T-Bone

23 hours ago, Mike said:

VPW said it in the BRC basement that day in 1982, just before PFAL'77.   I was there with at least 100 other people.

VPW was God's spokesman at the time.

Right here is the heart of Mike's belief system.

Mike is obviously a wierwille-worshipper.

Idolatry - Wikipedia

idolatry = the religious worship of idols. excessive or blind adoration, reverence, devotion.

10 hours ago, Mike said:

I'm doing my best to handle responses and I pretty well handled my backlog.  However, there was one comment that repeatedly slipped through my nets, but it was stuck in my memory, so I finally found it.

I had written the following:

  On 4/28/2023 at 2:29 PM, Mike said:

God does the hard part in supplying what is said.  We do simple, trivial, mechanical, fleshh actions, and God designed the human body with this S.I.T. stuff in mind, and He wanted to make it as easy as possible, so "no one gets missed."

Once again, your writings are unmistakably stupid! 

according to you    but really - - I’m tempted to think it might be some turd of an idea you probably found up wierwille’s a$$  - - let’s break that nonsense down:

Mike said: God does the hard part in supplying what is said.  

What a gross misrepresentation of true worship…If God supplies the words then you’re saying God is a puppeteer .

1Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2 “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!”

3 Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ 5 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’ 6 they are not to ‘honor their father or mother’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7 You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:

8 “ ‘These people honor me with their lips,

but their hearts are far from me.

9 They worship me in vain;

their teachings are merely human rules.’  ”

Matthew 15 NIV

wierwille’s idea - - and apparently yours also, is that true worship is the fakery he taught in PFAL. You move your lips, tongue, mouth, etc., but do not think of the words. Expect God to supply the words. How utterly stupid for wierwille to teach that – and you’re doubly stupid for regurgitating it here. Where does the person’s heart fit in??????? Look at Matthew 15:8 - These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me…any 2-bit plagiarist, drunkard, thief pathological liar and sexual predator can honor God wit their lips – wierwille did that most of the time.

Mike if you EVER get to finish reading Undertow you ought to suck it up and read   Losing the Way: A Memoir of Spiritual Longing, Manipulation, Abuse, and Escape: Skedgell, Kristen: 9780972002196: Amazon.com: Books   

. And in light of you taking FOREVER    to read a book that presents your idol wierwille in an unfavorable light and the fact that you don’t like to read anything but collaterals I recommend you  skip ahead to, that I feel is a section that SHOULD be important to you pages 117 to 120. It’s the part where Kristen – working in housekeeping relates an incident when she placed a welcome letter  on wierwille’s  pillow in the Coachman Suite at Rome City – the note said she would “do anything to make his time more blessed here”. 

The following night, after the evening teaching, wierwille called Kristen to his suite. He has a glass of Drambuie in one hand and a cigarette in the other  – he sits very relaxed – he had taken off his suit coat and tie, the top button of his white shirt was undone, and his shoes were kicked off. He asks her to sit on the bed and they exchange some polite small talk. He then asks her if she really meant what she said in the little welcome note. “Of course,” she says.

Then wierwille says “Well, there is one thing you can do for me. I’d like you to take off your clothes. I’d like to show you how to really make love to a man. You know what I’m talking about. You’re of age. Don’t you want me to show you how to have intercourse? How to make love to a man of God!”

In the book Kristen says “This is tantamount to a father soliciting sex from his daughter. The betrayal is unthinkable.” Trying to delay or avert wierwille’s advances, Kristen tried asking him how such an act is consistent with The Word. wierwille explains that all things are pure to the pure…it’s a matter of keeping our minds renewed and centered on God…a man of God needs many women to satisfy his overwhelming needs.

There is nothing titillating when Kristen describes wierwille sexually molesting her. It’s like reading a police report of a daughter being raped by her own father…the first time I read this part my heart ached in sympathy for Kristen and there was utter revulsion over wierwille’s betrayal…after wierwille molested her, he says to her “It’s the lockbox, honey. You have to keep this in the lockbox of your soul. Many of God’s people wouldn’t understand what we’ve just done.”

After you read Kristen’s book “Losing The Way”, feel free to come back to Grease Spot and discuss anything that was too cerebral for you. Besides myself, I’m sure there’s other Grease Spotters here who have been through way corps training and can easily explain the tale of two wierwilles to you – there’s the one who taught the PFAL class   - and then there’s the one who lived the life of a predator’s dream…it’s good to be the king.

Grease Spotters can find this book explained to Mike on another thread > my post Friday Jan. 7th 2022 Plagiarism on the road to success

Mike, did you notice the part in bold red?

Do you know what that reminds me of?

Jesus’ words  in Matthew 15:8 , These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.

Mike, get your head out of wierwille’s  a$$ !

