It seems like the researches were frequently quieted and the truth just wasn't allowed to be spoken. There definitely wasn't room for questioning or disagreement. It was one man's way or the highway. IMHO
The Hebrew word ayin, which means "eye", is used figuratively for the noun "fountain". A fountain was sometimes described as "the eye (center) of the landscape".
A homonym is a word that is spelled the same as another, but has a different meaning, often a different etymology. To say that the literal "eye" and the figurative "eye", meaning "fountain" are homonyms would be like saying that "delta", the fourth letter of the Greek alphabet, and "delta", as in the mouth of a river are homonyms, when the triangular shape of the network of streams feeding into the ocean or gulf is called a "delta" because it is the same shape as the letter "delta".
Martindale was very fond of finding a homonyms, or a figurative use of a word and imputing that meaning to the word that he was defining, often in error. Martindale might define a hypothetical biblical use of "river delta" as "Greek", because it derives from the greek letter.
Oak, also, if "word or words must be interpreted according to biblical usage", then would it necessitate that for him to be able to make the leap from "eye" to "fountain" that it be used as such elsewhere?
And...can you find where the "fountain" usage ever refers to a womans orgasm? I can't, but I'm not all that savvy with research.
I remember at one point VP had expressed dismay with Twig leaders going around teaching their own stuff. He didn't want anyone going off on a tangent. So he redefined research as "re-searching" that which had already been done. We were to get out the books and Way Mag and teach them in our Twigs.
Later it became mandatory to review the written materials instead of preparing a teaching. Do your Twiggies need info on eternal life? Sorry, we're on Chapter 3 in the blue book this week. Real personal. Must meet a lot of needs.
So of course TWI today does research. They all spend time "re-searching" what they already read and heard 20 times. Such a vital ministry.
Regards,
Shaz
The Way Corps program has a research section in the training where the trainees are given a certain situation and they are challenged to come up with a way to help that person and answer their questions by using the latest Sunday teachings, Way Magazine and the collaterals. Using your own research and outside sources are not permitted.
Who needs actual Biblical scholars when your people are actively discouraged
from reading the Bible for themselves and thinking for themselves?
As for any research now, you know it can't be going on for real. On their web site if you look under research, it shows photo of a couple of people sitting or standing at a conference table with impressive looking bookshelves behind them.
However what is lacking is the names and/or credentials of the people who supposedly submit this so-called "research." Ya know why?
They can't do it because they have NO ONE in that organization who has studied biblical languages at and/or graduated from a respectable accredited University with a degree in biblical studies and languages who can properly parse a pronoun.
If they DID, you KNOW they would have the information out there.
They sit on Aramaic work done by qualified people who are no longer around. Neither their own people can effectively use those works, because they don't understand and can't read and translate the script, nor can the outside relgious community buy the works because TWI will only sell them to "the household."
They had lots of well-qualified individuals with bachelors degrees, masters degrees, and PhDs in the languages, but RAN THEM OFF when these people had the integrity to NOT rubber-stamp bad work.
People like Dr. D*n McCon*ughy, Br*ce M*hone, and others who attended the University of Chicago and The Lutheran School of Theology under the world's foremost Aramaic Scholar, Dr. Arthur Voobus. People like B*b W*ssu*g, myself, and others sat at his feet. My husband studied biblical greek under Professor Wilmot at University of Chicago. There were many many others (for instance Orange Cat et al), that TWI could have utilized to do true and honest research, yet time and again, because we would not bend, were dismissed, harassed, defamed, and run off.
They can't DO genuine research because they have nobody qualified to do it.
All they permit anyone to do is rehash what has already been done and God forbid you should contradict established doctrine.
That's not RESEARCH and it's not HONEST.
I dragged this topic out of the archives to clarify something.
Joe Wis* spearheaded the production of the Aramaic Concordance which was published in August 1985. I helped with this project. Immediately after that, he proceeded to work on the translation for the Aramaic Interlinear , as was his assignment.
HOWEVER, he was fired - the reason given by LCM via W*lter C*mmins was that Joe was "too academic."
Joe's credentials included a Masters in Near Eastern Studies from Univ. of Chicago.
By the time he had to leave in August 1986, Joe had finished the translation of the Aramaic N.T. except the Book of Revelation.
That month, Br*ce M*hone - mentioned above - was brought in to finish the translation for the Interlinear.
How come Br*ce M*hone wasn't thought to be "too academic" as well?
My point is that anyone using the interlinear and concordance should be careful to notice any instances where it backs up TWI theology such as in Matt, 27:46. The Syriac word is for "Leave" or "forsake" not "spared" which the TWI translation used.
