Of course if PFAL was given by revelation like the Bible was I'm sure it would fit into the about image very nicely. Maybe another poster could begin that work in order to present some solid evidence of this.
It was not, and does not. (Furthermore, I think your image misses way too many crossthreading, and blenderizes stuff that absolutely needs to be kept separated...)
I wish all posters could be conversational and thoughtful like that. These three posts are the kind I want to read again, and maybe ADD to them as opposed to attacking whatever points I could to discredit the whole post.
Again, I'm super short on time, but I will return to these posts to understand them better after a first fast read. I've noticed you both to be thoughtful, and I'm not surprised such posts came from you.
I'm only still slowly getting to know who is who here.
While my perspective might not be considered the opposite of that, it sure doesn't sync well with it. Personally, I find myself astonished at the divineness of scripture - and the venerable coherency of it all. Yes, it does contain within it many practical solutions for living a better life here on earth. But more than that, it inevitably frames the invisible spiritual world around us in ways that speak of realities that cannot be known or understood otherwise. And beyond what Jesus' words, actions and life (that was) might mean for us today, I believe what Paul wrote is what Christ's words and life (that now is) mean for us today.
This image represents ways in which the Bible refers back to itself. "it is written" and soforth.
Squint your eyes it's quite detailed.
Did Bible writers plagiarize? I mean, that's a lot of people over a lot of time writing the most successful book in history, maybe.
3 hours ago, Bolshevik said:
Of course if PFAL was given by revelation like the Bible was I'm sure it would fit into the about image very nicely. Maybe another poster could begin that work in order to present some solid evidence of this.
Bolshevik:
As a matter of fact, I really DO have something which relates with your "image". God forbid that I should flap my gums forever here about all of that. Let it suffice that I've found reasonable evidence for what appears as God displaying the scientific principle of the refraction of light into it's 7 (basic) colors, precisely as we observe from the bottom to the top of a rainbow in nature!
I've written a book Genesis One: God's Table of Contents to the Bible, which is available for download here at GS. Basically, what I mentioned above is what I discovered once (while "just playing around") trying to assign the most logical color for each of the 7 days in Genesis 1. (I sort of got lucky to discover this, if ya know what I mean.)
Be that as it may; read it if you like. Whether it's actual truth or not, I promise it's very interesting! But I will say this, which is more on topic:
I'll bet VP wanted us to take his PFAL much further than he did while here. I'll also bet he died with many things hidden in his heart which were either just "too far ahead of time" or he just didn't see them clearly enough to explain about while he was still alive.
And that's EXACTLY what I did with "my little study". Perhaps this sounds a bit weird: But sometimes I fondly imagine seeing VP at the bema and imparting what I found to him about "color" --- to his sheer delight! Be that as it may.
But to revere PFAL to be "perfect, just as it is" is just plain WRONG. (That's what TWI still supposes, even today --- which lauds VP's work far too highly!)
And Mike: Please don't be offended at my saying this: Even though you no longer attend Way fellowships, in your mindset you're still a part of the present day TWI's camp, even as I described it in the previous paragraph.
You need to recognize parts of PFAL which are worth keeping and (with meekness) recognize that which isn't --- which is basically what GS is truly all about: to help others to "go beyond the old wine skin", even as I'm assuming VP desired of us after his departure.
NOW: I feel the need to (at least) express one example of error in PFAL --- not to pick, but which makes far more sense then what was taught. Basically, VP divided the administrations incorrectly. He sided with Bullinger that the last administration (the 7th one) is "future paradise", aka: New Jerusalem.
But I can logically show how the 7th timefits much better at the throne --- which settles everything since the time of Adam in Eden. And then (numerically speaking) the spiritual perfection (7) with which God handles things at his great white throne (reconciling everything to his own satisfaction!)is a much better fit than supposing the 7th time is "the eternal state" (as Bullinger put it) or "final paradise" (as VP put it).
Following that, one has two choices: [1] He can either keep counting upwards (which makes New Jerusalem the 8th time, in keeping withthe brand new beginning of a brand new earth) OR one can just start over, just as though nothing matters about the second earth --- from Adam's time to God's throne. And in that case, New Jerusalem would be viewed as the commencement of the 3rd earth (ie: a simple beginning, even as "1" would properly indicate).
Note: Even calling Eden first is the same as assuming there was no earth before that. However: If one prefers to consider the 1st earth (prior to Adam), then Eden itself would be the 8th time --- which would also (as did New Jerusalem) represent the brand new beginning of a brand new earth.
Not to belabor this: But if you keep counting from there, then the judgment at God's throne would be 14th (7 x 2) --- rendering it as a time of "spiritual perfection (7) being established (2)", which includes two sets of seven: [1] from the very beginning of earth until it became without form and void, and [2] from Adam until something similar happens to the earth we presently live in, which we read about in the book of Revelation. (And then comes the judgment I spoke of earlier.)
As far as "poking fun here" at times: God does have a sense of humor. For instance, consider Job's remark to his miserable comforters: "No doubt YOU ARE THE ONES --- and wisdom shall die with you!" (ie: "I suppose when you all die, there just won't be any more wisdom, huh?")
Surely, I enjoy sarcasm at times. And I don't do that just to be mean --- but (usually) to prove a point, by either exaggerating or using hyperbole. And I see a lot of that here at GS! When such things are leveled at people here, it should be taken as advice to learn something from --- and not to get in a tizzy about.
So lighten up, and try to see things more clearly --- BEYOND where PFAL left off! To me, much of what's in that class is truly like spoiled leftovers, rotting in the fridge.
While my perspective might not be considered the opposite of that, it sure doesn't sync well with it. Personally, I find myself astonished at the divineness of scripture - and the venerable coherency of it all. Yes, it does contain within it many practical solutions for living a better life here on earth. But more than that, it inevitably frames the invisible spiritual world around us in ways that speak of realities that cannot be known or understood otherwise. And beyond what Jesus' words, actions and life (that was) might mean for us today, I believe what Paul wrote is what Christ's words and life (that now is) mean for us today.
Well, I don’t have any real problem with your viewpoint either…and perhaps we’re on more converging lines of thought rather than in some lockstep synchronization fashion (whatever the hell that is )…I too see a venerable coherency in scripture – though it may not be completely across the board like you do…I mean, without going into every single little doctrinal detail AND nuanced differences of a person’s viewpoint – I tend to think overall, most serious Bible students do not have much difficulty in arranging the great truths of the Bible when it speaks of sin, redemption, prayer, the person of Jesus Christ, etc. in a fairly self-consistent fashion – which may not be saying much since we’ve all witnessed how someone can make the Bible say anything they want …however…stepping it up a notch or two in the discipline of systematic theology I believe that is a noble endeavor by scholars to formulate an orderly, rational, and coherent account of the doctrines of the Christian faith. That this can even be done may not be a big clincher for some folks but I believe it does testify to the divine inspiration of scripture.
I also agree with you that the Bible does map out a lot of things that have been and are and will be - - maybe not always in easily comprehensible ways. Now in the way that it’s “framed” - we may differ somewhat in how to interpret what it says. Is that literal, symbolic, is that something they adapted or reinterpreted, or "borrowed" from what was currently known? I dunno - that's a whole other topic to discuss...but that is part of the "framing" - it may be a spiritual truth never revealed before but do you think it's also possible it could be "ensconced" within these rough...imperfect...thoroughly human documents of the ancient world? ...I believe the form of writing used in the Bible is observational – a legitimate form in the ancient world. Observational writing tends to take the reader on the same journey that the writer experienced...I think that's how it's capable of relating to us today.
I share your concerns on fundamentalism. I’ve seen problems come up constantly in grads regarding this. It often involves forgetting what we were taught about this in the first session of the class.
