T-Bone

I was stuck in a phony college at Rome City for 2 years…man, that was a close shave.

At That Ain’t Hay Hot Rods they soup up cars the old fashion way - one horse at a time. Here we see owner and guitar operator of That Ain’t Hay Hot Rods , OldSkool checking on the miniaturization process of a Clydesdale which can take up to several weeks for large breed horses. OldSkool says the super-duper-ultra-trivialized-mighty-fine-equine is much easier to ‘invisiblize’ with Apparently Absent Paint since there is less mare to disappare…and cheaper to maintain too because there’s less steed to feed. One trick pony down - seven hundred and fifty eight more to go!

And for all those complicit with intellectual piracy there’s this: What Is Common Knowledge? | Definition & Examples (scribbr.com) Traditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property – Background Brief (wipo.int) Understanding common knowledge – Harvard Gazette

What’s ironic are the times when I have admitted being young and naïve to fall for wierwille’s con – and Mike jumps on that to say how smart and discerning he was to ignore wierwille’s ‘petty shortcomings’ and just absorb ‘The Word’. A weird role reversal for sure… maybe a pot calling the kettle black thing. "The pot calling the kettle black" is a proverbial idiom that may be of Spanish origin, of which English versions began to appear in the first half of the 17th century. It means a situation in which somebody accuses someone else of a fault which the accuser shares, and therefore is an example of psychological projection,[1] or hypocrisy.[2] Use of the expression to discredit or deflect a claim of wrongdoing by attacking the originator of the claim for their own similar behavior (rather than acknowledging the guilt of both) is the tu quoque logical fallacy.” From: The pot calling the kettle black - Wikipedia "oh, I feel so stupid! Why didn't I just ignore wierwille's petty shortcomings of plagiarism, delusions of grandeur, egocentrism, hypocrisy, moral depravity and just absorb 'The Word'...(then looking upward toward a predator's haven, with tears streaming down face - as seen on TV - hi Jimmy Swaggonmeister ) I have sinned Lord Anti-Idol !"

Me. While in-residence I think there was an unspoken shared understanding the corps had that wierwille was obviously over the research department - and it was assumed he 'directed' the analysis and 'selected' the findings by his 'great knowledge of the Word' with God's guidance of course.

wierwille will forever be remembered as an unabashed plagiarist by many ex-TWI followers. Being a flagrant pirate of intellectual property, wierwille doubled down on his fraudulent claims by saying biblical sounding stuff like “countries without Christ do not invent” and disparaged humankind’s cognitive and creative skills by pushing a rah rah spiritual elitism for Advanced Class grads saying “it’s not because you have such a high IQ - it’s because God has such a high IQ”. That is just a smidgin of the baloney on a Sunday Night Teaching tape “Carnal vs Spiritual “. It’s obvious wierwille had a low opinion of humankind’s cognitive and creative skills. I wonder what colored his attitude. Was he envious of legitimate scholars and creative people? People tend to be wary or even fearful of what they do not understand. I have a low opinion of wierwille’s cognitive and creative skills - but I will say this ‘creating’ a facade of a biblical research teaching and fellowship ministry has got to be sheer genius in any con artist’s book!

Damn! - I forget Keaton was in Jackie Brown… I haven’t seen that film in so long. I have that movie- collector’s edition ! I pulled it off the shelf, sat it by my day planner and will watch it in the next few days.

I'd worry his overdue library book fees are enormous...if so, maybe he should look at one of those debt-consolidation service...just a thought.