I know that Joe translated the Syriac as "forsake" but the final published translation, overseen by other people, is different and reflects PFAL dogma. When I asked W*lter Cum*ins whether Lamsa could have just misled VPW on this verse, he told me VPW was more spiritual than any of us. In that circumstance, the text was not the authority, but VPW was...this was a pattern most people know about.
BTW - Br*ce M*hone runs an offshoot based on VPW teachings. It's called something like Capital Area fellowship.
I guess they meant research as a self help get your own BUT (stay within TWI teachings!)
More like a sit down dinner of PotLuck and everyone brings the same thing! BORING.
It's always fun to read how Way-speak gets exposed here - folks using critical thinking skills & normal intellectual standards. There's obviously two different ways to define research. There's the world's way – which ideally is a systematic process to discover, analyze & establish facts. And then there's Way-world's definition of research – a systematic process [TWI-sanctioned methodology] to re-discover, re-absorb & re-establish PFAL.
The expanded literal definition according to usage of "research" reads as follows: repeated searching of TWI's teachings, which includes scriptural references [sorry - KJV only! all other versions don't count - unless allusion is made to "the original" by way of an expressed desire that others could see it] along with TWI's interpretation of said references, so as to establish beyond a shadow of a doubt the veracity of PFAL. Abbreviated definitions of "research" that are also acceptable: "working the Word to make it your own" and "mastering PFAL".
But, how can anyone re-search PFAL when they've put it in mothballs?
Well, that's a lost cause right there. PFAL had too many holes in it to begin with – what are mothballs gonna do?
Off topic alert:
I'm LMAO because the ad banner at the bottom of the page is for an all gay exotic cruise. What words in this thread made that come up?
LOL Nottawafer – taking it from the top of this page: post # 21 – "homosexuality", post # 22 – "homosexual woman", post # 23 –"Eve as a lesbian" & " Lilith theory", post # 24 "Eve & the devil as a lesbian", post # 25 "not real familiar with how the lesbian thing works", post # 26 "tree really meant penis", post # 27 "threesome fantasy" & "Lilith myth", post #28 "Eve is a lesbian" & " his wife's involvement with Rosalie"; and finally the piece de resistance - post # 33 "homonym" and "Greek".. . this has been a classic example of "poster buildup" [you may remember that from the foundational class]. That should answer your question – but you're really not supposed to ask any questions until the end of the class.
I dragged this topic out of the archives to clarify something.
Joe Wis* spearheaded the production of the Aramaic Concordance which was published in August 1985. I helped with this project. Immediately after that, he proceeded to work on the translation for the Aramaic Interlinear , as was his assignment.
HOWEVER, he was fired - the reason given by LCM via W*lter C*mmins was that Joe was "too academic."
Joe's credentials included a Masters in Near Eastern Studies from Univ. of Chicago.
By the time he had to leave in August 1986, Joe had finished the translation of the Aramaic N.T. except the Book of Revelation.
That month, Br*ce M*hone - mentioned above - was brought in to finish the translation for the Interlinear.
How come Br*ce M*hone wasn't thought to be "too academic" as well?
My point is that anyone using the interlinear and concordance should be careful to notice any instances where it backs up TWI theology such as in Matt, 27:46. The Syriac word is for "Leave" or "forsake" not "spared" which the TWI translation used.
I know that Joe translated the Syriac as "forsake" but the final published translation, overseen by other people, is different and reflects PFAL dogma. When I asked W*lter Cum*ins whether Lamsa could have just misled VPW on this verse, he told me VPW was more spiritual than any of us. In that circumstance, the text was not the authority, but VPW was...this was a pattern most people know about.
BTW - Br*ce M*hone runs an offshoot based on VPW teachings. It's called something like Capital Area fellowship.
Maybe I will create a poll asking who uses the above mentioned Aramaic research materials.
A related question I'm interested in is: does anyone think learning languages of the texts makes any difference to their spiritual life or are these two separate matters? Personally, they are separate...one is an intellectual exercise, the other is intuitive.
The heart of my question comes from wondering about the value of doing biblical studies and the specific ways in which people think they are necessary.
I believe VPW taught a person could not know God without a knowledge of the The Word (better known as the Bible in its original form, which we don't have, but that's another topic).
A few suggestions on tweaking your questions.. .Have several questions to determine use of biblical language references for Aramaic, Hebrew & Greek. Another series of questions to find out Grease Spotters' opinion of how important is an understanding of the biblical languages to their study life and practical/spiritual life.
To answer your questions now - my approach to Bible study has changed significantly over the years since leaving TWI in 86. Early on I got more into the Hebrew & Greek and targeting certain topics in my quest to re-examine everything I absorbed in TWI. As I branched off into reading commentaries & systematic theologies, an understanding of the biblical languages remained important to me so I could apply critical thinking skills to that material as well. No sense in getting hoodwinked twice.