Those who can’t control their emotions should not read this, but this is what PFAL page 30,31 says:
“At the next stop a man came to our compartment
in the train saying that he was representing his master
who wanted to come and meet the man of God. He
said his master was so-and-so, a member of Parliament
in New Delhi, who was also riding on the train. The
member of Parliament then came to our compartment
to tell Mrs. Wierwille and me that what he had
seen in Jubbulpore was the most tremendous
Christian event he had ever witnessed – that a man of
God would bless all God’s people irrespective of
whether they were Christian or Hindu.”
How many times have we thought highly of the Hindus?
Also mentioned with praise in “Christians Should Be Prosperous” are the Mormons; not exactly cherished as good neighbors by most fundamentalists. I find Mormons to be wonderful customers and people.
In the AC we heard of the great devotion and discipline of the Jain Dharma, one of India’s oldest religions.
I also like hanging out with Deadheads, an ancient Hippie religion.
Okay, Mike. Wierwille set forth in the PFLAP book a story (anecdote) about how someone of the Hindu culture and religion praised him. That IS the meaning of the excerpt you quoted, right? Further, the Mormon subculture is built on the diligent practice of tithing. Wierwille used that as (alleged) evidence for the concept he was promoting in his pamphlet on the subject, surreptitiously titled "Christians should be prosperous." The message in the book was more fundamentally, "send me money, at least 10 percent of all of what you get from any source."
Please explain how these anecdotes provide evidence that the subculture Wierwille established is "not fundamentalist."
It’s all a matter of perspective …speaking for myself – since I left TWI in ’86, I have settled into something sort of positive…it is practical, helpful, and constructive – it’s a self-directed journey…I have been free to explore many paths – whether philosophical, theological, social, whimsical or whatever to plumb the depths of my existence…a simple pursuit to give my life meaning…
I think people are complicated beings - - and so I tend to think we all go through some type of elaborate evolving convoluted mapping out process to navigate through life.
Regarding my Grease Spot posts - what you may think is the essential focus of my life - or you may believe that this is all I ever think about - is really nothing more than me LOOKING BACK to a specific point in the space-time continuum of my life from the reference point of where I am now…I think being retrospective is something we all do from time to time...that’s how we learn…that’s how we grow.
I certainly don’t celebrate the errors, abuses, exploitation, confusion and frustrations I experienced while I was in TWI – but like any troubling or traumatic aspect of one’s life all that has made me more sensitive to the influences and issues that brought on all that stuff.
perhaps one of the subtle underlying messages on Grease Spot is that there’s a lot more options available during your journey in life. The things of PFAL is certainly one option - but I think the general consensus here is that it’s not a very helpful, practical or constructive option...just saying why limit yourself to one very restrictive option.
Not like I’m perfect now or got all that figured out or I’m over it – but I feel it’s helpful, practical, and constructive to experience the give-and-take on Grease Spot – I get a lot of good things out of the experience and I hope my contribution might do the same for others.
Believe it or not, I do understand what you say about thinking there’s something good in PFAL. Just allow me the freedom to pick and choose that and to utilize it the way I want to. For instance, the keys to the interpretation of the Bible – yes, it was something wierwille plagiarized from Bullinger – but it’s not like Bullinger - or wierwille or PFAL is the final authority on interpreting the Bible or that I agree with a dogmatic view of there being only one possible interpretation of scripture.
I mean, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that you might want to better understand a document written in ancient times / cultures by looking into the context, overall usage of words, original languages, historical and cultural context, blah blah blah - yeah all that - but maybe try to understand things from their ancient worldview to grasp the essence of the message and what particular issue are they addressing in what they say and do.
fyi - it's not a book about science or history or geography - though you may get an idea of the writers' limited and imperfect view of the world back then. Not like we've got everything figured out now in this modern age - science, technology, knowledge is always changing, exploring, growing...my approach to the Bible is maybe along the lines of how I look at my past as I said earlier. What if the Bible is part of a map showing a path of a particular journey of faith?
I see folks dealing with the same basic issues of the human condition - and here I am in the present time trying to relate to how they dealt with all that...maybe I'll learn something.
I think Bullinger and wierwille got locked into a very literal…fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible…I look at the Bible as sort of a product of the times in which it was written…that’s one of the things I think wierwille ignored – I don’t of the times in which it was written."think he realized the Bible and modern man spoke two different “languages” – so he would often squeeze, crunch and mangle science, philosophy or any other modern disciplines to fit into an ancient template…I won’t say the Bible is outmoded – like it’s obsolete or no longer practical...
...I just think in our interpretation of it we should recognize the humanness of scripture – not as another key to how to interpret any particular part – but maybe as an attitude we should adopt when we approach scripture…as something inspired of God – yes – but as something we can relate to since it was written by people - it's asking how did they deal with this particular issue and will that work for me? Whether one views Jesus as human or divine or a combination thereof – I think people relate to him the same way. We look past the cultural setting and accumulated world knowledge of that time and look for what Jesus’ words, actions, and life mean for us today.
T-Bone, great post! I think you are right in that "we should recognize the humaness of scripture." I think for me, Jesus Christ is the cornerstone of humanity; we can endure huge amounts of pain, and suffering, because of what he endured for us. In every situation in the Bible, we see that Jesus was triumphant over everyone, and everything, including death. However, the Bible was written thousands of years ago in cultures very different from our's. I think the Bible was written to show us, that God's son Jesus Christ could endure various human travils, and emerge triumphant. I know that I don't always act, or think like Jesus, but I know that I can endure the hardships of life, because Jesus has already triumphed over everything, and God sent him to teach me personally. Because I am human, I don't always see life, the way that God does. Boy, do I make mistakes!! However, I think the Bible teaches me to "keep trucking," and in God's time, I will reap the benefits of living life like Jesus Christ.
T-Bone, great post! I think you are right in that "we should recognize the humaness of scripture." I think for me, Jesus Christ is the cornerstone of humanity; we can endure huge amounts of pain, and suffering, because of what he endured for us. In every situation in the Bible, we see that Jesus was triumphant over everyone, and everything, including death. However, the Bible was written thousands of years ago in cultures very different from our's. I think the Bible was written to show us, that God's son Jesus Christ could endure various human travils, and emerge triumphant. I know that I don't always act, or think like Jesus, but I know that I can endure the hardships of life, because Jesus has already triumphed over everything, and God sent him to teach me personally. Because I am human, I don't always see life, the way that God does. Boy, do I make mistakes!! However, I think the Bible teaches me to "keep trucking," and in God's time, I will reap the benefits of living life like Jesus Christ.
Some great points there, Grace !
…and you’ve touched on something that resonates big time with me about being human…ya know it doesn’t happen as often as it probably should…but sometimes when drafting a post for Grease Spot or mulling over something someone said on Grease Spot - every once and a great while I will actually get my head out of my a$$...
translation: when I realize we are all human beings…all bozos on the same bus…meaning no one is exempt from this weird and bizarre experience called the human condition…that’s when my theology and philosophical musings take a back seat (or I guess goes to the back of the bus ) and I just enjoy connecting with other human beings…times like that I probably shock some folks when I get all apologetic…sorry about that - - oops there I go again …(T-Bone, say “good night, Grace”)
Okay, Mike. Wierwille set forth in the PFLAP book a story (anecdote) about how someone of the Hindu culture and religion praised him. That IS the meaning of the excerpt you quoted, right? Further, the Mormon subculture is built on the diligent practice of tithing. Wierwille used that as (alleged) evidence for the concept he was promoting in his pamphlet on the subject, surreptitiously titled "Christians should be prosperous." The message in the book was more fundamentally, "send me money, at least 10 percent of all of what you get from any source."
Please explain how these anecdotes provide evidence that the subculture Wierwille established is "not fundamentalist."
Thank you.
I’ll try with my limited time to answer this as fully as possible.
For years I too had the weakened version of that record.
I use the word “record” because Mrs. Wierwille was a mentioned witness and she corroborated it, even to the point of producing pictures of the event. HCW posted here about this. He was no kiss-up to VPW, but he did defend this event as well documented. I think he even mentions how she showed him the picture. HCW also gained my respect when he TOTALLY shut down some of the minions here developing the Pure Evil model back then 10 or 15 years ago. They were working themselves into a lather trying to make VPW out as a racist. HCW is black, and he testified that he KNEW that there wasn’t any racism going on at all. It was a fascinating thread to me. HCW did not like me and my thesis, yet he testified to the facts as he knew them, and not as an ideology guided.