10 hours ago, Mike said:

Then T-Bone asked about it this way:

  On 4/28/2023 at 5:58 PM, T-Bone said:

and you know that how?   

I was very impressed when Jesus said his Father was actively seeking people who would be willing to shmooze with him with true worship,  which means spiritual worship as opposed to natural senses worship.

Schmooze = talk with someone in a lively and friendly way, typically in order to impress or manipulate them...Mike, you ought to be ashamed at your poor choice of words.

10 hours ago, Mike said:

The Father YEARNED for us to SIT !!!

Where does it say that in the Bible?

10 hours ago, Mike said:

Of course he designed our body and soul to be able to do this easily, if we had a trusting willing heart!   How could He not do that ???

heart - ahhh there it is again - if we had a trusting and willing heart. Do you mean a trusting and will heart like Kristen had toward wierwille? You can't mean wierwille had a willing heart to obey the Word of God. He was a repeat offender sexual predator. He was an unabashed plagiarist. He talked the walk ("they honor me with their lips") but he didn't walk the talk ("but their hearts are far from me")

10 hours ago, Mike said:

God would not give us a stone (or something worthless) when we want to do what He SEEKS, which is SIT.

He would not give us a scorpion (something diabolical) when we want to do what He SEEKS, which is SIT.

He would not design us a body and soul that are ill prepared when we want to do what He SEEKS, which is SIT.

THAT is how I know that.

Your references about God not giving us something bad are the exact same references wierwille used in RTHST, by which he asserted believers do not have to worry about receiving a counterfeit. That’s ironic. wierwille knew how to fake tongues and in PFAL he encourages students to disengage their mind and use the body parts of speech mechanics to speak gibberish.

 So, you must mean you interpret Jesus’ words as a reference to SIT because wierwille SAID SO.

You know nothing except what was up wierwille's a$$.

3 minutes ago, Mike said:

I view what I am doing as a first draft to a future book. 
Sure there are some rough edges, but they can be smoothed out.

It probably wont include the budget/double doors thing. I also abandoned my approach in the thread "The Ubiquitously Hidden Teaching of VPW."  I could not get that idea into the practical use category. 

But other than them, I am pretty happy with what I have contributed here.

...did I mention that I view my posting as a first draft to a future book?

 

yes - you did mention it twice in the same post - first and last thing you said.

are you doing okay?

you're repeating yourself.

28 minutes ago, Mike said:

VPW said it in the BRC basement that day in 1982, just before PFAL'77.   I was there with at least 100 other people.

VPW was God's spokesman at the time.

don't think I was clear enough in my response to you.

Mike, are you 5 years old ?!?!?!

Are you stoned ?!?!?!

why do you say stupid $hit like that ?!?!?!

Mike, I need the Lord Jesus Christ to come to my house right fvcking now and tell me that I should believe you. That's the ONLY way I would believe you. Got it? That's the ONLY way I would believe you.

4 minutes ago, Mike said:

 

 

VPW said it in the BRC basement that day in 1982, just before PFAL'77.   I was there with at least 100 other people.

VPW was God's spokesman at the time.

wow wee wow you   STILL  believe that horse-$hit ?!?! 

Mike, you've got some big issues.

If wierwille was God's spokesman at the time - and I mean if that was undeniably confirmed by Jesus Christ coming back to earth - just for a few minutes to announce "Mike speaks the truth, wierwille was God's spokesman at the time." then I would absolutely renounce Christianity !!!! And go on the attack of Christianity big time - I will pick up the persecution of the church where Saul of Tarsas left off just before he was converted on the road to Damascus. I swear on my parents' grave!!!!!! 

why?!?!?!

because Jesus Christ coming down to earth - where I see and hear and feel His awesome presence with my own rinky dink sinful body - and He fries my brain cells with the ultimate mind-fvck that the God whom I thought I served for some 69 years of my life is a hypocritical god. He demands I should not commit adultery, that I should not commit murder, that I should not steal or lie....Yet He uses wierwille the greatest hypocrite and wolf in sheep's clothing  in all of TWI history to enforce the dpuble standard...naw homey don't play that.

8 minutes ago, Mike said:

I see your point.

But I also see his apostles imitating him as he did whatever breathing her did.

They could also "rehearse" not rehearsing thing to say beforehand, and avoid pre-meditation.

Don't forget that Jesus sent out WoWs;  twice I think.  I also remember spirit upon being involved, healings, casting out devils, etc.    That was another PARTICIPATORY part for the apostles and disciples.

You are just not using your whole brain in thinking this through; only to impede what I am saying.
 

realize you are interpreting Jesus' earthly ministry through the eyes of wierwille's fake ministry to mimic Jesus' ministry. 

and Jesus Christ words and works authenticated His ministry.

The Holy Spirit authenticated the apostles words - both the words & works of Jesus, per what we find in the gospels - and what the apostles shared informally in their preaching and witnessing .

