WordWolf

This was another of the "everything's about sex and the sex organs" teachings that twi floated...

As we saw, lcm said it, but the evidence is against him....

Nice try at changing the subject. YOU claimed there were exagerrations on this thread. More than once. I said to find them, even ONE. I noticed you've neither found one nor apologized for mistakenly claiming there WAS one. Instead, calling your "bluff" gets some names thrown at me. However, we've played this game before and can clearly see an attempt to change a subject and throw up a smokescreen. In other news, all the self-deprecating names you've aimed at yourself and placed in my mouth impress very few people here. However, it's a lot easier just to do that than to "call my bluff" (if I'm actually bluffing), and read around and see what vpw did, and why so many people lost all respect for him. "The man's dead." I agree. "Remove the posts." I DISagree, and gave my reasons. Pretending there's neither reason nor cause to make the posts or keep them up does not actually make reasons or causes vanish.... And if you think MY POSTS are "heated", you would have been slain dead in your tracks by a tongue-lashing from vpw if you were "privileged" enough to know him privately rather than just by his own carefully-managed public image. Compared to vpw and all those he trained personally, I'm an amiable sheepdog.

I'm really trying to give anyone else a chance to jump in here....

CORRECT! The idea was that the Stardates suggest this episode comes after the one where the Bynars "upgrade" the holodeck, and that's why this glitch happened. Did you catch the Sidney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre homages in the episode? I'm also thinking the mysterious item Dixon Hill was supposed to have found was a statue of a bird..... I was going to add a quote about the aliens that had to be greeted in a few hours, to try to make this a bit fairer. And yes, he "lost a bet" and was wearing his Starfleet uniform. But the episode IS "the Big Goodbye." Are you warming up for a trivia contest or anything, perchance?

vpw taught the same at ROA '79, the next-to-last night, on "Believing:Hebrews 11". He taught that Hebrews 11:35 "Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection:" meant- and you can easily see this is incorrect with a read on your own- that the "deliverance" they didn't accept was deliverance given by God, and that the "that they might obtain a better resurrection" meant they "got tired of the fight, quit believing and died." This is such an obvious mistake that even cg taught this verse correctly in "God's Roll-Call of Honour", tape one of PFVCL. I shall explain in my OWN words and understanding. The deliverance they didn't "accept" was the acquiescence to their torturers, a cooperation with their captors. They remained faithful even to the degree of becoming martyrs. Like when Shadrach, Mesach, and Abed-nego said "Since you asked, our God is able to deliver us from your furnace, but even if He doesn't, we STILL won't worship your gods, o king." In their case, they were rescued by God, others were not, and proved faithful regardless, and by remaining faithful obtained a better resurrection, which is yet to come, though their flesh rests in hope of that day yet to come. The only part I agree with vpw on there is that there's 2 resurrections, one of which is better than the other.

Yes- besides saying the Roman soldiers raped/molested Jesus, they said the Philistines raped/molested Samson, and that the oath of swearing on the thigh meant grabbing the guy's eh- "family jewels". A while back, I got a bee in my bonnet about those, and started threads on them. "Oath-hand under thigh" was discussed here: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...st&p=243557 "Were Samson and Jesus molested" was discussed here: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...st&p=243931 Something I'd like to point out here is that when some posters questioned why some of us cared enough to give our best attempt to learn what the Bible ACTUALLY said on the subjects, I said the following, after my general comments about finding answers:

Ok, I'll take you up on your "challenge." Find me an exaggeration on this thread. Please be specific, quote the poster exactly, and leave the quote-tags intact so it links back to the original post and proves it actually said that. Then we can see if it WAS an exaggeration or not. vpw needed to do the right thing-and he often did not, and that often involved his bed- and often it did not. THAT was not only "not right", it was obscene and vile. Once one actually is AWARE of the desecrations of his office, the felonies performed by vpw himself on his fellow Christians for whom Christ died, a little outrage is more than warranted. Meanwhile, the right thing for YOU to do is find out who vpw actually WAS. Here's a hint- it wasn't who he portrayed when the microphones were on and the cameras were rolling- which you and I both thought. I was quite surprised to read the accounts of eyewitness after eyewitness after eyewitness.