***
I too, had in my head the idea that PFAL p. 31 was mostly “someone of the Hindu culture and religion praised him.” What I accurately remembered was that there was an inclusion of Hindus in the category of God’s people.
My inaccurate memory was I thought there were quotes around this inclusion and that it was the Hindu master and servant who said it. That gives the accuracy of this inclusion merely according to the authority of the Hindus, which was zero according to the subculture I was in: the TWI Verbal Traditions. So I thought that inclusion of Hindus in to “God’s people” were merely the words of a Hindu.
This was many years ago. I did not like that aspect of our subculture then, but I had no idea then how much that subculture had drifted from written PFAL. I too had drifted in many areas, but not this one. I did not like how it was going on exclusions of all not TWI.
I loved witnessing. When someone totally rejected my green card witnessing, and clung to their pagan religion or churchianity, I always remembered how many times I had rejected having Jesus Christ as the dominant figure in my life. I remember how God drew me and made changing my mind a delight. When a Hindu or a Mormon or an Atheist rejected the green card I tried to still love them and be patient. Tomorrow they might believe.
I was repulsed at how we were supposed to eschew unbelievers, and then we’re supposed to suddenly love them if they suddenly believed. I knew lots of people could suddenly believe after a long list of rejections (I was one), but it did not ring true that we had the ability to suddenly go from hate to love. If God loved a believer from before the foundations of the world, all through their prior rejections, that would put us at odds with God if we rejected those who rejected green cards, but later would believe. That’s just crazy!
I hung onto the passage on PFAL p 31 as a place where at least VPW didn’t eschew the JC rejecting man with the withered arm, and he didn’t eschew the praise of the master and servant. VPW also included this positive event with super blessed pagans in the class; another non-eschewing stance. That’s all still a pretty weak form of anti-fundamentalism and anti-bigotry.
***
One of my more pleasant surprises when I came back to PFAL was this passage.
When I brought this up I posted:
“I share your concerns on fundamentalism. I’ve seen problems come up constantly in grads regarding this. It often involves forgetting what we were taught about this in the first session of the class.”
When I actually looked at the passage I saw there were no quotes surrounding his inclusion of Hindus. Still, he said it, but VPW repeated it IN HIS WORDS. He added his authority to the Hindus saying it by paraphrasing it and not negating the inclusion.
“… The member of Parliament then came to our compartment to tell Mrs. Wierwille and me that what he had seen in Jubbulpore was the most tremendous Christian event he had ver witnessed – that a man of God would bless all God’s people irrespective of whether they were Christian or Hindu.”
A dyed-in-the-wool bigot fundamentalist would also (if they had to include the Hindu praise) put quotes in there to distance themselves from the “Hindu inclusion” as opposed to a default endorsement of it. Imagine you were quoting me. You definitely would want quotations marks to separate yourself from my ideas, I project… ah …er …I guess. Wouldn’t you?
I often see things like this when I come back to the PFAL text and not rely on memory. I learned from Eve’s mistake.
***
Next, you wrote:
“Further, the Mormon subculture is built on the diligent practice of tithing.”
Yes. And in the CSBP he shows how these people are included in God’s blessings in a big way, not because they signed a green card, but because they believe and act.
***
I know less about the Janes, but the way VPW praised them in the AC did not fit with any fundamentalist mode of eschewing I’ve ever seen.
***
My impressions are that how God blesses those outside green card status or Christianity in general are hidden in “the secret things” mentioned in Deut 29:29.
He told ancient Israel to eschew those who were out to kill them, which was everybody then. He told ancient Christians to minimize their fellowship with pagans to avoid diluting their pure doctrine. These are practical measures, not heart matters.
Didn’t David live in hiding from King Saul with some Pagans who were seed boys, bent on destroying Israel? I forget. I know the woman who lived on the Wall of Jericho was blessed. In Acts 17 Paul went to a Pagan alter to preach not against it, but with it. The Mystery was that all those terrible Pagans were suddenly allowed into the fold.
More that I learned since 1998 was that before filming PFAL his radio broadcast of “The Love Way” has some interesting spots. In there he talks about “going all the way with love” and daring to think that way. Later in the 79 AC he talks about the idea of being a maximum believer. I think these ideas are related to the “Christ Formed In You” topic I’ve brought up her often.
What I think we have over the Pagans, is not exclusive inclusion in “God’s people.” What we have in true Christianity is this possibility of going ALL THE WAY just like Jesus did.
THEN, once we do that, it’s our job to teach and help the Pagans to rise up to thrir highest potential. However, we have not quite done that, and neither have any other Christian groups in the past 2000 years. We wonderful Christians still got this little hang up, preventing us from blessing ANYWAY those who “don’t believe in your Jesus.”
I think this hangup on all Christians is that we all still have a natural man mind AFTER the new birth, and SIT does not help it. That next stage of forming Christ in us has eluded us since Paul decried it with the Galatians. Sure, a tiny few break through, just like prophets in the Old Testament, but it’s rare. Those few who get a taste of going all the way in love are usually extreme oddballs, just like in the OT. And they are ALWAYS individuals who still have nasty old man mind flaws. God wants flawed people to aim at and hit the mark of love all the way IN SPITE of that old man nature and is willing to teach even the most flawed.
As long as we Christians operate mostly from our old man nature, and fail to get Christ formed within, we are no better than Pagans, and in some cases worse.
I’ll try with my limited time to answer this as fully as possible.
For years I too had the weakened version of that record.
I use the word “record” because Mrs. Wierwille was a mentioned witness and she corroborated it, even to the point of producing pictures of the event. HCW posted here about this. He was no kiss-up to VPW, but he did defend this event as well documented. I think he even mentions how she showed him the picture. HCW also gained my respect when he TOTALLY shut down some of the minions here developing the Pure Evil model back then 10 or 15 years ago. They were working themselves into a lather trying to make VPW out as a racist. HCW is black, and he testified that he KNEW that there wasn’t any racism going on at all. It was a fascinating thread to me. HCW did not like me and my thesis, yet he testified to the facts as he knew them, and not as an ideology guided.
***
I too, had in my head the idea that PFAL p. 31 was mostly “someone of the Hindu culture and religion praised him.” What I accurately remembered was that there was an inclusion of Hindus in the category of God’s people.
My inaccurate memory was I thought there were quotes around this inclusion and that it was the Hindu master and servant who said it. That gives the accuracy of this inclusion merely according to the authority of the Hindus, which was zero according to the subculture I was in: the TWI Verbal Traditions. So I thought that inclusion of Hindus in to “God’s people” were merely the words of a Hindu.
This was many years ago. I did not like that aspect of our subculture then, but I had no idea then how much that subculture had drifted from written PFAL. I too had drifted in many areas, but not this one. I did not like how it was going on exclusions of all not TWI.
I loved witnessing. When someone totally rejected my green card witnessing, and clung to their pagan religion or churchianity, I always remembered how many times I had rejected having Jesus Christ as the dominant figure in my life. I remember how God drew me and made changing my mind a delight. When a Hindu or a Mormon or an Atheist rejected the green card I tried to still love them and be patient. Tomorrow they might believe.
I was repulsed at how we were supposed to eschew unbelievers, and then we’re supposed to suddenly love them if they suddenly believed. I knew lots of people could suddenly believe after a long list of rejections (I was one), but it did not ring true that we had the ability to suddenly go from hate to love. If God loved a believer from before the foundations of the world, all through their prior rejections, that would put us at odds with God if we rejected those who rejected green cards, but later would believe. That’s just crazy!
