Looking at accounts like the I Cor section contrasting the “natural man” with the “spiritual man” with the GP we are left with a confusing mess of what is it SIX different usages of “spirit” as defined in RHST? That is enough to confuse the brain and make the whole section choppy and saying something completely opposite of a cursory reading.
By contrast, however:
Quote
Ecclesiastes 7 (NT version) : 24 How can anyone discover what life means? It is too deep for us, too hard to understand.
25 But I devoted myself to knowledge and study; I was determined to find wisdom and the answers to my questions, and to learn how wicked and foolish stupidity is.
...
29 This is all that I have learned: God made us plain and simple, but we have made ourselves very complicated.
I spied something in the article "Reconciliation is Available to Whosoever Believes" (pg. 8 twi's latest mag). When did the Lord become "the Lord [God] in twi?
The author wrote, "This salvation is available through Jesus Christ to whoever calls on the name of the Lord our God and believes." Then he quotes Acts 2:21 as, "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord [God] shall be saved." Soon after he quotes Romans 10:13 as, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord [God]shall be saved." Is this a recent fabrication from twi's new research team?
Later on, the article says, "Ananias initially had some concerns about reaching out to Saul as he had heard of his terrible reconciliation. But God reassured Ananias, and he responded obediently to God. This is then immediately contradicted when Acts 9:17 is quoted correctly, "And Ananias went his way and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, “Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, has sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost [holy spirit].” God is not the author of confusion, so what the h*ll is this?
Later on, the article says, "Ananias initially had some concerns about reaching out to Saul as he had heard of his terrible reconciliation. But God reassured Ananias, and he responded obediently to God. This is then immediately contradicted when Acts 9:17 is quoted correctly, "And Ananias went his way and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, “Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, has sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost [holy spirit].” God is not the author of confusion, so what the h*ll is this?
The way international doesnt like to admit that Jesus isnt absent so their theology ignores him anywhere he is mentioned as active and interatcing with his Church. They purposely change scripture to suit thier needs and replace Jesus Christ with God in their theology. Since God is the one who elevated Jesus Christ to second in command....they blantantly disobey God's command to listen carfully to whatever Jesus Christ has to say.
The way international doesnt like to admit that Jesus isnt absent so their theology ignores him anywhere he is mentioned as active and interatcing with his Church. They purposely change scripture to suit thier needs and replace Jesus Christ with God in their theology. Since God is the one who elevated Jesus Christ to second in command....they blantantly disobey God's command to listen carfully to whatever Jesus Christ has to say.
I just haven't seen this type of blatant deceit before but then again, I haven't read anything by twi in decades. So this Lord [God] isn't new for them?
I just haven't seen this type of blatant deceit before but then again, I haven't read anything by twi in decades. So this Lord [God] isn't new for them?
Doesn't TWI have this idea, well, taken from older-style Bibles, that where it says LORD it means God but where it says Lord it means Jesus? I understand that in Hebrew, they'd never write the name of God or even "God" but rather "G-d" (too sacred).
The same may have carried on to some extent into Greek texts, depending on the basis for the Greek etc.
To make sense of the part Charity quoted, you'd have to look at the Hebrew or Greek word behind that in the English version.
In any event, TWI's explanation isn't to be trusted. Better to get your concordance and other study materials out and have a look at what word(s) has/have actually been translated.
Not to belabor the point, but I don't remember it being this blatant before I left twi in 1986. Did it or did it begin with lcm some time after the "fog years? I mean, they've added [God] after the word "Lord" in Acts 2:21! ("And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord [God] shall be saved.") A simple check on Bible Hub's interlinear site, not to mention every version out there, shows this to be wrong.
Sorry, but I'm just in a state of unbelief, but I'll get over it - where's my hot chocolate?!!!
Doesn't TWI have this idea, well, taken from older-style Bibles, that where it says LORD it means God but where it says Lord it means Jesus? I understand that in Hebrew, they'd never write the name of God or even "God" but rather "G-d" (too sacred).
The same may have carried on to some extent into Greek texts, depending on the basis for the Greek etc.
To make sense of the part Charity quoted, you'd have to look at the Hebrew or Greek word behind that in the English version.
In any event, TWI's explanation isn't to be trusted. Better to get your concordance and other study materials out and have a look at what word(s) has/have actually been translated.
Thanks Twinky, I just saw your reply and am reading the website now.
Not to belabor the point, but I don't remember it being this blatant before I left twi in 1986. Did it or did it begin with lcm some time after the "fog years? I mean, they've added [God] after the word "Lord" in Acts 2:21! ("And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord [God] shall be saved.") A simple check on Bible Hub's interlinear site, not to mention every version out there, shows this to be wrong.
