Remnant - I mean being a half used up fabric that is not yet discarded? Is that the NT imagery Jesus taught?
Thats a really good point!
When you think about what happened to Jesus Christ at the end of his ministry then Paul's troubles make more sense than what wierwille tried to infer. They turned against Jesus Christ at the end of his ministry, though Christ was no less victorious over the devil because people turned against him. In the gospels we see that without Jesus Christ, the true shephard, the sheep would naturally scatter. Jesus Christ gathered what was a scattared and built his Church with their help. Paul had mass people turn against him at the end of his life too...which st vic said was the Church in ruin as if Christ, Paul, et. al. had failed. I think not!
Paul's ministry in a nutshell:
Acts 9 13-16 (Start of Paul's ministry)
Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.
2Timothy 4:7-8 (near the end of Paul's ministry and life)
I have fought the good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith. Finally there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give to me on that day, and not to me only but also to all who have loved his appearing"
Any piece of cloth, gets worn out as it gets used. The fabric wears away. What's left hasn't fulfilled its function yet.
The faithful bit is more the used-up portion that you cannot see, because it gave its all, got worn out, and has been washed away. It was faithful to the end, and to its own destruction. It's now a hole in the fabric.
That which is left may still be faithful to perform its task. Or it might just be hanging around at the edges, hoping it never gets called into use.
TWI's meaning was (is?) those who continue to "stand" with TWI and haven't chosen to follow God a different way, or been M&A'd or otherwise departed. TWI mean those who are still hanging around the edges waiting to be used, abused and discarded.
I get that God has a different meaning. I'd rather be part of God's faithful remnant - because my strength, instead of being washed away, is renewed daily, like the eagle's.
On the remnant discussion, something I think is relevant:
I can't comment on Biblical significance or anything like that. But I will tell you LCM is practiced at constant rationalization. When he left / was kicked out / whatever you want to call it, I watched him rationalize his situation over and over and over again. It made me look at what he taught differently: if he has this mindset of rationalization, how much of what he taught that he thought was Godly really came from his using rationalization to make himself feel better?
The BIG one (for me) is abortion: if he needed women to get abortions to hide his infidelity, how could he make it Godly? By rationalizing it Biblically. Adultery? When it's printed that way in the King James, it should be more "accurately" translated "idolatry." It goes on and on. How much of his doctrine is more about his lack of mental health than it is about genuine inspiration? My guess is: a LOT.
So, as to the remnant, it's my thought that it's just another rationalization for his behavior (marking and avoiding so many people) and for the situation (people leaving TWI in droves in the late 80s). It's how he dealt with the cognitive dissonance and the pain of so many people leaving.
On the remnant discussion, something I think is relevant:
I can't comment on Biblical significance or anything like that. But I will tell you LCM is practiced at constant rationalization. When he left / was kicked out / whatever you want to call it, I watched him rationalize his situation over and over and over again. It made me look at what he taught differently: if he has this mindset of rationalization, how much of what he taught that he thought was Godly really came from his using rationalization to make himself feel better?
The BIG one (for me) is abortion: if he needed women to get abortions to hide his infidelity, how could he make it Godly? By rationalizing it Biblically. Adultery? When it's printed that way in the King James, it should be more "accurately" translated "idolatry." It goes on and on. How much of his doctrine is more about his lack of mental health than it is about genuine inspiration? My guess is: a LOT.
So, as to the remnant, it's my thought that it's just another rationalization for his behavior (marking and avoiding so many people) and for the situation (people leaving TWI in droves in the late 80s). It's how he dealt with the cognitive dissonance and the pain of so many people leaving.
Thoughts?
My only thought is these words come from a place of profound perception, heightened awareness, and divine sensitivity.
On the remnant discussion, something I think is relevant:
I can't comment on Biblical significance or anything like that. But I will tell you LCM is practiced at constant rationalization. When he left / was kicked out / whatever you want to call it, I watched him rationalize his situation over and over and over again. It made me look at what he taught differently: if he has this mindset of rationalization, how much of what he taught that he thought was Godly really came from his using rationalization to make himself feel better?
