Outlandish statements

[changedagain]

I suppose if I had to name just three outlandish statements/teachings that came from the pulpit while in TLWF, they would be the following:
1. The Kingdom of God arrived in December of 1979. This was based on a vision John claimed to have seven years prior. When nothing outwardly appeared to change following the alleged establishment of the Kingdom, the scriptural explanation was that it (KD) would not come by observation. In other words, it was a matter of faith--acceptance of what he said. I know that there's generally a lot of respect for John on these boards--even though there's a consensus that TLWF has lost its way since his death--but does anyone here accept this statement today?
2. John's death brought down Satan. This statement, which came sometime in the mid-80's, brought some sort of solace to TLWF that John's death had not been in vain. I never really bought into it, and I can't remember it being repeated from the pulpit in the 90's.
3. Shiloh is the center of the universe. I really don't want to elaborate much on this one, lest my head spin. I'm having a hard enough time accepting Pluto's banishment from our planetary system. But I suspect this notion (Shiloh as the COU) had to do with a perception that Shiloh played a central role in dictating the events that would unfold in all creation...from Johns' perspective.

Anyway, I'm interested in what you guys think about the above statements. I'm not dreaming, right? I mean, they were taught at one point in TLWF...were they not?

[themissinglink]

Well, the 1979 date actually coincided with Adam Rutherford's tracking in the Great Pyramid, which also alluded to a paradigm shift into an uncharted period of time, which would also be undiscernable from the soulish realm.

As far as taking what John said, including visions, and accepting it blindly, that is in total contradiction to what he taught, as I have iterated at length in prior posts, so I won't belabor it.

A genuine and personal revelation is not something you can talk someone else into, or they can be talked out of it, remember? That does not preclude the need for scriptural foundation and confirmation to anchor, test and prove the revelation, as God doesn't confuse nor contradict Himself, and there are many voices that must be ruled out. Then confirming witnesses become clear. I truly believe that is a spiritual birthright as well, (to cry with a whole heart, and have God truly respond as promised) and have never been impressed with the coercion that is so much a part of the "convincing" method of proseletizing recruits for the Lord. It offends me, having been allowed to experience a firsthand breakthrough of the Living kind, I would not want to deny that right to reality, or usurp it from anyone. Unless the Spirit builds the foundation, the House will not stand.

Brother Hoyer also confirmed the timing in the structural mathematics of the scriptures, sharing in late 1979, that John had only 3 years left to complete his course or he would be out of time, and that soulish christians would only be a liability in the lack of clear revelation and the vulnerability to deception that comes from that plane of living.

}}John so rejoiced with anticipation in his eternally idealistic faith for every man, that Shiloh would respond to the call to see Hoyer complete his lifetime efforts there, with the support of spiritual yokefellow. Of course, very sadly, no one really grasped the moment in time with the depth necessary to lay hold earnestly, and another great loss for this hour, was the lack of assistance for Hoyer to conclude the translation. He was a real peer in that the clear confirmation of John's strategic positioning and battle was expounded in the revelation flow of the divine mathematics. All sounds like nonsense though, doesn't it. Foolishness to the carnal mind.

Part #2 I agree was preposterous, but an indication of much distortion to follow.

#3 I would agree with your suspected perception of a spiritual birthing anticipated. (Even the joy of housing Hoyers completion of the perfect translation there. Judgments were certainly turned loose through the vehicle, and we have yet to see if and how thoroughly Mercy will Triumph over Judgment, which grantedly begins in the House. ~and after all, of course Haleakala is the center of the Universe! :-}

May we all buy eyesalve and be enlightened by the Grace that only Divine Intervention can provide.


(In this and so much other controversy, it is an "inside job" ~beyond intellectual speculation.) ~ Link (just walkin')

[changedagain]

Missing Link,
Yes, I know John didn't preach blind acceptance--athough the culture later adopted this mindset--but that aside, does it witness to you that the KD arrived in 1979? If so, is/was it based on his teachings...the word he preached as the 'apostle to the Kingdom?'
BTW, I'm not going to question your assertion that Haleakala is the real center of the universe. I always suspected that could be true. But the tide was so strong the other way, I never gave it voice (until now). ;

[spaceman]

For me, its not exactly outlandish statements, but perhaps puzzling ones. Here are a few that continue to puzzle me.