I don't understand this comment of yours: "You are just not using your whole brain in thinking this through; only to impede what I am saying." I did a lot more thinking through than you did - I went back and study the Bible especially NT in various translations and in the framework of various systematic theologies to get a better understanding of the Bible in its original languages and cultures. 

you're telling me your cognitive dissonance along with your fervent adoration of a sin-loving cult-leader like wierwiile is a better method of interpretation? I beg to differ.  I rejected that toxic nonsense years ago because it impeded the Holy Spirit working in my life - worshipping wierwille and PFAL obstructed me connecting with my living Lord & Savior Jesus Christ.

Go sell nonsense somewhere else ! I'm all stocked up at my house - I have one little isolated hermetically sealed and guarded with atomic powered lasers - like that little rat trap looking box in Ghostbusters - and there is where I store wierwille / PFAL nonsense - only as a reference when I quote from it on Grease Spot - although I could quote it all from my head - and then get challenged by psyco whack job wierwille fans who say I missed stuff. 

1 hour ago, WordWolf said:

I was reminded, a few months ago, that we once discussed microwave ovens. Mike recited the internet myth that microwave ovens leak radiation. I linked the real story.  AFTER that, Mike said that the link confirmed that microwave ovens are a radiation danger.  I summarized the danger- according to the link (an official source) , microwave ovens may leak an inch or so past the case. So, unless you drape yourself across a microwave oven while it's running, you're safe from a radiation leak...I thought of that when he was running his lines recently on how well he grasps science.

I’ve noticed similar inconsistencies of his thinking process on various topics - it's apparent when he discusses doctrinal stuff, PFAL / wierwille stuff besides scientific and technical stuff. Offhand, there’s only a few reasons I can think of that would explain his often-irrational theorizing, contradictory analysis as well as the inability to explain or grasp most simple science stuff:

1.Mike is suffering from old age, mental illness or brain injury:  Maybe he did have experience in all the science stuff he talks about – but age, mental illness, traumatic head injury may be a factor. I can relate to all 3 in some respects. I’ve started having issues recalling the name of a person I’ve met but haven’t seen in a long time or when drafting a post, mid-sentence I draw a blank for the right word to use. I don’t mean what’s appropriate – but what the damn thing is called. Maybe early waring signs of dementia or aphasia or something – like what Bruce Willis is dealing with. I did have a serious concussion – I was unconscious for a bit - in a  truck rollover at work in ’97. But this ‘unable to think of that word’ is a recent development...I started taking Prevagen - hope that helps.

On the mental illness factor – I think of the movie based on a true story  A Beautiful Mind (2001) - IMDb  …but John Nash suffered from schizophrenia which did NOT affect his brilliant mind’s capacity to make foundational contributions to - among other areas - game theory, real algebraic and differential geometry, mathematical analysis of partial differential equations and proposed a new encryption–decryption machine. ( see John Forbes Nash Jr. - Wikipedia ). The impact of his mental illness didn’t seem to affect his mental acuity, logic, interpretation of any data – rather he suffered from paranoia and hallucinations…I’ve had the same problem, but my excuse was LSD and weed – also truth be told I’m no genius – I suck at math and logic – but hallucinations and paranoia did not have a big negative impact on playing the bass….oh and I still have this recurring fear that I am hallucinating I’m not Jack Bruce. Occasionally fans come up to me and say yo dude I thought you died in 2014.

****

2. Mike suffers from some delusional disorder: (see  Delusional disorder - Wikipedia ) He may or may not have had some limited experience in some areas he talks about.  The biggest telltale symptom I’ve noticed is his strong mistaken beliefs despite superior evidence to the contrary. That applies across the board concerning PFAL, wierwille, the Bible, and theoretical and hard sciences. Hard for amateurs and laymen like me to diagnose someone over cyberspace – but I leave that possibility on the table till proven wrong.

****

3. Mike is a phony on many fronts: I tend to lean more on this reason. When in doubt – I don’t get into trying to judge one’s motivations or ‘game plan’ – so in cyberspace I go on face value – what does their online presence suggest? Phonies are easy to spot if you follow their schtick. I’ve been coming to Grease Spot for 17 years and Mike’s various routines, mutating ideology, ready defense of wierwille / PFAL and modus operandi  seem to suggest he is a troll, a phony or someone (or group) who enjoys messing with Grease Spotters.

****

4.It’s a combination of 1,2 and 3.

~ ~ ~ ~

If Mike is reading this post – I hope he can interpret it properly – and for what it’s worth, my intention is to provide him with honest feedback so he can refine his delivery and not get laughed at. I’m not trying to attack him personally. It’s like trying to advise a public speaker who lacks self-awareness.

