All Activity

they give us those nice bright colours They give us the greens of summers Makes you think all the world's a sunny day, oh yeah

"I don't believe that for a second." Not "you'll have to provide a lot more specific information if you'd expect me to agree," but you've already drawn a conclusion. "This is how I know you go beyond legitimate criticism to cynicism." So, "legitimate criticism" is when you believe it, and "cynicism" is when you don't? Either you didn't mean what you said, or you have a standard of distinguishing which is which that is subjective and unsound. " I'll listen to legitimate criticism, like saying he was a serial adulterer, but he was a mixed bag at a minimum." So, it's not the evidence, the eyewitness accounts, the direct quotes from him, or other things that determine where you draw the line, but rather what you believe? Well, that's honest to admit, I'll give you that. A lot of people COULD say the same, but wouldn't admit it. "I was a college atheist when I took PFAL. I believed the Bible and have been growing in it ever since. I've got VP Wierwille to thank for that." So, you know he was genuine because you benefited and got God in your life. That doesn't necessarily follow. Him being genuine or false and you getting God in your life are actually not automatically connected. That is, I'll stipulate to your benefit. I'll stipulate you got godly after being exposed to twi, pfal and so on. I would even go so far as to say I could say the same of myself. (How's that for cynicism?) That having been said, there's a lot more to the story than "He was godly, so I benefited." You heard some things that seemed godly. A fake could easily plagiarize the work of legit Christians. A fake could easily reproduce their work, their sermons, and so on. A fake could easily deliver a sermon. A good fake could produce a sermon with an impassioned plea that brings tears to his eyes- and might do so to you. So, a successful fake COULD do everything we saw vpw do. We also know that the House of Acts Christians, the hijacked hippies, those were legit Christians who were making a stir- which is why vpw heard of them from several states away. We know the people THEY taught, the people THEY prayed for, they got love and deliverance. And they taught some people, and so on. So, then, if a fake and a real preacher could both produce the same results as vpw- either through sincere work and dedication to God or through dedication to maintaining a cushy living and the means to keep it- how do we tell the difference? We look at the man himself. When we look at them when the cameras are on, we will probably see the same thing- a display of piety and sincerity. (A SUCCESSFUL fake won't be so easy to catch.) It's when the cameras are off that we will find out what the men are like. Let's say a man dedicates his life to God. Is he going to "walk the walk" as well as "talk the talk"? The answer should be obvious. But in twi, even what filters down to the local level is oddly permissive. No injunctions to moral living, EVER. We heard about God's PERMISSIVENESS, though. How far does this go? vpw had been at it for over a decade when he went to meet the hippies to recruit them. When he spoke privately to J1m D00p, he had a conversation that made no sense to J1m. vpw questioned him repeatedly about what it was like TO ATTEND AN ORGY. He told JD, speaking of ORGIES, that "THAT'S ALL AVAILABLE." His justification for that at the time was to tell him that I Corinthians 8:1 uses the word "GOOD" instead of "BEST" and so therefore, Christians could ATTEND ORGIES. JD was shocked, said he thanked God he was not in any of that, and changed the subject. Now, George Carlin once pointed out that a sin can have steps- that is, not be an impulse of an instant. "It was a sin for you to WANT to feel up Ellen, it was a sin to PLAN to feel up Ellen, it was a sin to FIGURE OUT A PLACE to feel up Ellen, it was a sin to TRY to feel her up, and it was a sin to feel her up! There were 6 sins in one feel, man!" All joking (and comedians) aside, he had a point. That sin involved PREMEDITATION AND PLANNING. He felt an impulse to sin. Rather than "flee fornication", he made occasion-and opportunity- for the sin. He worked out a location, made a plan, and put the plan into action. At this point, I'm pretty confident you'll just hand-wave it away, since it isn't what you think. However, when it came to the Way Corps, vpw had worked out a FEW places he could molest or rape women. GOING FROM THE REPORTS OF THE WOMEN WHO CAME FORWARD, I know of at least 2 that he used- his private bus, and his private office. He kept alcohol in both. OK, keeping alcohol in either is proof of nothing- although it suggests a possible drinking problem. But, by itself, proof of nothing. All Corps candidates were required to write an autobiography when applying, "From Birth to the Corps." In it, some of them mentioned they had a history where they survived sexual abuse. Now, survivors of sexual abuse are often easier to abuse later because of their previous conditioning and experiences. This, also, is proof of nothing when by itself. Now, consider the scenario. This was repeated in testimony after testimony of women who came forth, women who came here, and were called liars, were yelled at, were shouted down, were called whores by vpw fans, and who STILL came forward. The Corps was on the farm, in the middle of nowhere. The only people for miles were the people in the program and the staffers of twi. Women were there. Occasionally, a woman whose Corps paper said they'd survived rape was called privately to a private audience with vpw, either on the bus, or in the office. They attended. vpw greeted them- AND HAD THEIR AUTOBIOGRAPHY IN HIS HAND. He offered them a drink, and engaged in small talk for some time. Then his speech focused on their personal history. He offered to help heal them of their previous trauma. He was going to do that by showing them sexual contact with him, which was going to erase the trauma or overwrite it. "I'll show you what's good about being a woman." (And so on.) Some women were too shocked to react quickly, a few ran. A number mentioned falling unconscious. No, that's not a woman swooning, that's a woman who accepted a drink that turned out to be drugged, and passed out when the drug took affect. When they woke up, some woke up with vpw doing things to them. What happens next? Each woman leaves his presence. IMMEDIATELY, one of a handful of twi insiders appears and talks to them. The woman is subjected to an indoctrination about what a blessing that was, how they should feel good about it, and so on. The insider also observed their reactions. Women who looked like they might tell someone were rushed off of grounds before they could talk. A pretext for kicking them out of the Corps was constructed and presented. They were made to feel like trash, then put on a slow Greyhound bus home. As soon as they left but before they got home, the locals where they lived were phoned and given an earful about all the problems of this woman- most of them manufactured completely. If she told anyone when she got home, she was disbelieved- EVEN BY HER OWN FAMILY. LOTS of women came forth. According to the Bible, a multitude of witnesses whose accounts agree should be believed. I don't know what you're going to do. What it sounds like is that vpw made lengthy arrangements for the Corps where he was able to sort through the candidates and find women he was likely to be able to rape or molest successfully. Then he made lengthy arrangements for places where he was likely to be successful to rape or molest them- privacy, and so on. Then he made lengthy arrangements to have specific women isolated and brought to him- with no witnesses- and for one of a small handful of people to try to keep her from telling on him, and spying to make sure she wasn't going to talk. Then, those who looked likely to talk were kicked out, demeaned, and their reputations were savaged to keep anyone else from believing them. After all, vpw was The Man of God For Our Day and Time. Who would believe such things of him? That "one" woman must be lying for some reason.