1. "the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and violent men take it by force" (Matt 11:12 nasb)
This was the verse referred to during the violent intercession, and I just didn't get it.
Stern's Jewish New Testament translates this verse as follows "the Kingdom of Heaven has been suffering violence; yes, violent ones are trying to snatch it away." I guess I'm still confused!

2. I never did understand the doctrine of "another level conquered". Remember the song?

3. Submission to divine authority was another puzzle.

4. There's the others that have been discussed to some degree:
a. hitting God under the eye to get his attention
b. loosing the firstfruits?
c. apostle to the kingdom? Did you know that "apostle" means messenger?

I guess all I'm saying is that there are still ideas and doctrines from CLW that I struggle with and seek God's perspective on.

Shalom, Spaceman

[winterland]

Whatever happened to Brother Hoyer and his mathematical scripture work?

[louann]

I was at Shiloh when all that was going on with Brother Hoyer. I had heard of it prior to living at Shiloh from Brother Arvid Anderson of the Waukegan church. I can remember the mathematical types, scripture scholars, and computer whizzes (and computers, too) they brought in for the work.

What I heard (and this was well after you left Shiloh, Winterland) was that the mathematical structure did not work, and that it never would work. I heard this from some of those who were working with Bro. Hoyer. He left Shiloh sometime before all the stuff surrounding the final illness and death of JRS. If there is anyone out there who was involved with that work, it would be interesting to hear from you.

All the hoopla a few years ago about "The Bible Code" reminded me of Brother Hoyer.

About the three outlandish statements posited by "changedagain", I would say this:

1. All this about the Kingdom coming in 1979 reminds me of the predicted "second comings" of the Jehovah's Witnesses, among others. When the event did not happen, followers were told that the Lord had returned SECRETLY. Well, well, well. We have had some major "paradigm shifts" since 1979. Whether or not they had anything to do with the Kingdom of God remains to be seen.

2. This business of JRS' death bringing down Satan is preposterous and heretical. It was Jesus Christ, in His death and resurrection, who brought down Satan once and for all.

3. Shiloh is not the center of the universe, any more than is Rome, Salt Lake City, Washington DC, etc. The only city on earth which could even presume a claim such as this is Jerusalem. We were, IMHO, very close to a deadly hubris. Just my opinion.

[now_what]

spaceman

1. "the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and violent men take it by force" (Matt 11:12 nasb)
This was the verse referred to during the violent intercession, and I just didn't get it.


It was in context of spiritual violence, or intense focus would be another way to state it. The violent intercession was an attempt to break the tendency to passivity in things religious or spiritual. One of the great problems of Christianity is all the promises given to us and the lack of appropriating or walking in those promises.

God has given us much, if not all, but who has fought through their passivity, unbelief, demonic forces, etc...to obtain those promises? Not saying there were not violations, but I would take what we did over passive amens and enthusing over sermon after sermon, anyday.

Stern's Jewish New Testament translates this verse as follows "the Kingdom of Heaven has been suffering violence; yes, violent ones are trying to snatch it away." I guess I'm still confused!

This sounds like a very suspicious translation to me, I would check a few others to see if they agree. A queasiness to spiritual violence (certainly the scriptures and in TLW, no one was counseling physical violence) can be an excuse to avoid an intensity toward God.

2. I never did understand the doctrine of "another level conquered". Remember the song?

Goes to JRS teachings that we move into higher planes (spiritually)...the scripture from glory to glory would apply.

3. Submission to divine authority was another puzzle.

Scripturally there is no problem with that concept, in fact rebellion even to earthly (corrupt) authority was prohibited to the early church. I think people have differences in the application as we experienced it.

I guess all I'm saying is that there are still ideas and doctrines from CLW that I struggle with and seek God's perspective on.

Me too, but I have to also take into account that I may not be objective either, I have a vested interest in preserving my flesh. So I take with a grain of salt, even my own protests about experiences with TLW.

I think one of the larger problems we all had, especially in spiritual imaturity was putting too much focus on man, or leaders. As Samuel said, "I would they would all be Prophets of God."

[winterland]

Samuel might have said it too. But Moses said it in Numbers 11:29 So many things were just the result our own immaturity and the immaturity of the leaders.

