The letter was an eloquent appeal. Wouldn't its modest proposal send the CES trio packing off to somebody else's seminary for some actual book learnin'? Can you see those three sharing a freshman dorm room? It could get mighty stuffy in there.
The odds may be better they will form the next great boy-band. For a name, I suggest they call themselves "In-CES'ed." First CD title? "In-sist on In-CES'ed!" Brilliant? No? Awww, man! Well, I give that better odds than their giving your thoughts any creedence.
Other than the possibility of taking a few research-oriented utility/technical courses, I don't see them ever going back to school (figuratively or literally), much less re-examining their own beliefs, much less surveying "over 200 years worth of textual critical studies." You're asking old dogmatists to learn new tricks. They are the new defenders of the status quo.
It was a much-need catalyst that provided many with the justification and even courage for not remaining in slavery to a corrupt organization, its leaders and its teachings (though unfortunately the latter appears to be a much slower process, in my humble observation)...
But I feel that independence from twi will not truly be complete until all the former teachings have been scrutinized, rather than duplicated in some way
John Lynn (as he has stated) has seen both good and bad in TWI. This includes the teachings. Does scrutiny, as seems the tone to me here, require rejection? Perhaps he HAS scrutinized the teachings and found them to be right, or does scrutiny by somepne's definition have to lead to rejection?
John Lynn (as he has stated) has seen both good and bad in TWI. This includes the teachings. Does scrutiny, as seems the tone to me here, require rejection? Perhaps he HAS scrutinized the teachings and found them to be right, or does scrutiny by somepne's definition have to lead to rejection?
Lifted Up,
Your question disregards the specifics of Dan's letter. What is your opinion of those points which he suggests CES might need to reject upon further scrutiny?
Furthermore, doesn't he also suggest they might accept elements of that body of Christian work which they have, after Vic W's own fashion, apparently rejected out of hand?
You seem to ask, "Why not give them the benefit of the doubt?" But there is little doubt there, and Dan has made a pretty good case. Maybe you should scrutinize his letter a little more closely before rejecting the "message" you may have read into it.
I agree with you that CES and the other offshoots need to really look at their doctrines from other points of view. Their bias is pretty evident, especially since they still seek the approval of vpw.
Good biblical study will allow for differing of opinions and let other ideas come in.
Going to seminaries, colleges and other churches can prove invaluable in regard to obtaining the truth.
quote:I only wish that you and your associates had continued your "revolution" for truly, complete independence - not only from an organization and its leadership structure- but liberation from the shackles of its teachings.
Some have done this, but I think JAL and CES and others don't want to stray from the teachings they espouse, because they believe them to be the truth.
Why hold CES and JAL to a higher standard and burden to change their beliefs, than all the other religions out there?
Those who want CES and JAL to change -- if it's so simple, why don't YOU change YOUR minds?
For instance ...
Would you walk into a baptist church and ask them to cancel water baptism? or at least explore the possibility that they may be wrong?
Would you walk into a Roman Catholic church and ask them to stop believing that Mary is the mother of God? or the Mediatrix? Or at least research the possibility that they might be wrong? good luck ...
The Baptists and Catholics make no pretense of being in the truth discovery/recovery business. You never hear about their "biblical research."
From their website:
quote:CES draws from all relevant sources that shed light on the integrity of Scripture, whether in the field of geography, customs, language, history, or principles governing Bible interpretation.
Our goal is to seek the truth without respect to tradition or "orthodoxy."
Nobody is questioning more or less than what CES claims about itself. Why is that a problem for you?
The way I see it it's very simple, they've come to realize that certain teachings from twi are true, that is what they believe, and they are holding to those beliefs. Those teachings that they don't believe, they disposed of. Why ask or expect them to change? They believe what they believe. That's their menu. If you don't like their menu, you are free to go to another restaurant.
The way I see it it's very simple, they've come to realize that certain teachings from twi are true, that is what they believe, and they are holding to those beliefs. Those teachings that they don't believe, they disposed of. Why ask or expect them to change? They believe what they believe. That's their menu. If you don't like their menu, you are free to go to another restaurant.
Are they exempt from the same request they make of others? "Any individual willing to examine his beliefs... will perhaps profit..." That is from their "What is CES?" page. They are proselytizing, oldiesman, s e l l i n g, in other words. They are selling what appears to be Vic Wierwille's warmed-over, schlock "bib-olatry," looking for new suckers and lost ex-Wayfers alike to support them. They want to change your mind. Right, John?