Sorry, but I'm just in a state of unbelief, but I'll get over it - where's my hot chocolate?!!!
Im thiking the doctrine did not start with martindale, but I sure heard him rant and rave about having NOTHING to do with Jesus Christ in terms of praise, conversation, any type of fellowship...craig said that was another Jesus...and from the absent one they follow I agree...except the one martindale warned against is actually found in scripture whereas the absent one is absent from scripture as well.
Well. There's Jesus. And Jesus Christ. And Christ Jesus.
Not to mention Christ, Christ the Lord, and whatever other names and titles they could find, all with conjured-up meanings. Woe betide anyone who used the wrong name or title! You were worshipping devil spirits!
But methinks - the Lord - whoever - knows our hearts and understands when genuine praise, thanksgiving or cries for help are presented.
I spied something in the article "Reconciliation is Available to Whosoever Believes" (pg. 8 twi's latest mag). When did the Lord become "the Lord [God] in twi?
The author wrote, "This salvation is available through Jesus Christ to whoever calls on the name of the Lord our God and believes." Then he quotes Acts 2:21 as, "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord [God] shall be saved." Soon after he quotes Romans 10:13 as, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord [God]shall be saved." Is this a recent fabrication from twi's new research team?
Later on, the article says, "Ananias initially had some concerns about reaching out to Saul as he had heard of his terrible reconciliation. But God reassured Ananias, and he responded obediently to God. This is then immediately contradicted when Acts 9:17 is quoted correctly, "And Ananias went his way and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, “Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, has sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost [holy spirit].” God is not the author of confusion, so what the h*ll is this?
2 hours ago, Charity said:
Thanks Twinky, I just saw your reply and am reading the website now.
2 hours ago, Twinky said:
Doesn't TWI have this idea, well, taken from older-style Bibles, that where it says LORD it means God but where it says Lord it means Jesus? I understand that in Hebrew, they'd never write the name of God or even "God" but rather "G-d" (too sacred).
The same may have carried on to some extent into Greek texts, depending on the basis for the Greek etc.
To make sense of the part Charity quoted, you'd have to look at the Hebrew or Greek word behind that in the English version.
In any event, TWI's explanation isn't to be trusted. Better to get your concordance and other study materials out and have a look at what word(s) has/have actually been translated.
Okay, so both the Lord [God] used in Acts 2:21 and Romans 10:13 in the article refer to the Old Testament verse, Joel 2:32 - "And everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved." (NIV) The NASB Lexicon shows "LORD" as the word Yah·weh which is the proper name of the God of Israel.
Here's the thing though - when you read the above 2 verses in the Bible, the context of each tells you that they areOT quotes.
For Acts 2:21 - the context begins with Acts 2:16 which says, "But this is that which has been spoken through the prophet Joel."
For Romans 12:13 - the contexts begins with Romans 10:11 which says, "For the Scripture says, Whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.
The article, however, does not do this and that's why it drove me nuts.
Sentence #1 refers to Romans 10:9 (NT) - "because if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from among the dead, you will be saved."
BUT sentence #2 joins both the New Testament (NT) and OT together - "This salvation ( NT) is available through Jesus Christ (NT) to whoever calls on the name of the Lord our God (OT) and believes (NT)." I believe this is confusing, inaccurate and misleading - a big
Sentence #3 then quotes Acts 2:21 but does not reveal it's an OT quote - "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord [God] shall be saved."
Whether these 3 sentences were intentional in order to mislead the reader, I don't know. All I do know, is that while it drove me nuts. only with the help of the website Twinky sent, as well as me looking at the Hebrew lexicon and going back and forth from the new and old testaments multiple times, was I able to figure it out. Some others, however, might have simply accepted sentences #2 and 3 as a NT truth without realizing it just so happened to leave Jesus out.
Did I just make a mountain out a molehill? Maybe, but for me personally, I was not a happy camper when I first read it.
Okay, so both the Lord [God] used in Acts 2:21 and Romans 10:13 in the article refer to the Old Testament verse, Joel 2:32 - "And everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved." (NIV) The NASB Lexicon shows "LORD" as the word Yah·weh which is the proper name of the God of Israel.
Here's the thing though - when you read the above 2 verses in the Bible, the context of each tells you that they areOT quotes.
For Acts 2:21 - the context begins with Acts 2:16 which says, "But this is that which has been spoken through the prophet Joel."