[spaceman]

Hi now_what:

I appreciate your intensity and perspective, thanks. Regarding violent intercession: as the years go by, I find myself seeking God's perspective, and since Jesus lives to make intercession for us, I'm tending to speak agreement to His intercession and trust who He is and that He is faithful and able to fulfill His promises in His timing. It seems to generate a peaceful "intensity" while joining with Him for His will to be done.

Regarding submission to divine authority, I guess I'm more inclined to follow Jesus' example from John 2:24 NAS: "But Jesus, on His part, was not entrusting Himself to them, for He knew all men"
Also, Paul had comments in 1Cor 6:12 Amplified "Everything is lawful for me, but I will not become the slave of anything or be brought under its power".
I want to be subjected only to the Lord Jesus
and not to man or any other thing.

I must admit, tho' that these are still "sore" spots for me, and I continue to seek God's perspective on these and all issues.

shalom, Spaceman

[patience2]

Spaceman - I appreciate your perspective. I too had questions regarding the issue of violent intercession - and even later, the "blab it and grab it" variety of prayer. I was quite uncomfortable feeling as if I was telling our Father what to do for me (us, the church, world, etc...), or as you reminded me, "hitting God under the eye" to remind Him. An awakening took place in those days where I realized that as God is the Creator of all, omnipotent, omnipresent - who am I to be putting Him under subjugation to my desires or demands??? That is not to say that there isn't a time and place for violent intercession, but the defining question would be for me, is this coming from my flesh, or is it something that the Spirit is prompting me to do? There is a very big difference.

1 Corinthians 15:20-28 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when HE shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For HE must reign, till HE hath put all enemies under his feet.

Doctrinal / theological issues were always a stretch for me at the best of times, but the one thing I know is "greater is He that is in me than he who is in the world". What a relief!!

[winterland]

I am a little "fuzzy" in my thinking about the difference between prophecy and prayer. When I first came into the Walk, we were taught when we were going to prophecy in a service to listen for the "Keynote of the service" and then speak along this theme to "build up, stir up, and cheer up the body." Sometimes we would prophecy or pray to loose anything that seemed to be restricting the freedom of the service.

Later some of the prophecy and violent intercession was directed AGAINST certain people. How did this change happen? Was it a change in the doctrine of the Living Word about when and how prophecy and prayer should be used? Does anyone have any insight?

[winterland]

I guess it comes down to one thing--What was our identity? Were we a church? Were were a "break-through force" that the "unfolding of the ages was depending on?" Were we an organization dedicated to publishing and preserving John Steven's word? Sometimes I don't even think we knew our identity.

[winterland]

I think as we put John in a high place of importance and we put ourselves in a high place of importance (the fate of the ages was resting on us) the danger of misusing spiritual gifts also increased. We felt justified in praying against people and circumstances because we were protecting the "Lord's annointed." I remember the story of Moses and Korah being used a lot.

Also ministries that wanted a position felt justified by calling those that opposed them nephilim and jezebel.

Tabernacles is a good time to reflect on the old and new. I see how much my perspective on many things has changed. I see a lot of danger around the beliefs that some people carry "special annointings" and "special coverings." It is a lot safer to follow "THE ANNOINTED ONE.

[anothertraveler]

Did anyone here know John Bohlen? Or Royal Cronquest? Just curious

[changedagain]

I vaguely remember John Bohlen. Royal Cronquist was the pastor of the San Diego church for years.
Why do you ask?

[changedagain]

"I think as we put John in a high place of importance and we put ourselves in a high place of importance (the fate of the ages was resting on us) the danger of misusing spiritual gifts also increased. We felt justified in praying against people and circumstances because we were protecting the "Lord's annointed."

Well put, Winterland.

[muckmeister]

....just 2 comments....I don't ever remember anyone calling JRS "The Anointed ONE." We believed he was anointed, as anyone of us could be,...and/or become.....and...."The Center of the Universe" is a difficult concept since most of us cannot give up the beief in our own brain being the center of the universe.....self-anointed ones are we if we are NOT anointed by the Holy Spirit. I have found this belief to be prevelent in all Christianity! It was not absent from JRS's teaching....people tweaked it wrongly, yes. I believe JRS was anointed by the Holy Spirit, I never equated him with "The Anointed" one. To be an anointed on, The Holy Spirit through JRS taught us, was to be a "little one"...a needy one who understands his/her own human nature as being driven by our animal instincts....ie,,(our natures).http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/talker.gif