I hung onto the passage on PFAL p 31 as a place where at least VPW didn’t eschew the JC rejecting man with the withered arm, and he didn’t eschew the praise of the master and servant. VPW also included this positive event with super blessed pagans in the class; another non-eschewing stance. That’s all still a pretty weak form of anti-fundamentalism and anti-bigotry.
***
One of my more pleasant surprises when I came back to PFAL was this passage.
When I brought this up I posted:
“I share your concerns on fundamentalism. I’ve seen problems come up constantly in grads regarding this. It often involves forgetting what we were taught about this in the first session of the class.”
When I actually looked at the passage I saw there were no quotes surrounding his inclusion of Hindus. Still, he said it, but VPW repeated it IN HIS WORDS. He added his authority to the Hindus saying it by paraphrasing it and not negating the inclusion.
“… The member of Parliament then came to our compartment to tell Mrs. Wierwille and me that what he had seen in Jubbulpore was the most tremendous Christian event he had ver witnessed – that a man of God would bless all God’s people irrespective of whether they were Christian or Hindu.”
A dyed-in-the-wool bigot fundamentalist would also (if they had to include the Hindu praise) put quotes in there to distance themselves from the “Hindu inclusion” as opposed to a default endorsement of it. Imagine you were quoting me. You definitely would want quotations marks to separate yourself from my ideas, I project… ah …er …I guess. Wouldn’t you?
I often see things like this when I come back to the PFAL text and not rely on memory. I learned from Eve’s mistake.
***
Next, you wrote:
“Further, the Mormon subculture is built on the diligent practice of tithing.”
Yes. And in the CSBP he shows how these people are included in God’s blessings in a big way, not because they signed a green card, but because they believe and act.
***
I know less about the Janes, but the way VPW praised them in the AC did not fit with any fundamentalist mode of eschewing I’ve ever seen.
***
My impressions are that how God blesses those outside green card status or Christianity in general are hidden in “the secret things” mentioned in Deut 29:29.
He told ancient Israel to eschew those who were out to kill them, which was everybody then. He told ancient Christians to minimize their fellowship with pagans to avoid diluting their pure doctrine. These are practical measures, not heart matters.
Didn’t David live in hiding from King Saul with some Pagans who were seed boys, bent on destroying Israel? I forget. I know the woman who lived on the Wall of Jericho was blessed. In Acts 17 Paul went to a Pagan alter to preach not against it, but with it. The Mystery was that all those terrible Pagans were suddenly allowed into the fold.
More that I learned since 1998 was that before filming PFAL his radio broadcast of “The Love Way” has some interesting spots. In there he talks about “going all the way with love” and daring to think that way. Later in the 79 AC he talks about the idea of being a maximum believer. I think these ideas are related to the “Christ Formed In You” topic I’ve brought up her often.
What I think we have over the Pagans, is not exclusive inclusion in “God’s people.” What we have in true Christianity is this possibility of going ALL THE WAY just like Jesus did.
THEN, once we do that, it’s our job to teach and help the Pagans to rise up to thrir highest potential. However, we have not quite done that, and neither have any other Christian groups in the past 2000 years. We wonderful Christians still got this little hang up, preventing us from blessing ANYWAY those who “don’t believe in your Jesus.”
I think this hangup on all Christians is that we all still have a natural man mind AFTER the new birth, and SIT does not help it. That next stage of forming Christ in us has eluded us since Paul decried it with the Galatians. Sure, a tiny few break through, just like prophets in the Old Testament, but it’s rare. Those few who get a taste of going all the way in love are usually extreme oddballs, just like in the OT. And they are ALWAYS individuals who still have nasty old man mind flaws. God wants flawed people to aim at and hit the mark of love all the way IN SPITE of that old man nature and is willing to teach even the most flawed.
As long as we Christians operate mostly from our old man nature, and fail to get Christ formed within, we are no better than Pagans, and in some cases worse.
First of all, in asking you to explain how either of those two stories demonstrated that twi is NOT a fundamentalist organization, I did not question the stories themselves. IOW, I acknowledge(d) that you cited an excerpt from PFLAP and a well understood citation from the class on "send me at least 10 percent of all of your money."
While you may have provided some insight as to how YOU rationalize these things in your mind, you did NOT explain how they relate to what you claim they mean. You just didn't.
Ya know, Mike... some people here try to give you the opportunity to actually engage in discussion as you requested. But you now (and in the past) just don't seem to get it, and don't respond to legitimate points people make when they try to respond to you.
The India incident in PFLAP does nothing to show Wierwille or twi as not fundamentalist. The incident served instead, in the class and in the book, as Wierwille's attempt to buttress his claim to greatness. IOW, it was only your hero saying, "look at how great I am." That's narcissism. Nothing more, nothing less.
The tithing concept from the other class and pamphlet was offered ONLY as alleged evidence that if you faithfully send him money, you'll prosper. Nothing more, nothing less.
Is there anything in any Wierwille proclamation where he says that he approves of Hinduism or Mormonism as valid and legitimate ways to God?
Didn't Ted Ferrell have a song or two about the only way to God?
When he lost members and donations it cost a lot. It matters not if someone "owns" an organization if the major followers leave, ESPECIALLY if it's a tiny organization.
If he really had a 1942 revelation then the ministry SHOULD be about him and him giving it to us. That is NOT a democracy. It was the revelation to him that it was all about.
Now, if he didn't get a revelation in 1942 and the promised followups, THEN you all are totally right-on and I should join you.
But if it WAS a genuine revelation then you should join me.
It has NOTHING to do with VPW or his sin or his successes.
It all revolves around whether that was a genuine revelation. God can give a revelation to anyone He wants to. He does not have to follow OUR rules and principles for selecting ministers. Spectrum49's brilliant post above illustrates some of these principles we must use.
In fact I think God delights in confounding our traditions and man made religion in some of His ways. Remember Isaiah 55, that His ways are not our ways.
I see him selecting VPW as the recipient and the teacher of this revelation to confound those of us who insist on man made religion. It filters out the less devoted to truth from those who hunger for it above all man's ways and traditions and adulation.
From the benefits I have received from written PFAL, and from the providential shielding I had from ALL things Way Corps, I vote GENUINE.
Therein lies the flaw. Yes, either it was by revelation or it wasn't- and if it wasn't, then this is NOT special and unique, and it is only special and unique if it WAS by revelation.
Therefore, we investigate carefully to see if it was by revelation or not. And looking to see if there were "benefits" and considering that the standard is a SMOKESCREEN. vpw himself pointed out that people claim a benefit from sitting on a therapist's couch. Christians all over the world claim benefits in their groups, and supposedly this is greatly superior to ALL of theirs. HIndus, Jews, Muslims, and so on similarly claim benefits of their groups, and this is supposedly greatly superior to ALL of theirs.
How do we find out if this was by revelation or not, with some degree of authority?
We examine the claimed specifics concerning the revelation.
Mike's never actually done that. His process would hold up as "genuine" any group from which one would claim a benefit- and there are satanists who would claim they benefit from their group.
So, we examine the specifics. What would we find? The same things we found when some of us already did this and discussed it.
IF this failed a reasonable test for revelation, it could not be considered revelation.
SINCE it failed SEVERAL reasonable tests for revelation, if could NOT be considered revelation.
If it could not REASONABLY be considered revelation, then Mike should find out what the rest of us can teach him and why we're prospering and serving God while he's claiming we're not.
Naturally, he's under no compulsion to do so, and I personally don't see it happening this side of the grave. However, I can be surprised, and I also can't rule out a miracle.
…and you’ve touched on something that resonates big time with me about being human…ya know it doesn’t happen as often as it probably should…but sometimes when drafting a post for Grease Spot or mulling over something someone said on Grease Spot - every once and a great while I will actually get my head out of my a$$...
translation: when I realize we are all human beings…all bozos on the same bus…meaning no one is exempt from this weird and bizarre experience called the human condition…that’s when my theology and philosophical musings take a back seat (or I guess goes to the back of the bus ) and I just enjoy connecting with other human beings…times like that I probably shock some folks when I get all apologetic…sorry about that - - oops there I go again …(T-Bone, say “good night, Grace”)
Good night, Grace
T-Bone, I think you have a very good head on your shoulders. But you are right; sometimes all of us have our heads in our azzes. Someone famous once wrote, "to err is human, to forgive divine," or something similar to that. God forgives, and forgets. So should I.
