nutshell, it shows how one holds onto their cult leader and their perceived little corner of the world.
I found my Red Thread long-sleeve T shirt recently. I don't plan on ever wearing it again. But I was interested to consider where the supposed "red thread" came from. It's still an idea propagated by ex-Wayfers.
I listened to some of the OR tape. He lists his "fourth man" in every book of the bible, but giving different "descriptors" of who or what the red thread is. So did VPW invent these "descriptors" (for want of a better word)? Because clearly they aren't Roberts's descriptions.
It's something that came up in my church housegroup this evening. Nobody else has heard of any "red threads" and it was a novel concept to them. But I don't want to be spouting off about something that's essential Wayfer doctrine. Happy to share if it's somebody else's idea.
I found my Red Thread long-sleeve T shirt recently. I don't plan on ever wearing it again. But I was interested to consider where the supposed "red thread" came from. It's still an idea propagated by ex-Wayfers.
I listened to some of the OR tape. He lists his "fourth man" in every book of the bible, but giving different "descriptors" of who or what the red thread is. So did VPW invent these "descriptors" (for want of a better word)? Because clearly they aren't Roberts's descriptions.
It's something that came up in my church housegroup this evening. Nobody else has heard of any "red threads" and it was a novel concept to them. But I don't want to be spouting off about something that's essential Wayfer doctrine. Happy to share if it's somebody else's idea.
Further thoughts, anyone?
From what I remember Oral Robert's teaching might have been originally titled The Fourth Man - keying off the account in Daniel 3 - Roberts asked "who was that fourth man?" ...from Daniel 3 verse 25 "He answered and said, “But I see four men unbound, walking in the midst of the fire, and they are not hurt; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods.”...ESV
It was that "Fourth man thingy, but OR used different descriptors. So where the heck did VPW get his descriptors? Surely ... did he read and study his Bible?
It was that "Fourth man thingy, but OR used different descriptors. So where the heck did VPW get his descriptors? Surely ... did he read and study his Bible?
From what I remember wierwille did use many of Robert’s descriptions – but you know it wouldn’t take a whole lot of work to find alternates; At the time of wierwille’s teaching on tape – our Twig got really excited about it; one lady in our Twig was curious as to where in the Bible wierwille got these descriptions; that put me "on the spot" as the Twig leader – as a former TWI-study-bug I took that as a challenge and with the help of Young’s Concordance to the Bible I found scriptural references for all those titles besides alternate descriptions/passages – I gave her my handwritten homework-for-extra-credit. The point is wierwille probably didn’t need much more than a concordance and I imagine he had a general knowledge of the scope of The Bible anyway...I tend to think there might be something to the idea that you'll find Jesus Christ everywhere in The Bible - after all he is The Word...if anything wierwille might have changed some descriptions so as to cover his tracks on plagiarism...it was a pretty exciting teaching though - I remember some leadership in our state memorized the Red Thread and would quote it verbatim during a teaching.
Yes, Jesus in every book. In researching whether anybody else thinks this apart from Wayfers, I came across something that looked quite interesting - but then I discovered it was the exact list, with scripture references - produced by an ex-Wayfer in his own mini-ministry. The Oral Roberts version gives different "identities" (also with verses) and there are references on other sites. It leads to the consideration of how legit those sites are - who produces the materials thereon, what's their basis, background, theological position? (I'm getting cynical and suspicious in my old age!)
Yes, Jesus in every book. In researching whether anybody else thinks this apart from Wayfers, I came across something that looked quite interesting - but then I discovered it was the exact list, with scripture references - produced by an ex-Wayfer in his own mini-ministry. The Oral Roberts version gives different "identities" (also with verses) and there are references on other sites. It leads to the consideration of how legit those sites are - who produces the materials thereon, what's their basis, background, theological position? (I'm getting cynical and suspicious in my old age!)
Hi Twinky,
is part of your concern ex-Wafers or other sites do not give proper credit to the source of their list? I can understand that…but as far as variations on the list I think there’s a lot of leeway because how one understands the Bible depends on how one interprets it. That goes for doctrine too – more on that in a little bit.