I remember reading your remark about victor not being a true believer. At one time, I seriously considered it a possibility. But now I consider it a probability. It all makes sense with that in mind. His Corps letters, his rambling platitudes of so much nothing (Mmmph!), his overwhelming fear of having to answer questions... It just fits like a hand in a... Ehrman and McClellan took their academic pursuits much farther than victor was capable of, yet they did NOT lose their faith. (Ehrman has said repeatedly over the years that it was the problem of suffering, not training in textual criticism, that caused him to lose his faith.) ------ To the point about victor's laziness and appetite for big returns on small investments, look at his ThD. Theological and Biblical scholarship was on the rise mid-20th century. More ministers were being academically credentialed than ever before. With credentials comes marketability. The laity confers value and authority to preachers with letters behind their names. Congregations swell, books sell. To meet this new demand for competitive market-readiness, diploma mills started popping up everywhere. Enter Pikes Peak Bible Seminary. Victor's dumb luck was pure genius.

I don't believe that for a second. This is how I know you go beyond legitimate criticism to cynicism. I'll listen to legitimate criticism, like saying he was a serial adulterer, but he was a mixed bag at a minimum. I was a college atheist when I took PFAL. I believed the Bible and have been growing in it ever since. I've got VP Wierwille to thank for that. I wasn't a follower of Dr Weirwille. Ive studied the Bible myself and ran with a number of different churches through the years. When I was disappointed in or kicked out of them I took my Bible and Jesus and kept on going.

Love Wins All

This map will continually update. George

WW kind of sideswiped a theory I've been working under for the past few years. I've brought it up before but it bears repeating. I have a suspicion (not enough evidence to call it a theory) that VPW was an unbeliever at heart. In tribute to Mike's thesis about how Wierwille hid great truths in plain sight and we all missed it: He declared himself to be all but atheist after studying the Bible. He no longer believed the words Holy or Bible on the cover (which is grammatically and rhetorically stupid, but you get his point). Being educated about the Bible, its history and authorship caused him to all but lose his faith. He said so! What if he never regained it? Bear with me: what if, from that moment forward, it was never about getting God and His Word right, but getting while the getting was good? He got money. He got adoration, He got fame (relative to most of us). He got attention. He got sex. He got power. How much of what he did makes more sense if he didn't believe a word of it but knew how to manipulate people to get what he wanted from them? Every time he discovered a niche, he exploited it. "This book is not some kind of Johnny come lately idea just to be iconoclastic..." [if someone has the correct wording, please let me know. I'll be happy to fix]. Oh it WASN'T? Because it was so shoddy I would think that you were selling a title rather than a book. You have a doctorate. You know how to present and defend a thesis (stop laughing, you in the back row. @#$%ing Snowball Pete). But he was an unbeliever. He KNEW the scholarship about the Bible that people like Bart Ehrman and Dan McClellan are popularizing today. He knew and he stopped believing. And THAT is when the bulls hit started. The funny thing is, it doesn't negate anything he taught. Just his motives. If McClellan and Ehrman are right, the first Christians really weren't Trinitarians. They weren't what Wierwille espoused either, though some were. Jehovah's Witnesses actually got it right, if McClellan and Ehrman are correct. But even that conclusion presupposes a unified message from the New Testament writers. And they weren't unified. Here's the problem Wierwille exposed that a lot of Christianity still gets wrong. There WAS NO FIRST CENTURY CHURCH. There were first century churches. Tons of them. And they disagreed with each other about EVERYTHING. Another topic for another time. Bottom line, I'm increasingly coming to believe that Wierwille's rise and ministry can best be explained by the hypothesis that he was an unbeliever from the moment before he became relevant.