besides the fact that there is no such thing as the law of believing wierwille is NOT God and did not have the ability to peer into the mother's mind - END OF ARGUMENT ! the baseless theory you propose is about as preposterous as believing that miniature invisible horses are what moves cars and trucks. A man is showing off his 2022 Lamborghini Aventador and brags to the folks crowding around his car in the parking lot "this beast has 759 horsepower under the hood." People ooh and ahh - but one skeptic says "naw, how can you fit 759 horsepower under that hood?" An adamant believer from the Saint Vic Church of Nonsense shot right back, "you idiot, it's 759 miniature invisible horses." ~ ~ ~ ~ "In order to align our vocabularies with Dr’s," - whoa right there, partner! what if I don't want to align my thinking process with wierwille's weird and goofy vocabulary / re-definitions / concepts? ~ ~ ~ ~ chapter and verse, please. no essays please. please provide Scripture to support your theory that "The most efficient, maximum yield, spiritual use of the law of believing requires a promise of God" To assist you in being clear and concise I suggest you cite specific verses that show a clear correlation between the promises of God and the amount of yield being contingent upon one's incremental use of the law of believing - perhaps include a graph chart. ~ ~ ~ ~ in other words, there is no logical method to your analysis of wierwille's works. it seems you're always dumbing it down and obfuscating any real meaning so it fits in a sub-cultic mindset - my guess is that this particular subset of the typical wierwille-cult-mindset is unique - and hopefully a one-off mutation. ~ ~ ~ ~ Nope! you're reinterpreting wierwille's message to suit your own agenda - whatever that is - it's seems to change frequently. you're re-interpretations of wierwille's message look different from his, because they are! wierwille's message may have twisted Scripture, logical fallacies, and dubious speculations, whereas your stuff is bat-$hit crazy mercury running all over the place! ~ ~ ~ ~ what is the "believing muscle"? Where is that in the Bible? Chapter and verse please. No essays please. It's a shame you don't work on your communication skills. You tend to overcomplicate and obfuscate almost everything. I wish you'd take Rocky's advice and work on your communication skills - discussions with you might be possible then. And pay attention to the feedback you get from others – and use their comments and advice to help you hone your writing skills. I’m probably the last person you want to hear from about trimming down long posts…but if I may be so bold as to offer some constructive criticism: 1.reference other works besides wierwille’s. That may seem like a ridiculous suggestion – but hear me out. I’m aware most of your posts are in About the Way forum because it relates to wierwille – but this would go for doctrinal forum as well. I’m aware you lean heavily on wierwille doctrine – but you can argue for something he taught by not limiting yourself to just his works. You could cite the works of others – including commentaries, study Bibles, systematic theologies, biblical studies on select topics, hyperlinks, parallel translations (Bible Hub is great for that)and even secular works and hyperlinks if relevant to the topic. 2.embrace the Socratic method. That really is a group effort. It is NOT a gotcha game…rather it’s great for boiling things down to what’s essential and exposes logical fallacies too. Encourage cognitive skills in the discussion. I’ve referenced Bullinger’s Companion Bible and Bullinger’s How to Enjoy the Bible from both a positive and negative viewpoint – he was wacky on some stuff (4 crucified, dispensationalism, the NT canon), but good on other things (like literary structure, figures of speech). In light of # 1 – feel free to reference wierwille’s works or any TWI material – if something has validity it should be able to stand up to the most intense scrutiny. 3.respect common definitions and conventional intellectual standards. This should be no surprise to you – most Grease Spotters don’t think much of wierwille’s definitions and dubious credentials / accomplishments. And it doesn’t sit well with others when you declare the devil has a chokehold on academia. 4.rely on appropriate Scripture to make your point. Rather than writing a lengthy commentary or essay to make your case – try to find a verse or verses that plainly state your argument – and doesn’t require your audience to perform mental gymnastics – difficult and complex logical thought processes. For example, OldSkool’s and my reference to Matthew 5:18 King James Bible For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. ~ ~ ~ ~ hey WordWolf and all Grease Spotters on this thread please excuse me talking about writing with Mike - but I'm going on a hunch that he might be interested in developing his writing / communication skills to become better at sharing his ideas. One book that I review occasionally helps me in cutting down my wordiness: Amazon.in: Buy Write Tight: Say Exactly What You Mean with Precision and Power Book Online at Low Prices in India | Write Tight: Say Exactly What You Mean with Precision and Power Reviews & Ratings Another paperback I’m reading is Penwork’s newest book: From the Porch to the Page: A Guidebook for the Writing Life | Charlene L. Edge (charleneedge.com) PS – finish Undertow first ! If you like writing and sometimes struggle to get what’s in you out – keep an eye out for helps and hints from published writers. In Penworks’ newest book she also recommends: The Mystery of the Cleaning Lady: A Writer Looks at Creativity and Neu – UWA Publishing which I got the other day…I usually wind up reading 3 or 4 books at a time – depending on the subjects. In a given day I might block off an hour here and there – in between errands, and home maintenance, music projects, writing projects. Recently I've had 2 major shots-in-the-arm for creative writing; one was a suggestion from Penworks' guidebook for the writing life - and that was handwriting instead of typing on a computer...that was something different and more direct - I got a composition notebook and whipped out a beefy first chapter for one story... the other inspirational boost was after watching season 2 of The White Lotus , there was an unpacking feature at the end by the writer and creator Mike White; he talked about several critical scenes in season 2 that were intentionally written to NOT spell everything out. he left some things up to the imagination of the audience...this also helped me breeze through writing that same first chapter - it's a techno-psychological thriller and I was getting bogged down thinking I had to explain every detailed aspect of how the technology worked. I love creative writing! I have 41 story ideas in various stages of development with plot lines, subtext, themes, characters. Don’t know if I’ll ever publish any of it – but it burns a hole in me if I don’t do anything. My wife urges me to do some kids’ books and graphic novels…I don’t know about that – I think of it as a satisfying hobby like art or music and if anything, my family is my target audience...Even if anything I make doesn't go beyond my home - there is something so satisfying...fulfilling even - to look at something and think "hey, I made that!" The urge to create is what makes me post goofy stuff in the Being on-call and other misadventures in the humor forum. It's addictive to do - my humor is so quirky anyway - I don't post stuff cuz I think it will make others laugh so much as I feel like I'm getting away with murder - kinda like my modus operandi as class clown wannabe in high school. I can still hear my old critics "you killed it alright". Some of my inspiration for that comes unexpectedly when I look at CNN or Yahoo news on my computer – and you know how they have click-bait stuff like – 10 huge plot holes created by movie sequels...I look at a picture - and start thinking what is another way to explain how the scene came about. Think about what motivates you to post here. Most of the time I get the feeling you come here to cause trouble. But I don't know what motivates you. Again, think about the feedback you get. Apparently, many Grease Spotters feel like I do...If causing trouble is not your intent - you should reconsider the way you communicate here. and if causing trouble is not your goal - your efforts thus far - most of the time are actually counterproductive, if you are wanting folks to be receptive to your ideas. ~ ~ ~ ~ You do realize that this was all speculation on the part of wierwille. There is NO law of believing. It's a pet-theory of wierwille and all the other health and wealth gospel preachers. A law invariably works every time! Like the law of gravity. If you jump off a 102-story building today, you’ll plunge to your death. If you try it tomorrow – it will happen then too. Matter of fact, anyone who has ever had a death wish and attempted to jump from a high building were never disappointed by the law of gravity not working. It's not called the theory of gravity. There is zero evidence to support the supposed law of believing. ~ ~ ~ ~ I don’t think you know what you’re talking about…first off, wierwille is the last person anyone should emulate for what mental habits one should cultivate. I mean – he was an unabashed plagiarist, pathological liar, a drunkard, a sexual predator, a thief, an abusive and mean-spirited hypocritical pontificating deluded person. Apparently wierwille was incapable of distinguishing truth from lies, fact from fiction, right from wrong. you said "If fear isn't resisted it's damaging." Really ? How so? most normal fears have to do with self-preservation - that's something I believe God instilled in humankind... However, concerning your statement “There are religious circles where people who DON'T exhibit a fear of going to hell, then that kind of cocky attitude places them right on the edge of the pit” does fit wierwille to a T ! His lifestyle was typically one unconscionable act after another. Perhaps one of wierwille’s deep rooted problems was that he had no fear of God. If someone has difficulty distinguishing normal fears from phobias / irrational fears then maybe they should consider seeking professional help. Below are a few hyperlinks for direction: Phobias and Irrational Fears - HelpGuide.org Fear | Psychology Today Distinguishing between phobias (apa.org) That’s all for now, folks

