Renouncing The Word Because of Others' Sins

[WordWolf]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CoolWaters: (10/15, 10:56am)

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldiesman:

Oakspear, I think ALL of the posters who have been hurt by the evil works of VPW and LCM and others, and who later have renounced twi, fall in this category.

---

OM,

I think I _finally_ understand what is going on.

Are you equating what twi taught with "the word"?

---

Oldiesman's reply, 10/15/04, 12:42pm, was

"The simple answer is yes, with the proviso that some of what twi taught/

teaches is wrongly divided.

Stated another way, I don't think everything twi taught was/is rightly

divided, but that part that was/is, is "the Word".

============================

So,

that explains a few things.

The rest of us mean one thing when talking about "The Word".

We mean "the Bible as God's Word", or things along those lines

(e.g. "the originals before translation".)

When Oldies talks about "The Word",

he means

what vpw taught, packaged as twi materials like pfal.

That stuff is "The Word" (i.e. "God-breathed"), except where it isn't.

(Where it isn't is where it can be caught being blatantly wrong,

like tithing.)

=====================

So, when Oldies says

"People renounced The Word",

he means

"People renounced vpw's teachings".

Ok, if he had SAID that, we would have agreed, to varying degrees.

Some of us believe some of the things he taught,

but not simply because vpw taught them.

We concluded they were sensible on their OWN merits.

Some other people

(obsessed with infant hygiene analogies, mostly)

seem to view vpw's teachings as having an internal merit of their own,

where they are not meant to be keys or assists to understanding

the Bible,

but of equal (or greater) merit to the Bible on their own.

Those people would consider vpw's teachings to be "The Word".

==============

So, have we renounced vpw? Yes we have?

Have we renounced everything he taught?

Most of us renounced his package of material as a whole;

some of us have rejected all of its parts,

most have rejected some parts and consider other parts reliable

on their own merits.

Personally,

I think it's deceptive and dishonest to intentionally

substitute one concept for the other,

when it is clear the majority of us understand the words to mean

one thing,

and one or two others wish to reassign meaning to terms and words.

To do so accidentally is inferior, sloppy work.

(By this time, it's obvious it's not accidental.)

[WordWolf]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Goey:

Oldies,

quote:

---

"Wierwille committed disgusting sins at various points in his life, therefore everything about his life and teachings are bad ...

Nah, I don't believe it."

---

And neither does anyone else.

Why don't you stop the intentional misrepresentation of what people are saying.

FEW IF ANYONE HERE HAS EVER SAID THAT "EVERYTHING" ABOUT HIS LIFE AND TEACHINGS ARE BAD.

Yes I am yelling, cause you have a real problem hearing - either that are you one dispicably dishonest human being.

Get it through your thick head - and stop lying to yourself and to others about what folks are really saying.

Not "EVERYTHING", but rather "SOME". SOME of his teachings were bad. SOME parts of his life were bad.

As far as the Leaven Principle goes - first the "some" of his sins scripturally disqualified him for true leadership within the Church. The minimum standards are clear and concise. No one sins all the time. So let's say that VPW only commited adultery once per month and only got drunk once a week. Of all of his time that probably amounted to less than what - 5 -10 percent? Yet it was still enough to disqualify him as a leader according to the scriptures. So here is a case of a little leaven leavening the whole lump as far as being a true leader.

It is similar for teachings (doctrine). For argument sake, let's say that 95 percent of what VPW taught was doctrinally correct. That leaves 5 percent being doctrinally incorrect. Now, let's look at what the 5 percent was. First in my mind is problems with the law of believing. Next is his teaching on tithing. Then there is the one where the king owns all the women in the kingdom. And then consider the backroom teachings where adultery is not even really adultery - especially if it blesses the Man of God.

Now stir this stuff all up and we have the sum of all the individual parts - All of VPW's behavior - good and bad and his all his teachings - good and bad. - We now have "the lump" which is basically TWI-1 based upon VPW's teachings and leadership.

The point folks are making is NOT that "everything" individually that VPW did was bad, or that "everything" individually he taught was bad. So for Pete's sake get honest for once and stop saying that.

The point is that the bad (the leaven) was enough to spoil the whole lump (TWI as it was lead by VPW).

Oldies, I simply don't know how I could make it any clearer for you.

But just remember this - Whenever you represent folks as saying that "everything" that VPW taught was bad/wrong because of his sins - know for a fact that you are misrepresenting and lying about the truth of what is really being said.

