Nathan_Jr

38 minutes ago, Twinky said:

Was that meant to be sarcastic? 

He didn't have a "research ministry."  He had a deceiving ministry.  Now, who would that be from?  The father of lies, perhaps.

Right! Should have put "research" in quotes.

On 5/11/2022 at 1:24 AM, WordWolf said:

In making up this story from whole cloth, what did vpw accomplish?

A) He made Jesus Christ sound more like a maverick.  Since vpw fancied himself a maverick (go over his own accounts of how he handled his first pastorate if you need proof), he tried to make JC sound more like himself.  

B) He made The Establishment sound WRONG.   Again, putting Religious Authorities on one side, and himself and Right on the other side.

C) He made it sound like all other Christian teachers were WRONG- and you could only trust HIM to get it right. 

 

All of that was part of vpw's campaign to carve out his own little empire among the young Christians.  From the beginning, he'd preferred older Christians with money, but he wasn't able to impress them, he was able to fool the young and naive.  So, he slowly tried to assemble the parts of a machine that would allow him to fleece a flock of young Christians.    When his machine was ready, he still couldn't do it- until he heard about the Christian hippies of the House of Acts.  He arrived there and did his full act- in between things like asking what orgies were like and saying God was ok with orgies-  and manage to impress a handful of genuine Christians who were naive, and used them as his recruiting arm all through the 1970s.

My take-away from this actual manufactured error is vic's glaring hypocrisy and deeply flawed research methodology.

Vic claimed to be a Bible literalist and represented himself as a skilled exegete and textual critic, one who arrived at accuracy through exhaustive, precise "research." He constantly rebukes any other interpretation as eisegetical, "private," opinionated, and inaccurate.

HOWEVER, here he does exactly what he preaches against: Reading into a text something that doesn't exist. Now, there are theological, Christological, and historical arguments about who Jesus' earthly father is and all the attendant implications historically, religiously, spiritually. Victor doesn't develop any of these arguments here. Perhaps he doesn't really understand how (H-O-W), perhaps he's too lazy, perhaps he's too stupid or "spiritually immature."

He is hoping the viewer/reader/listener just won't notice, that they will be too intellectually fatigued from all the repetitive droning. Or that they will be so impressed with the novelty, they will BELIEVE the amazing bull$hit. It's sleight of hand. It's dishonest "research." Its magic. It's hypocrisy.

Who would accept any claim of fact about something as serious as The Word of God if anyone made it with: I heard about it somewhere, can't remember where, it's not in the text, but it can be, if you make it fit. Why would one believe this? Who would even utter such an idea? This is insanity. This is your sign!

This is only one of many, many self-contradictions in PFAL and collaterals.

PFALToday has an ethical, intellectual and spiritual responsibility to correct this and all other errors. Mere omission of an error is not a correction.

I think that was his point in telling it this way.

Again, this is how I remember it. Please correct me if my memory is not accurate (scientifically).

19 minutes ago, skyrider said:

 

Years ago, we delved into this thread, Ash Heap of TWI-story, that documented aspects of wierwille's *India trip experiences.*  

One of the most notable finds......was that their host in India was Dr. I.S. Williams.  He was a prominent church statesman, the president of the All-India Federation of National Churches.  Thus, with his position and notoriety....this man was able to open lots of doors, and the Jain Convention, for another American preacher in their country.

Irony of ironies......Joan Williams, the daughter of these dear parents who hosted Vic and Dotsie and their family was among one of the first international PFAL students in the Van Wert class in June 16-30, 1957.  Then immediately following, July 1-12, wierwille taught the Advanced Class to twenty-three new students, including the three from England, two from India and one from Australia.  (p. 214 Mrs. W's book, Born Again to Serve)

P. 216 -- "While we were preparing for this major transition in our lives from our lifelong involvement in the denomination to going independent into The Way International, Joan Williams, the daughter of our dear Indian friends, was developing a serious romantic relationship with a young man in her second year at Defiance College.  Just before he left to go home for the December holidays, the young man broke off the relationship.  Because of her great disappointment and her cultural background, she became very despondent and ended her life.  This came as very shocking, very sad news to us on Christmas Eve, 1957.  The Williams family were most understanding of the situation but also very grieved.  We buried her body in the cemetery in Defiance according to their wishes."

The above paragraph is quoted word-for-word from Mrs. Wierwille's book.

SO......HERE an advanced class student commits suicide December 24, 1957.  And, not just any run-of-the-mill advanced class student, but the daughter of prominent leaders and elders in India.  