If there is a shred of integrity in the CES management, they should acknowledge the validity of questions and be willing to answer them honestly and forthrightly - not on a "personal phone call" where nothing is overheard, or "private e-mail" where the content may be later denied, but in a public forum of dialogue and debate, OPEN to one and all. Let the chips fall.
Why is that a problem for you, oldiesman? Why is it a problem for CES? Something to hide? That might explain why they are in hiding.
"You're asking old dogmatists to learn new tricks."
:D--> :D--> :D-->
So funny, and true. You ought to be a columnist. :D-->
But I still like my old buddy and friend Mark G. and his wife too. Is he still Pres. of CES right now? Been a while since I have seen him. We go way back in the previous Way World and went through the Corps together too. He's a good man and a good father as well.
That is not an official website, Lifted Up, is it? You can find anything on the internet. Show me the legitimate, sanctioned Vatican equivalent of CES's "research." Show the equivalent of CES's (pretense of) accessibility.
And by the way, even without an implicit invitation, plenty of people do question denominational standards and beliefs in whatever forum is available. With the internet, those forums are growing rapidly. CES needs to come clean.
Wouldnt it be nice to just put doctrines all under the "Yeah so what?" Category For example, I heard John Hagee on TV one day arguing the necessity of believing in the rapture. Whatever. I always simply think, Well if it happens I'm going and if it don't I'm staying, either way it will be no surprise.
With respect to my own dreams, I to am a peon whose opinions have little signifacance. Certainly at times this has made me question what good I am doing. Like , know one cares, it makes no difference so why should I? The only problem with that is then I can never make good of the troublesome experiences I have left behind. Thats why the TWI experience is meaningful to me, I think God can use it to sharpen up that thing we called the word of God.
I suppose I could give you the top ten reasons that I havent turned my back on God and find myself snorting coke with a crack ho, (yes I am exaggerating for humor sake), sufficient to say I always find enough new daily interest, eternal benefit (faith) , and reasons along the way to keep myself from digressing. Lastly, who knows if every thing that we think is little will always remain so? I think its quite certain Jeremiah or Job would have never viewed themselves and there work as profound as it was, yah know? So in the end its more about what God thinks weve done than what we do. I find that quite liberating and compelling. Who knows maybe someday you will at least make the honor roll? For me, If he simply says, well done tho good and faithful servant, I think I will feel quite well.
I have been thinking about this letter from JAL, or whoever delivered it to this board and (deep breath inserted here) I am very concerned its implications concerning peoples, uhm. hearts. I was involved with TWI for a minimum of 20 yearz (75-95) in the capacity of TWIg Assistant Co. or TWIg Co. I thinks I was involved with a CULT!!!!!!
I know TWI is a cult and destructive to people who were involved its InDoctrination. Some say it never had a destructive hold on their soul. Well, good for you, I am glad you left with your mind intact. BUT for me, TWI certainly has been destructive as well as many many many others involved. I suppose there must be some balance in the trade for those who were controlled and then ripped apart and others who did not experience such a thing or just continue on and say "get over it". HEY try telling that to a Vet of war eh!!! (whoops that's right it was an Atheletic competition...) A predator can only consume, gourge so much prey before his belly full to rest and the others slip away until the predator returns for another belly full of prey.
I went to the links offered by GSC just to refresh my memory on how to avoid cults. Well, how many red flags do I need to see the spin offs, the TWISTER Sisters...?
Incidentally, some years ago I became friends with a young man (and his sister) who was a budding biblical scholar of real greatness and a phenomenal intellect. And a genuinely humble guy. I was somewhat amused when he ran into Schoenheit at a conference of some kind. It resulted in a relationship. I'm pretty sure it was my friend that led the ces guys to Anthony Buzzard (whom I also know). To my further surprise, he later left his church and began attending a ces fellowship. Eerie feeling, that.
According to him, he found that 'the boys' were not interested in "Dialog" after all (though I think they may have published a few short articles by him) and he was rudely and harshly told to get lost, in so many words.
Even without hearing the other side of the story, I had to know, based on my friend's steady character, that teh CES boys had walked down a very dark path.
