Talk:The Way International/Archive 4

message: I am very curious about the various editors' relationships to or experiences with TWI as it seems these must be strongly influencing this conversation. As a newer member of this discussion, is this something which would or should be disclosed here or would I be better to ask each of them privately?. AlanMcL 00:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Way International 

message: While I think it's important that the basic doctrines of The Way are outlined here, to give readers an idea of what The Way is; I think that incluidng the "adoption of children" section is a bit obscure. The "5 Gift Ministries" section IS relevant IMHO since it connects to their whole theory of leadership. Unless we're going to print summaries of every segment of PFAL, why is 'adoption of children" included?Ten of Swords 14:02, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beliefs and Practices 

message: "They also maintain that the 19 prayers Jesus Christ prayed in the Gospels prove that he is an individual distinct from God and not God himself." - Is this from the book or something? Obviously I can't know everything that is maintained obviously but just wondered where this is from? Thanks! Lsjzl 23:22, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nature of Jesus

message: I'd like to discuss how much information we should have in each of the "Beliefs and Practices" subsections.
While I think that it's important that the areas where TWI differs from mainstream, or orthodox Christianity are highlighted and that these ideas are presented in a neutral fashion, i.e. not spinning them as either "truth" or "heresy", some of the subsections are like mini "teachings". I hasten to add that the person who added them to the article did a good job of retaining a NPOV, so that's not the issue.
An example of what I'm talking about are the subsections on tithing, gift ministries, adminstrations and sonship rights. There's just too much. Examples of what I would consider good, concise subsections are "The Dead Are Dead" and "Eternal Life Cannot Be Lost". The point is made without belaboring it.
I'd like to get some consensus on this, rather than wholesale deletions.Ten of Swords 19:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: How Much is Enough?

message: The Way teaches that Jesus Christ had no existence before birth except in the mind of God. That though Jesus was a perfect sinless man, he was only a man, not God.
Wierwille asserted that God and Jesus Christ are separate, independently-thinking entities who are literally father and son. He holds that Jesus Christ did not exist until God created a fertilized egg in Mary's womb and that he did not have any consciousness until she gave birth to him.
Regarding the Holy Spirit, Wierwille taught that there was a distinction between "The Holy Spirit" and "holy spirit". The former refers directly to God the Father while the latter refers to an emanation or power from God (a.k.a. "the gift of holy spirit").Ten of Swords 01:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested shortening: "The Nature of Jesus Christ":

message: The Way teaches that Jesus was raised on Saturday and that there were four people crucified with Him, not two. Wierwille points out different Greek words were used for those crucified with Jesus in the different gospel accounts, as well as discrepancies in timing, statements, and actions of the characters in the narrative.Ten of Swords 01:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested Shortening: "Four Crucified With Christ":

message: Only those born-again (i.e., believers who lived after Pentecost) will be gathered together with Jesus Christ upon his return. Everyone who died before the day of Pentecost (including the men and women of the Old Testament), everyone who has lived after Pentecost and are not born-again, and those who live in the tribulation period will be raised in the "Resurrection of the Just" or the "Resurrection of the Unjust". Until that time the dead are not conscious or in any way "alive" until the resurrections or "gathering together". Ten of Swords 02:42, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Combining of "The Gathering Together" and "The Dead Are Dead" - Death & Resurrection

message: The Way teaches tithing (giving 10% of one's income) as a minimum requirement of giving. Additional giving is called "abundant sharing". An additional term, "plurality giving", was coined to refer to calculating the amount of money you need to live on, and giving all the rest. Ten of Swords 03:08, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested shortening of "Tithing"

message: The Way teaches that there are nine "manifestations of holy spirit" (not "gifts" as other denominations describe them) and that every Christian has the inherent ability to operate all nine. These "manifestations" are listed in 1 Corinthians 12:7-10 King James Version. The Way maintains that speaking in tongues energizes and enables the "effectual operation" of the other 8 manifestations.
According to Wierwille, speaking in tongues is " ... the believer's external manifestation in the senses world of the internal reality and presence of the power of the holy spirit". According to The Way, speaking in tongues can only be interpreted in a meeting where other believers are present and can never be interpreted in a believer's private prayer life. Numerous benefits that derive from speaking in tongues are taught. Ten of Swords 03:19, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: How about combining "Manifestations" and "Speaking in Tongues"? - Manifestations of Holy Spirits/Speaking in Tongues

message: The Way teaches that there are five "gift ministries", or abilities of service, that Jesus Christ gave to the Church. They derive their list of "ministries" (apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers) from Ephesians 4:11, although the exact term "gift ministries" is not found in the bible. The Way holds that these five "abilities of service" are inherent capabilities in every believer, and are gifts from God to the church.Ten of Swords 17:05, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested Condensed "5 Gift Ministries"

message: The Way teaches that there are seven administrations, or distinct periods of time governed by certain promises and commands God has given Man at key points in history. Therefore there are parts of the bible that are written to us in this "administration" and other parts that are not, but are "for our learning".Ten of Swords 17:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested Condensed 7 Administrations

message: The Way teaches that every Christian has five basic rights as sons and daughters of God. These fundamental rights are righteousness, redemption, justification, sanctification, and the ministry of reconciliation. Ten of Swords 21:42, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestion for condensed "Sonship Rights"

message: The whole section on "adoption of children" is really an extention of the belief that eternal life cannot be lost, wouldn'tcha say?Ten of Swords 21:45, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Combine Eternal Life Cannot Be Lost" with "Adoption of Children"?