As an example of another variation of listing Jesus represented in each book of the Bible – I have a book by Henrietta Mears (the book jacket states Mears trained, influenced or inspired thousands of young men and women to serve in Christian ministry including Billy Graham and Campus Crusade for Christ founders Bill and Vonette Bright) it’s titled What the Bible is All About …It’s an easy read and occasionally I read it with my daughter…anyway – I thought you might like a comparison of a few titles of Oral Roberts’ list to Henrietta Mears’ “list” – which are really the chapter heading for her giving a brief explanation of each book in the Bible…and this is just a brief random sampling:
The book of Genesis:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the seed of the woman
Henrietta Mears: Genesis portrays Jesus Christ, Our Creator God
The book of Exodus:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the Passover Lamb
Henrietta Mears: Exodus portrays Jesus Christ, Our Passover Lamb
The book of Numbers:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night
Henrietta Mears: Numbers portrays Jesus Christ, Our “Lifted-up One”
The book of Psalms:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is our Shepherd
Henrietta Mears: Psalms portrays Jesus Christ as our All in All
The book of Ezekiel:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the wonderful four-faced man
Henrietta Mears: Jesus Christ is portrayed as the Son of Man
The Book of Daniel:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the fourth man in the fiery furnace
Henrietta Mears: Daniel portrays Jesus Christ, the Smiting Stone
The book of Matthew:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the Messiah
Henrietta Mears: Matthew portrays Jesus Christ as the Promised Messiah
The book of Acts:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the Holy Ghost
Henrietta Mears: Jesus Christ is portrayed as the Living Lord
The book of Hebrews:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the Blood of the Everlasting Covenant
Henrietta Mears: Jesus Christ is portrayed as Our Intercessor at the Throne
As you can see there are some JC portrayals where Roberts and Mears are similar and some where they differ – and by the way, to give Roberts some more credit – if you looked at the link I gave in a previous post – he adds a lot of other portrayals found in Scripture after he completes the by-each-book-of-the-Bible list… And actually I don’t have a problem with either interpretation. The thing I like about Mears’ book is that she devoted several pages of a chapter with scriptural references for each book of the Bible and how each book specifically portrays Jesus Christ.
== == == == ==
As I mentioned earlier, I wanted to mention something about doctrine as it relates to the interpretation of Scripture. Over the years since I left TWI I’ve accumulated several systematic theologies – I think I’m up to 11 now – and I made it a point to select authors from various viewpoints – Evangelicals and subsets like Fundamentalism, Charismatic, Modernism, Liberal, etc. I value different perspectives and find things of merit in all.
One of my favorite authors on theological stuff is Alister McGrath . On pages 28 and 29 of his book Understanding Doctrine McGrath states the following:
“A helpful way of thinking of the relation of doctrine to Scripture, probably suggested by a growing Victorian public interest in botanical gardens, was put forward by the nineteenth-century Scottish writer Thomas Guthrie. Guthrie argued that Scripture is like nature, in which flowers and plants grow freely in their natural habitat, unordered by human hands. The human desire for orderliness leads to these plants being collected and arranged in botanical gardens according to their species, in order that they can be individually studied in more detail. The same plants are found in different contexts – one of which is natural, the other of which is the result of human ordering. Doctrine represents the human attempt to order the ideas of Scripture, arranging them in a logical manner in order that their mutual relation can be better understood.”
End of excerpt
== == ==
I think I’ve referred to this McGrath quote a couple of times before on Grease Spot, because it excites me as a student of the Bible to be aware of there being more than one interpretation of Scripture and to appreciate the viewpoints of others.
is part of your concern ex-Wafers or other sites do not give proper credit to the source of their list?
I wondered if anyone apart from ex-Wayfers ever talked about "the red thread." Or whether it was only ex-Wayfers (usually pushing their own wannabe ministries) that got excited about the idea. Several of the sites I looked at that described red thread are clearly ex-Wayfers; the Jesus descriptions are the same, and the wording of any supporting paragraph is the same old jargon - even though many don't give any names in the About Us section of their websites.
It was something that was relevant to my housegroup discussions on Wednesday evening. They were very interested when I asked if anyone had heard of the red thread and wanted to know more. But the last thing I want to do is push TWI type doctrine on this lovely group of people.
I wondered if anyone apart from ex-Wayfers ever talked about "the red thread." Or whether it was only ex-Wayfers (usually pushing their own wannabe ministries) that got excited about the idea. Several of the sites I looked at that described red thread are clearly ex-Wayfers; the Jesus descriptions are the same, and the wording of any supporting paragraph is the same old jargon - even though many don't give any names in the About Us section of their websites.
It was something that was relevant to my housegroup discussions on Wednesday evening. They were very interested when I asked if anyone had heard of the red thread and wanted to know more. But the last thing I want to do is push TWI type doctrine on this lovely group of people.
Okay, I think I understand your concern. I really don’t see “the red thread” as a TWI doctrine per se, as far as the concept goes – Jesus Christ symbolized in every book of the Bible. Perhaps wierwille merely slapped the title “the red thread” on Roberts’ “fourth man” teaching. Does that make it a TWI doctrine? I always thought “the red thread” was a cool title that really captured the imagination – and it seemed to have the same effect on your discussion group. I think it would be a fun thing to explore in your group – but that’s just me.