T-Bone, I think you have a very good head on your shoulders. But you are right; sometimes all of us have our heads in our azzes. Someone famous once wrote, "to err is human, to forgive divine," or something similar to that. God forgives, and forgets. So should I.
That apparently was Alexander Pope. In An Essay on Criticism, Part II, in 1711, apparently,
Pope explains that, while anyone can make a mistake, we should aspire to do as God does, that is, show mercy and forgive sinners:
Ah ne'er so dire a Thirst of Glory boast,
Nor in the Critick let the Man be lost!
Good-Nature and Good-Sense must ever join;
To err is Humane; to Forgive, Divine.
Note that Pope's original wording uses the word 'humane' rather than, as it is now usually spelled, 'human'. This wasn't a spelling mistake, nor have we misunderstood the poet's meaning, just that 'humane' was the accepted spelling of 'human' in the early 18th century.
First of all, in asking you to explain how either of those two stories demonstrated that twi is NOT a fundamentalist organization....
.....The India incident in PFLAP does nothing to show Wierwille or twi as not fundamentalist.
I think we slightly miscommunication on what aspect of fundamentalist organizations TWI was not.
After several readings It looks like (possibly) you were thinking of where fundamentalism starts. It starts with a fundamental authoritative text that is inerrant. Oh, yes, TWI was fundamentalist there. End of story.
What I was thinking of was where fundamentalism usually ends up: only Christians go to heaven. Usually, to most people I've talked to, this is the most objectionable aspect of fundamentalism, that of great exclusivity and loss of love in the process.
***
If my guess is right, I'm wondering why the idea of an authoritative text would bug you more than the exclusivity. I went into my essay because you expressed an objection to fundamentalism in TWI.
I like the idea that God issues words and that they can be found, or delivered to seekers. This is EXACTLY what Science is all about, with recent secularization replacing God's Word with the Laws of Physics. Newton was a theologian.
Maybe your dislike of an authoritarian text would subside if you saw that it enables freedom, rather than prohibiting it. I find uncertainty fine in the atomic realm, but not so useful in charting my course through life.
i was wondering if you had a chance yet to read Penworks’ Undertow book
I have it and am slowly reading it.
My first objection, though, is how she objected to the idea that "the Bible interprets itself." I find that objection very dim witted, even when pumped up with detail like with the posters that attacked it 15 years ago here. It slowed down my reading, but I still intend to finish it. That interpretation issue lowered my expectations and the book's priority in my schedule.
In a nutshell: Imagine how quirky it is for God to issue His Word to communicate to us, but then He FAILS to put cues, keys, and signposts in there to guide sincere seekers. That sounds like a bad way to get a message out. It's like Him saying "I want you to know something but I will not help you understand it."
The phrase "The Bible interprets itself" is an extreme abbreviation of a complex idea. She did not do that justice IMO. The criticism this idea got here 15 years ago I thought was similarly lacking. My impression was that she was leading uninformed readers into thinking God is supposed to be mysterious, an old Catholic idea. Maybe her book will get better later.
If you can recommend a spot to skip ahead to I would appreciate seeing what you feel is an section important to me.
How do we find out if this was by revelation or not, with some degree of authority?
I find this philosophically interesting. If it WAS given by revelation then how would that acceptable degree of authority compare to the authority of the revelation. It begins to sound like the Ford explaining Henry. I don't have time to chase down this Godellian hunch, but I thought i'd throw it out there.
I also noticed on your link that you seemed to not mention the digital reams of debate that swirled around that issue 15 years ago here. Do you remember that? Do you remember how Lifted Up (Pretty sure name accurate) testified finding himself SUDDENLY enveloped in a rogue snowstorm while running in New Knoxville? It happens on the Oceans all the time with water waves. A rogue snowstorm is usually very small in area, and would not be detected with 1940s technology.
That apparently was Alexander Pope. In An Essay on Criticism, Part II, in 1711, apparently,
Pope explains that, while anyone can make a mistake, we should aspire to do as God does, that is, show mercy and forgive sinners:
Ah ne'er so dire a Thirst of Glory boast,
Nor in the Critick let the Man be lost!
Good-Nature and Good-Sense must ever join;
To err is Humane; to Forgive, Divine.
Note that Pope's original wording uses the word 'humane' rather than, as it is now usually spelled, 'human'. This wasn't a spelling mistake, nor have we misunderstood the poet's meaning, just that 'humane' was the accepted spelling of 'human' in the early 18th century.
Didn't Ted Ferrell have a song or two about the only way to God?
Yes.
If his lyric means the only way to be accepted and loved by God, then I'd place that lyric the TVT (Twi Verbal Traditions) that drifted from the revelation into exclusive fundamentalism.
If his lyric means the only way to get to that maximum believer, Christ formed, going all the way in love.....THEN it is in line with the revelation.
I hope you read my essay again with our miscommunication on fundamentalism in mind. I was tilting at different windmill than you thought.
I find this philosophically interesting. If it WAS given by revelation then how would that acceptable degree of authority compare to the authority of the revelation. It begins to sound like the Ford explaining Henry. I don't have time to chase down this Godellian hunch, but I thought i'd throw it out there.[/quote]
I find it interesting that you skipped the plainest discussion to fog the issue with sesquipedian concepts that had nothing to do with it. If a prediction is flawed or fails to come to pass, it's faulty. We actually looked at the phrasing of the supposed revelation upon which this was based. We examined it, and all its parts. It failed on several parts. Your response? Change the subject FAST. It's a red flag you've got no answer to any of the points raised-and there were several.
We had "some degree of authority" because we actually examined the substance rather than discarding it and making a judgement that tells us nothing. I mentioned that part-your previous failure- and you've skipped over it. "Some of it was useful so it must be by revelation"- said by Mike, Muslims, Hindus, Satanists, etc.
I also noticed on your link that you seemed to not mention the digital reams of debate that swirled around that issue 15 years ago here. Do you remember that? Do you remember how Lifted Up (Pretty sure name accurate) testified finding himself SUDDENLY enveloped in a rogue snowstorm while running in New Knoxville? It happens on the Oceans all the time with water waves. A rogue snowstorm is usually very small in area, and would not be detected with 1940s technology.
I'm just wondering why you left out Lifted Up.
If there were actually "digital reams of debate"on this and not one offhand comment and a short discussion, you should have no trouble finding the thing to cite so we can discuss what he actually said and how it didn't relate except in your imagination. I'm expecting you to say it can't be found but that it somehow was the key to your statements- while continuing to skip all the other points-for which you have no SENSIBLE answer.
In a nutshell: Imagine how quirky it is for God to issue His Word to communicate to us, but then He FAILS to put cues, keys, and signposts in there to guide sincere seekers. That sounds like a bad way to get a message out. It's like Him saying "I want you to know something but I will not help you understand it."
The phrase "The Bible interprets itself" is an extreme abbreviation of a complex idea. She did not do that justice IMO. The criticism this idea got here 15 years ago I thought was similarly lacking. My impression was that she was leading uninformed readers into thinking God is supposed to be mysterious, an old Catholic idea. Maybe her book will get better later.
If you can recommend a spot to skip ahead to I would appreciate seeing what you feel is an section important to me.
Sorry Mike, but I think you are obfuscating the simplicity of the Bible; I believe if God communicated his Word - then what more is needed then to simply believe it? I think one can infer from many passages that God does indeed help seekers to get a better understanding of his Word...