Then I'll keep quoting until something becomes clearer. "I lost a bet." "If I leave town, the town leaves with me." "Hiya Doc. What's cookin'?" "Y'know, I had some trouble getting through. Where's Captain Picard?" "He's on ice." "Pardon?" "He's being grilled." "What is he, a fish?" ""Helm, take us out of orbit. And Mr. La Forge?" "Yes sir?" "Step on it."

Gee, lcm and vpw were "do as I say, not as I do" types, aka, hypocrites. Can you imagine? The shock..... In 20/20 hindsight, it's blindingly obvious..... Scary how we missed it the first time....

I used a Large-Print, and fit entire words in rather than letters, so I didn't have that problem. I still needed to remember Greek or whatever.

I still love the vision that O'Brien and Bashir have while enduring torture on the Path to Kal-Hyah, which they thought was going to resemble a human bachelor party. "I can see it...I'm going to kill Worf." *both chanting* "Kill Worf...kill Worf..." ======= Ok, different episode. "I lost a bet." "If I leave town, the town leaves with me."

It is that kind of humour, often. However, a different set of siblings was involved...sorta....

So, you're not going to embrace this concept, just because it flatters you? Well, that kills THAT idea...

I think my favourite was when he tried to get everyone to believe Genesis 3 referred to his lesbian fixation. He fast-talked through a lot of words trying to justify his position, then, when everyone sat there stunned, trying to figure out if he'd been smoking some primo weed to come up with that, he offered his summation: "Don't see it? Too bad. *laughs* I do." Which was a nice summary of his policies overall. So long as HE saw it that way, didn't matter what EVERYBODY else saw. "Too bad." His answered were embraced no matter how ludicrous, his policies were enacted no matter how asinine.

You just described the lcm regime- both in doctrine and policy. Ill-considered emotional outbursts became doctrines and policy. That's how they got "weakness always brings down strength", "no debt, not even for a house or car", "all corps are to go fulltime and quit their jobs", "no pets", etc. etc. Even PENS AND PENCILS couldn't be given. Mind you, the corps were being paid subsistence wages in many cases, and subject to moving without notice, and forced to hunt for a living wage when the corps was taken OFF fulltime not long after they were forced to quit their jobs, so sometimes, Christians saw a brother suffering and wanted to do a little something to alleviate it- but twi MANDATED this was not allowed under any circumstance. And all the people likely to just disregard senseless rules had either left already or been driven out already.... Wouldn't surprise me. He ALWAYS sought to put HIMSELF in the middle of EVERYTHING. He was the star in AOS, he appeared in High Country Caravan, he'd go onstage when Acts 29 and other groups were singing, etc. etc. The most dangerous place to be in twi was between lcm and the limelight.