You tell him his fly is open before he walks out to the lectern and embarrasses himself – and he refuses to believe you. Several others tell him. Point to his reflection in the backstage mirror – but he still doesn’t see it or refuses to look. He goes out there – delivers his message while there’s a smattering of chuckles and snickering in the audience. He finally snaps at the audience  you people are unreceptive to any of these great truth I share and storms off the stage.

I am no longer receiving email alerts from Grease Spot when someone PMs me.

I used to receive them awhile back - not sure of when it stopped - last year?

I even check spam folder on gmail and see nothing from Grease Spot in there.

anyway, I've gone over my Grease Spot Cafe profile settings on messaging, alerts - I have not changed anything since I joined in 2006.

other details:

I use a 'dedicated'  gmail address; just means I receive email receipts from purchases and autopayments accounts; I check it periodically.

I have another gmail address that I use for most communications for personal stuff - friends, etc. 

If any moderators or Grease Spotters have any ideas or input on the issue I'm having please let me know...either on this thread     -  or   -you can PM me  - however, remember I won't know you've sent me a PM until the next time I log onto Grease Spot . 

let me know if I need to   check / change   setting(s)  in my Grease Spot Cafe message controls. thanks!

3 hours ago, Raf said:

Exactly. The notion of "Darwinian construct" as implied in the statement I quoted demands a definition that is a caricature of what Darwinism predicts. It basically says, goodness can only come from God. Therefore, where there is no God, there is no goodness.

This is, of course, horse hit.

I agree. 

some others might not 

to them I say don't beat a dead horse  

When was the last time you brought a new person to Twig?

5 hours ago, Mike said:

you can't find this incident in the archives here, let me know, and I will search for it in my copies of the threads that were lost in the Pruning Crisis of circa 2007?  It may have been earlier.

There are many other posters in these lost threads I have. I am willing to donate them to  whoever is able to code them into the current GSC software. 

Being a coder myself, this would be massively difficult, because the files in my archive were saved in several different file formats, 2 different browsers, and includes at least 2 different GSC software platforms.  Still, it's a big chunk of GSC history, unless someone had made archive copies before the Pruning Crisis.

*/*/*

Anyone who's hooked on trivia might want to test themselves on what was the main point the Red Drapes story being in the film class.  It is stated clearly in the transcript pretty well etched into my memory.

Anyone want to play my trivia game here?

If you have a transcript, then by Scout's Honor you are bound to withdraw from the quiz. 

So far I know the cynical guesses I did see prior to my 14 hour backlog were wrong.  I know for sure the point of the Red Drapes was  NOT to encourage us all to envision houses with 3 car garages and carloads of money. 

Hint: the answer to the trivia quiz is related to "be anxious for nothing."

You are patently wrong !!!!!!! 

I think what you’re good at encoding is converting the twisted theology of a megalomaniac-drunken-liar-money-grubbing-plagiarizing-sexual-predator  into some kind of obfuscating bull-$hit that you like to push on Grease Spot.

Keep your damn mutating toxic folders infested with the inner demons of wierwille to yourself.  
 

Without opening a single page of the collaterals I can cite numerous references of wierwille’s fixation and promotion of greed and materialism - because I’ve had that cultic propaganda drilled into my head. Challenging the reader to think bigger for whatever their hearts desired by asking “are you limiting God?” Tempting the reader toward greed and materialism by instructing them to “get clear on what you want in your mind”

what do you think - we’re morons?

why do you think there was so much disappointment and disillusionment in TWI and why most people only lasted so long - and then left or slowly faded away because wierwille promised so much but his “law of believing”  , positive affirmations techniques , and tithing / abundant sharing / law of giving and receiving delivered nothing!

3 hours ago, oldiesman said:

I don't remember if I suggested something like this incident in the past at GS in defense of VPW's snow story as possibly being true, but it's an experience where a small but strange snowstorm could actually happen without being part of a written record.   I thought VPW's story was possible and still do; but being we are here at GS, I may also assume it was bs.   No way of knowing really.   As Craig might say "ask God to help you understand it."   He said that once to me on a different topic.

Your point touches upon two of the most powerful and insidious elements of wierwille’s theology: his signature intuition and his tendencies toward Gnosticism.

The con is twofold. The harmful and controlling cult-leader appeals to the cult-follower’s desire to mimic the cult-leader  - - the subliminal undertone being like a hypnotic melody to ask a “God” who bears a remarkable resemblance to the manageable God promoted by the cult-leader. The tendency toward Gnosticism is in the seeking of special knowledge innocently camouflaged as asking God how to understand and believe in wierwille’s legend of the snow storm.

Thus the member of a cult is NOT following THEIR OWN instincts but has learned to walk behind the signature intuition of the cult-leader. 