so, you're going to continue to waffle then - I figured as much

Some people don’t know this - but there are 2 kinds of logic: 1. There’s logic logic and then there’s 2. cult-logic

Hmmmm…previously I thought you said it was hyperbole. Now you’re changing you’re opinion and saying it’s literal?

Too bad we’re all not telepathic - grammar and the meaning of words wouldn’t matter - we would all just know what each other really meant

Nope! That's not what you said. Mike said: "If the literal understanding is made available by the author, then the figurative is acceptable, and not misleading." So, can you point to places in the Bible or in the PFAL class, where the author gives a literal understanding of a hyperbole just used in the immediate context. for instance, whether in the Bible or in PFAL it might sound something like this: PFAL: "Where I just said it was the fear in the heart of that mother is what killed that little boy, I was exaggerating. More than likely the mother knew her child liked to play in traffic, and he wasn't very cautious when crossing streets anyway - she probably worried all the time about that drunken pastor who drove by the neighborhood frequently. So, let's not blame it on the drunken pastor who ran over the kid. " Matthew 5 hyperbo-shonta-fied: "If thy right hand offend thee cut it off...uhm okay guys, I don't mean literally cut it off." No essays please. How does the Bible interpret itself regarding hyperbole? Please give specific passages. No essays please. the Great Principle looks like bull-$hit to me. Pure speculation by a preacher that knew how to fake speaking in tongues. where is biblical support for wierwille's Great Principle? Just Scripture references - no essays please. So, you admit that you were fooled by your own bull-$hit. amazing! "smack dab in the middle of this ancient thread" huh? do you mean that literally?

Predator 2 scene: want some candy

Most people consider exaggeration to be a lie because they are intentionally misleading others to believe that events occurred in a way that they did not. Lying is usually associated with a wide range of negative outcomes. That’s an apt description for how wierwille used hyperbole. He was a sneaky little goblin he was.

So you’re saying wierwille exaggerated in the story about the mother and the death of her little boy.

Ah there’s the problem - one of wierwille’s signature moves - take full advantage of the nebulous factor! one can reinterpret anything by ‘defining’ the intent of another person. For example: Mike, when I said your explanation of Daniel 3 stinks, I meant it in a nice way. In the above example, I am not revealing my real motive. This can be used about others as well. For example “Do you know what killed that little boy? It was the fear in the heart of that mother!”