Satori : "Wouldn't its modest proposal send the CES trio packing off to somebody else's seminary for some actual book learnin'? Can you see those three sharing a freshman dorm room? It could get mighty stuffy in there."
Actually, I think they could get by surprisingly well by investing a few hours between visiting public and university libraries, and viewing some of the programs on the "History" channel. With the former, I've had little problem getting hold of a variety of works through interlibrary loan (a Godsend by itself); university and seminary libraries have been extremely gracious. And with the latter, I spent an enjoyable evening earlier this week watching a new show on the Dead Sea scrolls, followed by a program on the subject of "Heaven and Hell". It's just another great way to get exposure to these subjects.
"The odds may be better they will form the next great boy-band. For a name, I suggest they call themselves "In-CES'ed." First CD title? "In-sist on In-CES'ed!" Brilliant? No? Awww, man! Well, I give that better odds than their giving your thoughts any creedence."
(chuckle) God forbid, not another boy band, especially if they dub themselves "The Cessians" or "The Victors II".
Lifted Up : "John Lynn (as he has stated) has seen both good and bad in TWI. This includes the teachings. Does scrutiny, as seems the tone to me here, require rejection? "
Sometimes.
"Perhaps he HAS scrutinized the teachings and found them to be right, or does scrutiny by someone's definition have to lead to rejection?"
Perhaps he has, to the best of his ability...but again, I'm a bit confused here as to how "research" is conducted in CES (let alone what they actually regard themselves to actually be - a church for disenfranchised ex-ways - a biblical research group?) - is it endeavored in the noble spirit of open inquiry, - to let the chips fall where evidence may lead - or is everything done more to simply pad up that which they have already determined beforehand as the "right" doctrines and interpretations?
For instance, we might consider the past affairs in twi 's "research" department - from what I've heard of the experiences of former researchers at Waydale and GS, Wierwille's afore-drawn conclusions in PFAL were largely held up as sacred cows, with very little "new light" which might challenge or change prior conceptions shining out. With the result that those researchers who followed their conscience and spoke up were either fired, cast out, or they left out of disgust or boredom.
I recall hearing often the notion that with the basic principles of PFAL, there was little need to "re-invent the wheel". This was seemingly used as justification for not re-investigating a lot of things.
But what if the "wheel" that Wierwille constructed has only so much mileage?
What if one could only go so far riding a vehicle mounted with Wierwille's wheels, or a competitor's retread? Might the Way and subsequent imitators have overlooked or ignored a whole array of other "research tools" and resources? The discoveries of the past century in the field of Biblical literature -e.g., the Dead Sea scrolls and the Nag Hammadi Library - would have blown Bullinger's mind, who unfortunately never lived to see these discoveries. I can't even begin to imagine how much our understanding in this field will expand 100 years from now.
Def59 : "Beautiful letter Dan.
I agree with you that CES and the other offshoots need to really look at their doctrines from other points of view. Their bias is pretty evident, especially since they still seek the approval of vpw.
Good biblical study will allow for differing of opinions and let other ideas come in. "
Thank you Def59. I agree with you - it's healthy and rewarding to maintain an open mind, and consider other ideas besides (or alongside) those in which may have been raised. It can be challenging and even extremely difficult - but I think one can emerge much stronger from doing so. One may even reach a place where they have even more questions than when they started out; but I have taken even more pleasure in this.
Oldiesman: "Some have done this, but I think JAL and CES and others don't want to stray from the teachings they espouse, because they believe them to be the truth.
Why hold CES and JAL to a higher standard and burden to change their beliefs, than all the other religions out there?
Those who want CES and JAL to change -- if it's so simple, why don't YOU change YOUR minds?"
Well again, while in the Way, a number of researchers were not allowed to really "stray" from the sacred cows of Wierwille's doctrines and interpretations. So I find it all the more puzzling why some of those "most reputed" who have moved on to establish their offshoots, being no longer under the thumb of the Way organizational system, apparently still feel compelled to continue using the "wheel" manufactured through Way Tires, Inc.
CES and others can and should do as they please. I'm not so unrealistic as to expect they would change due to anything on my account. It's their show. Perhaps it's still in development.
