When I was in college, I took "Nature of Religion". (It satisfied the distribution requirement, I was able to get in the class.) There, the class was largely about how all religions were the same and all religions were fake. Considering how we began with Eliade, it was possible to teach the class with some leeway for believing SOMETHING was out there, that different experiences of the divine counted for something or at least MIGHT - but that's not the direction this teacher took. (Frankly, he conformed to the worst stereotypes mentioned in twi.)
During the class, I noticed something which said a lot about the teacher's worldview. When he covered things that might have multiple explanations, he did at least 2 things I found unusual. One, he taught ALL the answers, and gave them all equal weight and said them as if each was THE answer and they weren't contradictory. Two, he never seemed too concerned about actually finding out what was factually correct. As in, "Why did these people say this? They meant..." with contradictory explanations different times and no concern that he contradicted the previous class. His history was also sloppy but matched what he wanted to say.
Ever wonder about why gladiators waited for thumbs up or thumbs down before killing? The historical truth is that they looked for a single signal- the thumbs up or the thumb HIDDEN. The thumb UP meant to stab the knife, to kill. The thumb HIDDEN meant to refrain from stabbing, let him live. My teacher taught that it was thumbs up or thumbs down, and that thumbs up originally meant to kill, and that it was an easier way to signal a nod from a distance, and that the nod was what was being conveyed. (He was on a kick about the head and religious practices, and apparently everything was about the head and sky for about 5 minutes- they everything was about the earth for another 5 minutes.)
We got much the same thing in pfal. vpw's explanations were sometimes all over the map and contradicted each other. This should have been a sign he wasn't paying attention, that he was spitting back rote answers without understanding them- otherwise he would have noticed what contradicted. So long as he got the money, he didn't really care when his explanations didn't make sense or contradicted. As has been pointed out.... "God is Spirit, and GOD CAN ONLY GIVE WHAT HE IS" was right in pfal, and doesn't make one lick of sense. "God gave manna. God is not manna." His explanation sometimes said God could only give what He is, and sometimes said He could only communicate with spirit- which was STILL wrong because God communicates with flesh all the time, via the 5 senses or some other way. Ask Adam and Eve if they were still communicating with God after "they lost spirit." The insistence that ALL of His communications with man had to have spirit slapped onto a man conditionally to receive a message from God, then it was taken away IMMEDIATELY was an odd rationalization that neither made sense on paper nor was backed up with verses. (Prophets yes, Joe down the street for 4 minutes, no.)
This was glaringly obvious in the Advanced class, with the writing on the wall. The inability to understand the writing was "explained" by saying Nebuchadnezzar had spirit put on him and that's how he read writing that was only visible to spirit, and that's why the wise men didn't understand it. FF Bruce had already explained what the problem was decades before, in a book sometimes carried in the twi bookstore! vpw was a lazy student. Bruce said that the words were perfectly visible, but, without the vowels, they either meant "weighed, numbered, divided" in one language, or "a dollar, a fiver and some change" in a different language.
Anyway, wierwille's explanations contradicted each other or common sense because he didn't understand what he was passing along, and didn't really care as long as people went along with it. For a conman, this is not a surprise. For an alleged minister, it's a disgrace.