Wierwille's Independent Ministry and Undertaking began December 19, 1957 (p. 219).  So, five days after starting their independent work..... an advanced class student commits suicide.  As I've said many times.......Mrs. Wierwille's book gives us insight to many things that few have ever heard about twi's background and history.  Joan Williams RIP.  Sad.  Clearly, it does raise some questions about "how significant was this advanced class if it didn't enable a student to overcome fear and/or have power over darkness* etc, etc.

 

.

 

 

 

 

Thanks, Sky. I remember reading that thread and all your postings on BATS. Your voice here has been critically important to me over the years. Thank you.

I should have been more precise (mathematically). I was referring to victor's story in PFAL about wading through throngs of adoring Indians and finally healing a random man's withered hand. That man didn't accept Jesus Christ, BUT he believed and ol' Vic just healed him. (At least, this is how I remember that segment.)

The CORPS "teacher" I endured a few years ago told a story that about this same withered-hand-Hindi's daughter being present in New Knoxville at an advanced class or some event between 1976 and 1986. 

This is the "India experience" I have no reason to believe. After all, vic didn't have a healing ministry, he had a research ministry.

7 minutes ago, Bolshevik said:

Yep.

When we say scripture we mean a written communication.  In this thread we're refering to a book.

Remember when everyone wore masks?  You couldn't see smiles or scowls.  It was harder to read people. Some folks are better than others at reading eyes for emotional cues.  Those face to face interactions were missed, I felt.

When stories are written, that's not a face to face interaction.  But ongoing experience might change how you interpret a written story.  I have  changed my views on some stories over long periods of time, because I had changed. 

VPW's idea that scripture interprets itself highlights the static nature of his being.  Scripture was supposed to be understood immediately and never change.  That's ridiculous.  I doubt he as a person changed much at all over his entire life.

Yes. It's also a form of gaslighting. It's a control tactic designed to cause self doubt, because everyone is slightly wrong all the time, requiring reproof and correction. One must be "taught" how (H-O-W) scripture interprets itself rightly, otherwise it's man-made private opinion. Don't do it.... Dooon't do it!

"This is a doctrine that was invented in the 19th century in Ireland by James Darby.

I wonder if the author meant John Nelson Darby, the inventor of dispensationalism.

"...to indoctrinate through his Bible studies..." 

Gross

18 minutes ago, Rocky said:

If he WOULD? Would he if he still could... btw, he demeaned a LOT of people... anyone who disagreed with him or disobeyed or disappointed him in anyway, as I recall.

Yes. I know this is true.

17 minutes ago, Rocky said:

Ask Mike. (j/k)

Haha! No. The cognitive dissonance must be so painful for him.

3 hours ago, skyrider said:

Simply put...... wierwille lied to us.  He bloviated.  How many other times did wierwille lie?  How are we to believe his India trip experiences?  Everything was about self-promotion.  What a narcissist!  Stealing, lying, boastful, arrogance......I see a pattern here.  LOL

It seems there's no reason at all to believe the India trip experiences. It's too conveniently inconvenient to verify. After that segment in PFAL, one of the sycophants at my "class" told a story about the "healed" Hindi's daughter being present at an advanced class or something at headquarters. That same flying monkey rushed to show me a photo of the 18th century French cemetery after the 4 crucified segment, as if that was evidence of anything at all.

You can't believe your way to Truth. Belief is not required to find out what is true. Only a lie requires belief. 

5 minutes ago, Twinky said:

Now that is a very good point.  And it puts the face-meltings and slanderous remarks that were so commonplace in TWI in perspective. 

If VPW can "face-melt" and pour scorn upon Jesus in this way - hey! those of us that suffered face-meltings for from him (or in my case from his protege Craig) are in very good company!  I heard many such slanderous remarks about "cop outs" and other perceived transgressors, usually well after they'd been ejected.  I used to wonder how such evil people could possibly have hidden in our midst - I knew some of the slandered people well and found the allegations hard to even begin to fathom.  And over a decade after M&A-ing me, I was told about slanderous comments that had been made about me at the time.  Absolutely no basis in reality.  They were so slanderous they were hysterically funny, as anyone who actually knew me would know.  (At least, I hope so!  Unless they were wearing PFAL-coloured glasses.)  Perhaps we should see such face-meltings as a badge of honour?!

Jesus, now.  Had plenty of unprovoked and vile attacks, both slanderously and physically, in the time he walked on the earth.  His ministry disparaged at every turn.  Others apparently using his name in vain.  No doubt Vic's insults would just have elicited a shrug from him: not important enough to bother about.  Jesus would have swatted away the fly that was VPW and just gone along on his way.