But now with all these former Way leaders and researchers striking it out on their own, I would have expected (again unrealistically perhaps?) more ambitious "research" coming from them, in that spirit of open inquiry previously denied them (and others) in the old group. After all, at one time the Way touted itself as being at the top of the world of cutting edge research. So yes, I and others can, and do go elsewhere. And along the way we express our opinions.
Sky4it: "Wouldnt it be nice to just put doctrines all under the "Yeah so what?" Category For example, I heard John Hagee on TV one day arguing the necessity of believing in the rapture. Whatever. I always simply think, Well if it happens I'm going and if it don't I'm staying, either way it will be no surprise."
The UU church that my wife attends has an approach similar to what you've suggested. I like dropping in on them every so often. They seem very tolerant and laid back. They may not agree on doctrines and ideas - but I admire how they come together to do things to help folks in their local communities. A far cry from "I have no friends when it comes to the Word".
"With respect to my own dreams, I to am a peon whose opinions have little signifacance. Certainly at times this has made me question what good I am doing. Like , know one cares, it makes no difference so why should I? The only problem with that is then I can never make good of the troublesome experiences I have left behind. Thats why the TWI experience is meaningful to me, I think God can use it to sharpen up that thing we called the word of God. "
I agree, I think one may draw some invaluable, most effective contrasts from even our previous "bad" experiences and ideas. I recall folks in the Way doing it with their prior religious upbringing (i.e., "I was once a Roman Catholic and it really sucked" and so on). Little did many realize at the time that the ideas and experiences of the Way would one day serve as antithetical showpieces.
TheEvan : " Where do I enlist in the Invisible Dan's Official Religion?"
Three "Hail Marys" accompanied by a viewing of MST3k's lambasting of the 70s classic "PumaMan".
quote: is it endeavored in the noble spirit of open inquiry, - to let the chips fall where evidence may lead - or is everything done more to simply pad up that which they have already determined beforehand as the "right" doctrines and interpretations?
Yes. The way I see it, they apply the totality of evidence and research they've already engaged in, and formed beliefs that they choose are satisfactory and biblical. So what's the problem? They are human and can make mistakes as well. You can go on and on about "already determined beforehand" beliefs, and what they think are "right" doctrines. The fact remains the same. Are they not entitled to believe, hold fast, and communicate what they think is "right"?
You seem to be making the case that they are unobjective and don't care to hear other viewpoints. Welcome to Religion in the USA, 2004. Welcome to dealing with human beings, who have formed beliefs.
quote:I would have expected (again unrealistically perhaps?) more ambitious "research" coming from them, in that spirit of open inquiry previously denied them (and others) in the old group. After all, at one time the Way touted itself as being at the top of the world of cutting edge research. So yes, I and others can, and do go elsewhere.
You are also free to start your own biblical research group, if you will, if you think you have the more accurate version. nothing wrong with that. but bear in mind it isn't just the doctrine they espouse but also the effort and will and commitment it takes to communicate it to others. That takes dedication and hard work.
You seem to be making the case that they are unobjective and don't care to hear other viewpoints. Welcome to Religion in the USA, 2004. Welcome to dealing with human beings, who have formed beliefs.
Exactly, oldiesman, and they represent themselves as the alternative to "Religion in the USA, 2004," and therefore they are misrepresenting themselves. I had to connect the dots for you, but a very good observation on your part.
quote:You are also free to start your own biblical research group, if you will, if you think you have the more accurate version. nothing wrong with that. but bear in mind it isn't just the doctrine they espouse but also the effort and will and commitment it takes to communicate it to others. That takes dedication and hard work.
How does dedication and hard work somehow justify the promoting of shakey/shady doctrine? That's a new one.
I was attempting to respond to something Danny said, and the way I saw it, that he was complaining about CES not being objective. The point was if your view and beliefs are so much better, start your own group and put some hard work into it, if you think what you belief is that much better. Just food for thought.
This argument means little as I see it. If the point you are making is that CES is fudging their claims about themselves, ok, I see your point, but it's a little anal retentive. So what? The way I see it, hardly anyone in the field of religion and doctrine is all that objective to the point of changing their views that quickly. Are you really surprised that CES is holding fast what they believe is truth we learned from TWI? I'm very glad they are holding fast some teachings.
oldies - At one time CES published "22 Principles" for interpreting the Bible. At least 3 of the principles contradict each other. When I pointed this out to them, they ignored the truth.