That is the whole idea behind the following passages:
16 Jesus answered, “My teaching is not my own. It comes from the one who sent me. 17 Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own...John 7:16, 17 NIV
Reflect on what I am saying, for the Lord will give you insight into all this. II Timothy 2:7 NIV
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding...Proverbs 9:10 NIV
The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple. ...Psalm 119:130 KJV
13 For we write you nothing other than what you read and understand [there is no doublemeaning in what we say]. And I hope you will [accurately] understand [divine things] until the end; 14 just as you have [already] partially understood us, [and one day will recognize] that you can be proud of us just as we are of you, in the day of our Lord Jesus...II Corinthians 1: 13, 14 Amplified
Mike, don’t over complicate it! The Word is right there in plain sight ! No one needs a secret decoder ring !
The snowstorm never happened. That's a fact. Despite what you might think, Mike, Ohio has weather records that are quite comprehensive, dating all the way back to the late 1800's. We've been through this all before and looked at specific dates for Ohio weather records.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
73
138
52
45
Popular Days
Feb 28
62
Feb 26
51
Mar 28
47
Feb 25
42
Top Posters In This Topic
Rocky 73 posts
Mike 138 posts
waysider 52 posts
So_crates 45 posts
Popular Days
Feb 28 2018
62 posts
Feb 26 2018
51 posts
Mar 28 2018
47 posts
Feb 25 2018
42 posts
Popular Posts
T-Bone
Just for the record - I’ve mentioned this before - the definition for “hard hitting” as often associated with tough journalists who do their job - is uncompromisingly direct and honest, especially in
Grace Valerie Claire
Mike, what are you talking about?? I think there is a lot of "good," here at the GSC. For example, if you go back, and read the threads, many people have revealed the real TWI, not the one in your i
DontWorryBeHappy
Hey Mike: Don’t flatter yourself with your fantasy that I am your “opponent” in some grand “debate”. I am NOT your opponent. I feel deep sorrow and pity for you, not opposition. I have already to
TLC
It was not, and does not. (Furthermore, I think your image misses way too many crossthreading, and blenderizes stuff that absolutely needs to be kept separated...)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Thanks, T-Bone and Boshivek !
I wish all posters could be conversational and thoughtful like that. These three posts are the kind I want to read again, and maybe ADD to them as opposed to attacking whatever points I could to discredit the whole post.
Again, I'm super short on time, but I will return to these posts to understand them better after a first fast read. I've noticed you both to be thoughtful, and I'm not surprised such posts came from you.
I'm only still slowly getting to know who is who here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Cool! Another thinker.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
Bolshevik:
As a matter of fact, I really DO have something which relates with your "image". God forbid that I should flap my gums forever here about all of that. Let it suffice that I've found reasonable evidence for what appears as God displaying the scientific principle of the refraction of light into it's 7 (basic) colors, precisely as we observe from the bottom to the top of a rainbow in nature!
I've written a book Genesis One: God's Table of Contents to the Bible, which is available for download here at GS. Basically, what I mentioned above is what I discovered once (while "just playing around") trying to assign the most logical color for each of the 7 days in Genesis 1. (I sort of got lucky to discover this, if ya know what I mean.)
Be that as it may; read it if you like. Whether it's actual truth or not, I promise it's very interesting! But I will say this, which is more on topic:
I'll bet VP wanted us to take his PFAL much further than he did while here. I'll also bet he died with many things hidden in his heart which were either just "too far ahead of time" or he just didn't see them clearly enough to explain about while he was still alive.
And that's EXACTLY what I did with "my little study". Perhaps this sounds a bit weird: But sometimes I fondly imagine seeing VP at the bema and imparting what I found to him about "color" --- to his sheer delight! Be that as it may.
But to revere PFAL to be "perfect, just as it is" is just plain WRONG. (That's what TWI still supposes, even today --- which lauds VP's work far too highly!)
And Mike: Please don't be offended at my saying this: Even though you no longer attend Way fellowships, in your mindset you're still a part of the present day TWI's camp, even as I described it in the previous paragraph.
You need to recognize parts of PFAL which are worth keeping and (with meekness) recognize that which isn't --- which is basically what GS is truly all about: to help others to "go beyond the old wine skin", even as I'm assuming VP desired of us after his departure.
NOW: I feel the need to (at least) express one example of error in PFAL --- not to pick, but which makes far more sense then what was taught. Basically, VP divided the administrations incorrectly. He sided with Bullinger that the last administration (the 7th one) is "future paradise", aka: New Jerusalem.
But I can logically show how the 7th time fits much better at the throne --- which settles everything since the time of Adam in Eden. And then (numerically speaking) the spiritual perfection (7) with which God handles things at his great white throne (reconciling everything to his own satisfaction!) is a much better fit than supposing the 7th time is "the eternal state" (as Bullinger put it) or "final paradise" (as VP put it).
Following that, one has two choices: [1] He can either keep counting upwards (which makes New Jerusalem the 8th time, in keeping with the brand new beginning of a brand new earth) OR one can just start over, just as though nothing matters about the second earth --- from Adam's time to God's throne. And in that case, New Jerusalem would be viewed as the commencement of the 3rd earth (ie: a simple beginning, even as "1" would properly indicate).
Note: Even calling Eden first is the same as assuming there was no earth before that. However: If one prefers to consider the 1st earth (prior to Adam), then Eden itself would be the 8th time --- which would also (as did New Jerusalem) represent the brand new beginning of a brand new earth.
Not to belabor this: But if you keep counting from there, then the judgment at God's throne would be 14th (7 x 2) --- rendering it as a time of "spiritual perfection (7) being established (2)", which includes two sets of seven: [1] from the very beginning of earth until it became without form and void, and [2] from Adam until something similar happens to the earth we presently live in, which we read about in the book of Revelation. (And then comes the judgment I spoke of earlier.)
As far as "poking fun here" at times: God does have a sense of humor. For instance, consider Job's remark to his miserable comforters: "No doubt YOU ARE THE ONES --- and wisdom shall die with you!" (ie: "I suppose when you all die, there just won't be any more wisdom, huh?")
Surely, I enjoy sarcasm at times. And I don't do that just to be mean --- but (usually) to prove a point, by either exaggerating or using hyperbole. And I see a lot of that here at GS! When such things are leveled at people here, it should be taken as advice to learn something from --- and not to get in a tizzy about.
So lighten up, and try to see things more clearly --- BEYOND where PFAL left off! To me, much of what's in that class is truly like spoiled leftovers, rotting in the fridge.
Spec
Edited by spectrum49grammar
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Well, I don’t have any real problem with your viewpoint either…and perhaps we’re on more converging lines of thought rather than in some lockstep synchronization fashion (whatever the hell that is
)…I too see a venerable coherency in scripture – though it may not be completely across the board like you do…I mean, without going into every single little doctrinal detail AND nuanced differences of a person’s viewpoint – I tend to think overall, most serious Bible students do not have much difficulty in arranging the great truths of the Bible when it speaks of sin, redemption, prayer, the person of Jesus Christ, etc. in a fairly self-consistent fashion – which may not be saying much since we’ve all witnessed how someone can make the Bible say anything they want 
…however…stepping it up a notch or two in the discipline of systematic theology I believe that is a noble endeavor by scholars to formulate an orderly, rational, and coherent account of the doctrines of the Christian faith. That this can even be done may not be a big clincher for some folks but I believe it does testify to the divine inspiration of scripture.
I also agree with you that the Bible does map out a lot of things that have been and are and will be - - maybe not always in easily comprehensible ways. Now in the way that it’s “framed” - we may differ somewhat in how to interpret what it says. Is that literal, symbolic, is that something they adapted or reinterpreted, or "borrowed" from what was currently known? I dunno - that's a whole other topic to discuss...but that is part of the "framing" - it may be a spiritual truth never revealed before but do you think it's also possible it could be "ensconced" within these rough...imperfect...thoroughly human documents of the ancient world? ...I believe the form of writing used in the Bible is observational – a legitimate form in the ancient world. Observational writing tends to take the reader on the same journey that the writer experienced...I think that's how it's capable of relating to us today.