For Romans 12:13 - the contexts begins with Romans 10:11 which says, "For the Scripture says, Whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.
The article, however, does not do this and that's why it drove me nuts.
Sentence #1 refers to Romans 10:9 (NT) - "because if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from among the dead, you will be saved."
BUT sentence #2 joins both the New Testament (NT) and OT together - "This salvation ( NT) is available through Jesus Christ (NT) to whoever calls on the name of the Lord our God (OT) and believes (NT)." I believe this is confusing, inaccurate and misleading - a big
Sentence #3 then quotes Acts 2:21 but does not reveal it's an OT quote - "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord [God] shall be saved."
Whether these 3 sentences were intentional in order to mislead the reader, I don't know. All I do know, is that while it drove me nuts. only with the help of the website Twinky sent, as well as me looking at the Hebrew lexicon and going back and forth from the new and old testaments multiple times, was I able to figure it out. Some others, however, might have simply accepted sentences #2 and 3 as a NT truth without realizing it just so happened to leave Jesus out.
Did I just make a mountain out a molehill? Maybe, but for me personally, I was not a happy camper when I first read it.
So the authors of the God breathed Bible, unlike VPW, used a bibliography and quotes in their work.
I hope I am not derailing this thread by bringing up the TWI Research Department.
On another thread (Great Principle Whitewashed?) I noticed this portion of a post by T-Bone:
On 1/15/2023 at 6:57 PM, T-Bone said:
As far as him pressuring or persuading the research department of TWI - that's a non-issue since wierwille ruled everything with an iron hand. If you haven't read Penworks' book Undertow you should - she gets into the pressure wierwille exerted on research staff
I remember one corps night rev. walter c. was teaching us from the book of Timothy and he mentioned wierwille instructing him before he went to the Institute for New Testament Textual Research ( I think that's the name of it ) in Germany, to look for a manuscript of Timothy that would prove wierwille's speculation ( more like wishful thinking ) was right about some version of a passage that he was confident existed which would support his anti-Trinitarian rants...well, in my opinion that's sneaky tactics to support confirmation bias...that's NOT true research
This is a very interesting topic: the mission of the Research Department.I am trying to get back to reading Penwork’s book for this reason.I too had a few complaints or issues with the Research Department back in the 70s and 80s, and posted briefly here on them not long ago.
I remember hearing of Walter's mission in Germany back then and it immediately generated a red flag.
Later, as I thought things through, I wondered how the Research Dept (or VPW) isolated one particular ancient text over the others, and could say “OK, lets run with THIS text.”It seemed like cheating, when it came to how scientific research is done.
What was your FIRST reaction to Walter’s mentioning this? Did you spot the problem right away? Or does it now stick out in retrospect.The reason I ask is because from the moment I first heard of Walter’s Germany mission, I have not heard ONE PERSON ever speak up against it, until I read this post from you last Sunday.I’ve been pondering this since then. I was much more critical and suspicious at times back then than you would think.
I am amazed at how no one seemed to understand the Research Dept.I think several times VPW tried to tell us that it wasn’t like normal research that they did there.I think we did not get it at the time.Do you remember how the word “research” became “re-search” or "seeing it again," or something like that.Maybe VPW’s explanation of it was lame, or maybe our ability to hear him was lame, or maybe both.
There were more instances of this that I had noticed back then, and I really do look forward to reading more of Penwork’s insider's perspective.
I am amazed at how no one seemed to understand the Research Dept.
Under rivenbark it didnt matter much. There was no research and if you read penworks book (I understand you are working on it) you will see that when they did actual research with qualified people that the results were mandated and heavily controlled by wierwille. There hasnt been any actual research at the way international in a very long time, its all a sham. When I was around they had one cabinet person who had mass responsibility in other ares working as the "research department coordinator" and the research department was part time and staffed by the department coordinator only. Due to my inside knowledge of how the various publication departments interfaced I can assuredly say that there was no research. Items that needed to be researched were promted by a query usually from way publications or presidents publications. It wasnt like they were in there trying to figure anything out. This was where the "re-search" was done. The department was used as a fact/consistency checking station if you will. Yes, the department contributed to books by helping with the developmental editing process where the material was refined and what not. However, the material was on books like Just the Way it Was, or Born Again to Serve, etc. Its all a hustle.
Thats not to say that there werent various and sundry topical assignments given to the research department, such as the debt and using the research department to drum up twisted scripture support for their no debt policy instituted under craigory. Anywho. Laters.