Schoenheit did a teaching on evolution, and used the fact that it's built on a circular argument to discredit it.
When I demonstrated to Schoenheit that dispensationalism ALSO is based on a circular argument, it didn't seem to bother him.
TWI was not what it advertised itself to be. Wierwille was dishonest, and I don't see how that could have been anything other than deliberate.
CES is not what it advertises itself to be. The CES leaders are dishonest. Is it deliberate? I don't think so. I just think their hearts have deceived them into believing their own hype.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
28
25
23
19
Popular Days
Jul 30
50
Aug 10
37
Sep 9
30
Jul 31
28
Top Posters In This Topic
sky4it 28 posts
oldiesman 25 posts
satori001 23 posts
TheSongRemainsTheSame 19 posts
Popular Days
Jul 30 2004
50 posts
Aug 10 2004
37 posts
Sep 9 2004
30 posts
Jul 31 2004
28 posts
satori001
Indivisible Dan,
The letter was an eloquent appeal. Wouldn't its modest proposal send the CES trio packing off to somebody else's seminary for some actual book learnin'? Can you see those three sharing a freshman dorm room? It could get mighty stuffy in there.
The odds may be better they will form the next great boy-band. For a name, I suggest they call themselves "In-CES'ed." First CD title? "In-sist on In-CES'ed!" Brilliant? No? Awww, man! Well, I give that better odds than their giving your thoughts any creedence.
Other than the possibility of taking a few research-oriented utility/technical courses, I don't see them ever going back to school (figuratively or literally), much less re-examining their own beliefs, much less surveying "over 200 years worth of textual critical studies." You're asking old dogmatists to learn new tricks. They are the new defenders of the status quo.
Regards...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lifted Up
John Lynn (as he has stated) has seen both good and bad in TWI. This includes the teachings. Does scrutiny, as seems the tone to me here, require rejection? Perhaps he HAS scrutinized the teachings and found them to be right, or does scrutiny by somepne's definition have to lead to rejection?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori001
Lifted Up,
Your question disregards the specifics of Dan's letter. What is your opinion of those points which he suggests CES might need to reject upon further scrutiny?
Furthermore, doesn't he also suggest they might accept elements of that body of Christian work which they have, after Vic W's own fashion, apparently rejected out of hand?
You seem to ask, "Why not give them the benefit of the doubt?" But there is little doubt there, and Dan has made a pretty good case. Maybe you should scrutinize his letter a little more closely before rejecting the "message" you may have read into it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
Beautiful letter Dan.
I agree with you that CES and the other offshoots need to really look at their doctrines from other points of view. Their bias is pretty evident, especially since they still seek the approval of vpw.
Good biblical study will allow for differing of opinions and let other ideas come in.
Going to seminaries, colleges and other churches can prove invaluable in regard to obtaining the truth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Some have done this, but I think JAL and CES and others don't want to stray from the teachings they espouse, because they believe them to be the truth.
Why hold CES and JAL to a higher standard and burden to change their beliefs, than all the other religions out there?
Those who want CES and JAL to change -- if it's so simple, why don't YOU change YOUR minds?
For instance ...
Would you walk into a baptist church and ask them to cancel water baptism? or at least explore the possibility that they may be wrong?
Would you walk into a Roman Catholic church and ask them to stop believing that Mary is the mother of God? or the Mediatrix? Or at least research the possibility that they might be wrong? good luck ...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori001
oldiesman,
The Baptists and Catholics make no pretense of being in the truth discovery/recovery business. You never hear about their "biblical research."
From their website:
Nobody is questioning more or less than what CES claims about itself. Why is that a problem for you?Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
The way I see it it's very simple, they've come to realize that certain teachings from twi are true, that is what they believe, and they are holding to those beliefs. Those teachings that they don't believe, they disposed of. Why ask or expect them to change? They believe what they believe. That's their menu. If you don't like their menu, you are free to go to another restaurant.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori001
If there is a shred of integrity in the CES management, they should acknowledge the validity of questions and be willing to answer them honestly and forthrightly - not on a "personal phone call" where nothing is overheard, or "private e-mail" where the content may be later denied, but in a public forum of dialogue and debate, OPEN to one and all. Let the chips fall.