---

=====================

I thought it might get missed the first time.

A number of things seem to slip by that way.

Alfakat also summarized the main points of the above as follows:

"Yes, Virginia, of course there was good and good times in twi--

but it came to naught,

NOT cuz the debill didn't like us,

but because there was leaven-

i.e. error, evil, sin, what-have-you---

in the doctrine and practice of twit.

QED."

[TheSongRemainsTheSame]

what is the absolute word of god?

maybe, i am missing the point this topc?

[imbus]

There are no absolutes with "The Word". It is all subjective. The Bible however holds some wonderful truths. "Da Word" according to VPW is his private interpretaion of The Bible. Boy, once you understand that then you can start spiritually embracing those truths for yourself.

It does however takes work on the Pschy to get past the instilled fear if you Throw out "The Word", and start anew with the Bible. For some of us that inslilled fear may last a life time and you may never be able to read the Bible.

[excathedra]

so far i'm not too interested

with the bible that is

god and his son are okay by me

[imbus]

Here, here Exie...I too find it difficult to read and there are times I can't read it at all. But I sure love reading about it. Different theologins "workin dahw woud". That is absolutly fun to me.

[GeorgeStGeorge]

quote:

---

Originally posted by excathedra:

so far i'm not too interested

with the bible that is

god and his son are okay by me

---

That's swell, Exie; but if you don't care about the Bible, why do you believe God had a Son? -->

George

[oldiesman]

quote:

---

But just remember this - Whenever you represent folks as saying that "everything" that VPW taught was bad/wrong because of his sins - know for a fact that you are misrepresenting and lying about the truth of what is really being said.

---

Goey, yes, this is how I read what some folks are saying when they talk about the Leaven Principle as it relates to twi. I think you're misstating what the Leaven Principle means and what folks think about it.

Here's what Excathedra quoted that article said:

quote:

---

The Leaven Principle speaks of the fact that a little bit of one thing, though mixed with a much larger amount of something else, changes the nature of the whole. A little bit of bad mixed with a lot of good tends to make the whole thing bad.

---

THAT is the Leaven Principle, the baby is tainted/spoiled/no good. I think some folks are so angry and disappointed at VPW because of his transgressions, they've thrown out the baby with the bathwater because, as Pat described it, "most of the time, the crap is so integral in the baby so that even though you have thrown out the bath water, you still have a crap filled baby."

Do you really believe some folks would have the problems they do with twi, had Wierwille lived a devout life? Let's take all the spin away, and answer that one question.

Some folks may not say outright they believe "everything" about twi was bad, but, they may just as well say it, because that's the way I read their writings. That's why, when I bring up some "good things" about twi-1, why do some folks get so angry and defensive and engage in sarcasm, namecalling and put-downs? I think because they don't really care what good happened and don't want to hear any of it because in their mind, it doesn't matter what good existed. To them, the evil is the only thing that has any real meaning.

I don't think I am misrepresenting and lying about those who think this way. It appears obvious to me by the way some people react to what I have to say that this is the way of things.

[alfakat]

quote:

---

Originally posted by WordWolf:

Alfakat also summarized the main points of the above as follows:

"Yes, Virginia, of course there was GOOD AND GOOD TIMES IN TWI --

but it came to naught,

NOT cuz the debill didn't like us,

but because there was leaven-

i.e. error, evil, sin, what-have-you---

in the doctrine and practice of twit.

QED."

---

And, in rebuttal....

OM, you may replace Virginia's name with your own, if you like....

[oldiesman]

Alfakat, your rebuttal proves my point.

The godly elements of twi-1 just doesn't matter.

I think the folks who genuinely feel this way, should speak for themselves only because they can't speak for others who don't feel as they do, and certainly not me.

[alfakat]

OM -- ???????????????????????????

you talk out of both side of mouth, kimo sabe...

[alfakat]

so why did it, TWI, come to naught, then, OM????? cuz us peeps was all bad??? cuz ole vic slaved over us korks, but we was jess BADD!!???

huh?? why, om???

[oldiesman]

The fact that twi-1 as we know it came to naught, doesn't change the truths taught and assimilated there. They are ever enduring, for those who choose to stand fast on them. Those who choose to throw them away can do that if they wish. However, I don't think you can throw away eternal life. :)-->

[Steve!]

So in other words, the ends justify the means.

j@ckfoot.