To relate how effective this subliminal tactic is - I’ll tell you about my own experience. In my 12 years of cult involvement there were many times my faith was challenged over the veracity of wierwille’s story of God’s voice, being given a mission and authenticated by a snow storm. And I would reflect deeply and ask God to help me overcome my doubt. (Grease Spotters should realize I was already biased for which way to think by that last sentence)

Each time I went through such inner turmoil wrestling with my “faith” - there was always a myriad of wierwille-isms flooding my thoughts to remind me to see wierwille as the apostle for my generation: “the adversary will always go after those speaking the truth”

“When Judas walked out on Jesus and the disciples it was night. The only alternative to God’s ministry is the darkness of oblivion.”

My recalling these wierwille-isms tend to subtly push me in a certain direction. Like the Professional Weight Guesser in the movie The Jerk - he limits the choices one can make

The Jerk: the professional weight guesser scene

21 minutes ago, waysider said:

Sadly, it did not. A street cleaning crew swept its remains to the gutter where it was picked up by a homeless person who did, in fact, find it to be useful for starting the fire in a warming barrel. Which, when you think about it, is a bit of a twisted miracle, in that it may have kept that man from freezing to death that bitterly cold August night in Ohio. 

And the twisted miracle kept on twisting. A maverick metal sculpturist / plagiarist envisioned a cash cow (the classic business jargon version) stole the warming barrel (PFAL book – the older version – now in ashes) and in his portable art studio (altered motorcoach – refurbished by Classic Perversion Conversions) he completely, completely, absolutely completely turned it into a cremation urn…in his decrepit old age the maverick metal sculpturist / plagiarist with a checkered past and chubby from the exceedingly abundantly above moolah coming in, said “let’s twist again like we did last snow storm” and he made mini-urn (aka PFAL Today - - the new version).

2 hours ago, waysider said:

You wanna know what killed that lady with the FIRE ENGINE RED! drapes? Well, I'll tell you. Some little boy was crossing the street and dropped a PFAL book in the road (It was the older version.). A big 'ole battleship grey '39 Packard (with a rumble seat) being driven by a traveling salesman with a death wish came a barreling down the road like a house afire and swerved to avoid the little boy, as he paused to save his precious book.(The older version) The lady with the FIRE ENGINE RED! drapes, being traumatized by the event that she was about to witness, froze right there in the path of the big 'ole battleship grey '39 Packard (with a rumble seat) and commenced to yammerin' a string of strange words, the likes of which the little boy had never, ever heard before in his short but precious life. She didn't look left and she didn't look right and, well, you guessed it. She done got squashed like a June Bug on a hot summer night. I wish I could have been there to see it. It was really somethin'!

did the PFAL book (the older version)  make it out okay?

16 minutes ago, Mike said:

God was happy with the 1968 film class and unhappy with the planned replacement, and when VPW finally was able to hear that, he scrapped the original goal of PFAL'77. 

How do you KNOW God was happy or unhappy?

Are you God's spokesperson?

who put you in charge?

why should I believe you?

why do you say stuff like this?

do you say this stuff to friends, family and where you work?

29 minutes ago, Mike said:

You really know how to push my buttons, don't you.

Here's a sample of what I am talking about for you to reject:  "And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

Jesus breathing on them does not qualify as an excellor session

29 minutes ago, Mike said:

Here's a few ways you can see for yourself how at numerous times Jesus prepared his apostles for Pentecost. 

preparation for an excellor session is not an excellor session

29 minutes ago, Mike said:

Look in the 2nd appendix of RHST for all the occurrences of "spirit" in the NT. Take special note of the context when Jesus speaks the word "spirit" or "Ghost" as in the verse above. 

Jesus talking about spirit or ghost does not qualify as excellor session 

29 minutes ago, Mike said:

Also, in John's Gospel, the narrator explains a few times that Jesus was speaking of a later time, when spirit would come on Pentecost.  John has several such interesting "flash forwards" in time, and this is hinted at in the class once. The term "flash forward" was not used in the hint; that's mine, copyright 2023.

Jesus speaking of Pentecost and what would come does not qualify as excellor session

29 minutes ago, Mike said:

I also remember, that in another place Jesus talks about not rehearsing or premeditating, but waiting for the spirit to inspire.

Jesus making prefatory remarks does not qualify as excellor session.

29 minutes ago, Mike said:

I think I have a list of more in some ancient paper folder, but I am out of squat now.

 

that's ok forget squat.

learn  why   PARTICIPATING  IN  excellor session  is  DIFFERENT than

a teacher telling students beforehand what to expect in a excellor session

24 minutes ago, Mike said:

If I thought for one second that you could receive it I would.

It is abundantly clear that you simply want more targets to shoot at. 

You can search the archives for when I explained it long ago here.

Reminds me of that line in PFAL "I have a jack but I'm not going to give it to you"

2 minutes ago, Mike said:

If I thought for one second that you could receive it I would.

It is abundantly clear that you simply want more targets to shoot at. 