Under rivenbark it didnt matter much. There was no research and if you read penworks book (I understand you are working on it) you will see that when they did actual research with qualified people that the results were mandated and heavily controlled by wierwille. There hasnt been any actual research at the way international in a very long time, its all a sham. When I was around they had one cabinet person who had mass responsibility as the "research department coordinator". Due to my inside knowledge of how the various publication departments interfaced I can assuredly say that there was no research. Items that needed to be researched were promted by a query usually from way publications or presidents publications. It wasnt like they were in there trying to figure anything out. This was where the "re-search" was done. The department was used as a fact/consistency checking station if you will. Yes, the department contributed to books by helping with the developmental editing process where the material was refined and what not. However, the material was on books like Just the Way it Was, or Born Again to Serve, etc. Its all a hustle.
Thats not to say that there werent various and sundry topical assignments given to the research department, such as the debt and using the research department to drum up twisted scripture support for their no debt policy instituted under craigory. Anywho. Laters.
Thanks. That is useful information.
Were you at HQ at all during Craig's TWI-2, or was all that pertaining to Rosalie's TWI-3?
What were "Just the Way it Was," or "Born Again to Serve" all about?
Book titles? Was one of them Mrs. Wierwille's book?
Thanks. That is useful information.
Were you at HQ at all during Craig's TWI-2, or was all that pertaining to Rosalie's TWI-3?
What were "Just the Way it Was," or "Born Again to Serve" all about?
Book titles? Was one of them Mrs. Wierwille's book?
YW.
There really was no TWI-3. I was at HQ at the tail end of Craigs reign of terror, though I was unscathed by it. There is really no distinction between rosalie and craig, well besides the obvious. Rosalie supported craig until supporting craig likely would have meant the end of their positions and access to the coffers. Once everyhting was on the line they fired craig, basically hid him away in Toledo but paid his expenses...very dishonest but to be expected. Rosalie openly lamented in a cabinet meeting where I heard first hand that she hated all the changes they have had to make over the years. Meaning she supported the pregnancy policy, and all sorts of abusive practices that were in play under craig. There is no difference. The current board of directors may have a different flair but there really is no meaningful difference. TWI-2 came about under craig trying to distinguish himself from VPW.
Just the Way it Was was a book by Mrs. Owens detailing her time around the cornfield.
T-Bonesaid: I remember one corps night rev. walter c. was teaching us from the book of Timothy and he mentioned wierwille instructing him before he went to the Institute for New Testament Textual Research ( I think that's the name of it ) in Germany, to look for a manuscript of Timothy that would prove wierwille's speculation ( more like wishful thinking ) was right about some version of a passage that he was confident existed which would support his anti-Trinitarian rants...well, in my opinion that's sneaky tactics to support confirmation bias...that's NOT true research
@T-BoneDo you remember what victorneeded a manuscript of Timothy to say to confirm his bias? Was it a specific verse that he wanted rewritten?
Did Walter admit to a lack of evidence required to support victor's fantasy, or did he continue running with the hope that one day they might be able to manufacture a glove to fit the hand?
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
I am amazed at how no one seemed to understand the Research Dept.I think several times VPW tried to tell us that it wasn’t like normal research that they did there.I think we did not get it at the time.Do you remember how the word “research” became “re-search” or "seeing it again," or something like that.Maybe VPW’s explanation of it was lame, or maybe our ability to hear him was lame, or maybe both.
I heard a complaint, circa 1977-78, about the research department from 2 associates or members of that department, just a month or two before they were kicked out of the 7th Corps. They told me that VPW was manipulating things and not doing valid research.
This is exactly the complaint I slowly developed myself in the following years about the research department, and for me it was from listening closely to weekly, public SNT tapes from 1978 to ‘85. I did not believe them, but their complaint did register strongly.
And this was NOT Walter commenting semi-privately on a Corps tape; this was VPW on the public SNT tapes that I heard.Paraphrasing VPW:“We sent Walter to Germany to find some manuscripts I just know had to exist.”I forget the year Walter went there.
This really bothered me. I wasn’t sure if VPW misspoke or if I didn’t understand it right, but it seemed backwards or something. Definitely a red flag.I had no idea of the following at that time, but now I look back and think VPW was trying to tell us (or hint to us) that the Research Dept at TWI worked a little “differently” than the usual expected way.It’s when I link this to other incidents, and to what I learned decades later when I locked on to the collaterals (1998), that I formed this retrospective.
*/*/*/*
I can only paraphrase what I remember VPW saying about Walter’s Germany mission. I’d love to retrieve these exact quotes someday, in the SNT transcripts that have been slowly accumulating on YouTube lately.