Why is that a problem for you, oldiesman? Why is it a problem for CES? Something to hide? That might explain why they are in hiding.
edited for spelling
Edited by satori001Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lifted Up
Oldies, I think you say it better (and simpler) than I do.
As for Catholics and Baptists being concerned about discovering the truth, evidently some of them are.
Catholic Culture site review
Link to comment
Share on other sites
igotout
"You're asking old dogmatists to learn new tricks."
So funny, and true. You ought to be a columnist.
:D-->
But I still like my old buddy and friend Mark G. and his wife too. Is he still Pres. of CES right now? Been a while since I have seen him. We go way back in the previous Way World and went through the Corps together too. He's a good man and a good father as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori001
That is not an official website, Lifted Up, is it? You can find anything on the internet. Show me the legitimate, sanctioned Vatican equivalent of CES's "research." Show the equivalent of CES's (pretense of) accessibility.
And by the way, even without an implicit invitation, plenty of people do question denominational standards and beliefs in whatever forum is available. With the internet, those forums are growing rapidly. CES needs to come clean.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
Invisible Dan:
Wouldnt it be nice to just put doctrines all under the "Yeah so what?" Category For example, I heard John Hagee on TV one day arguing the necessity of believing in the rapture. Whatever. I always simply think, Well if it happens I'm going and if it don't I'm staying, either way it will be no surprise.
With respect to my own dreams, I to am a peon whose opinions have little signifacance. Certainly at times this has made me question what good I am doing. Like , know one cares, it makes no difference so why should I? The only problem with that is then I can never make good of the troublesome experiences I have left behind. Thats why the TWI experience is meaningful to me, I think God can use it to sharpen up that thing we called the word of God.
I suppose I could give you the top ten reasons that I havent turned my back on God and find myself snorting coke with a crack ho, (yes I am exaggerating for humor sake), sufficient to say I always find enough new daily interest, eternal benefit (faith) , and reasons along the way to keep myself from digressing. Lastly, who knows if every thing that we think is little will always remain so? I think its quite certain Jeremiah or Job would have never viewed themselves and there work as profound as it was, yah know? So in the end its more about what God thinks weve done than what we do. I find that quite liberating and compelling. Who knows maybe someday you will at least make the honor roll? For me, If he simply says, well done tho good and faithful servant, I think I will feel quite well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSongRemainsTheSame
I have been thinking about this letter from JAL, or whoever delivered it to this board and (deep breath inserted here) I am very concerned its implications concerning peoples, uhm. hearts. I was involved with TWI for a minimum of 20 yearz (75-95) in the capacity of TWIg Assistant Co. or TWIg Co. I thinks I was involved with a CULT!!!!!!
I know TWI is a cult and destructive to people who were involved its InDoctrination. Some say it never had a destructive hold on their soul. Well, good for you, I am glad you left with your mind intact. BUT for me, TWI certainly has been destructive as well as many many many others involved. I suppose there must be some balance in the trade for those who were controlled and then ripped apart and others who did not experience such a thing or just continue on and say "get over it". HEY try telling that to a Vet of war eh!!! (whoops that's right it was an Atheletic competition...) A predator can only consume, gourge so much prey before his belly full to rest and the others slip away until the predator returns for another belly full of prey.
I went to the links offered by GSC just to refresh my memory on how to avoid cults. Well, how many red flags do I need to see the spin offs, the TWISTER Sisters...?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheEvan
Having heard John had made an appearance I nosed around and found this. John, hi. Um, John? HELLO??
Shessh, I run off to Africa for a while and return to this.
Where do I enlist in the Invisible Dan's Official Religion?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheEvan
Incidentally, some years ago I became friends with a young man (and his sister) who was a budding biblical scholar of real greatness and a phenomenal intellect. And a genuinely humble guy. I was somewhat amused when he ran into Schoenheit at a conference of some kind. It resulted in a relationship. I'm pretty sure it was my friend that led the ces guys to Anthony Buzzard (whom I also know). To my further surprise, he later left his church and began attending a ces fellowship. Eerie feeling, that.
According to him, he found that 'the boys' were not interested in "Dialog" after all (though I think they may have published a few short articles by him) and he was rudely and harshly told to get lost, in so many words.
Even without hearing the other side of the story, I had to know, based on my friend's steady character, that teh CES boys had walked down a very dark path.
Research, my ***.