You can search the archives for when I explained it long ago here.

okay - so you're saying there aren't any "excellors sessions were spread out in the Gospels."

i thought that's what you'd say...I didn't mention that earlier because I thought you wouldn't believe it

17 minutes ago, Mike said:

Actually, their excellors sessions were spread out in the Gospels.

Remember, what is taught in excellors sessions is what is our part in the matter (versus God's part) and overcoming the fears that hinder.   The 12 apostles had a rather different culture than ours, different attitudes towards action, and different fears that hindered.  Excellors sessions should be tailored to fit the needs of the recipients, not follow some one-size-fits-all strategy.

Please cite chapter and verse on Excellor sessions in the Gospels - actually copy paste whole section of chapter for context  here is handy hyperlink > > >  John 16 NIV (biblehub.com) you are smart little atom smasher you should be able to figure out how to navigate the website for chapters 

wierwille use to say "you show me where it  says that in the Bible - I want to read it myself - line by line and word by word." thems dah rules - no "I believe this was a type of excellors session" bull-$hit. 

show me line by line and word by word in the gospels where it shows this >>>> "Actually, their excellors sessions were spread out in the Gospels."

6 minutes ago, Mike said:

Another disingenuous pile of horse puckey.  Somehow VP struggled with the topic before going off the self publication isolationist cliff.

Oh but Mikey was solid on all the concepts way before the book even came out.  

YES, that is right!

I did not have the massive impediments VPW faced for going against the trinity.  I didn't embrace it and my profession did not embrace it; VPW had to fight this one up hill.

It's not that hard a topic on its own, and the KJV yields much for understanding it. There are only a few difficult verses.  Most of the problem is fear and tradition.

Plus I found the ultimate trinity-buster all by my myself:  "Who fathered Jesus?"    Was it.....  the Father?  Or was it someone else ???

I had heard of the trinity, along with dozens of other things in Catholic School, but never paid any attention to them. I was alarmed at the idea of going against the believers in my family and many years of RC tradition, and the millions of adherents for 2,000 years.

But I didn't have my mind muddled with Jesus being God and man at the same time and 2 other stranger gods besides him.  I just knew it was important to be careful and go slow and methodically.

No one in any circles I traveled in did any kind of systematic searching on ANY subject.  Most trusted leadership to handle complicated matters, and just wanted to fellowship.

I later learned many of these non-systematic PFAL students went on to be leaders if they could fake the wisdom and knowledge part. 

Thanks for the offer, chockful, but you can keep your horse puckey to yourself.

 

*/*/*/*/*

When Thomas followed the instruction of the resurrected Christ he said “my Lord and God”.

Jesus didn’t correct him.  If VP was right in his apostasy, then Jesus would have said “Thomas all glory goes to my Father, as I am just a resurrected man”.  

This was the first verse trinitarians would hit me with in the 1970s.  When Thomas said the word "God" he was using the common meaning they had, not the trinitarian meaning that came along centuries later.

A proper translation would be "My lord and my god."

 

*/*/*/*/*

 

... the “difficult verses must be understood in light of the clear verses”.

Chapter and verse on that one?  Not a chance it is something made up in the mind of Wierwille.

That is just common sense. Science uses it all the time.  The mathematics of Quantum Mechanics comes from the math that describes a simple swinging pendulum.    The difficult systems of atoms must be understood in light of the clear simple pendulum.

 

*/*/*/*/*/*

 

 

You can’t magnify 1 Tim 2:5 and throw away John 20:27,28.  

Well obviously you can because that’s what VP did in the JCNG book.

To me that verse in John 20:28 indicates that if you don’t accept Jesus as “my Lord and God” like the paradigm example in the Bible did, then you are doubting and do not believe.

Understand the difficult verses for themselves, don’t dumb them down and force square pegs into round holes.

–You are the one throwing out verses, and CLEAR ones at that.  A most clarifying verse is right under your nose in the same chapter of John.

John 20:17
Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to  my God, and your God.

Trinitarians who love verse 28, always miss verse 17.

I think Mike and a few other wierwille fans have got a real problem mischaracterizing Trinitarian doctrine. who would believe in the Trinity the way they describe it.

Mike et al use absolute thinking. 

I'm no theologian. But from what I've studied and the systematic theologies I've read - the Trinity is just one simple label to describe something way beyond our understanding. Biblical scholars use more fine brush strokes and nuances and not the cartoonish broad strokes of fundamentalism wierwille style. 

Even in Scripture there are details to show a differences in the persons of the Trinity - differences in roles. All flows from the Father to the Son through the Holy Spirit to the believer...jumping into my how-to-explain-things-to-a-10-year-old mode - I will say just like any Father/ Son relationship - God has a Son - so the Son is not the Father the Father is not the Son. Who raised Jesus from the dead? God the Father ! Even in OT there is a hierarchy of deity - look at Psalms the Lord said unto my Lord ...Mike the Trinity is NOT what wierwille said it was!!!