Another SNT tape in that early span of years (78-85) had this kind of quote, severely paraphrased again, because I have no idea which SNS tape it came from. “Someday we’re going to find a manuscript that verifies this.”
That is obviously cheating, bending again! This isn’t how scientific research works. This is cherry picking among the manuscripts, at best.
This is actually worse than cherry picking among the manuscripts.It is cherry picking outside the manuscripts that have been found, as in imaginary manuscripts.
But the real corker I have almost perfectly memorized. This is not paraphrasing, but is a near quote on a SNT tape: “We probably won’t find a manuscript in my lifetime that verifies this, but my spiritual awareness tells me what the original has to say.”
So my trust of Biblical research at the TWI was severely shaken by these accumulating pieces of hard public evidence on tape by VPW himself.
I also couldn’t figure out why he was admitting it on tapes!!!
I also couldn’t figure out why no one else noticed it and objected !!!
It was an complete anomaly that took me about 13 years to figure out.
The explanation is tied up in the complicated topic “Our Only Rule for Faith and Practice.”I tried before to explain all this here circa 2008, but nobody at GreaseSpot got it, except two: Abigail and Oakspear. Now, Abigail and Oakspear did NOT agree with my explanation, but they did understand it. Anyway, we’d have to get a whole new thread going on “Only Rule” to get into my full explanation.
I heard a complaint, circa 1977-78, about the research department from 2 associates or members of that department, just a month or two before they were kicked out of the 7th Corps. They told me that VPW was manipulating things and not doing valid research.
This is exactly the complaint I slowly developed myself in the following years about the research department, and for me it was from listening closely to weekly, public SNT tapes from 1978 to ‘85. I did not believe them, but their complaint did register strongly.
And this was NOT Walter commenting semi-privately on a Corps tape; this was VPW on the public SNT tapes that I heard.Paraphrasing VPW:“We sent Walter to Germany to find some manuscripts I just know had to exist.”I forget the year Walter went there.
This really bothered me. I wasn’t sure if VPW misspoke or if I didn’t understand it right, but it seemed backwards or something. Definitely a red flag.I had no idea of the following at that time, but now I look back and think VPW was trying to tell us (or hint to us) that the Research Dept at TWI worked a little “differently” than the usual expected way.It’s when I link this to other incidents, and to what I learned decades later when I locked on to the collaterals (1998), that I formed this retrospective.
*/*/*/*
I can only paraphrase what I remember VPW saying about Walter’s Germany mission. I’d love to retrieve these exact quotes someday, in the SNT transcripts that have been slowly accumulating on YouTube lately.
Another SNT tape in that early span of years (78-85) had this kind of quote, severely paraphrased again, because I have no idea which SNS tape it came from. “Someday we’re going to find a manuscript that verifies this.”
That is obviously cheating, bending again! This isn’t how scientific research works. This is cherry picking among the manuscripts, at best.
This is actually worse than cherry picking among the manuscripts.It is cherry picking outside the manuscripts that have been found, as in imaginary manuscripts.
But the real corker I have almost perfectly memorized. This is not paraphrasing, but is a near quote on a SNT tape: “We probably won’t find a manuscript in my lifetime that verifies this, but my spiritual awareness tells me what the original has to say.”
So my trust of Biblical research at the TWI was severely shaken by these accumulating pieces of hard public evidence on tape by VPW himself.
I also couldn’t figure out why he was admitting it on tapes!!!
I also couldn’t figure out why no one else noticed it and objected !!!
It was an complete anomaly that took me about 13 years to figure out.
The explanation is tied up in the complicated topic “Our Only Rule for Faith and Practice.”I tried before to explain all this here circa 2008, but nobody at GreaseSpot got it, except two: Abigail and Oakspear. Now, Abigail and Oakspear did NOT agree with my explanation, but they did understand it. Anyway, we’d have to get a whole new thread going on “Only Rule” to get into my full explanation.
If you understand narcissistic personalities, it's no great mystery.
Among the traits narcissist have are:
1. Testing boundaries to see what they can get away with.
2. The need to tell on themselves.
Saint Vic was just testing his boundaries with his audience.
Usually when a narcissist confesses it's through projection, by blaming others for what they're doing. This, however, is a case of straight up admitting it and hoping no one will notice.
If you understand narcissistic personalities, it's no great mystery.
Among the traits narcissist have are:
1. Testing boundaries to see what they can get away with.
2. The need to tell on themselves. won't get caught.
That is your filter talking. My filter is constructed differently.