Mmmph This. I was raised with a unitarian theology - not the denomination. It was not reactionary doctrine. It was never anti-trinitarian. There was no axe to grind. It was just obvious for plenty of reasons. I didn't think the idea radical. I didn't need to be sold, but was reproved and corrected anyway for not being meek, for thinking I already knew something when how else could I learn unless I was taught! Exhausting. I couldn't even get through all of JCING, it was so weak, so embarrassing, so cringe.

Some of you might know about The International Cultic Studies Association, which is very helpful to people trapped in cults but want to get out, to those who've left cults, to those born into cults but got out, and families and friends concerned about "innies" they love. I've spoken at a couple of ICSA conferences and got to know one of the organization's executives, Michael Langone, PhD. He promoted Undertow for me and it's sold in the ICSA bookstore. Michael has his own website, too, that offers great info, like powerpoints which succinctly capture main issues with this complex thing we call a "cult." He knows what he's talking about, having spent many years counseling and teaching and working in this field. Here's the link: Michael D. Langone, PhD - PowerPoints, Selected Enjoy! Charlene Edge a.k.a. Penworks

I remember some lines a lot better than others from that movie.

I think- I may be misinformed- that the modern Christian Ecumenical movement started up after World War I and picked up steam here and there since then. I've met with Christians of different groups down the years, and some of them were just fine interacting and working together. That's been true in at least 2 countries as far as my personal experience goes. (I can't vouch for what I haven't personally experienced, but I would be highly skeptical if someone claimed I found the only Christians in both countries that are cool to work together.)

It was taught in twi- and in NYC in twi when both you and I were in- that if someone was an ordained minister, and later resigned, they forfeited all their rewards from God. No explanation nor verses were mentioned with this, of course. As far as twi is concerned, you leave twi, and God will take away everything, period. That may include your life, and those of your loved ones! As you pointed out, twi's answer if you left and prospered, was that the devil was causing you to prosper, since they already said God wasn't going to do it. As I see it, twi has been out of God's operations, and has been made to prosper by the devil- when they prospered.

"...it's not even a sin to eat meat on Fridays anymore..... but I bet there's still guys in hell on a meat rap! 'I thought it was retro-active! I ate a baloney sandwich. This guy had a beef jerky.' How'd you like to do Eternity for a beef jerky?"

To be bluntly honest, out of all the books carrying vpw's name, that one was so shoddy I would expect it to be the one most written by him, and least written by others. I think he may have used some basic reference books in the beginning, including the Encyclopedia Brittanica, but that seemed to be it. JCOP and JCOPS were well-written- and were done by the research department. vpw came along later, added the intros, and put his name on the covers. The Studies in Abundant Living were basically typewritten sermons- transcripts of some teachings he did, later edited as well. Those read like sermons. (Some of their content was obviously plagiarized, also.) The Orange Book and the White Book had contents directly taken from Leonard, Stiles and Bullinger, mixed and matched a bit here and there. But JCING was almost a vanity project. (He left signed copies at church doors once.)