37 minutes ago, Mike said:

For those who keep complaining about being promised in PFAL a TV style of abundance, I will know there is a weak understanding of the whole class that I must minister to.  

But that is exactly what was promised in PFAL - book and the movie      - I can still hear wierwille's envy coming through loud and clear when teaching on John 10:10 when i looked around the community and saw unbelievers with all their abundance - Mike minister to thyself - come out old foul and turd-like spirit of wierwille 

33 minutes ago, OldSkool said:

If u haven't already look up Kaneh Bosem on YouTube...

Didn’t watch the You Tube yet - but in Googling the words got some other hits - ah so I see it’s some aromatic hemp or reed that may have been used in making anointing oil in Old Testament… uhm you do realize the OT wasn’t addressed to us.   

31 minutes ago, cman said:

Honestly, I think Mike needs to smoke some weed. See a doctor or something.

I think I need some...waiting on it to be legal in Texas

18 hours ago, T-Bone said:

My starting point of examination was in the green book,  The New Dynamic Church, in chapter 10  How to Speak in Tongues on page 117 wierwille says the following:

Have you ever thought through the mechanics of speech? You with your own vocal organs have to do the speaking. The same mechanics that are involved in speaking English or any other known language are involved in speaking in tongues…

…The only difference between speaking in tongues and speaking in English is that when I say, “I love the Lord Jesus Christ,” I have to think. When I speak in tongues I do not think the words I speak. God gives the words to my spirit, and I formulate them on my lips. I do not think the words, but they are there when I move my lips, my throat, my tongue.

End of excerpts

...

wierwille’s description of the process of speaking in tongues is typical of his affinity to explain the inexplicable. 

Although he's just describing some of the mechanics of speech - a student's imagination can assume God is supplying the words. All he is describing is very fine motor skills that any adult who speaks a language is very familiar with.

The trick that wierwille pulls on students is to get them to loosen up on inhibitions....

... One must still engage the brain to think of how to control the lips, tongue, how much to open or close the vocal folds, etc. .

...Now try this yourself - pronounce the word teeth.

pronounce the word cat.

pronounce the word baseball.

Did it take any great mental effort to do that? I'm assuming you are familiar with the words teeth, cat and baseball and have actually spoken those words outload in some conversation. If English is your native tongue and you're an adult, the speed with which you saw those words, understood what they meant, deciding to comply with my request and then forming and controlling the various body parts to say those words was super zip-zap-lickity-split-quick ! Did you experience any noticeable "buffering"?

Did you see one of these floating across your eyeballs?

   

 

 

...How does genuine speaking in tongues work? I don’t know. You’ll have to ask the Holy Spirit.

...

How to speak gibberish.

As I got further and further into analyzing what wierwille taught and compared it to readily accessible information on the mechanics of speech – it dawned on me that I first did in 1974 was sleep back into an old talent I had for imitating an Asian or  Russian language for entertaining my high school friends. It’s merely speaking gibberish.

How to speak Gibberish - secret language

Gibberish 101: how to speak in Gibberish from Laguna Laughter Club

The trick that wierwille pulls on students is to get them to loosen up on inhibitions.

Once a person gets over the fear of making a fool of themself – it’s easy to speak gibberish in front of others. Just use all the parts of speech you use when speaking in your language - except don't think about the sounds you are making.

Adults have fun playing games like literary charades – sort of a reverse of speaking gibberish - - one player making exaggerated silly moves and the others have to guess the word. A good example of this is in   Young Frankenstein: give him a sedagive scene .

 

Sometimes we misspeak. I’ve accidentally made up a word. We recently re-watched Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002) - IMDb   Beyoncé’s character is   indirectly   telling Austin Powers who she is  It's me Foxy Cleopatra – after the movie we were quoting lines from it and I said    It’s  me  Foxy  Clara Petra.  Surprised us all with a good laugh – it was not intentional.

 

If we had a bunch of time to waste for no good reason    - We could print a redacted form of wierwille’s description of the mechanics of speech on page 117, to read like generic instructions – something like:

Relax and act natural. Move your lips,  move your throat, move your tongue, move your mouth but do not think of the words you are saying. Then randomly pick 100 strangers and ask them to follow these instructions. Once they got over the odd situation and silly request and agreed to follow the instructions - how many would start speaking gibberish? How many would go through all the motions but not produce a sound? And finally, HOW do you know – or rather HOW could you verify they are not thinking of the words to say?

wierwille was not qualified to be a linguistic expert. And neither is Mike. Has anyone ever recorded these tongues or better yet have the person speaking in tongues perform before a panel of language experts.

 

What’s recorded in Acts that authenticated the speaking in tongues was genuine was that certain witnesses in the audience understood that language.