I now think VPW's several SNT comments on finding manuscripts was one of the ways he documented and tried to explain what was going on with research, ESPECIALLY in the years when the need for research was beginning to terminate.
In October 1982, right on Craig's Coronation SNT tape, he said the the research was basically done. That was when the Research Dept was to switch gears, but no one really got it. (Certainly not me; I learned all this many years later.) Once he stepped down as President he could no long control that as easily. So he hinted at things on tape, at a distance.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
21
19
16
23
Popular Days
Jan 23
53
Jan 21
26
Jan 3
21
Jan 22
19
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 21 posts
Bolshevik 19 posts
chockfull 16 posts
OldSkool 23 posts
Popular Days
Jan 23 2023
53 posts
Jan 21 2023
26 posts
Jan 3 2023
21 posts
Jan 22 2023
19 posts
Popular Posts
Bolshevik
You're describing confabulation via confirmation bias. You literally decide anything you want, because of your narcissistic paranoia that your adversary is "out there", and decide that whatever you l
WordWolf
"Someday we’re going to find a manuscript that verifies this." "“We probably won’t find a manuscript in my lifetime that verifies this, but my spiritual awareness tells me what the original has t
Rocky
Twinky
By contrast, however:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
What the heck? Never seen this before.
I spied
something 
in the article "Reconciliation is Available to Whosoever Believes" (pg. 8 twi's latest mag). When did the Lord become "the Lord [God] in twi?
The author wrote, "This salvation is available through Jesus Christ to whoever calls on the name of the Lord our God and believes." Then he quotes Acts 2:21 as, "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord [God] shall be saved." Soon after he quotes Romans 10:13 as, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord [God] shall be saved." Is this a recent fabrication from twi's new research team?
Later on, the article says, "Ananias initially had some concerns about reaching out to Saul as he had heard of his terrible reconciliation. But God reassured Ananias, and he responded obediently to God. This is then immediately contradicted when Acts 9:17 is quoted correctly, "And Ananias went his way and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, “Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, has sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost [holy spirit].” God is not the author of confusion, so what the h*ll is this?
Edited by CharityLink to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
The way international doesnt like to admit that Jesus isnt absent so their theology ignores him anywhere he is mentioned as active and interatcing with his Church. They purposely change scripture to suit thier needs and replace Jesus Christ with God in their theology. Since God is the one who elevated Jesus Christ to second in command....they blantantly disobey God's command to listen carfully to whatever Jesus Christ has to say.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
I just haven't seen this type of blatant deceit before but then again, I haven't read anything by twi in decades. So this Lord [God] isn't new for them?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Not at all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Doesn't TWI have this idea, well, taken from older-style Bibles, that where it says LORD it means God but where it says Lord it means Jesus? I understand that in Hebrew, they'd never write the name of God or even "God" but rather "G-d" (too sacred).
The same may have carried on to some extent into Greek texts, depending on the basis for the Greek etc.
To make sense of the part Charity quoted, you'd have to look at the Hebrew or Greek word behind that in the English version.
https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/god-yhwh/difference-between-lord-Lord-and-LORD.htm
In any event, TWI's explanation isn't to be trusted. Better to get your concordance and other study materials out and have a look at what word(s) has/have actually been translated.
Edited by TwinkyLink to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Not to belabor the point, but I don't remember it being this blatant before I left twi in 1986. Did it or did it begin with lcm some time after the "fog years? I mean, they've added [God] after the word "Lord" in Acts 2:21! ("And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord [God] shall be saved.") A simple check on Bible Hub's interlinear site, not to mention every version out there, shows this to be wrong.
Sorry, but I'm just in a state of unbelief, but I'll get over it - where's my hot chocolate?!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Thanks Twinky, I just saw your reply and am reading the website now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Im thiking the doctrine did not start with martindale, but I sure heard him rant and rave about having NOTHING to do with Jesus Christ in terms of praise, conversation, any type of fellowship...craig said that was another Jesus...and from the absent one they follow I agree...except the one martindale warned against is actually found in scripture whereas the absent one is absent from scripture as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Well. There's Jesus. And Jesus Christ. And Christ Jesus.
Not to mention Christ, Christ the Lord, and whatever other names and titles they could find, all with conjured-up meanings. Woe betide anyone who used the wrong name or title! You were worshipping devil spirits!
But methinks - the Lord - whoever - knows our hearts and understands when genuine praise, thanksgiving or cries for help are presented.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Okay, so both the Lord [God] used in Acts 2:21 and Romans 10:13 in the article refer to the Old Testament verse, Joel 2:32 - "And everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved." (NIV) The NASB Lexicon shows "LORD" as the word Yah·weh which is the proper name of the God of Israel.
