Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

Practical Error Always Leads to Doctrinal Error


Nottawayfer
 Share

Recommended Posts

This is something that was pounded in our heads for years in twi. That being said, why would we even trust VPW or Martinpuke with doctrine? I sure don't anymore. They were both manipulators of women sexually while they were married. I saw the doctrinal error creeping in through Martinpuke's teachings when he videotaped the "Believer's Family Class". VPW may not have been so blatant, but he definitely gave his OK on it in personal contact with people. "And if the MOG says it's OK, well then I guess I'll take the ball and run with it" is the attitude I saw. There was a MAJOR problem with sex in twi, and this was the cause of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People were aware for years that VPW at least had extramarital affairs. It wasn't until the internet that we found out about his manipulative ways with younger women.

I had a Trustee Cabinet wife tell me about VPW's sexual trists even before I left twitville. Her excuse was, "What do you do? Leave the Word?" It's sad to think that people can't think beyond the box of twitville even when they know something stinks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think it was an attraction for some.

It was very young people for the most part, he wanted to attract and then the sale of pfal was from young people, who eles can give all that was given to sell that class?

word of mouth and the fact they were not religous was a seling point for many, a type of rebellion in a very rebellous age, and time. The RC church was a model for many who got involved if they had any past dealings with church and the fact JC was not God really rebelled everything a parent had to offer and to rebel one needs to break free of much of what a parent offers as truth . PFAL set it up and it flew.

and the pill was getting popular the church never endorsed that and the sexual freedom the pill brought fit nice into vpw teachings about life and when it begins etc. The next step would naturaly be free sex.

the idea of grace in face of the turmoil many young ideals go through takes all the guilt or remorse from being sexual active. It is clear from his teachings that the fact he openly spoke of sex and females (the rise of womans liberation was also hot topic at the time) as equals haha fit into what the world was thinking not so much what Christ taught .

Look at the times the man knew how to sell his product, he truly bought into it himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the face of it, the idea that Practical Error Always Leads to Doctrinal Error is a ridiculous thing for someone who claims to be a christian to believe. Practical error would mean committing a sin. If it ALWAYS leads to doctrinal error that would mean that anyone who committs a sin is destined to teach or believe wrongly (depending how you define doctrinal error). That would seem to negate forgiveness and the ability to live a holy life in spite of being a sinner. Doesn't that go contrary to the fundamental idea of christianity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the point was that if someone knowingly sins, he'll develop a doctrinal "cover" to explain it away. For example, a "man of God" commits adultery. If he can twist an OT reference where a king commits adultery along with the medieval practice of "droit de seigneur," and then somehow contrive that a religious leader equals the "king" of our day, then BOOM! It's okay for him to be an adulterer. Practical error has led to doctrinal error.

Does this mean that it ALWAYS happens? No. The sinner could simple recognize his sin and repent. Or, it could be pointed out to him (as Nathan did to David in the OT record alluded to above); and he could repent. Without godly sorrow, though, doctrinal error is almost sure to follow.

George

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:
On the face of it, the idea that Practical Error Always Leads to Doctrinal Error is a ridiculous thing for someone who claims to be a christian to believe. Practical error would mean committing a sin. If it ALWAYS leads to doctrinal error that would mean that anyone who committs a sin is destined to teach or believe wrongly (depending how you define doctrinal error). That would seem to negate forgiveness and the ability to live a holy life in spite of being a sinner. Doesn't that go contrary to the fundamental idea of christianity?

I was only quoting what had been pounded in my head so many times while I was in twi. Since it was promoted so heavily during martinpuke's reign, wouldn't you think that some people would wake up and realize that the very principle they were taught negates the teachings they believe? I brought this up because it was an important point in my departure from twi.

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...