 ...wierwille’s instructions reveal his fixation to specify and detail otherworldly stuff that he obviously knew nothing about.

 

Why do we need to be taught how to speak in tongues? If it’s something of God – we shouldn’t have to be taught. It’s like wierwille’s bogus Great Principle – God who is Spirit, teaches His creation in you, which is now your spirit and blah dee blah blah…where is that stated in the Bible?...

...

 

*Mechanics of speech:

https://www.speechbuddy.com/blog/language-development/a-quick-primer-on-the-mechanics-of-speech/

https://prezi.com/p/ketszfrzz2ox/mechanic-and-process-of-speaking/

http://www.literary-articles.com/2012/03/mechanism-of-speech-process-and.html 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_skill

Organs of Speech – Literature and Humanities

After I posted this – especially the part I quoted above – I kept thinking about wierwille’s model of how speaking in tongues works. My mind got stuck in a loop – like a dog chasing its tail – sure it’s fun but I wasn’t making any progress in understanding  HOW  it works. Then it occurred to me I was wrestling with a theoretical model dreamed up by someone who was prone to take leaps of logic over tall buildings. Look ! Up in the sky…it’s a turd…it’s so plain…it’s just wierwille.

Logic is a method of reasoning that involves a series of statements, each of which must be true if the statement before it is true.

Thinking of wierwille’s theoretical model of how speaking in tongues works - the abbreviated version being:

one employs all the body parts involved in the mechanics of speech except for thinking of what words to say.

While mulling over wierwille’s theoretical model, I remembered something – whether it was in PFAL or Intermediate class on TIP – didn’t “the teacher” say something along the lines that you don’t have to think of the words to say because God already knows in advance how you will shape your mouth, position your tongue, etc., so He provides the word that would fit that speech-body-parts configuration…maybe someone remembers what I’m referring to and could correct me and/or cite who said it and in what class.

I’m not trying to be a faith-blaster…and only somewhat familiar with New Yorkese…Grease Spot is like a second language to me. Tonto’s friend had studied some speech pathology stuff in college (she’s ex-TWI and was in corps) so I anticipate talking to her soon about the mashup of the mechanics of speech and wierwille’s theory.

I believe the references of speaking in tongues in the Bible are historically true. I wish I could go back in time and interview one of the apostles about what it felt like to speak in tongues. I’m putting my funny bone and time-travel paradoxes on ice and simply explaining the reason for my wish – another theory – my own theory:

Genuine speaking in tongues involves the Holy Spirit - in some mysterious way – engaging all the body parts used in speech as well as the brain to produce a real language inspired by God.

Well…that’s a working theory anyway…I’m thinking that for the person who is genuinely speaking in tongues there might be some unique sensations in the body parts used in speech different from when they speak in their native tongue. 

*More thoughts and hyperlinks below

Have a nice day      

LoShonta to all and to all LoShonta   

I am my own grandpa  

whether in my mind or out of my mind I know not  

If not me who? If not now when?  

what do you think his back looked like?    

I had great enthusiasm for this sports  

wouldn't you like to go to church with me? 

PFAL is as PFAL ain't 

Is muss be my lucky day 

Mister and Mississippi walk into a bar 

Sincerity is no guarantee for truth...but that's not why you came to our used car lot, is it? 

 even more thoughts after the wavy gravy things

~ ~ ~ ~

*More thoughts and hyperlinks

Thought I’d bring this up here – don’t know why – cuz I know on threads where you-know-who-extrapolates-to-infinity-and-behind, everything gets lost in the Kool-Aid and Awesome Sauce…maybe some atom-smashing-lie-detector-making-bottoms-up-approaching-ABBAABBA-chanting-stop-watch-gazing type person will lick their lips, act real natural, move their hands, fingers, and dial-up modem to start a thread in doctrinal on theories of how genuine speaking in tongues works…or maybe not.

List of fallacies - Wikipedia

Jumping to Conclusions: When People Decide Based on Insufficient Information – Effectiviology

Accepted theories are the best explanations available so far for how the world works. They have been thoroughly tested, are supported by multiple lines of evidence, and have proved useful in generating explanations and opening up new areas for research. However, science is always a work in progress, and even theories change. How? We’ll look at some over-arching theories in physics as examples…

From: Even theories change - Understanding Science (berkeley.edu)

Welcome Redrock !

I got a kick out of your first post. I’ll tell you right off the bat you had me at 76 orbits around the sun! I love it!

I would have responded last night but after reading the rest of the thread I got stuck in an entertaining fantasy of an astronaut complaining his ‘daily’ commute  to and from work takes a year.

Fell asleep looking at my phone. 

Earth spun a little more - and picked up where I left off on wanting to say hi.

I look forward to the unique perspective you’ll bring to Grease Spot - - and just so you know - I’ve been around the solar system a time or two.
 

a round of Tang for everyone- on me!