The BIG one (for me) is abortion: if he needed women to get abortions to hide his infidelity, how could he make it Godly? By rationalizing it Biblically. Adultery? When it's printed that way in the King James, it should be more "accurately" translated "idolatry." It goes on and on. How much of his doctrine is more about his lack of mental health than it is about genuine inspiration? My guess is: a LOT.
So, as to the remnant, it's my thought that it's just another rationalization for his behavior (marking and avoiding so many people) and for the situation (people leaving TWI in droves in the late 80s). It's how he dealt with the cognitive dissonance and the pain of so many people leaving.
Thoughts?
Rings true like church bells that can be heard for many miles."...if [SINCE] he has this mindset of rationalization..."
Everybody does the same thing. Rationalization is a powerful defense emotional mechanism. As is denial.
But I figure since you recognize these realities in a certain relative, you probably already know how pervasive and powerful the concepts are at protecting a person's emotional "well-being."
Quote
Rationalization is a defense mechanism in which people justify difficult or unacceptable feelings with seemingly logical reasons and explanations.
...defenses function to unconsciously protect the ego from discomfort or distress....
Quote
Denial is a defense mechanism in which an individual refuses to recognize or acknowledge objective facts or experiences. It’s an unconscious process that serves to protect the person from discomfort or anxiety.
On the remnant discussion, something I think is relevant:
I can't comment on Biblical significance or anything like that. But I will tell you LCM is practiced at constant rationalization. When he left / was kicked out / whatever you want to call it, I watched him rationalize his situation over and over and over again. It made me look at what he taught differently: if he has this mindset of rationalization, how much of what he taught that he thought was Godly really came from his using rationalization to make himself feel better?
The BIG one (for me) is abortion: if he needed women to get abortions to hide his infidelity, how could he make it Godly? By rationalizing it Biblically. Adultery? When it's printed that way in the King James, it should be more "accurately" translated "idolatry." It goes on and on. How much of his doctrine is more about his lack of mental health than it is about genuine inspiration? My guess is: a LOT.
So, as to the remnant, it's my thought that it's just another rationalization for his behavior (marking and avoiding so many people) and for the situation (people leaving TWI in droves in the late 80s). It's how he dealt with the cognitive dissonance and the pain of so many people leaving.
Thoughts?
That makes sense to me. People masking their mental illness behind the idea that it is “revelation”. In a similar sense how much of VPs revelation was narcissism wrapped up in a gift wrap?
Yes I think you have something there where people resolve cognitive dissonance by making up a voice in their head telling them something I.e. revelation. I am not saying inspiration or God communicating to you is false. Just I do not agree with all the rote Iron Man suit like interpretation of what the way teaches about manifestations any longer. I mean if they screwed up the body of Christ scriptures that bad how can I trust them on manifestations? Beyond the fact I never saw any evidence of the reality of the “all 9 all the time” quote that was popular.
More like people wandering around muttering to themselves and making up crap about each other. Never any real healing or miracles. And other idiots damaging people for life by their selfishness and blaming it on revelation.
Your logic makes more sense in evaluating people by their fruit like Christ taught.
That makes sense to me. People masking their mental illness behind the idea that it is “revelation”. In a similar sense how much of VPs revelation was narcissism wrapped up in a gift wrap?
Yes I think you have something there where people resolve cognitive dissonance by making up a voice in their head telling them something I.e. revelation. I am not saying inspiration or God communicating to you is false. Just I do not agree with all the rote Iron Man suit like interpretation of what the way teaches about manifestations any longer. I mean if they screwed up the body of Christ scriptures that bad how can I trust them on manifestations? Beyond the fact I never saw any evidence of the reality of the “all 9 all the time” quote that was popular.
More like people wandering around muttering to themselves and making up crap about each other. Never any real healing or miracles. And other idiots damaging people for life by their selfishness and blaming it on revelation.