If one really wants to go beyond all the crippling deficiencies inflicted on them as a result of the crippling deficiencies vpw taught (as a result of his own crippling deficiences), then one must put aside twi/vpw mode, and learn things in patterns vpw never saw, in fashions vpw never used, using tools vpw never did, from people and places that never heard of vpw. At the very least, one needs to put them aside for a time. On the other hand, if one wishes to remain hobbled by wrong twi thinking and wrong twi teaching, by all means, one should cling closely to vpw/twi doctrine, books, methodology.... Which, BTW, can be done BADLY by using ONLY twi methods,or can be done EFFECTIVELY by using the entire spectrum of Christian tools and not just the twi crayon. He said those words on a number of occassions. However, if you search, you'd BETTER end with a conclusion that agrees with vpw, or you'd BETTER keep it to yourself. vpw NEVER tolerated the slightest deviations from his doctrines, ESPECIALLY face-to-face. So, I'd say he CLAIMED he wanted us to do this, but actually wanted us to ENDORSE him in any searches we did. That's why the methodology always stuck close to what he taught, "his" books, etc. After being taught specific limitations were the key to ALL knowledge, and discovering thata lot of the doctrine was arranged to facilitiate criminal conspiracies, it is eminently logical to question just how well one believes anything vpw taught, or that they know what the Scriptures really say after all. Therefore, the idea that someone would say "I'm confident that the Bible is completely true, and that I truly understand it, but I'm trashing it because my teacher was the lowest form of whale blubber in the ocean depths" is rather silly, and a scenario manufactured by Oldiesman so he has something to distinctly condemn. This is also known as the "Strawman." Ok, I'll agree. If we should ever find a human being who said "I believe that the Bible is Truth, and I believe I understand the true doctrines contained in it, and those doctrines are congruent in ALL RESPECTS with what vpw taught in twi, but I'm discarding it all ANYWAY because vpw was a wiggly worm", then we should say that person is using "victim entitlement." Signal me if you ever find such a person. I'll dust them off and check for straw. I don't either.Then again, only you were even suggesting that position. Of course, if one doesn't make a REAL investigation, how does one know if it's God's Will that one remain ensorcelled by vpw worship, as opposed to freeing their understanding for all the OTHER things God wished to show them, and to enlighten their eyes with, but they're too busy shutting their eyes and huddling around the collaterals to see it? If one NEVER puts it all down to look OUTSIDE the groupthink and partyline of twi, one will NEVER know which is which. They certainly can't claim they've "tested" their doctrine and it's held up to anything resembling a "fair" test. That, of course, means when a REAL crisis comes, the answers can slip past you due to mental hobbling. Instead, to clutch the collaterals to one's chest tightly, to insist that only their twi education has the answers when there's many Christians with BETTER answers, THAT's letting one's emotions rule, too....Nostalgia replaces truth... That doesn't make sense to me, but I can understand the appeal.

"Better to reject everything that comes out of the mouth of VPW as untrustworthy, and start the search for truth from scratch. Those things that are true will resurface independently of VPW's "work."" "I think what he did was dishonest and self-promoting, but I have for so long separated what was taught from who taught it that the undeniable fact of his plagiarism doesn't make me lose much sleep. Truth is truth, error is error, and the works published under his name contained both. ... Prove all things. Hold fast to that which is good. I know I read that somewhere." I find that these 2 statements are not CONTRADICTORY, despite Oldies' suggestion that they are. Step 1. Put aside all vpw/twi reading materials, get a clean Bible with no notes, then go off and learn some stuff. Presume you need to learn all the fundamental basics, and proceed from there. Step 2. Learn a bunch of stuff, carefully monitoring your filtering media and translator, making sure you are judging things on their own merits rather than whether or not they are saying the same thing that vpw/twi said. Step 3. Pick up some vpw/twi reading materials, and see if they hold up to any real scrutiny. Thus, discard everything he taught, start over, and later re-evaluate what he taught. This isn't a one-weekend process!

I didn't zoom thru it like I was skimming, but I read it at the pace the average person reads, which, for me, is a bit slow. That's the speed I go at when I'm trying to absorb material, not just give a quick read. I also agree that context and ease of vocabulary helped. This wasn't exactly technical jargon.

Sounds like a free shot. Whoever posts a song next, it's their turn!

Well, that kills the NEXT one I was going to do....

Reading what is written, I get that the lesson was to separate the teaching from the teacher. (At least when it comes to the Bible.)

The main difference between vpw and lcm is that vpw KNEW what he was doing was wrong, and KNEW others knew it was wrong, so he concealed his actions- he concealed the sources that made him look competent (Stiles, Leonard, Bullinger, Kenyon), he concealed his "I can help myself to any woman I want" doctrine, he concealed his "my suggestions are commands" thing, he concealed his criminal gang of "lockbox" conspirators. lcm, however, was educated by vpw to the point (some would call it brainwashing) that he was UNABLE TO TELL that it was wrong to rape women, have his brother's wife, bark out orders and expect BLIND OBEDIENCE, and maintain a criminal gang of "lockbox" conspirators. So, he covered his tracks less, which helped him get caught. (The internet helped a lot.) Or otherwise put forth that God gave imaginary snowstorms and actually spoke to vpw and made him the greatest Christian in nearly 2 millenia.