I found a similar idea while googling “the red thread” – it’s “the scarlet thread running through the Bible”: Theologians and Bible students sometimes refer to “the scarlet thread running through the Bible.” By this they mean that the Bible’s theme is Jesus Christ and His sacrifice for the redemption of mankind. The blood of Christ runs throughout the entire Bible, symbolically. It is seen in the animals killed in Eden to provide garments for Adam and Eve, the ram that took Isaac’s place on the altar of Moriah, the Passover lamb, the institution of the sacrificial system, the scarlet rope of Rahab, and the thousands of years of sacrifices performed at the tabernacle and temple. The scarlet thread runs all the way up to John the Baptist’s declaration, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29) and to the foot of the cross, where Jesus finally says, “It is finished” (John 19:30).
“Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Hebrews 9:22), and that’s why the symbolism of the scarlet thread in the Bible is significant. The scarlet thread is the theme of atonement found throughout the pages of Scripture.
As a side note I came across “the red thread of fate” - - “also referred to as the Red Thread of Marriage, and other variants, is an East Asian belief originating from Chinese mythology. It is commonly thought of as an invisible red cord around the finger of those that are destined to meet one another in a certain situation as they are "their true love"…The two people connected by the red thread are destined lovers, regardless of place, time, or circumstances. This magical cord may stretch or tangle, but never break. This myth is similar to the Western concept of soulmate or a destined partner.” From Wikipedia - the red thread of fate
…I thought this was interesting and started playing with the idea of Jesus Christ as figuratively the Red Thread – who I was destined to meet regardless of place, time or circumstances – this Scarlet Cord would stretch and tangle through the space-time continuum but never break.
the concept of finding Christ throughout the Bible is a foundational Christian principle. We see him in direct prophecies, types (like king David being a type of King Jesus), foreshadowing (sacrificial lambs in the temple), prophecies with double fulfillment, etc. The "red thread" is just a way of "packaging" it in a sermon or Bible study in a way that is memorable. "Red" or scarlet is a natural choice because the blood shed by Christ is central to the faith. "Thread" is a natural choice because everyone has carpets and textiles, and countless people wove their own over the centuries- many with intricate patterns and symbolism built in (including red in temple textiles). You could pick other figures of speech besides thread, like chain or pattern, to follow the presentations of Christ through the Bible. Picking one from each book is also a handy structure, but may be to long for a typical sermon if you want to talk about any passages in any detail. No doubt VP stole the whole package from Roberts, since he loved to plagiarize. But I have no doubt that hundreds of preachers have preached sermons/ studies very much like this over the centuries. I wouldn't be surprised if you found examples of this in centuries of British preaching and/ or the pre- and post- Nicene church fathers (their writings fill about 25 volumes). There's nothing new under the sun.
"Romans Road" is a similar and very common way of "packaging" a series of verses to make them more memorable. As most of you know, it explains and leads people to faith in Christ via Romans 3, 5, 8 and 10.
the concept of finding Christ throughout the Bible is a foundational Christian principle. We see him in direct prophecies, types (like king David being a type of King Jesus), foreshadowing (sacrificial lambs in the temple), prophecies with double fulfillment, etc. The "red thread" is just a way of "packaging" it in a sermon or Bible study in a way that is memorable. "Red" or scarlet is a natural choice because the blood shed by Christ is central to the faith. "Thread" is a natural choice because everyone has carpets and textiles, and countless people wove their own over the centuries- many with intricate patterns and symbolism built in (including red in temple textiles). You could pick other figures of speech besides thread, like chain or pattern, to follow the presentations of Christ through the Bible. Picking one from each book is also a handy structure, but may be to long for a typical sermon if you want to talk about any passages in any detail. No doubt VP stole the whole package from Roberts, since he loved to plagiarize. But I have no doubt that hundreds of preachers have preached sermons/ studies very much like this over the centuries. I wouldn't be surprised if you found examples of this in centuries of British preaching and/ or the pre- and post- Nicene church fathers (their writings fill about 25 volumes). There's nothing new under the sun.