Your logic makes more sense in evaluating people by their fruit like Christ taught.
POWER POWER POWER!
As I posted somewhere else, the very name of the class Power for Abundant Living is a huge clue to the misdirection of the gospel of Jesus Christ provided therein.Did Jesus talk about power? Sure.Was it the dominant theme of his ministry? Absolutely not.His was a message of selfless service in love.
Interesting that “all nine all the time” is mentioned above.Even on the face of it it is ridiculous and it is a wonder it ever became a catchphrase.Even the classes taught that 6 of the manifestations in 1 Cor. 12 could only be ‘operated’ by God’s prerogative.
Really starting down a rabbit hole, just because there are nine manifestations of Holy Spirit listed consecutively in a reproof epistle should not cause someone to assume that there are only nine.Manifestation simply means evidence, and even a cursory reading of the church epistles show that the primary manifestation of the spirit is love.The gospels confirm this, and it is the glue that holds the entire Bible together.In truth, Paul notes in 1 Cor. 13 that manifestations not produced and governed by love are nothing but lying signs and wonders.Focusing on manifestations as something you can ‘operate’ instead of realizing that what they are is the love of God being shed abroad leads to nothing but confusion and every evil work.
I cannot judge VPs heart, or LCM’s - just because they were big shots at one time does not mean that they were not misled.Unbelievers are not enemies, they are merely more people who need Gods grace and mercy, just like me.Evil works and putrid fruit, however, are manifestations of something other than Holy Spirit.
I cannot judge VPs heart, or LCM’s - just because they were big shots at one time does not mean that they were not misled.Unbelievers are not enemies, they are merely more people who need Gods grace and mercy, just like me.Evil works and putrid fruit, however, are manifestations of something other than Holy Spirit.
Insightful message.
Nevertheless, we CAN judge/evaluate/measure against known standards VPs/LCMs words and actions.
Nevertheless, we CAN judge/evaluate/measure against known standards VPs/LCMs words and actions.
Yes indeed, that is an excellent point! We have to judge/evaluate/measure in order to move forward(or even backward....or sideways). The known standards we choose will guide our own works and fruit. Words and actions are works and produce fruit of one kind or another.
I cannot judge VPs heart, or LCM’s - just because they were big shots at one time does not mean that they were not misled.Unbelievers are not enemies, they are merely more people who need Gods grace and mercy, just like me.Evil works and putrid fruit, however, are manifestations of something other than Holy Spirit.
Most of what is posted on GSC are the evil works and the putrid fruit from not only VPW and LCM, but of other leadership of TWI. Whatever the pasts, before TWI, are of VPW and LCM, are not widely expressed here, but their evil works and corruption abound. For example, women in the ministry were subject to sexual exploitation from both men. Other leadership folowed by also taking advantage of innocent women.
Most of what is posted on GSC are the evil works and the putrid fruit from not only VPW and LCM, but of other leadership of TWI. Whatever the pasts, before TWI, are of VPW and LCM, are not widely expressed here, but their evil works and corruption abound. For example, women in the ministry were subject to sexual exploitation from both men. Other leadership folowed by also taking advantage of innocent women.
I realize that some people may not believe in big Xs and little xs (ie. sins) but if there are, one of the big Xs is definitely the teaching that there is not serious judgment awaiting certain born-again believers, especially leadership who abuse positions. To whom much is given, much is expected. The lie of no punishment for believers because.......grace, is one of the nastiest told ever. I am confident the Lord is able to straighten it out.
In PFAL, drawing on the concept of big “X”s and little “x”s wierwille put forth the argument that in God’s eyes all sin is the same. This is narrow reasoning – meaning it is limited in size or scope. It fails to take into account unrepentant sin, presumptuous sin and the consequences of sin.