BTW, welcome to this place, John.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jeff USAF RET
For those of you that would like to see more of John Lynn's heart, here is a link to some of his online articles.
He is out of town and has no idea I am posting this.
Okay, come and get me.
But these are really good!
http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.ph...ws&new_topic=54
Love to all,
Jeff
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
But,
does he know that you.... *reads the last post*
..oh, never mind, then.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
oh boy...more of John Lynn's heart
-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
I'm so sorry for taking so long to respond.
The summer heat and humidity renders me so lazy.
I think I need to move to Alaska someday.
Satori : "Wouldn't its modest proposal send the CES trio packing off to somebody else's seminary for some actual book learnin'? Can you see those three sharing a freshman dorm room? It could get mighty stuffy in there."
Actually, I think they could get by surprisingly well by investing a few hours between visiting public and university libraries, and viewing some of the programs on the "History" channel. With the former, I've had little problem getting hold of a variety of works through interlibrary loan (a Godsend by itself); university and seminary libraries have been extremely gracious. And with the latter, I spent an enjoyable evening earlier this week watching a new show on the Dead Sea scrolls, followed by a program on the subject of "Heaven and Hell". It's just another great way to get exposure to these subjects.
"The odds may be better they will form the next great boy-band. For a name, I suggest they call themselves "In-CES'ed." First CD title? "In-sist on In-CES'ed!" Brilliant? No? Awww, man! Well, I give that better odds than their giving your thoughts any creedence."
(chuckle) God forbid, not another boy band, especially if they dub themselves "The Cessians" or "The Victors II".
Lifted Up : "John Lynn (as he has stated) has seen both good and bad in TWI. This includes the teachings. Does scrutiny, as seems the tone to me here, require rejection? "
Sometimes.
"Perhaps he HAS scrutinized the teachings and found them to be right, or does scrutiny by someone's definition have to lead to rejection?"
Perhaps he has, to the best of his ability...but again, I'm a bit confused here as to how "research" is conducted in CES (let alone what they actually regard themselves to actually be - a church for disenfranchised ex-ways - a biblical research group?) - is it endeavored in the noble spirit of open inquiry, - to let the chips fall where evidence may lead - or is everything done more to simply pad up that which they have already determined beforehand as the "right" doctrines and interpretations?
For instance, we might consider the past affairs in twi 's "research" department - from what I've heard of the experiences of former researchers at Waydale and GS, Wierwille's afore-drawn conclusions in PFAL were largely held up as sacred cows, with very little "new light" which might challenge or change prior conceptions shining out. With the result that those researchers who followed their conscience and spoke up were either fired, cast out, or they left out of disgust or boredom.
I recall hearing often the notion that with the basic principles of PFAL, there was little need to "re-invent the wheel". This was seemingly used as justification for not re-investigating a lot of things.
But what if the "wheel" that Wierwille constructed has only so much mileage?
What if one could only go so far riding a vehicle mounted with Wierwille's wheels, or a competitor's retread? Might the Way and subsequent imitators have overlooked or ignored a whole array of other "research tools" and resources? The discoveries of the past century in the field of Biblical literature -e.g., the Dead Sea scrolls and the Nag Hammadi Library - would have blown Bullinger's mind, who unfortunately never lived to see these discoveries. I can't even begin to imagine how much our understanding in this field will expand 100 years from now.
Def59 : "Beautiful letter Dan.
I agree with you that CES and the other offshoots need to really look at their doctrines from other points of view. Their bias is pretty evident, especially since they still seek the approval of vpw.
Good biblical study will allow for differing of opinions and let other ideas come in. "
Thank you Def59. I agree with you - it's healthy and rewarding to maintain an open mind, and consider other ideas besides (or alongside) those in which may have been raised. It can be challenging and even extremely difficult - but I think one can emerge much stronger from doing so. One may even reach a place where they have even more questions than when they started out; but I have taken even more pleasure in this.
Oldiesman: "Some have done this, but I think JAL and CES and others don't want to stray from the teachings they espouse, because they believe them to be the truth.
Why hold CES and JAL to a higher standard and burden to change their beliefs, than all the other religions out there?
Those who want CES and JAL to change -- if it's so simple, why don't YOU change YOUR minds?"