38 minutes ago, johnj said:
"Romans Road" is a similar and very common way of "packaging" a series of verses to make them more memorable. As most of you know, it explains and leads people to faith in Christ via Romans 3, 5, 8 and 10.
the concept of finding Christ throughout the Bible is a foundational Christian principle. We see him in direct prophecies, types (like king David being a type of King Jesus), foreshadowing (sacrificial lambs in the temple), prophecies with double fulfillment, etc. The "red thread" is just a way of "packaging" it in a sermon or Bible study in a way that is memorable. "Red" or scarlet is a natural choice because the blood shed by Christ is central to the faith. "Thread" is a natural choice because everyone has carpets and textiles, and countless people wove their own over the centuries- many with intricate patterns and symbolism built in (including red in temple textiles). You could pick other figures of speech besides thread, like chain or pattern, to follow the presentations of Christ through the Bible. Picking one from each book is also a handy structure, but may be to long for a typical sermon if you want to talk about any passages in any detail. No doubt VP stole the whole package from Roberts, since he loved to plagiarize. But I have no doubt that hundreds of preachers have preached sermons/ studies very much like this over the centuries. I wouldn't be surprised if you found examples of this in centuries of British preaching and/ or the pre- and post- Nicene church fathers (their writings fill about 25 volumes). There's nothing new under the sun.
I'm guessing that some variations of the "red thread" idea of tracing the history of Christ by comparing it to weaving and fabric have popped up here and there for a long time somewhere in the Christian Church. I think Americans have less sense of heritage and symbolism than other cultures, especially historic ones. But Scotts identify their clans by the colors and weave of tartans/ kilts. Mid eastern tribes identified themselves similarly, and Palestinian nationalism is in the colors and pattern of the headdress. Others express personal or tribal history in embroidery, whether red thread or another color. Americans see some symbolism in color, like patriotic red white and blue. I suspect certain weavers "signed" their handiwork in some part of the fabric. Identity and history by weaves probably started by accident, because each locale had only certain natural dyes and fabrics available, though they grew as trade expanded. So why not identify Christ as having been woven into the fabric of the history of God's people as recorded in Scripture?
is part of your concern ex-Wafers or other sites do not give proper credit to the source of their list? I can understand that…but as far as variations on the list I think there’s a lot of leeway because how one understands the Bible depends on how one interprets it. That goes for doctrine too – more on that in a little bit.
As an example of another variation of listing Jesus represented in each book of the Bible – I have a book by Henrietta Mears (the book jacket states Mears trained, influenced or inspired thousands of young men and women to serve in Christian ministry including Billy Graham and Campus Crusade for Christ founders Bill and Vonette Bright) it’s titled What the Bible is All About …It’s an easy read and occasionally I read it with my daughter…anyway – I thought you might like a comparison of a few titles of Oral Roberts’ list to Henrietta Mears’ “list” – which are really the chapter heading for her giving a brief explanation of each book in the Bible…and this is just a brief random sampling:
The book of Genesis:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the seed of the woman
Henrietta Mears: Genesis portrays Jesus Christ, Our Creator God
The book of Exodus:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the Passover Lamb
Henrietta Mears: Exodus portrays Jesus Christ, Our Passover Lamb
The book of Numbers:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night
Henrietta Mears: Numbers portrays Jesus Christ, Our “Lifted-up One”
The book of Psalms:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is our Shepherd
Henrietta Mears: Psalms portrays Jesus Christ as our All in All
The book of Ezekiel:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the wonderful four-faced man
Henrietta Mears: Jesus Christ is portrayed as the Son of Man
The Book of Daniel:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the fourth man in the fiery furnace
Henrietta Mears: Daniel portrays Jesus Christ, the Smiting Stone
The book of Matthew:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the Messiah
Henrietta Mears: Matthew portrays Jesus Christ as the Promised Messiah
The book of Acts:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the Holy Ghost
Henrietta Mears: Jesus Christ is portrayed as the Living Lord
The book of Hebrews:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the Blood of the Everlasting Covenant
Henrietta Mears: Jesus Christ is portrayed as Our Intercessor at the Throne
As you can see there are some JC portrayals where Roberts and Mears are similar and some where they differ – and by the way, to give Roberts some more credit – if you looked at the link I gave in a previous post – he adds a lot of other portrayals found in Scripture after he completes the by-each-book-of-the-Bible list… And actually I don’t have a problem with either interpretation. The thing I like about Mears’ book is that she devoted several pages of a chapter with scriptural references for each book of the Bible and how each book specifically portrays Jesus Christ.
== == == == ==
As I mentioned earlier, I wanted to mention something about doctrine as it relates to the interpretation of Scripture. Over the years since I left TWI I’ve accumulated several systematic theologies – I think I’m up to 11 now – and I made it a point to select authors from various viewpoints – Evangelicals and subsets like Fundamentalism, Charismatic, Modernism, Liberal, etc. I value different perspectives and find things of merit in all.