I assume God has at least the same sense of justice as humans – if not more so. I believe we’re all made in God’s image and likeness – and I think we find in most civilized countries some consensus on how to handle “sin” - or “crime”. However, you define it a sin is a sin, and a crime is a crime. But some sins/crimes have more serious consequences than others. In America we distinguish between a misdemeanor – which is a lesser criminal act punished less severely – compared to a felony. The judicial system in the Old Testament spoke of an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth – it’s along the same lines of expressing reciprocal judgement – that the injured person is compensated fairly – and similarly governing authorities usually decree the punishment is to fit the crime.
I tend to think – considering eternity – the degree of punishment is directly proportional to the degree of severity of the sin. If this were not so, then passages like Matthew 11: 20-24Luke 17:1-4do not make much sense and Jesus must have been bluffing about people getting what they deserve.
In Matthew 7: 15-24we are instructed to look at the fruit – Jesus spoke of these religious charlatans as a diseased tree that bears bad fruit, and every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Again, this is in reference to a future judgement. But for the here and now, He did NOT say the diseased tree should be healed, salvaged, or reformed.
But all matters of judging someone’s heart aside – what if these religious charlatans are committing criminal acts in the here and now? In America we are governed by the rule of law. No one is above the law. wierwille, LCM and others acted with impunity. They were a law unto themselves. LCM got caught, whereas wierwille did not.
We don’t live in a perfect world. Justice isn’t always served. With the dispensational theology in TWI, I think there was a tendency for these religious charlatans who got away with murder to think in terms of justice postponedor it’s the age of Grace or they find some rationalization to justify themselves…maybe there’s just something about self-deception or a seared conscience that sabotaged their self-awareness.
If you think about the highest priorities as being to love God and neighbor than one practical application of that is to put reconciliation even before religious service – this is dictated in Matthew 5: 23, 24. I don’t know what goes on in the hearts of cult-leaders – and grace and mercy are not my department anyway. I like the simple things – immorality in the church? Get rid of it before it defiles the whole church I Corinthians 5 . What’s so hard to understand about that?
Let "grace" and "mercy" for sexual predators sweep it all under the carpet? Well…in my opinion that’s one of the big problems in TWI. By big I mean I Cor. 5 big - it's defiled the whole organization!
Grease Spot Café tells the other side of the story. At least some of this stuff is coming to light. I’m a guy. I was never sexually molested by a cult-leader. I never knew they did that stuff until I came to Grease Spot. It sickens me to hear about it – but it explains a lot of why they pushed “the freedom we have in Christ…anything done in the love of God is okay…all the women in the kingdom belonged to king David...the spiritually mature can handle things that would freak out believers still wet behind the ears.”
VPW said, "anything done in the love of God is okay."
BULLSHONTA. This is STUPID. It's a logical impossibility. How can that which God hates be done in his Love? It's like saying any bird that can fly can fly under water. WTAF?
ANYTHING can't be done in the Love of God; the only things done in the Love of God are the thing's of God, of Love, of Truth. That which God hates can't be done in the Love of God. These gloves don't fit those hands.
There is no space in the Love of God for rape. The Love of God cannot comprehend this action. It is not of God. It cannot be done in Love. There is no room for the rapist to operate if he is operating in God's Love. It's impossible.
BULLSHONTA. This is STUPID. It's a logical impossibility. How can that which God hates be done in his Love? It's like saying any bird that can fly can fly under water. WTAF?
ANYTHING can't be done in the Love of God; the only things done in the Love of God are the thing's of God, of Love, of Truth. That which God hates can't be done in the Love of God. These gloves don't fit those hands.
There is no space in the Love of God for rape. The Love of God cannot comprehend this action. It is not of God. It cannot be done in Love. There is no room for the rapist to operate if he is operating in God's Love. It's impossible.
Devil seeded bagels are not made in God's bakery.
Nathan, if this post is going to endure over time, it might be a good idea to clarify. What it says you quoted from T-Bone was really T-Bone quoting what Wierwille used as his self-justifying rationalization. Then again, maybe I just did so for you. Nevertheless, I had to read both comments (your and T-Bone's) closely to figure it out.