Nope !!!!!!!!! You’re changing the category Everything God said will come to pass means just that. No contingencies . You’re a sneaky little goblin - you refer to Daniel 3 because to YOU that also SOUNDS biblical. I know the exact teaching of wierwille you’re talking about - and yeah that’s another one of those instances of him misinterpreting / misapplying Scripture that I was talking about. Why don’t you READ what’s WRITTEN! Read the following section of Daniel 3 and then I’ll point out how it differs from wierwille’s sensationalistic “sermon”: 16 Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego replied to him, “King Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. 17 If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to deliver us from it, and he will deliver us from Your Majesty’s hand. 18 But even if he does not, we want you to know, Your Majesty, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up.” Daniel 3: 16 - 19 S, M & A (sounds like tech company ) were being pressured to deny God. BUT They chose to be faithful to Him no matter happened. They trusted God to deliver them - but were determined to be faithful regardless of the consequences. You should quit holding onto wierwille’s super-duper believer power daydream. It’s a fantasy. Think of all those in OT and NT who stayed faithful and suffered dearly for it - many died - Hebrews 11 talks about that , and the history of the church is often written with the blood of martyrs. I don’t know if I’d have that kind of faith if I was threatened to deny God or die. But I know this - wierwille was a self-centered ba$tard of the 1st order. His teachings, his classes, his books, his programs, his ministry - it was always ABOUT HIM! I don’t think the man was capable of compassion, empathy or self-sacrifice - I don’t care how much he made himself out to be Jesus on a stick. If God always rescued believers who trusted Him - it would make God like a puppet on a string - and the Divine Puppet has a great insurance policy and self-centered people would line up around the block to sign up for that. Yeah that’s the kind of cheesy religion wierwille promoted! A god that one can control. Drop your silly nonsense and learn to read what’s written. You can’t win this case no matter how many quotes you pull out of wierwille’s dead a$$.

your 2nd question is the answer. at the time I was not aware that TWI was a cult - I simply was being a snob.

oh yeah - I love that scene...love the whole movie actually. In my opinion he was the best Batman too. oh no - here I go way off-topic on some other great roles in Bird Man Dope sick Spotlight Night Shift Mister Mom

To be clear, my post was challenging wierwille’s statement – mine was a rhetorical question, asked to undermine wierwille’s point; I could have said that doesn't make sense. And what was wierwille’s point? I’ve heard him use the phrase in the context of berating followers after some fiasco with the corps program as well as various other failures to achieve a benchmark with other TWI-agenda. And in more general scenarios I’ve heard him use a form of the phrase to reprimand someone’s lack of believing – like even if what you were believing for never happens, it’s still God’s Word. He’d waffle around all kinds of ambitious claims, I remember one time he got off on some scatterbrained tirade about the monumental challenge of getting the Word over the world – and he said something like if we got the Word over the world in his lifetime, we’d see Jesus Christ come back 'booms-quick' – in other words, the failure of wierwille’s conditional phrase doesn’t negate God’s Word. All of these examples presume biblically sounding goals are promises of God – with a subtext in each failure that any TWI guilt-ridden follower knows means just because they failed to believe the promises of God - aka the more than abundant life as assured in PFAL – it’s still God’s Word. I see that all as a misinterpretation and misapplication of Scripture. As OldSkool referenced Matthew 5:18 New International Version For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. wierwille’s statement "It’s the Word, even if it never comes to pass" sounds biblical – but it negates what Jesus Chrisr said in Matthew 5:18 – another way to put it is if it doesn’t come to pass then it wasn’t the Word of God. For the ancient Hebrews, there was a safeguard to secure the predictive or prophetic elements of Scripture – as mentioned in Deuteronomy 18:22: New International Version If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously, so do not be alarmed. Thus, everything in the Bible that God said will come to pass - will happen. There should be no question that it won't. For greedy, materialistic, health-and-wealth 'believers' that's a different story. "God's Word says I should prosper. I'm dirt poor. I don't understand it. I'm believing for it. I'm practicing the law of giving and receiving - going way over the tithe to TWI. I'm still dirt poor. wa wa wa all the way home in my WOW-moblie." This business here is backpedaling…with some of that conversational quick-change scam to boot! Shame on you Mike! Quit trying to defend wierwille’s goofy phrases by revising them and running it up the flagpole.

Good one...I always kept my eye out for a Dodge Omni when at a traffic light - so I could say "Look there's an Omni present !" ....I'm here all week folks...

Then there’s the word omnipresent - present everywhere at the same time – which makes me think of New International Version When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all…I Corinthians 15:28 That takes present to a whole new mind-blowing level

okay you're forgiven