Edited by T-Bonerevision
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Okay, Mike. Wierwille set forth in the PFLAP book a story (anecdote) about how someone of the Hindu culture and religion praised him. That IS the meaning of the excerpt you quoted, right? Further, the Mormon subculture is built on the diligent practice of tithing. Wierwille used that as (alleged) evidence for the concept he was promoting in his pamphlet on the subject, surreptitiously titled "Christians should be prosperous." The message in the book was more fundamentally, "send me money, at least 10 percent of all of what you get from any source."
Edited by RockyPlease explain how these anecdotes provide evidence that the subculture Wierwille established is "not fundamentalist."
Thank you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
T-Bone, great post! I think you are right in that "we should recognize the humaness of scripture." I think for me, Jesus Christ is the cornerstone of humanity; we can endure huge amounts of pain, and suffering, because of what he endured for us. In every situation in the Bible, we see that Jesus was triumphant over everyone, and everything, including death. However, the Bible was written thousands of years ago in cultures very different from our's. I think the Bible was written to show us, that God's son Jesus Christ could endure various human travils, and emerge triumphant. I know that I don't always act, or think like Jesus, but I know that I can endure the hardships of life, because Jesus has already triumphed over everything, and God sent him to teach me personally. Because I am human, I don't always see life, the way that God does. Boy, do I make mistakes!! However, I think the Bible teaches me to "keep trucking," and in God's time, I will reap the benefits of living life like Jesus Christ.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Some great points there, Grace !
…and you’ve touched on something that resonates big time with me about being human…ya know it doesn’t happen as often as it probably should…but sometimes when drafting a post for Grease Spot or mulling over something someone said on Grease Spot - every once and a great while I will actually get my head out of my a$$...
translation: when I realize we are all human beings…all bozos on the same bus…meaning no one is exempt from this weird and bizarre experience called the human condition…that’s when my theology and philosophical musings take a back seat (or I guess goes to the back of the bus
) and I just enjoy connecting with other human beings…times like that I probably shock some folks when I get all apologetic…sorry about that - - oops there I go again 
…(T-Bone, say “good night, Grace”)
Good night, Grace
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I’ll try with my limited time to answer this as fully as possible.
For years I too had the weakened version of that record.
I use the word “record” because Mrs. Wierwille was a mentioned witness and she corroborated it, even to the point of producing pictures of the event. HCW posted here about this. He was no kiss-up to VPW, but he did defend this event as well documented. I think he even mentions how she showed him the picture. HCW also gained my respect when he TOTALLY shut down some of the minions here developing the Pure Evil model back then 10 or 15 years ago. They were working themselves into a lather trying to make VPW out as a racist. HCW is black, and he testified that he KNEW that there wasn’t any racism going on at all. It was a fascinating thread to me. HCW did not like me and my thesis, yet he testified to the facts as he knew them, and not as an ideology guided.
***
I too, had in my head the idea that PFAL p. 31 was mostly “someone of the Hindu culture and religion praised him.” What I accurately remembered was that there was an inclusion of Hindus in the category of God’s people.
My inaccurate memory was I thought there were quotes around this inclusion and that it was the Hindu master and servant who said it. That gives the accuracy of this inclusion merely according to the authority of the Hindus, which was zero according to the subculture I was in: the TWI Verbal Traditions. So I thought that inclusion of Hindus in to “God’s people” were merely the words of a Hindu.
This was many years ago. I did not like that aspect of our subculture then, but I had no idea then how much that subculture had drifted from written PFAL. I too had drifted in many areas, but not this one. I did not like how it was going on exclusions of all not TWI.
I loved witnessing. When someone totally rejected my green card witnessing, and clung to their pagan religion or churchianity, I always remembered how many times I had rejected having Jesus Christ as the dominant figure in my life. I remember how God drew me and made changing my mind a delight. When a Hindu or a Mormon or an Atheist rejected the green card I tried to still love them and be patient. Tomorrow they might believe.
I was repulsed at how we were supposed to eschew unbelievers, and then we’re supposed to suddenly love them if they suddenly believed. I knew lots of people could suddenly believe after a long list of rejections (I was one), but it did not ring true that we had the ability to suddenly go from hate to love. If God loved a believer from before the foundations of the world, all through their prior rejections, that would put us at odds with God if we rejected those who rejected green cards, but later would believe. That’s just crazy!
I hung onto the passage on PFAL p 31 as a place where at least VPW didn’t eschew the JC rejecting man with the withered arm, and he didn’t eschew the praise of the master and servant. VPW also included this positive event with super blessed pagans in the class; another non-eschewing stance. That’s all still a pretty weak form of anti-fundamentalism and anti-bigotry.
***
One of my more pleasant surprises when I came back to PFAL was this passage.
When I brought this up I posted:
“I share your concerns on fundamentalism. I’ve seen problems come up constantly in grads regarding this. It often involves forgetting what we were taught about this in the first session of the class.”
When I actually looked at the passage I saw there were no quotes surrounding his inclusion of Hindus. Still, he said it, but VPW repeated it IN HIS WORDS. He added his authority to the Hindus saying it by paraphrasing it and not negating the inclusion.
“… The member of Parliament then came to our compartment to tell Mrs. Wierwille and me that what he had seen in Jubbulpore was the most tremendous Christian event he had ver witnessed – that a man of God would bless all God’s people irrespective of whether they were Christian or Hindu.”
A dyed-in-the-wool bigot fundamentalist would also (if they had to include the Hindu praise) put quotes in there to distance themselves from the “Hindu inclusion” as opposed to a default endorsement of it. Imagine you were quoting me. You definitely would want quotations marks to separate yourself from my ideas, I project… ah …er …I guess. Wouldn’t you?
I often see things like this when I come back to the PFAL text and not rely on memory. I learned from Eve’s mistake.
***
Next, you wrote:
“Further, the Mormon subculture is built on the diligent practice of tithing.”
Yes. And in the CSBP he shows how these people are included in God’s blessings in a big way, not because they signed a green card, but because they believe and act.
***
I know less about the Janes, but the way VPW praised them in the AC did not fit with any fundamentalist mode of eschewing I’ve ever seen.
***
My impressions are that how God blesses those outside green card status or Christianity in general are hidden in “the secret things” mentioned in Deut 29:29.
He told ancient Israel to eschew those who were out to kill them, which was everybody then. He told ancient Christians to minimize their fellowship with pagans to avoid diluting their pure doctrine. These are practical measures, not heart matters.
Didn’t David live in hiding from King Saul with some Pagans who were seed boys, bent on destroying Israel? I forget. I know the woman who lived on the Wall of Jericho was blessed. In Acts 17 Paul went to a Pagan alter to preach not against it, but with it. The Mystery was that all those terrible Pagans were suddenly allowed into the fold.
More that I learned since 1998 was that before filming PFAL his radio broadcast of “The Love Way” has some interesting spots. In there he talks about “going all the way with love” and daring to think that way. Later in the 79 AC he talks about the idea of being a maximum believer. I think these ideas are related to the “Christ Formed In You” topic I’ve brought up her often.
What I think we have over the Pagans, is not exclusive inclusion in “God’s people.” What we have in true Christianity is this possibility of going ALL THE WAY just like Jesus did.
THEN, once we do that, it’s our job to teach and help the Pagans to rise up to thrir highest potential. However, we have not quite done that, and neither have any other Christian groups in the past 2000 years. We wonderful Christians still got this little hang up, preventing us from blessing ANYWAY those who “don’t believe in your Jesus.”
I think this hangup on all Christians is that we all still have a natural man mind AFTER the new birth, and SIT does not help it. That next stage of forming Christ in us has eluded us since Paul decried it with the Galatians. Sure, a tiny few break through, just like prophets in the Old Testament, but it’s rare. Those few who get a taste of going all the way in love are usually extreme oddballs, just like in the OT. And they are ALWAYS individuals who still have nasty old man mind flaws. God wants flawed people to aim at and hit the mark of love all the way IN SPITE of that old man nature and is willing to teach even the most flawed.