 

Thanks, Twinky. Your voice here at GSC has always been so encouraging. I can't say it enough: Thank God for GSC, and all the brave voices of Truth here. And for all the voices of bull$hit so we can know what it looks like.

Scripture is sacred text written by humans derived from (preposition) oral tradition. Given. But (conjunction) when is it decided that these words are sacred? And who decides? And must it be ancient?

The scripture of 2 Peter is the Torah, right? Or is "Peter" talking about Paul's letters and the Gospels? 2 Peter was certainly written late enough that anything written in the 1st century might have seemed ancient to his audience...

Or was Peter talking about scripture from the Far East? Or from Sumer? Or Egypt?

PFAL became scripture to some soon after it was published.
 

Who decides?

3 hours ago, Bolshevik said:

Deep down VPW, as an NPD, hated himself the most.

 

Yeah, I keep trying to remind myself of this. But (conjunction!) liars make me so angry and nauseous. I crave righteous justice to be visited upon them - and I want to watch! BUT (conjunction) my work is to let go and forgive.

My ex-wife is an C-NPD. One of my last, desperate concessions to appease her, to save our marriage, to give her another chance, to trauma bond one more time before I snapped out of it was to take the "class." One of her family members was Corps, "taught" fellowship, and administered the class.

So, her flying monkeys are the entire fellowship, comprised mostly of her family, and her stick is the narcissistic Vic Paul.

6 hours ago, Twinky said:

Except that he wasn't a "bastard" since his parents were legally married at the time.  It was after she was betrothed but before she was married that she became pregnant.  It's highly likely that the time between betrothal and marriage was only a very short time - though long enough for Mary to realise.  And for the angel to have words with Joseph.

If you read your OT, if a man had sexual relations with a woman before marriage, they were compelled to be married, because he'd sullied her honour.  It was considered rape.  But there is absolutely no inference that the child so conceived would be subject to any abuse, penalties, exclusion, etc.  In fact, it was all about protecting that child and its mother.

Lots about this (and other sexual relationships) in Numbers and Leviticus, but right now I don't have time to look it up.  You can have a rummage around in BibleHub to find the references if you want.

That's right, Twinky. I didn't call Jesus a bastard, vic did. It's an intentionally demeaning epithet. That was his point. That's why he lied about the whole thing.

 If he will go to such lengths to lie about and demean the name of Jesus, what else will he lie about? Who else will he demean?

9 hours ago, T-Bone said:

Speaking of dead men’s bones - I was reading about the founder on TWI’s website and got to questioning just how much or if at all wierwille “consulted and worked with many outstanding individuals in Christian studies”.

I spent only a few minutes Googling a few of the names I never heard of besides Barth and Tillich (see links below). I breezed through the Wikipedia articles and started wondering how much wierwille actually “consulted and worked with” them.

Was some of that just name-dropping to impress others?

Maybe someone can verify he worked with ALL those named  – especially the big names like Barth and Tillich.

Anyway, here’s the article about the founder:
"Victor Paul Wierwille spent several decades vigorously and prayerfully searching out the truths of God’s Word. As part of his search he consulted and worked with many outstanding individuals in Christian studies for keys to power-filled, victorious living. Such men as Karl Barth, Joseph Bauer, Glenn Clark, Karl J. Ernst, Josiah Friedli, Louis C. Hessert, Elmer G. Homrighausen, E. Stanley Jones, George M. Lamsa, Richard and Reinhold Niebuhr, K. C. Pillai, Paul Tillich, Ernst Traeger, and many others were a part of Dr. Wierwille’s quest to find the truths of the Word of God.

Dr. Wierwille’s academic career included Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Theology degrees from Mission House (Lakeland) College and Seminary, and graduate studies at the University of Chicago and at Princeton Theological Seminary, where he earned the Master of Theology degree in Practical Theology. Later he completed his work for the Doctor of Theology degree at Pikes Peak Bible Seminary and Burton College in Manitou Springs, Colorado.

For over forty years, Dr. Wierwille devoted his major energies to intensive research and teaching of the accuracy of God’s Word. In 1953 he began teaching his Biblical research in classes on Power for Abundant Living. He was the founder and first president of The Way International, a nonsectarian, nondenominational Biblical research, teaching, and fellowship ministry. He held the presidency of The Way College of Emporia, and he was the founder and first president of several other centers of learning: The Way College of Biblical Research, Indiana Campus; Camp Gunnison; and LEAD Outdoor Academy International.