Nathan, if this post is going to endure over time, it might be a good idea to clarify. What it says you quoted from T-Bone was really T-Bone quoting what Wierwille used as his self-justifying rationalization. Then again, maybe I just did so for you. Nevertheless, I had to read both comments (your and T-Bone's) closely to figure it out.
Oh no! Thank you! Let there be no confusion. I am quoting T-Bone who is quoting victor. The quote is victor's!
That's the same victor paul wierwille who went to Haight-Ashbury to hijack the Christian hippies of the House of Acts to be his sales force for pfal. While he was there, he spoke privately with J1m D00p. vpw asked J1m what it was like to be at an orgy. J1m mentioned having arrived at one once, leaving quickly. While they were on this subject- which vpw continued discussing, which made J1m uncomfortable- vpw said this on the subject of ORGIES and PARTICIPATION IN ORGIES.
"You know, that's all available." He rationalized this by quoting I Corinthians 7:1, which says "Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. "He said that if God had not wanted it available, 7:1 would have said "best" and not "good." So, that was how vpw told J1m that God Almighty was all right with ORGIES and PARTICIPATION IN ORGIES. J1m disagreed and said he was glad he was free of that whole scene. He later wondered about the incident, and thought he must have been mistaken somehow in what vpw had said, since it was so obviously and blatantly wrong, to say the least.
So, don't think those are isolated statements= in the mindset of vpw, it was all of one piece to say God Almighty was ok with participation in orgies, and sex with someone other than your spouse, and molesting the flock (he also had no problem drugging them, but I'm not aware of any justification he used for that.)
I realize that some people may not believe in big Xs and little xs (ie. sins) but if there are, one of the big Xs is definitely the teaching that there is not serious judgment awaiting certain born-again believers, especially leadership who abuse positions. To whom much is given, much is expected. The lie of no punishment for believers because.......grace, is one of the nastiest told ever. I am confident the Lord is able to straighten it out.
I do not know about the big and little x s but I do remember Jesus teaching something about a millstone necklace in Matt 18 and Luke 17
I've always been intrigued how Jesus referred to himself as 'the Vine'...when I think of a vine as opposed to a tree a vine moves, creeps, manoeuvres, goes around. Not much can get in its path and when something does, well, the vine just goes around, over or under, relentlessly moving and reaching out. Perhaps this is what Jesus meant when he said the gates of hell shall not prevail against him and the church.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
33
23
33
32
Popular Days
Mar 4
30
Mar 1
24
Mar 3
14
Feb 19
13
Top Posters In This Topic
Rocky 33 posts
johniam 23 posts
T-Bone 33 posts
Nathan_Jr 32 posts
Popular Days
Mar 4 2023
30 posts
Mar 1 2023
24 posts
Mar 3 2023
14 posts
Feb 19 2022
13 posts
Popular Posts
T-Bone
Oh yeah – you nailed it Bolshevik! An alarming aspect of TWI-follower’s/big PFAL-fans’ fascination with demonology is the amount of control it affords cult-leaders. They elevate consequen
Twinky
Good lord, is that Craig? His vaunted golden hair has slipped down to his chin, and gone grey? Still got the scowl, though.
BecomingMe
Hi, friends! Sorry I'm late to the party. I step in and out of cult world, because it's just too heavy sometimes. I'm Craig's oldest kid and wanted to jump on this thread to help out if I can...
Posted Images
OldSkool
Thats a really good point!
When you think about what happened to Jesus Christ at the end of his ministry then Paul's troubles make more sense than what wierwille tried to infer. They turned against Jesus Christ at the end of his ministry, though Christ was no less victorious over the devil because people turned against him. In the gospels we see that without Jesus Christ, the true shephard, the sheep would naturally scatter. Jesus Christ gathered what was a scattared and built his Church with their help. Paul had mass people turn against him at the end of his life too...which st vic said was the Church in ruin as if Christ, Paul, et. al. had failed. I think not!
Paul's ministry in a nutshell:
Acts 9 13-16 (Start of Paul's ministry)
Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.