message: Only those born-again (i.e., believers who lived after Pentecost) will be gathered together with Jesus Christ upon his return. Everyone who died before the day of Pentecost (including the men and women of the Old Testament), everyone who has lived after Pentecost and are not born-again, and those who live in the tribulation period will be raised in the "Resurrection of the Just" or the "Resurrection of the Unjust". Until that time the dead are not conscious or in any way "alive" until the resurrections or "gathering together". Regarding Luke 23:43 ...And Jesus said unto him, "Verily I say unto thee, today shalt thou be with me in paradise." The Way teaches that it is more accurately translated, "Verily I say unto thee today, thou shalt be with me in paradise." (Note the placement of the comma) They point out that the resurrections of the just and the unjust, as well as the gathering of the Church to Christ, are still future events. Ten of Swords 23:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Combine "Death & Ressurection" with "Heaven & Paradise"?

message: I don't recall ever hearing Darby mentioned nor ever seeing him noted in any Way written materials. While I don't doubt that his "dispensationalism" and Wierwille's differ, did TWI "reject" Darby?Ten of Swords 02:21, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Darby and his dispensationalism

message: Suspending of the ROA because of at least a suspicion of sexual activities among the teenagers was stated by Martindale himself to be one of his reasons...so why take it out? The same with the allegations of sexual misconduct. True, these allegations have never seen the inside of a courtroom, but it's indisputable that the allegations themselves contributed to the change in Presidency of TWI. I agree with the restoration of these comments because they are demonstrable reasons for change within TWI.
Regarding the allegations of "love bombing" - THE GROUP was alleged to participate in this, not just "some" in the group. So, the allegations initially appeared in the 70's...do they not continue to this day? If so, why take them out?Ten of Swords 19:27, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removing Unflattering Comments

message: Whether it was true or not, Chris Geer's "Passing of the Patriarch" made allegations of an unbiblical direction and lack of biblical leadership by Martindale. Removing references to the "oath of allegience", painting those who left as not wanting to "stand with Martindale" and being a hinderance to "the ministry", is skewing the POV toward Martindale. A NPOV does not assume that either side was/is right.Ten of Swords 19:28, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV regarding motivations for late 80's split

message: If we're going to turn this article into a PFAL recap...listing doctrine after doctrine, why are the "kookier" ones being edited out? (Thanks Feldspar for restoring) - by "kookie" I mean things like original sin = masturbation or lesbian sex with the Devil...these were things that were being taught, and certainly fall under the category of "controversial"
Wierwille's assertion that adoptions could not be reversed under Roman law has not been substantiated, so it is merely Wierwille's opinion. I googled Roman adoption law and could find no reference to it being irreversible. The qualifier "...that Wierwille said..." should remain.
While it is correct that Wierwille did some of his own Aramaic research (members of his former research team may credit him to less than many think) and Wierwille DID make the statements about "lama" and "lmana" in his class, why would the pointing out of a disagreement between two of TWI's published works be edited out?
Wierwille's teaching about the original sin of mankind was well known within TWI, and recorded in the class "Christian Family & Sex". Why was it deleted?
Martindale's teachings about "without form and void" and the original sin of mankind are also recorded in his Way of Abundance & Power (WayAP) class. Ten of Swords 19:39, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removing Unflattering Doctrinal References

message: In the beliefs and practices section, the phrase adoption of children was explained according to Wierwille's teachings. He always taught that Roman adoption law prohibited reversing or annulling the adoption whereas a natural son COULD be disinherited. In searching a number of websites regarding Roman adoption I could find no reference to the adoption being necessarily permanant or irreversible, so the section was changed to indicate that Wierwille CLAIMED or STATED that it said that. This was still accurate since he did STATE that, but my change took it out of the realm of certainty.
One poster changed it back, Pete reverted it to my change.
This small change is a good example of how it's easy to cross the line between simply reporting what TWI taught and putting the stamp of truth on some of his unsubstantiated statements. If there is no evidence that Roman adoption law said what Wierwille said it said, why put it in the article as if there where? Ten of Swords 17:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Roman Adoption (Good example of taking Wierwille's word for it)

message: I took out a sentence saying that he "let" other people teach at events besides himself. It's ridiculously obvious. It would be worth noting if he REFUSED to let other people teach when dozens of people are supposed to take the podium, or at multiple locations simultaneously. EVERYBODY has other people do sermons or lessons SOME of the time! Is TWI supposed to be so substandard, LCM so miserable, that this needs to be stated outright? Pete Snowball 18:15, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  L.Craig Martindale