Here's the thing though - when you read the above 2 verses in the Bible, the context of each tells you that they are OT quotes.
For Acts 2:21 - the context begins with Acts 2:16 which says, "But this is that which has been spoken through the prophet Joel."
For Romans 12:13 - the contexts begins with Romans 10:11 which says, "For the Scripture says, Whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.
The article, however, does not do this and that's why it drove me nuts.
Sentence #1 refers to Romans 10:9 (NT) - "because if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from among the dead, you will be saved."
BUT sentence #2 joins both the New Testament (NT) and OT together - "This salvation ( NT) is available through Jesus Christ (NT) to whoever calls on the name of the Lord our God (OT) and believes (NT)." I believe this is confusing, inaccurate and misleading - a big
Sentence #3 then quotes Acts 2:21 but does not reveal it's an OT quote - "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord [God] shall be saved."
Whether these 3 sentences were intentional in order to mislead the reader, I don't know. All I do know, is that while it drove me nuts. only with the help of the website Twinky sent, as well as me looking at the Hebrew lexicon and going back and forth from the new and old testaments multiple times, was I able to figure it out. Some others, however, might have simply accepted sentences #2 and 3 as a NT truth without realizing it just so happened to leave Jesus out.
Did I just make a mountain out a molehill? Maybe, but for me personally, I was not a happy camper when I first read it.
Edited by CharityLink to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
So the authors of the God breathed Bible, unlike VPW, used a bibliography and quotes in their work.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
.
I hope I am not derailing this thread by bringing up the TWI Research Department.
On another thread (Great Principle Whitewashed?) I noticed this portion of a post by T-Bone:
This is a very interesting topic: the mission of the Research Department. I am trying to get back to reading Penwork’s book for this reason. I too had a few complaints or issues with the Research Department back in the 70s and 80s, and posted briefly here on them not long ago.
I remember hearing of Walter's mission in Germany back then and it immediately generated a red flag.
Later, as I thought things through, I wondered how the Research Dept (or VPW) isolated one particular ancient text over the others, and could say “OK, lets run with THIS text.” It seemed like cheating, when it came to how scientific research is done.
What was your FIRST reaction to Walter’s mentioning this? Did you spot the problem right away? Or does it now stick out in retrospect. The reason I ask is because from the moment I first heard of Walter’s Germany mission, I have not heard ONE PERSON ever speak up against it, until I read this post from you last Sunday. I’ve been pondering this since then. I was much more critical and suspicious at times back then than you would think.
I am amazed at how no one seemed to understand the Research Dept. I think several times VPW tried to tell us that it wasn’t like normal research that they did there. I think we did not get it at the time. Do you remember how the word “research” became “re-search” or "seeing it again," or something like that. Maybe VPW’s explanation of it was lame, or maybe our ability to hear him was lame, or maybe both.
There were more instances of this that I had noticed back then, and I really do look forward to reading more of Penwork’s insider's perspective.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Under rivenbark it didnt matter much. There was no research and if you read penworks book (I understand you are working on it) you will see that when they did actual research with qualified people that the results were mandated and heavily controlled by wierwille. There hasnt been any actual research at the way international in a very long time, its all a sham. When I was around they had one cabinet person who had mass responsibility in other ares working as the "research department coordinator" and the research department was part time and staffed by the department coordinator only. Due to my inside knowledge of how the various publication departments interfaced I can assuredly say that there was no research. Items that needed to be researched were promted by a query usually from way publications or presidents publications. It wasnt like they were in there trying to figure anything out. This was where the "re-search" was done. The department was used as a fact/consistency checking station if you will. Yes, the department contributed to books by helping with the developmental editing process where the material was refined and what not. However, the material was on books like Just the Way it Was, or Born Again to Serve, etc. Its all a hustle.
Thats not to say that there werent various and sundry topical assignments given to the research department, such as the debt and using the research department to drum up twisted scripture support for their no debt policy instituted under craigory. Anywho. Laters.
Edited by OldSkoolLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Thanks. That is useful information.
Were you at HQ at all during Craig's TWI-2, or was all that pertaining to Rosalie's TWI-3?
What were "Just the Way it Was," or "Born Again to Serve" all about?
Book titles? Was one of them Mrs. Wierwille's book?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
It's been discussed here many times.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
YW.