2Timothy 4:7-8 (near the end of Paul's ministry and life)
I have fought the good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith. Finally there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give to me on that day, and not to me only but also to all who have loved his appearing"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
This is my "now" take on the "faithful remnant."
Any piece of cloth, gets worn out as it gets used. The fabric wears away. What's left hasn't fulfilled its function yet.
The faithful bit is more the used-up portion that you cannot see, because it gave its all, got worn out, and has been washed away. It was faithful to the end, and to its own destruction. It's now a hole in the fabric.
That which is left may still be faithful to perform its task. Or it might just be hanging around at the edges, hoping it never gets called into use.
TWI's meaning was (is?) those who continue to "stand" with TWI and haven't chosen to follow God a different way, or been M&A'd or otherwise departed. TWI mean those who are still hanging around the edges waiting to be used, abused and discarded.
I get that God has a different meaning. I'd rather be part of God's faithful remnant - because my strength, instead of being washed away, is renewed daily, like the eagle's.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BecomingMe
On the remnant discussion, something I think is relevant:
I can't comment on Biblical significance or anything like that. But I will tell you LCM is practiced at constant rationalization. When he left / was kicked out / whatever you want to call it, I watched him rationalize his situation over and over and over again. It made me look at what he taught differently: if he has this mindset of rationalization, how much of what he taught that he thought was Godly really came from his using rationalization to make himself feel better?
The BIG one (for me) is abortion: if he needed women to get abortions to hide his infidelity, how could he make it Godly? By rationalizing it Biblically. Adultery? When it's printed that way in the King James, it should be more "accurately" translated "idolatry." It goes on and on. How much of his doctrine is more about his lack of mental health than it is about genuine inspiration? My guess is: a LOT.
So, as to the remnant, it's my thought that it's just another rationalization for his behavior (marking and avoiding so many people) and for the situation (people leaving TWI in droves in the late 80s). It's how he dealt with the cognitive dissonance and the pain of so many people leaving.
Thoughts?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
My only thought is these words come from a place of profound perception, heightened awareness, and divine sensitivity.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Rings true like church bells that can be heard for many miles."...if [SINCE] he has this mindset of rationalization..."
Everybody does the same thing. Rationalization is a powerful defense emotional mechanism. As is denial.
But I figure since you recognize these realities in a certain relative, you probably already know how pervasive and powerful the concepts are at protecting a person's emotional "well-being."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
That makes sense to me. People masking their mental illness behind the idea that it is “revelation”. In a similar sense how much of VPs revelation was narcissism wrapped up in a gift wrap?
Yes I think you have something there where people resolve cognitive dissonance by making up a voice in their head telling them something I.e. revelation. I am not saying inspiration or God communicating to you is false. Just I do not agree with all the rote Iron Man suit like interpretation of what the way teaches about manifestations any longer. I mean if they screwed up the body of Christ scriptures that bad how can I trust them on manifestations? Beyond the fact I never saw any evidence of the reality of the “all 9 all the time” quote that was popular.
More like people wandering around muttering to themselves and making up crap about each other. Never any real healing or miracles. And other idiots damaging people for life by their selfishness and blaming it on revelation.
Your logic makes more sense in evaluating people by their fruit like Christ taught.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
fredgrant
POWER POWER POWER!
As I posted somewhere else, the very name of the class Power for Abundant Living is a huge clue to the misdirection of the gospel of Jesus Christ provided therein. Did Jesus talk about power? Sure. Was it the dominant theme of his ministry? Absolutely not. His was a message of selfless service in love.
Interesting that “all nine all the time” is mentioned above. Even on the face of it it is ridiculous and it is a wonder it ever became a catchphrase. Even the classes taught that 6 of the manifestations in 1 Cor. 12 could only be ‘operated’ by God’s prerogative.