As long as we Christians operate mostly from our old man nature, and fail to get Christ formed within, we are no better than Pagans, and in some cases worse.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
First of all, in asking you to explain how either of those two stories demonstrated that twi is NOT a fundamentalist organization, I did not question the stories themselves. IOW, I acknowledge(d) that you cited an excerpt from PFLAP and a well understood citation from the class on "send me at least 10 percent of all of your money."
While you may have provided some insight as to how YOU rationalize these things in your mind, you did NOT explain how they relate to what you claim they mean. You just didn't.
Ya know, Mike... some people here try to give you the opportunity to actually engage in discussion as you requested. But you now (and in the past) just don't seem to get it, and don't respond to legitimate points people make when they try to respond to you.
The India incident in PFLAP does nothing to show Wierwille or twi as not fundamentalist. The incident served instead, in the class and in the book, as Wierwille's attempt to buttress his claim to greatness. IOW, it was only your hero saying, "look at how great I am." That's narcissism. Nothing more, nothing less.
The tithing concept from the other class and pamphlet was offered ONLY as alleged evidence that if you faithfully send him money, you'll prosper. Nothing more, nothing less.
Is there anything in any Wierwille proclamation where he says that he approves of Hinduism or Mormonism as valid and legitimate ways to God?
Didn't Ted Ferrell have a song or two about the only way to God?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Therein lies the flaw. Yes, either it was by revelation or it wasn't- and if it wasn't, then this is NOT special and unique, and it is only special and unique if it WAS by revelation.
Therefore, we investigate carefully to see if it was by revelation or not. And looking to see if there were "benefits" and considering that the standard is a SMOKESCREEN. vpw himself pointed out that people claim a benefit from sitting on a therapist's couch. Christians all over the world claim benefits in their groups, and supposedly this is greatly superior to ALL of theirs. HIndus, Jews, Muslims, and so on similarly claim benefits of their groups, and this is supposedly greatly superior to ALL of theirs.
How do we find out if this was by revelation or not, with some degree of authority?
We examine the claimed specifics concerning the revelation.
Mike's never actually done that. His process would hold up as "genuine" any group from which one would claim a benefit- and there are satanists who would claim they benefit from their group.
So, we examine the specifics. What would we find? The same things we found when some of us already did this and discussed it.
http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/24592-the-failed-1942-promise/
IF this failed a reasonable test for revelation, it could not be considered revelation.
SINCE it failed SEVERAL reasonable tests for revelation, if could NOT be considered revelation.
If it could not REASONABLY be considered revelation, then Mike should find out what the rest of us can teach him and why we're prospering and serving God while he's claiming we're not.
Naturally, he's under no compulsion to do so, and I personally don't see it happening this side of the grave. However, I can be surprised, and I also can't rule out a miracle.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
T-Bone, I think you have a very good head on your shoulders. But you are right; sometimes all of us have our heads in our azzes. Someone famous once wrote, "to err is human, to forgive divine," or something similar to that. God forgives, and forgets. So should I.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
That apparently was Alexander Pope. In An Essay on Criticism, Part II, in 1711, apparently,
Pope explains that, while anyone can make a mistake, we should aspire to do as God does, that is, show mercy and forgive sinners:
Note that Pope's original wording uses the word 'humane' rather than, as it is now usually spelled, 'human'. This wasn't a spelling mistake, nor have we misunderstood the poet's meaning, just that 'humane' was the accepted spelling of 'human' in the early 18th century.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Did nobody nail me for not citing a source?
http://www.chrisharrison.net/index.php/Visualizations/BibleViz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Hey Mike,
i was wondering if you had a chance yet to read Penworks’ Undertow book
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I think we slightly miscommunication on what aspect of fundamentalist organizations TWI was not.
After several readings It looks like (possibly) you were thinking of where fundamentalism starts. It starts with a fundamental authoritative text that is inerrant. Oh, yes, TWI was fundamentalist there. End of story.
What I was thinking of was where fundamentalism usually ends up: only Christians go to heaven. Usually, to most people I've talked to, this is the most objectionable aspect of fundamentalism, that of great exclusivity and loss of love in the process.
***
If my guess is right, I'm wondering why the idea of an authoritative text would bug you more than the exclusivity. I went into my essay because you expressed an objection to fundamentalism in TWI.
I like the idea that God issues words and that they can be found, or delivered to seekers. This is EXACTLY what Science is all about, with recent secularization replacing God's Word with the Laws of Physics. Newton was a theologian.
Maybe your dislike of an authoritarian text would subside if you saw that it enables freedom, rather than prohibiting it. I find uncertainty fine in the atomic realm, but not so useful in charting my course through life.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I have it and am slowly reading it.
My first objection, though, is how she objected to the idea that "the Bible interprets itself." I find that objection very dim witted, even when pumped up with detail like with the posters that attacked it 15 years ago here. It slowed down my reading, but I still intend to finish it. That interpretation issue lowered my expectations and the book's priority in my schedule.
In a nutshell: Imagine how quirky it is for God to issue His Word to communicate to us, but then He FAILS to put cues, keys, and signposts in there to guide sincere seekers. That sounds like a bad way to get a message out. It's like Him saying "I want you to know something but I will not help you understand it."
The phrase "The Bible interprets itself" is an extreme abbreviation of a complex idea. She did not do that justice IMO. The criticism this idea got here 15 years ago I thought was similarly lacking. My impression was that she was leading uninformed readers into thinking God is supposed to be mysterious, an old Catholic idea. Maybe her book will get better later.
If you can recommend a spot to skip ahead to I would appreciate seeing what you feel is an section important to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I find this philosophically interesting. If it WAS given by revelation then how would that acceptable degree of authority compare to the authority of the revelation. It begins to sound like the Ford explaining Henry. I don't have time to chase down this Godellian hunch, but I thought i'd throw it out there.
I also noticed on your link that you seemed to not mention the digital reams of debate that swirled around that issue 15 years ago here. Do you remember that? Do you remember how Lifted Up (Pretty sure name accurate) testified finding himself SUDDENLY enveloped in a rogue snowstorm while running in New Knoxville? It happens on the Oceans all the time with water waves. A rogue snowstorm is usually very small in area, and would not be detected with 1940s technology.
I'm just wondering why you left out Lifted Up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
http://alcoholrehab.com/drug-addiction/petrol-sniffing-gasoline-sniffing/
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
Rocky, thanks! I thought it was Shakespeare.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Yes.
If his lyric means the only way to be accepted and loved by God, then I'd place that lyric the TVT (Twi Verbal Traditions) that drifted from the revelation into exclusive fundamentalism.
If his lyric means the only way to get to that maximum believer, Christ formed, going all the way in love.....THEN it is in line with the revelation.
I hope you read my essay again with our miscommunication on fundamentalism in mind. I was tilting at different windmill than you thought.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Sorry Mike, but I think you are obfuscating the simplicity of the Bible; I believe if God communicated his Word - then what more is needed then to simply believe it? I think one can infer from many passages that God does indeed help seekers to get a better understanding of his Word...
That is the whole idea behind the following passages:
16 Jesus answered, “My teaching is not my own. It comes from the one who sent me. 17 Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own...John 7:16, 17 NIV
Reflect on what I am saying, for the Lord will give you insight into all this. II Timothy 2:7 NIV
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding...Proverbs 9:10 NIV
The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple. ...Psalm 119:130 KJV
13 For we write you nothing other than what you read and understand [there is no double meaning in what we say]. And I hope you will [accurately] understand [divine things] until the end; 14 just as you have [already] partially understood us, [and one day will recognize] that you can be proud of us just as we are of you, in the day of our Lord Jesus...II Corinthians 1: 13, 14 Amplified
Mike, don’t over complicate it! The Word is right there in plain sight ! No one needs a secret decoder ring !
Edited by T-Bonerevision
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
The snowstorm never happened. That's a fact. Despite what you might think, Mike, Ohio has weather records that are quite comprehensive, dating all the way back to the late 1800's. We've been through this all before and looked at specific dates for Ohio weather records.
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.