WordWolf

Please note that you'll have to look, and you may note that he never actually takes even TWO statements, let alone 22, and say "this is how vpw said pfal is God-breathed." He insists you do all the interpreting yourself, and if you come to conclusions other than his, there's something wrong with you. But, go ahead, follow his links. You've been warned. BTW, here's a direct quote from the beginning of the Orange Book: "This is a book containing Biblical KEYS. The contents herein do not teach the Scriptures from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21; RATHER, it is designed to set before the reader the BASIC KEYS in the Word of God so that the abundant life which Jesus Christ came to make available will become evident to those who want to appropriate God's abundance to their lives." Mike says this is a book replacing the Scriptures from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21. vpw said they are BASIC KEYS to understanding Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21. Mike says that vpw says this is a book replacing the Scriptures from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21. You can see the difference, I'm sure. Feel free to do so, if you want. HOWEVER, please note that a number of posters who opened communication with Mike by phone, by email, by pm have gone on to post publickly, some demanding Mike never contact him privately ever again, and some DEMANDING that Mike stop posting things they confided privately to him. If you care to run the risk of agreeing with them, go right ahead and communicate privately with Mike.

You'll leave them hunting high and low for this one, dooj...

For variety, I'll take a wild shot and guess "Wordsworth".

Right. Your turn.

Thanks for the kind words. Feel free to consider everything over time and at great length. It's only fair- most of us did the same. I certainly did. Everything I post may sound like I picked it all up in an afternoon, but it's referencing posts from across most of a decade, not to mention what people learned off the GSC. I think having time to consider will only strengthen a good "argument", not weaken it.

I only mentioned Leonard. However, please note that most of the people vpw plagiarized were NOT contemporaries- Bullinger was dead, the others were a generation older than him (including Leonard.) As WTH pointed out on another thread, twi never did a public release of the books. WTH claims this is because they were doing this for some noble purpose. I think it's AT LEAST a strong possibility that twi held the books close to minimize the risk vpw'd get caught plagiarizing, while the most likely possibility was that the intent was to use the exclusivity of the books as a club to hold over the heads of the participants- "follow the company line, or we'll cut you off from the truths hidden for nearly 2000 years" and so on.

I know Leonard's position wasn't the traditional Trinitarian one. IIRC, previous discussions mentioned his book titled "The Godhead" and subtitled "the Water in the Bottle." (I may not recall the title correctly.)

Personally, I think that each incidence of hiding his sources says something. When he removed even the nameless references to Stiles in the White Book, that said something. Even though the base book was Stiles' and Bullinger's book was the 385 usages of holy spirit vpw sometimes mentioned without ever connecting Bullinger to them. You missed some special posts. We've had posters who met Leonard. One looked through Leonard's photo album, and found the SAME photo he was told was the photo of the first pfal class. He asked about it. Leonard HIMSELF gave the details, which match what Mrs W said in HER book. Leonard said that, a few months after vpw sat through his entire class, vpw approached him and said he wanted to run Leonard's class once locally for his congregation. Leonard, being unconcerned with name recognition or money, approved the request. vpw sent him a photo of the class for his photo album, and Leonard was told that this was the end of it, and didn't give it another thought at the time. What Leonard was NOT told was that the students of that class were told that the class they were taking were vpw's class, period. Leonard's name was never mentioned. Was it the same class? As Mrs W herself noted in her book, the few people in vpw's congregation that had taken Leonard's class a few months before were AUTOMATICALLY considered to be GRADS of vpw's class. Therefore, vpw considered the classes to be identical. Years later, Leonard found out that vpw had CONTINUED to teach Leonard's class instead of stopping after the one time Leonard approved. Leonard had the choice to sue, but he elected to NOT bring another Christian to court. HOWEVER, he DID add ELABORATE notes in his books about plagiarism. (He added a PAGE to each book.) Some people can speculate that the reluctant-seeming publicity of Leonard's work in later years was the result of having been burned by vpw years before. Without Leonard to ask, we will not know. I think it's certainly a possibility.

http://library.csusm.edu/plagiarism/howtoa...void_common.htm "The two criteria that are most commonly used in deciding whether or not something is common knowledge relate to quantity: the fact can be found in numerous places and ubiquity: it is likely to be known by a lot of people. Ideally both conditions are true. A third criteria that is sometimes used is whether the information can be easily found in a general reference source." What does it mean? It means we don't need to cite sources when explaining what "gravity" is, who "William Shakespeare" is, or who the current President of the US of A. Ever hear someone say "It's my pleasure to introduce someone who needs no introduction..."? They're making a claim that who the person is, is common knowledge. That is a complete misrepresentation of both what all students learn in school, and how copyright law works. Even if you write a single paper for school that you show know one and shove it onto a shelf, you still need to cite your sources, or you broke the law. Please note that most people won't PROSECUTE you on the law you BROKE if you're not passing it around, but it's still broken law. The explanation of "common knowledge" here is also false. These were the textbook of the pfal class, and related books. In each case, to be legal, sources had to be cited. That vpw understood that copyright bore protections can be seen by his making sure each of "his" books had a copyright on it. This is also completely false. twi is interested in claiming they have unique information-so they hold that information close. BG Leonard wasn't interested in claiming he had unique information- so he recommended church leaders take his classes and go back to their local churches- to enhance the local churches, not to get applause for him. His books, BTW, were perfectly legal. The same books by twi STILL break copyright laws in their printing. The extra little jab at people who sell individual copies of books the acquired legally is also false. It's one reason so many people buy and sell books of every kind online at places like E-Bay and others. I know it's one goal of a few to say "vpw never broke the law-it's everyone who CRITICIZE him who's wrong, vpw was a great guy", but the facts and the law do not support such a claim.