Really starting down a rabbit hole, just because there are nine manifestations of Holy Spirit listed consecutively in a reproof epistle should not cause someone to assume that there are only nine. Manifestation simply means evidence, and even a cursory reading of the church epistles show that the primary manifestation of the spirit is love. The gospels confirm this, and it is the glue that holds the entire Bible together. In truth, Paul notes in 1 Cor. 13 that manifestations not produced and governed by love are nothing but lying signs and wonders. Focusing on manifestations as something you can ‘operate’ instead of realizing that what they are is the love of God being shed abroad leads to nothing but confusion and every evil work.
I cannot judge VPs heart, or LCM’s - just because they were big shots at one time does not mean that they were not misled. Unbelievers are not enemies, they are merely more people who need Gods grace and mercy, just like me. Evil works and putrid fruit, however, are manifestations of something other than Holy Spirit.
Edited by fredgrantLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Insightful message.
Nevertheless, we CAN judge/evaluate/measure against known standards VPs/LCMs words and actions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
fredgrant
Yes indeed, that is an excellent point! We have to judge/evaluate/measure in order to move forward(or even backward....or sideways). The known standards we choose will guide our own works and fruit. Words and actions are works and produce fruit of one kind or another.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stayed Too Long
Most of what is posted on GSC are the evil works and the putrid fruit from not only VPW and LCM, but of other leadership of TWI. Whatever the pasts, before TWI, are of VPW and LCM, are not widely expressed here, but their evil works and corruption abound. For example, women in the ministry were subject to sexual exploitation from both men. Other leadership folowed by also taking advantage of innocent women.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
fredgrant
Double
Link to comment
Share on other sites
fredgrant
I realize that some people may not believe in big Xs and little xs (ie. sins) but if there are, one of the big Xs is definitely the teaching that there is not serious judgment awaiting certain born-again believers, especially leadership who abuse positions. To whom much is given, much is expected. The lie of no punishment for believers because.......grace, is one of the nastiest told ever. I am confident the Lord is able to straighten it out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
In PFAL, drawing on the concept of big “X”s and little “x”s wierwille put forth the argument that in God’s eyes all sin is the same. This is narrow reasoning – meaning it is limited in size or scope. It fails to take into account unrepentant sin, presumptuous sin and the consequences of sin.
I assume God has at least the same sense of justice as humans – if not more so. I believe we’re all made in God’s image and likeness – and I think we find in most civilized countries some consensus on how to handle “sin” - or “crime”. However, you define it a sin is a sin, and a crime is a crime. But some sins/crimes have more serious consequences than others. In America we distinguish between a misdemeanor – which is a lesser criminal act punished less severely – compared to a felony. The judicial system in the Old Testament spoke of an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth – it’s along the same lines of expressing reciprocal judgement – that the injured person is compensated fairly – and similarly governing authorities usually decree the punishment is to fit the crime.
I tend to think – considering eternity – the degree of punishment is directly proportional to the degree of severity of the sin. If this were not so, then passages like Matthew 11: 20-24 Luke 17:1-4 do not make much sense and Jesus must have been bluffing about people getting what they deserve.
In Matthew 7: 15-24 we are instructed to look at the fruit – Jesus spoke of these religious charlatans as a diseased tree that bears bad fruit, and every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Again, this is in reference to a future judgement. But for the here and now, He did NOT say the diseased tree should be healed, salvaged, or reformed.
But all matters of judging someone’s heart aside – what if these religious charlatans are committing criminal acts in the here and now? In America we are governed by the rule of law. No one is above the law. wierwille, LCM and others acted with impunity. They were a law unto themselves. LCM got caught, whereas wierwille did not.
We don’t live in a perfect world. Justice isn’t always served. With the dispensational theology in TWI, I think there was a tendency for these religious charlatans who got away with murder to think in terms of justice postponed or it’s the age of Grace or they find some rationalization to justify themselves…maybe there’s just something about self-deception or a seared conscience that sabotaged their self-awareness.