As Dr. Wierwille persevered in his research of the Bible, he continued to write more research works and to develop further classes in Biblical studies, including The University of Life outreach courses, an international Biblical studies correspondence school. As a dynamic lecturer, he traveled and taught worldwide, holding forth the greatness and the accuracy of God’s Word with great intensity until his death in May of 1985."

From: The Way org About the founder

~ ~ ~ ~ 

Wikipedia – Karl Barth

Wikipedia – Elmer G Homrighausen

Wikipedia – Helmut Richard Niebuhr

Wikipedia - Richard Niebuhr

Wikipedia – Paul Tillich
 

B. G. Leonard is conspicuously missing from this list.

The ThD. in Homiletics is conspicuously missing.

But (conjunction) I've got to give 'em credit for mentioning Pike Peak. Ballzy move. 

33 minutes ago, Nathan_Jr said:

Right. So who manufactured the error of Jesus' bastard bar mitzvah? Whose faulty, dishonest methodology manufactured this error? Did Raf manufacture this error or did victor?

After following the evidence, I am convinced Victor contrived this error to make his opinion of dating Jesus' birth fit like a hand in a glove - a glove that knows how to interpret itself.

If victor is wrong about this, what else is he wrong about? Observe with a mind free of indoctrination and conclusions to find out.

 

I must correct myself, as I think I'm conflating this error with one of the many, many others, including the birth dating. The birth date was not the point here. I am not convinced he lied about the bar mitzvah to prove any dating. But (a conjunction) I am convinced he lied to manufacture error.

I now remember my initial astonishment upon hearing this erroneous  "teaching." It was that his evidence of the lost document was no evidence at all! And what was his point? That Jesus was a bastard? His point was to disparage Jesus as a bastard Jew - an epithet taken very seriously by Jews of any era.

37 minutes ago, T-Bone said:

According to one answer I found on the Internet:
“Jesus didn’t “get” a bar mitzvah. He became one. Every Jewish boy becomes a bar mitzvah automatically at age 13. I think you’re really asking when Jesus celebrated the occasion of becoming a bar mitzvah. The answer is that he didn’t. That didn’t become a thing until the Middle Ages.”
From    Quora – Did Jesus have a bar mitzvah?

 
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

I think most problems with what’s taught in PFAL have to do with wierwille's  bastardizing of plagiarized material. Which proves the old proverb that I just made up: clueless thievery is the badder part of proficiency.

Bastardize: change (something) in such a way as to lower its quality or value, typically by adding new elements; synonyms: adulterate · corrupt · contaminate · weaken · dilute · spoil · taint · pollute · foul · defile · debase · degrade · devalue · depreciate · distort · vitiate.
 

Right. So who manufactured the error of Jesus' bastard bar mitzvah? Whose faulty, dishonest methodology manufactured this error? Did Raf manufacture this error or did victor?

After following the evidence, I am convinced Victor contrived this error to make his opinion of dating Jesus' birth fit like a hand in a glove - a glove that knows how to interpret itself.

If victor is wrong about this, what else is he wrong about? Observe with a mind free of indoctrination and conclusions to find out.

4 hours ago, Stayed Too Long said:

Who can square II Peter with Acts 8:26-31?

26 Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Go south to the road—the desert road—that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” 

27 So he started out, and on his way he met an Ethiopian eunuch, an important official in charge of all the treasury of the Kandake (which means “queen of the Ethiopians”). This man had gone to Jerusalem to worship, 

28 and on his way home was sitting in his chariot reading the Book of Isaiah the prophet. 

29 The Spirit told Philip, “Go to that chariot and stay near it.” 

30 Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. “Do you understand what you are reading?” Philip asked. 

31 “How can I,” he said, “unless someone explains it to me?” So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

According to Acts, someone must explain the scriptures, so the scriptures do not intrepret themselves. 

 

I forgot about this. So sinister. It was one of many used against me as a proof text for why I couldn't possibly understand unless I was "taught."  The phrase "How can you learn unless you've been taught" was used constantly. And who will be the teacher? The leader who was taught by vic paul who revealed St. Paul who revealed Christ who revealed God.

Maybe, once you are taught how (spelled: H-O-W), then the scriptures interpret themselves.

All (without exception or distinction) cults absolutely love to "teach."

When does a writing become scripture?

Getting back to the original PFAL: Can anyone explain the bastard bar mitzvah?

Didn't Vic "teach" that in "Bible times" bastard boys were given their bar mitzvah at a different age than legitimate boys?  This is why Jesus and fam go to Juruselem when he's twelve. In Luke, I think.  He couldn't remember who told him this, but that didn't stop him from anointing it factual and worthy of "teaching" - this methodology always bothered me.