What's the difference between sincerity and insincerity? Anyone should be able to tell you. Someone who is sincere means what they say, and someone who is insincere does not mean what they say. So, a man intentionally selling shoddy material, and knowing it is shoddy, can make an impassioned diatribe about how fine the products are- but he would not be SINCERE. He would be FAKING by making a FALSE DISPLAY resembling sincerity. vpw spoke a number of times on what sincerity was, including from the ROA main stage, where the microphones recorded him for posterity. He said that the man who tries to sell you a toothbrush with only one bristle on it has to be REALLY sincere. Why do I make a point of this? it's simple once you look at it. To vpw, for him to be "sincere" was a matter of THE APPEARANCE of sincerity, and NOT THE REALITY of sincerity, NO SUBSTANCE to his "sincerity." vpw carried on, in effect, as 2 people. When in private, he was a petty, venal, greedy man, an alcoholic, a plagiarist, a molester and a rapist. (And so on.) When he was in public, he stepped into character as if he was performing on stage. When the cameras were on, he was a humble servant of God, who cared only about what God cared about, and knew that a man should neither molest nor rape women. (It was IMPLIED in CFS.) That's why the real vpw made it mandatory for all pfal students to begin by studying the booklet on why they should tithe, and came up with "abundant sharing" and pushed that a lot, and why he was unique in all of Christendom and came up with "plurality giving", which was his term and concept- where you figure out exactly what you need for day-to-day living, and donate ALL THE REST OF YOUR MONEY to twi. No saving, no investing, no putting aside to buy newer or nicer things. vpw never "turned from" a humble, dedicated service to God because he never began on that path. He began by looking for a career with the least work and the most possible benefit that he could manage. From there, he used people and used up people, and found financial and temporal benefits in doing so- at their expense. Perhaps there will be a place for him in the special hell- where they send child molesters and people who talk in the theater.

Before you ever heard of him. It comes as a shock to a lot of people when they see many of the details that were kept out of the public eye. (It certainly was a shock to me, long ago!) According to vpw's own account, before he went into the ministry/church work, he considered a few different careers- business, entertainment, and ministry. He decided on ministry. (No, it wasn't a calling.) One of the more shocking things, for me, was right in "the Way- Living in Love." That was when vpw admitted that he had gone to divinity school, had been assigned a congregation, and had been giving weekly sermons FOR ABOUT A YEAR... BEFORE EVER BELIEVING THE BIBLE WAS GOD'S WORD. Furthermore, in his first 2 years as a pastor, he TWICE considered just giving up. Ever hear how he spoke about OTHER people who thought about giving up? He said they weren't worthy to be Christians. It continues from there. He made decisions consistently purely on the financial sense. When he heard about BG Leonard's class, he contacted Leonard, who told him a class was already in progress, and to contact him after it ended. vpw immediately traveled to where he was teaching the class, and demanded to be allowed to join the current one. He retook it a few months later. Then vpw asked for permission to teach Leonard's class on "the Gifts of the Spirit" on a one-time basis, locally. Leonard agreed. A few months later, Leonard received a photo of the grads of "his" class, and was told it went well. The end. As for vpw, when he began the class, he told all the students it was his OWN class on "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today." After that, vpw continued to teach Leonard's class, calling it his own. He continued to change it, and called it PFAL. He added a lot of material from Bullinger, primarily from "How to Enjoy the Bible." vpw also took Stiles' book on "Gifts of the Holy Spirit" and repackaged it as the White Book, "Recieving the Holy Spirit Today." Later editions of the book include a changed introduction- with the change making it sound like it was all a book that was the result of vpw and God and nobody else's work- but the earlier editions mentioned an anonymous man vpw found eventually who could teach him this subject. That man was Stiles- who taught him face to face, and whose book vpw ripped off entirely. BTW, the reason the definitions of the manifestations sound so cumbersome is that vpw kept changing them to make them sound different from Leonard's, but never changed them to reflect a deeper understanding of them, or even a clearer explanation. The little group grew very slowly. When vpw heard about the House of Acts Christians, he rushed over there. He performed his full act, and managed to convince many of the kids there that himself was some great one. He took a new, vibrant movement of God's people and strangled it, diverting many of the early people into becoming the sales force for twi. Many of them taught new people, who taught other new people. This was an unintended consequence- they were just supposed to sell people on pfal and twig and tithing. Ever have a really blessed time at twi? That was the accidental result of those people teaching others, and those people teaching still others. WHEN THE CAMERAS WERE ON, vpw was a humble man who didn't care about his own name, and was entirely about God's Word. WHEN THE CAMERAS WERE OFF, it was either his way or the highway. He kicked out an entire year of the corps, then the next day allowed them to rejoin- if they'd swear allegiance to him personally. He considered twi his personal piggy bank, and its belonging as his own belongings. So, he never GOT ON The Word. What he "got on" was making a display of being about The Word.

I guess we'll need to hang this one up. It's "Feel My Love" , made popular by Adele. HERE is another really nice cover, with beautiful harmonies. FREE POST!

No, it was first recorded in 1997.

I've only seen a few minutes of Pulp Fiction. George

The rhythm reminds me of "Like a Rolling Stone." Is that it? George

This is a Dylan song that's been covered over 450 times, excluding various YouTubers. Twice, it's reached the #1 spot on different charts.

Thx Raf just ordered it from Amazon... looking forward...

I'm not aware of any such allegation.

Does anyone know if vpw plagiarized someone's work for the Jesus Christ if Not God book?