If you think about the highest priorities as being to love God and neighbor than one practical application of that is to put reconciliation even before religious service – this is dictated in Matthew 5: 23, 24 . I don’t know what goes on in the hearts of cult-leaders – and grace and mercy are not my department anyway. I like the simple things – immorality in the church? Get rid of it before it defiles the whole church I Corinthians 5 . What’s so hard to understand about that?
Let "grace" and "mercy" for sexual predators sweep it all under the carpet? Well…in my opinion that’s one of the big problems in TWI. By big I mean I Cor. 5 big - it's defiled the whole organization!
Grease Spot Café tells the other side of the story. At least some of this stuff is coming to light. I’m a guy. I was never sexually molested by a cult-leader. I never knew they did that stuff until I came to Grease Spot. It sickens me to hear about it – but it explains a lot of why they pushed “the freedom we have in Christ…anything done in the love of God is okay…all the women in the kingdom belonged to king David...the spiritually mature can handle things that would freak out believers still wet behind the ears.”
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
BULLSHONTA. This is STUPID. It's a logical impossibility. How can that which God hates be done in his Love? It's like saying any bird that can fly can fly under water. WTAF?
ANYTHING can't be done in the Love of God; the only things done in the Love of God are the thing's of God, of Love, of Truth. That which God hates can't be done in the Love of God. These gloves don't fit those hands.
There is no space in the Love of God for rape. The Love of God cannot comprehend this action. It is not of God. It cannot be done in Love. There is no room for the rapist to operate if he is operating in God's Love. It's impossible.
Devil seeded bagels are not made in God's bakery.
Edited by Nathan_JrLo shonta
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Nathan, if this post is going to endure over time, it might be a good idea to clarify. What it says you quoted from T-Bone was really T-Bone quoting what Wierwille used as his self-justifying rationalization. Then again, maybe I just did so for you. Nevertheless, I had to read both comments (your and T-Bone's) closely to figure it out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Oh no! Thank you! Let there be no confusion. I am quoting T-Bone who is quoting victor. The quote is victor's!
Edited by Nathan_JrI amended the citation
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
That's the same victor paul wierwille who went to Haight-Ashbury to hijack the Christian hippies of the House of Acts to be his sales force for pfal. While he was there, he spoke privately with J1m D00p. vpw asked J1m what it was like to be at an orgy. J1m mentioned having arrived at one once, leaving quickly. While they were on this subject- which vpw continued discussing, which made J1m uncomfortable- vpw said this on the subject of ORGIES and PARTICIPATION IN ORGIES.
"You know, that's all available." He rationalized this by quoting I Corinthians 7:1, which says "Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. "He said that if God had not wanted it available, 7:1 would have said "best" and not "good." So, that was how vpw told J1m that God Almighty was all right with ORGIES and PARTICIPATION IN ORGIES. J1m disagreed and said he was glad he was free of that whole scene. He later wondered about the incident, and thought he must have been mistaken somehow in what vpw had said, since it was so obviously and blatantly wrong, to say the least.
So, don't think those are isolated statements= in the mindset of vpw, it was all of one piece to say God Almighty was ok with participation in orgies, and sex with someone other than your spouse, and molesting the flock (he also had no problem drugging them, but I'm not aware of any justification he used for that.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
BTW, there have been some threads about lcm in the past. Here's 2 of them.
https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/9753-martindale-as-wierwilles-heir/
https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/6468-who-was-l-craig-martindale/
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
I do not know about the big and little x s but I do remember Jesus teaching something about a millstone necklace in Matt 18 and Luke 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Other than that he demanded those things be kept in the "lockbox."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
I've always been intrigued how Jesus referred to himself as 'the Vine'...when I think of a vine as opposed to a tree a vine moves, creeps, manoeuvres, goes around. Not much can get in its path and when something does, well, the vine just goes around, over or under, relentlessly moving and reaching out. Perhaps this is what Jesus meant when he said the gates of hell shall not prevail against him and the church.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Interesting idea, Allan.
A grapevine, hopefully. Producing some crackin' good wine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Hopefully, Champagne!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Ah, Nathan, I was thinking of a really rich red of some sort.
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.