One of my favorite authors on theological stuff is Alister McGrath . On pages 28 and 29 of his book Understanding Doctrine McGrath states the following:
“A helpful way of thinking of the relation of doctrine to Scripture, probably suggested by a growing Victorian public interest in botanical gardens, was put forward by the nineteenth-century Scottish writer Thomas Guthrie. Guthrie argued that Scripture is like nature, in which flowers and plants grow freely in their natural habitat, unordered by human hands. The human desire for orderliness leads to these plants being collected and arranged in botanical gardens according to their species, in order that they can be individually studied in more detail. The same plants are found in different contexts – one of which is natural, the other of which is the result of human ordering. Doctrine represents the human attempt to order the ideas of Scripture, arranging them in a logical manner in order that their mutual relation can be better understood.”
End of excerpt
== == ==
I think I’ve referred to this McGrath quote a couple of times before on Grease Spot, because it excites me as a student of the Bible to be aware of there being more than one interpretation of Scripture and to appreciate the viewpoints of others.
I love Guthrie’s quote! My own journey post-twi took me to the Episcopal church. One of its primary draws for me was that they do not have an official doctrine (dogma) which is very restful after the years of “The Bible is the revealed Word and Will of God” , et cetera. Among my bedrock beliefs is that no one, ever, in the history of humankind has had the last word or a complete understanding of the mind of God. God is God and we are not, so nobody gets to decide for everyone else what is “truth.”
I love Guthrie’s quote! My own journey post-twi took me to the Episcopal church. One of its primary draws for me was that they do not have an official doctrine (dogma) which is very restful after the years of “The Bible is the revealed Word and Will of God” , et cetera. Among my bedrock beliefs is that no one, ever, in the history of humankind has had the last word or a complete understanding of the mind of God. God is God and we are not, so nobody gets to decide for everyone else what is “truth.”
Recommended Posts
waysider
As far as I know, Oral Roberts was the first to teach it in the 1950's as part of his famous "The Fourth Man" sermon.
You can listen to it HERE. The Red Thread begins at about 37:30.
It may very well predate Oral Roberts but I'm not aware of any evidence to that effect.
edit: I remember Wierwille teaching this sermon at the Advanced Class in 1973 as if it was his own. I don't recall him ever giving credit to Roberts. Maybe he did and I missed it. It was along time ago.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Oral Roberts taught it first. OR started teaching it with his teaching called "The Fourth Man." He taught that one from at least the 1950s onward because there's a YT video of him teaching on it listed as from the 1950s. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHnniRcNjN4
"Oral Roberts the 4th Man (1950s)."
==================================
http://www.equip.org/article/the-way-tree-is-splintering/
"Charges that “the Master teacher” V.P. Wierwille plagiarized large sections of other authors’ books also occupy many conversations. This writer published the first examples in 1980, showing that in his Receiving the Holy Spirit Today Wierwille plagiarized sections of E.W. Bullinger’s The Giver and His Gifts.1 By 1987 Jay Valusek and I had also published excerpts showing Wierwille had plagiarized portions of The Gift of the Holy Spirit by J.E. Stiles, The Father and His Family by E.W. Kenyon, and Selected Writings, The Church Epistles, The Mystery, How to Enjoy the Bible, and Figures of Speech Used in the Bible by Bullinger.2 Recently, more examples have been uncovered, including (but not limited to) Wierwille’s use of:
· Bullinger in his University of Life course on Thessalonians.
· B.G. Leonard’s The Gifts of the Spirit in his Receiving the Holy Spirit Today and the Intermediate and Advanced Power for Abundant Living courses.
· Oral Roberts’s The Red Thread in his Lifestyle of God’s Word."
========================================
DWBH, Feb 26, 2016.
"Good post WordWolf.
At the advanced class 1972 in Rye, NY, vic played the tape of Oral Roberts' preaching on The Red Thread. After the tape, Vic got into a rap about how he almost got hooked up with Oral and Billy Graham. His plan was for them to do the evangelizing and then send all their converts to vic to be under the Teacher at The Way. Vic said evangelism was not his "long suit" but t it was Graham's and Roberts.
He said the thwarting point was the Trinity. The usual excuse for his obnoxiousness and pugnacity, which turned off everyone who wasn't in vic's
Way. Lazy back then already expecting everyone else to evangelize as WordWolf posted, and then send all those new students Vic's way. I'll be the apostle, prophet and teacher, the pope of New Knoxville hanging out at the family farm where he was born. Handy dandy, eh?"
==========================================
skyrider, Oct 28, 2015.
"Rev. Oral Roberts' teaching on "The Fourth Man" schooled wierwille
on the full exhaustive, expansive and exalted Jesus Christ.