Currently, I don't get into them as much – except for doctrinal discussions here and at another website that is a Christian forum. My personal study pursues a more general understanding of a passage with a goal of abstracting something practical out of it – basically asking the questions: what was the author's purpose in writing this & what difference should this make in the way I think or act?
I've been reading lately in The Lion Handbook to the Bible. I just came across this statement:
Most of us read [the Gospels] in our own language, so it is sensible to have two or three good translations to study, compare and contrast. We must understand what the text is actually saying, and not what we want it to say!
(emphasis added)
As I've been reading many different versions after escaping TWI, I've been struck by the better way things are expressed. Sometimes the better way accords with notes in The Companion Bible, showing perhaps how frustrated Bullinger may have been at some of the KJV translations. Reading versions from RSV through The Message gives a much fuller understanding of what the text may have been intended to say.
What I do recall, however, is that VPW and later LCM would give alternative "translations" of verses of KJV, saying, "This is what is actually says," or words to that effect (a better choice of tense, perhaps) - a literal according to usage - and that's so clearly what some other version says.
I wonder if, at least in the later days, Biblical research was reduced to reading other versions of the Bible and presenting those versions as "better translations" or "literals according to usage." Amplified would be a great version to base "literals" on.
Of course, none of us would ever know, since use of other than KJV was virtually unknown. That's if we even had time to read and assimilate.
Recommended Posts
WordWolf
In the same breath, he had the nerve to spin his threesome
fantasy AND make fun of the Lilith myth?
That's rich.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
I know that I am not the only one who see's the correlation between martindales "eve is a lesbian" doctrine and his wifes involvement with Rosalie.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
Do you think lc meant that eve was lebanese? or librarian? that could explain the emnity between men and the evil vindictive bookmarms who shush them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gladtobeout
It seems like the researches were frequently quieted and the truth just wasn't allowed to be spoken. There definitely wasn't room for questioning or disagreement. It was one man's way or the highway. IMHO
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
there was no research. there was no independent thought. all was done to prove the (praisebehisname) vik right
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wasway
I think that the last "revelation" to come out of the RD was "LUO" (to dismantle complely.)
I think it was from the AC special in about 90-91.
seem to me like Luo applies to TWI more and more every day!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
The Hebrew word ayin, which means "eye", is used figuratively for the noun "fountain". A fountain was sometimes described as "the eye (center) of the landscape".
A homonym is a word that is spelled the same as another, but has a different meaning, often a different etymology. To say that the literal "eye" and the figurative "eye", meaning "fountain" are homonyms would be like saying that "delta", the fourth letter of the Greek alphabet, and "delta", as in the mouth of a river are homonyms, when the triangular shape of the network of streams feeding into the ocean or gulf is called a "delta" because it is the same shape as the letter "delta".
Martindale was very fond of finding a homonyms, or a figurative use of a word and imputing that meaning to the word that he was defining, often in error. Martindale might define a hypothetical biblical use of "river delta" as "Greek", because it derives from the greek letter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
insurgent
Oak, also, if "word or words must be interpreted according to biblical usage", then would it necessitate that for him to be able to make the leap from "eye" to "fountain" that it be used as such elsewhere?
And...can you find where the "fountain" usage ever refers to a womans orgasm? I can't, but I'm not all that savvy with research.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Who needs actual Biblical scholars when your people are actively discouraged
from reading the Bible for themselves and thinking for themselves?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
penworks
I dragged this topic out of the archives to clarify something.
Joe Wis* spearheaded the production of the Aramaic Concordance which was published in August 1985. I helped with this project. Immediately after that, he proceeded to work on the translation for the Aramaic Interlinear , as was his assignment.
HOWEVER, he was fired - the reason given by LCM via W*lter C*mmins was that Joe was "too academic."
Joe's credentials included a Masters in Near Eastern Studies from Univ. of Chicago.
By the time he had to leave in August 1986, Joe had finished the translation of the Aramaic N.T. except the Book of Revelation.
That month, Br*ce M*hone - mentioned above - was brought in to finish the translation for the Interlinear.
How come Br*ce M*hone wasn't thought to be "too academic" as well?
My point is that anyone using the interlinear and concordance should be careful to notice any instances where it backs up TWI theology such as in Matt, 27:46. The Syriac word is for "Leave" or "forsake" not "spared" which the TWI translation used.
I know that Joe translated the Syriac as "forsake" but the final published translation, overseen by other people, is different and reflects PFAL dogma. When I asked W*lter Cum*ins whether Lamsa could have just misled VPW on this verse, he told me VPW was more spiritual than any of us. In that circumstance, the text was not the authority, but VPW was...this was a pattern most people know about.