I've consulted several Od/New Testament scholars, Rabbis, Ancient Near East historians, theologians. (I admit I didn't consult the Greek people.) None could confirm the veracity of this notion of bastard bar mitzvah. 

When it doesn't fit you've got to MAKE it fit. Force that hand into that self-interpreting glove. You've got to WORK that word into that glove!

(Insert OJ courtroom glove meme)

Well, just bless your little hearts. If only you could read it in the original where scripture always interprets itself if you make it fit.

36 minutes ago, Bolshevik said:

"Scripture interprets itself" could act as an anchoring phrase.

Something to kept in mind if a person , . .  I mean a scripture . . . Gets difficult 

An anchor phrase.... genius....

Like when you can't remember the fictional character who told you about a first century "bastard bar mitzvah".... scripture interprets itself.

Or when you read a metaphor from Paul's letters back into Genesis - the trees are people!!.....scripture interprets itself.

Or when, as a doctor, you have to spell instead of pronounce the Greek after "researching" 18 hours a day for forty years.....scripture interprets itself.

Or when you'd rather move verses and chapters around in Genesis to form fit your opinion instead of doing honest spirit-led exegesis......scripture interprets itself.

Or whenever you encounter a preposition or conjunction, and your opinion is on the line.....scripture interprets itself.

Or when you need 2 to actually mean 4 because of an 18th century cemetery and a flat earth...... scripture interprets itself.

Textual redactions redact themselves, interpolations interpolate themselves, engravings on silver bracelets engrave themselves, prepositions pre position themselves...

BULL$HIT

Obviously, scripture does NOT and can NOT interpret itself - because it's SCRIPTURE!

Not only does scripture interpret itself, it writes itself and reads itself.

Similarly, poetry interprets itself, writes itself and reads itself. Or, art interprets itself, paints itself, views itself. See?

Isn't that just wonderful!! Bless your little hearts. I wish you could read it in the original. 

I didn't have a problem focusing on the good until I "took the class." So much pretense. So many presumptions. So much negativity and evil was preached. I had never heard such effort to divide the Body of Christ, to separate friendships and families. I had never heard of a so-called MOG spend so much energy religiously arguing against other shades of diverse religious doctrine - the truth needs no defense, but, boy, was vic always on the defensive. Yet, he was the one on the attack!  I remember wondering: With whom are you arguing?!?!

Someone, maybe Babe Ruth, said: Don't throw out the baby with the bath water. Well, if the baby is a deceased corpse, it's going out with the bath water, and the entire tub will be filled with bleach to disinfect.

I'm eternally grateful for excellent teachers throughout my life. So grateful. I know what it looks like. Vic ain't it.  He's one of the worst teachers and PFAL is one of the worst "classes" I've ever encountered. I know not all are as blessed as I, and for some victor seems impressive. This astonishes and saddens me. But I'm not on any mission to convert followers to sycophants.

I work every day to forgive him, even though he doesn't deserve it. That's grace. I hope one day he can thank me for enduring the dozens of hours I spent in "the class." And I hope one day he can read it in the original. Bless his little heart.

Thanks. There are so many published and private Bible translations. I wouldn't ever say one is better than another. They are different. We have preferences. We study. There are methods for study, methods for translation, hermeneutics. All rooted in ancient and contemporary schools of thought and theory on textual translation and interpretation.

Horace and Cicero may have been the first to codify a binary translation theory: Word for Word and Sense for Sense. Today the field is more nuanced, complex. So, is it literal OR is it according to usage?

I remember reading and hearing vp's literal according to usage and they sounded like paraphrase, freer and more expansive and carnally opinionated than any amplified Bible - neither word for word nor sense for sense, according to the original. (I do wish vic could have read it in the original... bless his heart.)

I'm fine with anyone's private interpretation (private inspiration is essential), but the phrase literal according to usage sounds contrived, manipulative. Is it designed to impress? To obscure? As a dilettante would? The phrase sounds so technical, but the actual translation is free form paraphrase full of the very religion vp disparaged. And it was "taught" to me as the most accurate translation ever written.

Maybe I've been reading too much Harry Frankfurt lately. Im calling bull$hit.

What does the phase "literal according to usage" mean? VP's text reads like a free translation - nothing literal or according to usage about it.

I was usually condemned as spiritually immature for asking such questions or else provided a bull$hit word salad for an answer.

It seems to me literal and according to usage are mutually exclusive terms in the work of a translator.