In Genesis, he is.........The seed of the woman
In Exodus, he is..........The Passover lamb
In Leviticus, he is.......Our High Priest
In Numbers, he is.........Pillar of Cloud by Day, Pillar of Fire by Night
In Deuteronomy, he is.....The Prophet like unto Moses
In Joshua, he is..........The Captain of our salvation
In Judges, he is..........The Lawgiver
In Ruth, he is............Our Kinsmen Redeemer
.............<snip>
In Revelation, he is......The King of kings and Lord of lords
=====================================
OperaBuff, Oct 3, 2011.
You can listen to Oral Roberts delivering his teaching called "The Fourth Man" here:
http://earstohear.net/Kingdom/The%20Fourth%20Man_1.mp3
And a book by book listing of who Jesus Christ is in the Bible:
http://earstohear.net/Kingdom/fourthman.html
"The Red Thread" was always one of my most favorite VPW teachings. It's on STS tape number 904, recorded in March 1978. Until I read this thread, I had no idea he stole it from Oral Roberts.
P.S. STS tape number 763, titled "Our God Is Able" contains much of this Oral Roberts teaching as well. sheeesh."
================================
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
I'm glad to know that. Something I can accept, then, as not a VPW invention.
The arrogance of that PoS wanting reputable preachers to evangelize and then send their converts to him (gag!) to corrupt and ruin. I don't think many church-attending people are aware of the Red Thread; it doesn't seem familiar to them when I've "tested the waters" previously.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Yes.......The Red Thread was Oral Robert's teaching on "The Fourth Man."
What I find interesting is that after some 40 years.......the plagiarist wierwille is still hiding in the shadows by wierwille-apologists and sycophant cultists. This dynamic teaching was skewed by Mr. Tweak Man......wierwille, a fitting example to everything else he did.
In this thread, The Game of Incrementalism.......(page 2) the fawning wierwille-admirer says ".......so what?" He didn't care that wierwille stole it, nor had he ever heard the original. So, how does one know if wierwille's plagiarized teaching is the best......if he had never heard the original?
In a nutshell, it shows how one holds onto their cult leader and their perceived little corner of the world.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
penguin2
Thanks! I couldn't remember. And now I feel better about believing it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
I found my Red Thread long-sleeve T shirt recently. I don't plan on ever wearing it again. But I was interested to consider where the supposed "red thread" came from. It's still an idea propagated by ex-Wayfers.
I listened to some of the OR tape. He lists his "fourth man" in every book of the bible, but giving different "descriptors" of who or what the red thread is. So did VPW invent these "descriptors" (for want of a better word)? Because clearly they aren't Roberts's descriptions.
It's something that came up in my church housegroup this evening. Nobody else has heard of any "red threads" and it was a novel concept to them. But I don't want to be spouting off about something that's essential Wayfer doctrine. Happy to share if it's somebody else's idea.
Further thoughts, anyone?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
From what I remember Oral Robert's teaching might have been originally titled The Fourth Man - keying off the account in Daniel 3 - Roberts asked "who was that fourth man?" ...from Daniel 3 verse 25 "He answered and said, “But I see four men unbound, walking in the midst of the fire, and they are not hurt; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods.”...ESV
I found it in written form here: The Fourth Man by Oral Roberts
Edited by T-Bonerevision
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
It was that "Fourth man thingy, but OR used different descriptors. So where the heck did VPW get his descriptors? Surely ... did he read and study his Bible?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
From what I remember wierwille did use many of Robert’s descriptions – but you know it wouldn’t take a whole lot of work to find alternates; At the time of wierwille’s teaching on tape – our Twig got really excited about it; one lady in our Twig was curious as to where in the Bible wierwille got these descriptions; that put me "on the spot" as the Twig leader
– as a former TWI-study-bug I took that as a challenge and with the help of Young’s Concordance to the Bible I found scriptural references for all those titles besides alternate descriptions/passages – I gave her my handwritten homework-for-extra-credit. 
The point is wierwille probably didn’t need much more than a concordance and I imagine he had a general knowledge of the scope of The Bible anyway...I tend to think there might be something to the idea that you'll find Jesus Christ everywhere in The Bible - after all he is The Word...if anything wierwille might have changed some descriptions so as to cover his tracks on plagiarism...it was a pretty exciting teaching though - I remember some leadership in our state memorized the Red Thread and would quote it verbatim during a teaching.
Edited by T-Bonerevision
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Yes, Jesus in every book. In researching whether anybody else thinks this apart from Wayfers, I came across something that looked quite interesting - but then I discovered it was the exact list, with scripture references - produced by an ex-Wayfer in his own mini-ministry. The Oral Roberts version gives different "identities" (also with verses) and there are references on other sites. It leads to the consideration of how legit those sites are - who produces the materials thereon, what's their basis, background, theological position? (I'm getting cynical and suspicious in my old age!)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Hi Twinky,
is part of your concern ex-Wafers or other sites do not give proper credit to the source of their list? I can understand that…but as far as variations on the list I think there’s a lot of leeway because how one understands the Bible depends on how one interprets it. That goes for doctrine too – more on that in a little bit.