I like to list songs that have covers when I can, since it gives players a chance to know more than one version of the song.

"I am just a poor boy, though my story's seldom told"

"Proud Mary", by Tina Turner. Or "Tina Turner", by Proud Mary.

Also done by U-2 and others. Correct. You're up.

[WordWolf responds in boldface and brackets.]

"you and I, we've been through that, and this is not our fate. So let us not talk falsely now, the hour is getting late."

That's "I Like It Like That." I'm not sure the artist, though. (I heard it on a string of commercials.)

Those of us who don't check in to the website every 2-3 hours are at a distinct disadvantage when the clues are left in succession. I could've gotten it from the first clue. I'm just saying.

Proverbs 1:17 Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird. You're aware of the possible dangers, the tactics, and the most important things to be careful to avoid. So long as you stay alert, you should be fine. Probably not. But, who knows? You might happen to find this family at a unique point when they'll listen. Understand the odds are against you, but the odds have been beaten before like that. (I'm one of many people who've gone up against such odds, and won before.)

I like this guy. Brushstroke, can you hang around with the old folks even after your adventure's played itself out?

Yes, it does. It is. The station operated with a skeleton crew due to storms, which allowed a Trill a chance to take over the station. Lucky for him the crew was less competent than when they "surrendered" the station later.... Go, George!

"Until the disturbance ends, we'll be forced to maintain the station with a skeleton crew." "I assume the Promenade is secure." "Yes sir. I've struck the sails and battened the hatches... so to speak." "Either you help me, or you and your friends will die." "Don't call me Benjamin." "...... cargo ship Ekina. We've been caught by the storm. Our engines have been severely damaged. We need emergency assistance. Can you read me? Repeat, this is the cargo ship Ekina..."

Well, let's take what we know, or at least what vpw himself said, first, then see where that takes us. According to TW:LiL (official twi book endorsed by vpw), when vpw grew up, he showed no signs of piety and devotion beyond a single comment made to a travelling minister who got accolades. It's likely that single comment accounts not for piety, but rather for interest in the accolades. (He didn't follow up the incident with any study, not even by his own claims.) When he went into seminary, everyone was surprised locally, since it was completely out-of-character for him. The only one who ever claimed vpw ever did preaching was "Uncle Harry", who admitted HE never saw it, but claimed that vpw was "preaching to the trees" when out of sight. Some people might consider that an interpolation of when Billy Graham did that as a student-to which there were witnesses. However, anyone should admit there isn't even Uncle Harry saying he SAW this. When vpw went into Princeton Theological Seminary (a respectable school unrelated to Princeton University) for his Masters, he had the option of fields of study like "Church history" or "Bible history" or "Bible languages" or anything relating to the actual Bible. Instead, he chose "Homiletics", or "preaching" or "how to put a teaching/sermon together", which is about the SOFTEST option to take in a place like that. In the years between then and he writing of TW:LiL, vpw claimed he took EVERY class Moody Bible Institute ever taught (as recorded in TW:LiL). However, Moody has NO record of him ever taking ANY course (one of our posters got that IN WRITING from Moody.) He said that the weekly sermons he did for his early pastorate "MADE" him go to the Bible regularly. (This means he wasn't voluntarily going there already.) His later teachings-those we've all ever heard- all can be traced to one or more "original authors"- Leonard, Bullinger, Stiles, and so on. Frankly, I can see a pattern of him AVOIDING Bible study when possible, and using "shortcuts" (other authors) whenever possible, completely relying on them more as time progresses. I can't find a timeframe where he put sizeable amounts of time in the Bible-except when he supposedly was starting out. That's the timeframe when he claimed that-twice- he was ready to give up on ministry. It also includes a time of at least a year where he was preaching but BEFORE he claimed he ever believed the Bible was God's Word. (Again, TW:LiL.) IF he was ever dedicated to Bible study- which would have to be between his claim to believe the Bible was God's Word and 1953- he seems to have completely abandoned his OWN study as soon as he had Leonard and Stiles' work to draw from. From there, he added more authors- Bullinger for example- but not his OWN study. I'm not claiming he never disagreed with Bullinger or others, but I DON'T think that was the result of vpw studying the subjects independently and disagreeing. I think it was the result of him reviewing what Bullinger did and deciding to go out on his own. Otherwise, he would have caught some gaffes like Bullinger claiming there was a difference between "kingdom of heaven" and "kingdom of God", when the Bible uses them interchangeably. The differences included changing "dispensations" to "administrations" (personally, I prefer "stewardships" to either), changing Leonard's use of "gifts" to "manifestations" (but otherwise retaining the meaning), and adding increasing wordiness to the definitions later. Those look more like when an author takes HIS OWN WORK and makes changes in later editions, not like when an author reads the work of another, then goes off and makes a new work entirely.

Actually, it's easy to connect the dots if you have the right information in your hands. In this case, it's the Bullinger books "The Rich Man and Lazarus: An Intermediate State?" & "Saul and the Witch at Endor: Did the Dead Rise at Her Bidding?" vpw said (in TW:LiL) that he read ALL of Bullinger's books. (Mrs W said the same in her book.) Here's the former of those books. http://philologos.org/__eb-rml/ (There's a link for its pdf and doc files there if you want.)

"Until the disturbance ends, we'll be forced to maintain the station with a skeleton crew." "I assume the Promenade is secure." "Yes sir. I've struck the sails and battened the hatches... so to speak."

Ok, just so we're clear on that.