message: I added a notation to the Family Tables link. They're not ALLOWED to have non-current TWI members post there. (They got in trouble when they DID.) So I said as much. This will save any miscommunication when someone NOT a member tries to join because they saw the link here. Pete Snowball 12:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Current Member Sites

message: To say that allegations "continue to this day" is first, not accurate, and second, seems to be indicative of a recurring anti-TWI, anti-Wierwille POV (which just blows me away ... I've never seen or heard of a man more dedicated to studying and teaching the Bible and have never seen a ministry or church more in-depth in the biblical research behind what they teach - how you can have hostility and animosity towards this man and this group is just ... mind-boggling). (Written by Stanley.)
The allegations continue to this day, your lack of information on them notwithstanding. As to what is indicative, we've hewn to what can be PROVEN, since including the details of the people whose lives were supposedly destroyed by VPW HIMSELF and LCM HIMSELF are not appropriate for Wikipedia, whether true or not. We haven't been trying to sneak them in, either. You, however, have had little difficulty labelling TWI's doctrines as "the truth", calling official documents (like LCM's admissions he engaged in improper sexual activity) lies, deletion of DOCUMENTED things you don't like (such as teachings by VPW and LCM which don't cast them in a favorable light), and the like. When something we dislike is documented, we leave it there. When something you dislike is documented, you seek to delete it. Most people can see the difference.
Oh, and if you haven't "seen or heard of a man more dedicated to studying and teaching the Bible and have never seen a ministry or church more in-depth in biblical research behind what they teach", then I'd recommend getting around some. Do you REALLY want to know why we have "hostility and animosity"-or are determined to show that there's a negative side to his story- or don't you? I'm amazed you have been determined to not know ANY of the reasons-a quick websearch will show MANY of them.... Pete Snowball 18:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsubstantiated Allegations w/ an Anti-TWI POV

message: There's a couple of things that I think would make it more readable: (Stanley already started this by putting subtitles in the Beliefs and Practices section)
Eliminate the subtitle "controversial teachings" and subtitle each subsection. One reason is that the doctrine in that section isn't any more "controversial" than the other stuff and I wonder if we're putting a pejorative label on it by using the term "controversial". 
There's also some duplication that can be cleaned up as well; for example, I think that the Way's teaching on the Trinity (or lack of the same) is covered in three different places. 
Also, where do we want to the section on L Craig Martindale? Right now it's plopped into the middle of "Beliefs and Practices" - any suggestions? 
None of this should cause any argument, but I thought I'd throw it out if anyone else wanted to help clean things up a bit.Ten of Swords 16:04, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure of the article 

message: (you can help!)
1. To start trimming this long page down I removed the semi-complete list of published works. This already exists under another page and was simply linked to. Lsjzl 21:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "*Belizean BRC Bookstore" link was removed - why an Ebay bookstore should be linked to is beyond me. Lsjzl 16:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  "*The Christian Critic's Movie Parables - http://www.christiancritic.com/" was removed. Yes his bio says he is a current member and that his reviews get mentioned in Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB etc. But I doubt on his own he would be notable nor really does it help this article. I am tempted to say the same thing for the cortright pages on the 4 crucified and Mark and Avoid links. Lsjzl 13:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cutting down 

message: (It should be noted that Wierwille lacked any experience, background, or interaction with the USMC, and thus based any claims about them on their media image and third-hand reports at best.) .. was removed for discussion.
I am not clear on why it should be noted? Is there some claim here to the contrary that needs to be corrected? I believe the way the article states the inspiration for the Way Corps doesn't leave any other impression. Lsjzl 22:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps it should be noted because The Way Corps bore little if any resemblence to The Marine Corps. The inspiration comment, in my opinion, leaves the impression that The Way Corps were trained in some fashion like The Marine Corps. Ten of Swords 02:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  USMC 

message: Please place new items at the bottom of the page. Lsjzl 16:24, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Note

message: Removed this section:
Interestingly, his theory would explain exactly what dark matter is ... it would explain where the bulk of the unseen mass in the universe is and in what form it is.
as it smacks of Original Research (in a sense) 
To be honest so does other parts like the capitalization of words about lama, but anyway I recorded this here in case the author wishes to discuss. Lsjzl 22:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dark matter 

message: Critics charge that the beliefs of the group are not consistent with orthodox Christian beliefs, and some accuse the group of being a cult.
Doesn't this say the same thing as if it is a different idea? maybe change the end to "which is one of the reasons some accuse this group of being a cult." or "which some take to mean that this group is a cult." Which is awkwardly worded but just an idea. Lsjzl 14:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Inconsistancy with Christian orthodoxy and cult status are related, but not universally. Some equate cults with practices and abuses, rather than beliefs, while others use beliefs as their guidelineTen of Swords 02:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Gotcha, so in reality it seems that the way the line is stated does ensure that both points are made. Lsjzl 04:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Closing line of opening