BTW - Br*ce M*hone runs an offshoot based on VPW teachings. It's called something like Capital Area fellowship.
Edited by penworksLink to comment
Share on other sites
cheranne
I guess they meant research as a self help get your own BUT (stay within TWI teachings!)
More like a sit down dinner of PotLuck and everyone brings the same thing! BORING.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
It's always fun to read how Way-speak gets exposed here - folks using critical thinking skills & normal intellectual standards. There's obviously two different ways to define research. There's the world's way – which ideally is a systematic process to discover, analyze & establish facts. And then there's Way-world's definition of research – a systematic process [TWI-sanctioned methodology] to re-discover, re-absorb & re-establish PFAL.
The expanded literal definition according to usage of "research" reads as follows: repeated searching of TWI's teachings, which includes scriptural references [sorry - KJV only! all other versions don't count - unless allusion is made to "the original" by way of an expressed desire that others could see it] along with TWI's interpretation of said references, so as to establish beyond a shadow of a doubt the veracity of PFAL. Abbreviated definitions of "research" that are also acceptable: "working the Word to make it your own" and "mastering PFAL".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
But, how can anyone re-search PFAL when they've put it in mothballs?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
Off topic alert:
I'm LMAO because the ad banner at the bottom of the page is for an all gay exotic cruise. What words in this thread made that come up?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Well, that's a lost cause right there. PFAL had too many holes in it to begin with – what are mothballs gonna do?
LOL Nottawafer – taking it from the top of this page: post # 21 – "homosexuality", post # 22 – "homosexual woman", post # 23 –"Eve as a lesbian" & " Lilith theory", post # 24 "Eve & the devil as a lesbian", post # 25 "not real familiar with how the lesbian thing works", post # 26 "tree really meant penis", post # 27 "threesome fantasy" & "Lilith myth", post #28 "Eve is a lesbian" & " his wife's involvement with Rosalie"; and finally the piece de resistance - post # 33 "homonym" and "Greek".. . this has been a classic example of "poster buildup" [you may remember that from the foundational class]. That should answer your question – but you're really not supposed to ask any questions until the end of the class.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Mask the stench.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
eeewww, the PFAsmeLL
.. . yuk, guess I forgot how pungent that old stinking thinking was.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
penworks
Maybe I will create a poll asking who uses the above mentioned Aramaic research materials.
A related question I'm interested in is: does anyone think learning languages of the texts makes any difference to their spiritual life or are these two separate matters? Personally, they are separate...one is an intellectual exercise, the other is intuitive.
The heart of my question comes from wondering about the value of doing biblical studies and the specific ways in which people think they are necessary.
I believe VPW taught a person could not know God without a knowledge of the The Word (better known as the Bible in its original form, which we don't have, but that's another topic).
What other questions could we put on the poll?
Edited by penworksLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
A few suggestions on tweaking your questions.. .Have several questions to determine use of biblical language references for Aramaic, Hebrew & Greek. Another series of questions to find out Grease Spotters' opinion of how important is an understanding of the biblical languages to their study life and practical/spiritual life.
To answer your questions now - my approach to Bible study has changed significantly over the years since leaving TWI in 86. Early on I got more into the Hebrew & Greek and targeting certain topics in my quest to re-examine everything I absorbed in TWI. As I branched off into reading commentaries & systematic theologies, an understanding of the biblical languages remained important to me so I could apply critical thinking skills to that material as well. No sense in getting hoodwinked twice.
Currently, I don't get into them as much – except for doctrinal discussions here and at another website that is a Christian forum. My personal study pursues a more general understanding of a passage with a goal of abstracting something practical out of it – basically asking the questions: what was the author's purpose in writing this & what difference should this make in the way I think or act?
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
How about asking what PRACTICAL APPLICATION of said research people adopt - like helping the disadvantaged?
(= what is the end result of their research?)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
I've been reading lately in The Lion Handbook to the Bible. I just came across this statement:
(emphasis added)
As I've been reading many different versions after escaping TWI, I've been struck by the better way things are expressed. Sometimes the better way accords with notes in The Companion Bible, showing perhaps how frustrated Bullinger may have been at some of the KJV translations. Reading versions from RSV through The Message gives a much fuller understanding of what the text may have been intended to say.
What I do recall, however, is that VPW and later LCM would give alternative "translations" of verses of KJV, saying, "This is what is actually says," or words to that effect (a better choice of tense, perhaps) - a literal according to usage - and that's so clearly what some other version says.
I wonder if, at least in the later days, Biblical research was reduced to reading other versions of the Bible and presenting those versions as "better translations" or "literals according to usage." Amplified would be a great version to base "literals" on.
Of course, none of us would ever know, since use of other than KJV was virtually unknown. That's if we even had time to read and assimilate.
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.