There really was no TWI-3. I was at HQ at the tail end of Craigs reign of terror, though I was unscathed by it. There is really no distinction between rosalie and craig, well besides the obvious. Rosalie supported craig until supporting craig likely would have meant the end of their positions and access to the coffers. Once everyhting was on the line they fired craig, basically hid him away in Toledo but paid his expenses...very dishonest but to be expected. Rosalie openly lamented in a cabinet meeting where I heard first hand that she hated all the changes they have had to make over the years. Meaning she supported the pregnancy policy, and all sorts of abusive practices that were in play under craig. There is no difference. The current board of directors may have a different flair but there really is no meaningful difference. TWI-2 came about under craig trying to distinguish himself from VPW.
Just the Way it Was was a book by Mrs. Owens detailing her time around the cornfield.
https://store.theway.org/store/just-the-way-it-was/
Born Again to Serve is Mrs. Wierwilles book.
https://store.theway.org/store/born-again-to-serve/
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Thanks again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Yw!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
@T-BoneDo you remember what victor needed a manuscript of Timothy to say to confirm his bias? Was it a specific verse that he wanted rewritten?
Did Walter admit to a lack of evidence required to support victor's fantasy, or did he continue running with the hope that one day they might be able to manufacture a glove to fit the hand?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Not sure - it might have been over I Timothy 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I heard a complaint, circa 1977-78, about the research department from 2 associates or members of that department, just a month or two before they were kicked out of the 7th Corps. They told me that VPW was manipulating things and not doing valid research.
This is exactly the complaint I slowly developed myself in the following years about the research department, and for me it was from listening closely to weekly, public SNT tapes from 1978 to ‘85. I did not believe them, but their complaint did register strongly.
And this was NOT Walter commenting semi-privately on a Corps tape; this was VPW on the public SNT tapes that I heard. Paraphrasing VPW: “We sent Walter to Germany to find some manuscripts I just know had to exist.” I forget the year Walter went there.
This really bothered me. I wasn’t sure if VPW misspoke or if I didn’t understand it right, but it seemed backwards or something. Definitely a red flag. I had no idea of the following at that time, but now I look back and think VPW was trying to tell us (or hint to us) that the Research Dept at TWI worked a little “differently” than the usual expected way. It’s when I link this to other incidents, and to what I learned decades later when I locked on to the collaterals (1998), that I formed this retrospective.
*/*/*/*
I can only paraphrase what I remember VPW saying about Walter’s Germany mission. I’d love to retrieve these exact quotes someday, in the SNT transcripts that have been slowly accumulating on YouTube lately.
Another SNT tape in that early span of years (78-85) had this kind of quote, severely paraphrased again, because I have no idea which SNS tape it came from. “Someday we’re going to find a manuscript that verifies this.”
That is obviously cheating, bending again! This isn’t how scientific research works. This is cherry picking among the manuscripts, at best.
This is actually worse than cherry picking among the manuscripts. It is cherry picking outside the manuscripts that have been found, as in imaginary manuscripts.
But the real corker I have almost perfectly memorized. This is not paraphrasing, but is a near quote on a SNT tape: “We probably won’t find a manuscript in my lifetime that verifies this, but my spiritual awareness tells me what the original has to say.”
So my trust of Biblical research at the TWI was severely shaken by these accumulating pieces of hard public evidence on tape by VPW himself.
I also couldn’t figure out why he was admitting it on tapes!!!
I also couldn’t figure out why no one else noticed it and objected !!!
It was an complete anomaly that took me about 13 years to figure out.
The explanation is tied up in the complicated topic “Our Only Rule for Faith and Practice.” I tried before to explain all this here circa 2008, but nobody at GreaseSpot got it, except two: Abigail and Oakspear. Now, Abigail and Oakspear did NOT agree with my explanation, but they did understand it. Anyway, we’d have to get a whole new thread going on “Only Rule” to get into my full explanation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
If you understand narcissistic personalities, it's no great mystery.
Among the traits narcissist have are:
1. Testing boundaries to see what they can get away with.
2. The need to tell on themselves.
Saint Vic was just testing his boundaries with his audience.
Usually when a narcissist confesses it's through projection, by blaming others for what they're doing. This, however, is a case of straight up admitting it and hoping no one will notice.
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
That is your filter talking. My filter is constructed differently.
I now think VPW's several SNT comments on finding manuscripts was one of the ways he documented and tried to explain what was going on with research, ESPECIALLY in the years when the need for research was beginning to terminate.
In October 1982, right on Craig's Coronation SNT tape, he said the the research was basically done. That was when the Research Dept was to switch gears, but no one really got it. (Certainly not me; I learned all this many years later.) Once he stepped down as President he could no long control that as easily. So he hinted at things on tape, at a distance.
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.