As an example of another variation of listing Jesus represented in each book of the Bible – I have a book by Henrietta Mears (the book jacket states Mears trained, influenced or inspired thousands of young men and women to serve in Christian ministry including Billy Graham and Campus Crusade for Christ founders Bill and Vonette Bright) it’s titled What the Bible is All About …It’s an easy read and occasionally I read it with my daughter…anyway – I thought you might like a comparison of a few titles of Oral Roberts’ list to Henrietta Mears’ “list” – which are really the chapter heading for her giving a brief explanation of each book in the Bible…and this is just a brief random sampling:
The book of Genesis:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the seed of the woman
Henrietta Mears: Genesis portrays Jesus Christ, Our Creator God
The book of Exodus:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the Passover Lamb
Henrietta Mears: Exodus portrays Jesus Christ, Our Passover Lamb
The book of Numbers:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night
Henrietta Mears: Numbers portrays Jesus Christ, Our “Lifted-up One”
The book of Psalms:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is our Shepherd
Henrietta Mears: Psalms portrays Jesus Christ as our All in All
The book of Ezekiel:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the wonderful four-faced man
Henrietta Mears: Jesus Christ is portrayed as the Son of Man
The Book of Daniel:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the fourth man in the fiery furnace
Henrietta Mears: Daniel portrays Jesus Christ, the Smiting Stone
The book of Matthew:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the Messiah
Henrietta Mears: Matthew portrays Jesus Christ as the Promised Messiah
The book of Acts:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the Holy Ghost
Henrietta Mears: Jesus Christ is portrayed as the Living Lord
The book of Hebrews:
Oral Roberts: Jesus Christ is the Blood of the Everlasting Covenant
Henrietta Mears: Jesus Christ is portrayed as Our Intercessor at the Throne
As you can see there are some JC portrayals where Roberts and Mears are similar and some where they differ – and by the way, to give Roberts some more credit – if you looked at the link I gave in a previous post – he adds a lot of other portrayals found in Scripture after he completes the by-each-book-of-the-Bible list… And actually I don’t have a problem with either interpretation. The thing I like about Mears’ book is that she devoted several pages of a chapter with scriptural references for each book of the Bible and how each book specifically portrays Jesus Christ.
== == == == ==
As I mentioned earlier, I wanted to mention something about doctrine as it relates to the interpretation of Scripture. Over the years since I left TWI I’ve accumulated several systematic theologies – I think I’m up to 11 now – and I made it a point to select authors from various viewpoints – Evangelicals and subsets like Fundamentalism, Charismatic, Modernism, Liberal, etc. I value different perspectives and find things of merit in all.
One of my favorite authors on theological stuff is Alister McGrath . On pages 28 and 29 of his book Understanding Doctrine McGrath states the following:
“A helpful way of thinking of the relation of doctrine to Scripture, probably suggested by a growing Victorian public interest in botanical gardens, was put forward by the nineteenth-century Scottish writer Thomas Guthrie. Guthrie argued that Scripture is like nature, in which flowers and plants grow freely in their natural habitat, unordered by human hands. The human desire for orderliness leads to these plants being collected and arranged in botanical gardens according to their species, in order that they can be individually studied in more detail. The same plants are found in different contexts – one of which is natural, the other of which is the result of human ordering. Doctrine represents the human attempt to order the ideas of Scripture, arranging them in a logical manner in order that their mutual relation can be better understood.”
End of excerpt
== == ==
I think I’ve referred to this McGrath quote a couple of times before on Grease Spot, because it excites me as a student of the Bible to be aware of there being more than one interpretation of Scripture and to appreciate the viewpoints of others.
Edited by T-Boneformatting and typos
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
I wondered if anyone apart from ex-Wayfers ever talked about "the red thread." Or whether it was only ex-Wayfers (usually pushing their own wannabe ministries) that got excited about the idea. Several of the sites I looked at that described red thread are clearly ex-Wayfers; the Jesus descriptions are the same, and the wording of any supporting paragraph is the same old jargon - even though many don't give any names in the About Us section of their websites.
It was something that was relevant to my housegroup discussions on Wednesday evening. They were very interested when I asked if anyone had heard of the red thread and wanted to know more. But the last thing I want to do is push TWI type doctrine on this lovely group of people.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Okay, I think I understand your concern. I really don’t see “the red thread” as a TWI doctrine per se, as far as the concept goes – Jesus Christ symbolized in every book of the Bible. Perhaps wierwille merely slapped the title “the red thread” on Roberts’ “fourth man” teaching. Does that make it a TWI doctrine? I always thought “the red thread” was a cool title that really captured the imagination – and it seemed to have the same effect on your discussion group. I think it would be a fun thing to explore in your group – but that’s just me.