[oldiesman]

quote:

---

That's why, when I bring up some "good things" about twi-1, why do some folks get so angry and defensive and engage in sarcasm, namecalling and put-downs? I think because they don't really care what good happened and don't want to hear any of it because in their mind, it doesn't matter what good existed. To them, the evil is the only thing that has any real meaning.

---

[rascal]

The teachings in twi were tainted by the teachers lack of spirituality and integrety....they are not to be trusted as a true representative of God or scripture....

Galations recomends we examine the fruit to determine if a man is of the spirit...and only then is he to be trusted.

I do not believe that a man of the flesh as wierwille was proven to be....could be trusted to accuratly represent the things of the spirit...I do not believe that he could accuratly recieve revelation from God as a man of the flesh.....

Truky, it would behoove us to honestly reexamine ANY teaching or *truth* recieved in twi from a proven man of the flesh....or teachers who learned from a man of the flesh.

So yeah I think dumping twi teachings and starting over fresh is a smart idea....God`s word warns us of being taken in by wolves in sheeps clothing.....I do not think it is wise to trust the wolves on any account....or to be gratefull for them....thankfull to them that you weren`t the one devoured......that is a far cry from *renouncing the word*

[oldiesman]

Would you then presume you dumped Proverbs a long time ago, because Solomon was a man of the flesh?

You know he was a sex addict, no better than Wierwille. He had 700 some odd wives? concubines? whatever. Solomon was a man of the flesh if there ever was one.

So then I guess that disqualifies any spiritual workings in his life, according to The Rascal Principle?

[alfakat]

from a more careful reading of Proverbs one might deduce:

A. Solomon was not the author of all of them.

B. What he did write was as a young man, when the Spirit of God was upon him. Apparently he later went his own way for much of his life, following his own lead and engaging in idolatrous sin. The bible indicates the Spirit left those who did such -- how much writing did he do for the true god then, om??? speak up, son, can't hear ya...

C. Vic wrote NO WORD OF GOD I know of unless you have joined Mike's crazy ministry of piffle-bible...

ergo, Solomon -- Vic, 2 horses, different (heteros) colors, no REAL comparison...

[excathedra]

i didn't know solomon personally

[GarthP2000]

Ahh yes, the old "Well David and Solomon were sinners too, yet they got 'The Wuurd'!" copou--err 'principle'.

And as it has been pointed out before, O stubborn one, the difference between David/Solomon, and your MOG Wierwille, is that both David, and later Solomon realized their errors and turned away from the crap.

When did Weirwille, hmmm? At all. Oh and, your _belief_ that he did just ain't good enough, dude. Because all you have to go on is the desperate hope that somehow, someway, on his deathbed in that couch, he somehow said "Ooopsie! I think I screwed up."

OM, if all you have to go on is Weirwille for your biblical info (The Wuuurd), ..... ((shakes head))

[alfakat]

how can canning twit teaching be compared to canning Proverbs?????????

when you can twit, you can pick up a Bible and read -- go ahead, om, you do this...millions have, have received of God's gift and knew nothing of twit...ergo, twit not same as proverbs or Bible in general QED.....

[rascal]

I do not think that you can use proverbs as an excuse to dismiss the clear instructions and warnings given in galations.

A man of wierwilles character was clearly not to be trusted...

I am sorry that you have based your spiritual understanding on a false prophets teachings...

I am sorry that you are going to have to begin all over again if you truly wish to understand.

It is a difficult but necessary process to get rid of the false teaching....and though what we were taught had a nugget of two of truth...our understanding has been so corrupted by the false teacher...by the leaven....as to become virtually useless.

It is a very hard thing to do...it takes honesty meekness....and guts...it takes admitting that we were decieved...

I really feel bad for anyone who feels like twi was the end all be all ministry for truth....simply because it has been revealed to be nothing but a pathetic substitute...and untill one sees it as such....you will be completely unable to replace the falseness .........you will forever be stuck trying to make a broken system function...forever accepting the blame for the failings.

[oldiesman]

quote:

---

....and though what we were taught had a nugget of two of truth...our understanding has been so corrupted by the false teacher...by the leaven....as to become virtually useless.

---

Rascal, speak for yourself please.

[rascal]

Oldies, I am sorry that you are unable to see past the falseness of what you were taught...this does not make it any less false.

I am sorry that you might spend the rest of your life trying to live within the confines of a lie.

[oldiesman]

Awwww Rascal, don't feel bad.

I'll be ok, really.

:)-->