Well again, while in the Way, a number of researchers were not allowed to really "stray" from the sacred cows of Wierwille's doctrines and interpretations. So I find it all the more puzzling why some of those "most reputed" who have moved on to establish their offshoots, being no longer under the thumb of the Way organizational system, apparently still feel compelled to continue using the "wheel" manufactured through Way Tires, Inc.
CES and others can and should do as they please. I'm not so unrealistic as to expect they would change due to anything on my account. It's their show. Perhaps it's still in development.
But now with all these former Way leaders and researchers striking it out on their own, I would have expected (again unrealistically perhaps?) more ambitious "research" coming from them, in that spirit of open inquiry previously denied them (and others) in the old group. After all, at one time the Way touted itself as being at the top of the world of cutting edge research. So yes, I and others can, and do go elsewhere. And along the way we express our opinions.
Sky4it: "Wouldnt it be nice to just put doctrines all under the "Yeah so what?" Category For example, I heard John Hagee on TV one day arguing the necessity of believing in the rapture. Whatever. I always simply think, Well if it happens I'm going and if it don't I'm staying, either way it will be no surprise."
The UU church that my wife attends has an approach similar to what you've suggested. I like dropping in on them every so often. They seem very tolerant and laid back. They may not agree on doctrines and ideas - but I admire how they come together to do things to help folks in their local communities. A far cry from "I have no friends when it comes to the Word".
"With respect to my own dreams, I to am a peon whose opinions have little signifacance. Certainly at times this has made me question what good I am doing. Like , know one cares, it makes no difference so why should I? The only problem with that is then I can never make good of the troublesome experiences I have left behind. Thats why the TWI experience is meaningful to me, I think God can use it to sharpen up that thing we called the word of God. "
I agree, I think one may draw some invaluable, most effective contrasts from even our previous "bad" experiences and ideas. I recall folks in the Way doing it with their prior religious upbringing (i.e., "I was once a Roman Catholic and it really sucked" and so on). Little did many realize at the time that the ideas and experiences of the Way would one day serve as antithetical showpieces.
TheEvan : " Where do I enlist in the Invisible Dan's Official Religion?"
Three "Hail Marys" accompanied by a viewing of MST3k's lambasting of the 70s classic "PumaMan".
You'll be so blessed that you did.
Danny
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Yes. The way I see it, they apply the totality of evidence and research they've already engaged in, and formed beliefs that they choose are satisfactory and biblical. So what's the problem? They are human and can make mistakes as well. You can go on and on about "already determined beforehand" beliefs, and what they think are "right" doctrines. The fact remains the same. Are they not entitled to believe, hold fast, and communicate what they think is "right"?
You seem to be making the case that they are unobjective and don't care to hear other viewpoints. Welcome to Religion in the USA, 2004. Welcome to dealing with human beings, who have formed beliefs.
You are also free to start your own biblical research group, if you will, if you think you have the more accurate version. nothing wrong with that. but bear in mind it isn't just the doctrine they espouse but also the effort and will and commitment it takes to communicate it to others. That takes dedication and hard work.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori001
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Satori,
I was attempting to respond to something Danny said, and the way I saw it, that he was complaining about CES not being objective. The point was if your view and beliefs are so much better, start your own group and put some hard work into it, if you think what you belief is that much better. Just food for thought.
This argument means little as I see it. If the point you are making is that CES is fudging their claims about themselves, ok, I see your point, but it's a little anal retentive. So what? The way I see it, hardly anyone in the field of religion and doctrine is all that objective to the point of changing their views that quickly. Are you really surprised that CES is holding fast what they believe is truth we learned from TWI? I'm very glad they are holding fast some teachings.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
oldies - At one time CES published "22 Principles" for interpreting the Bible. At least 3 of the principles contradict each other. When I pointed this out to them, they ignored the truth.
Schoenheit did a teaching on evolution, and used the fact that it's built on a circular argument to discredit it.
When I demonstrated to Schoenheit that dispensationalism ALSO is based on a circular argument, it didn't seem to bother him.
TWI was not what it advertised itself to be. Wierwille was dishonest, and I don't see how that could have been anything other than deliberate.
CES is not what it advertises itself to be. The CES leaders are dishonest. Is it deliberate? I don't think so. I just think their hearts have deceived them into believing their own hype.
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
The Invisible Dan - You hit the nail on the head. I could not have expressed it better.
Love,
Steve
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.