I found a similar idea while googling “the red thread” – it’s “the scarlet thread running through the Bible”: Theologians and Bible students sometimes refer to “the scarlet thread running through the Bible.” By this they mean that the Bible’s theme is Jesus Christ and His sacrifice for the redemption of mankind. The blood of Christ runs throughout the entire Bible, symbolically. It is seen in the animals killed in Eden to provide garments for Adam and Eve, the ram that took Isaac’s place on the altar of Moriah, the Passover lamb, the institution of the sacrificial system, the scarlet rope of Rahab, and the thousands of years of sacrifices performed at the tabernacle and temple. The scarlet thread runs all the way up to John the Baptist’s declaration, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29) and to the foot of the cross, where Jesus finally says, “It is finished” (John 19:30).
“Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Hebrews 9:22), and that’s why the symbolism of the scarlet thread in the Bible is significant. The scarlet thread is the theme of atonement found throughout the pages of Scripture.
from: What is the significance of the scarlet thread in the Bible?
As a side note I came across “the red thread of fate” - - “also referred to as the Red Thread of Marriage, and other variants, is an East Asian belief originating from Chinese mythology. It is commonly thought of as an invisible red cord around the finger of those that are destined to meet one another in a certain situation as they are "their true love"…The two people connected by the red thread are destined lovers, regardless of place, time, or circumstances. This magical cord may stretch or tangle, but never break. This myth is similar to the Western concept of soulmate or a destined partner.” From Wikipedia - the red thread of fate
…I thought this was interesting and started playing with the idea of Jesus Christ as figuratively the Red Thread – who I was destined to meet regardless of place, time or circumstances – this Scarlet Cord would stretch and tangle through the space-time continuum but never break.
Edited by T-Boneformatting and typos
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnj
the concept of finding Christ throughout the Bible is a foundational Christian principle. We see him in direct prophecies, types (like king David being a type of King Jesus), foreshadowing (sacrificial lambs in the temple), prophecies with double fulfillment, etc. The "red thread" is just a way of "packaging" it in a sermon or Bible study in a way that is memorable. "Red" or scarlet is a natural choice because the blood shed by Christ is central to the faith. "Thread" is a natural choice because everyone has carpets and textiles, and countless people wove their own over the centuries- many with intricate patterns and symbolism built in (including red in temple textiles). You could pick other figures of speech besides thread, like chain or pattern, to follow the presentations of Christ through the Bible. Picking one from each book is also a handy structure, but may be to long for a typical sermon if you want to talk about any passages in any detail. No doubt VP stole the whole package from Roberts, since he loved to plagiarize. But I have no doubt that hundreds of preachers have preached sermons/ studies very much like this over the centuries. I wouldn't be surprised if you found examples of this in centuries of British preaching and/ or the pre- and post- Nicene church fathers (their writings fill about 25 volumes). There's nothing new under the sun.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnj
"Romans Road" is a similar and very common way of "packaging" a series of verses to make them more memorable. As most of you know, it explains and leads people to faith in Christ via Romans 3, 5, 8 and 10.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
that's some good points JohnJ !!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Thanks John. I appreciate that insight.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnj
I'm guessing that some variations of the "red thread" idea of tracing the history of Christ by comparing it to weaving and fabric have popped up here and there for a long time somewhere in the Christian Church. I think Americans have less sense of heritage and symbolism than other cultures, especially historic ones. But Scotts identify their clans by the colors and weave of tartans/ kilts. Mid eastern tribes identified themselves similarly, and Palestinian nationalism is in the colors and pattern of the headdress. Others express personal or tribal history in embroidery, whether red thread or another color. Americans see some symbolism in color, like patriotic red white and blue. I suspect certain weavers "signed" their handiwork in some part of the fabric. Identity and history by weaves probably started by accident, because each locale had only certain natural dyes and fabrics available, though they grew as trade expanded. So why not identify Christ as having been woven into the fabric of the history of God's people as recorded in Scripture?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace and Mercy
I love Guthrie’s quote! My own journey post-twi took me to the Episcopal church. One of its primary draws for me was that they do not have an official doctrine (dogma) which is very restful after the years of “The Bible is the revealed Word and Will of God” , et cetera. Among my bedrock beliefs is that no one, ever, in the history of humankind has had the last word or a complete understanding of the mind of God. God is God and we are not, so nobody gets to decide for everyone else what is “truth.”
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
Grace, great post!
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.