WordWolf

I'm all over it.

I'm sorry you guys have your brains turned off, but I stand by what I posted.

Despite vpw saying-in print-something completely different....

Here's what you said vpw meant...

In the pfal class VP held one hand above the other while he was saying "if your needs are down here and your wants are way up here, it won't flow", but when he actually said "your needs and wants must be parallel" his hands were side by side, forming an 8" line which happened to be "parallel" to his bible, which was directly underneath his hands.

Here's what vpw said vpw meant...

=========

Orange Book, pg-19 to 21.

"If we are going to tap the resources for the more abundant life, we must not only know what is available, how to receive it,

and what to do with it; but we must also get our needs and wants parallel. If our needs are light and our wants are heavy,

we are not balanced. If our needs are light and our wants are heavy, we are not balanced. If our wants are light and

our needs are heavy, we will never get an answer. When we believe, we get results in prayer if our needs and our wants are equal.

Look at Matthew 18:19.

...If two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

In the Greek text the word 'agree' is ' symphonized'. If the two people agree, they are in harmony; they have their needs and wants

parallel because 'it shall be done.' John 14:13 is another tremendous truth.

John 14:13

And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

Again, whatsoever we ask in Jesus' name, having our needs and wants parallel, he is going to do. In John 15:16 is another wonderful

promise.

John 15:16

Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

If we know what is available, how to receive it, what to do with it, and have our needs and wants parallel, then whatsoever

we shall ask shall be done unto us.

There is another promise in I John 5:14.

I John 5:14

And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us:

If we have our needs and wants parallel, we can ask him anything according to His will. How can we know His will without knowing

His Word? His Word is His Will. "

======

"Sorry you have your brain turned off", but I stand behind vpw explaining what he meant.

The early Rock of Ages were pretty loose, relaxed, with varied people coming together for fellowship and teaching. Over the years people became more and more alike, way-brain. Now compare a SNS at New Knox' auditorium. Everyone seems to dress, look, talk, act alike. (Even down to the funny choir outfits with the multicolored scarves.) Like a convention of business suit tailors. This is one effect of the way tree- everybody knuckles under the leadership and becomes alike.

Some people would claim vpw didn't intend this result.

They would put forth that all the changes that happened together JUST HAPPENED

to be vpw-serving, and that was an unintended coincidence.

Then again, some people think 'professional wrestling' is real.

TWI did not make itself grow. VPW latched onto a genuine movement of God, the "Jesus Movement" of the late 1960s and 1970s. Young people were flocking to the Lord as the "counterculture" movement was driving other people into immorality, alternative religion and anarchy. The Jesus People were a spiritual revival and led to renewal of worship, which is always a facet of spiritual revival. (Worship renewal was led my Maranatha Music/Calvary chapel and other contemporary worship music using guitar/ keyboard/ bass/ drums instead of organ/ piano.) VPW literally stole people from the Jesus movement (first in San Fran). The way tree and VPW replaced the Jesus movement (which was genuinely spiritual and not managable) and tried to impose VPW's likeness on people in place of Christ's likeness. VPW squeezed out spiritual life. He wasn't the onyl one- other cults/ cult leaders like Berg and "the Children of God" perverted the Jesus movement too.

From his start as a minister to 1953, vpw seemed interested in working with youth,

but didn't seem to be exceptional in what he wanted to accomplish,

not being noteworthy one way or another at the time.

In 1953, he stole Leonard's class, and began to teach it as HIS class,

and stole Stiles' book, and began to sell it as HIS book.

Now he had a product- the results of quality Christians.

(he added to them with Bullinger, Kenyon, and Lamsa.)

However, for the next DECADE, numbers did not swell, which probably is why

vpw didn't "give up his day job" and continued to draw a paycheck from his

denomination.

It was only his recruitment of the Jesus People that led directly to large numbers

of people hearing about his group, visiting, and liking it.

(Actually, they liked H33fn3r's group and D00p's group, and vpw was just

part of the package.)

vpw diverted Christians from what they were then doing, and put them to work

as his recruitment arms.

(Someone's suggested that vpw was the devil's way of making the Jesus People

less effective.)

Once they brought in the numbers, vpw kicked out H33fn3r and D00p and

consolidated all control and decision-making,

and especialy all money-

into his own hands.

Hi Oakspeare!.......and hi to all who have posted on this thread.

i copied the above post from another thread to save some time.

the "revelation" of the way tree was given to vic- according to him- in order to establish the administrative structure of twi, .as i stated above.

no one in the "early" daze of the way east, where i got "involved" with twi in late 1970, really ever heard much about it.

steve and sandi heefner were our "leaders". he was the only "ordained" clergyman in the way east when he came to us,

ordained in november, 1970 if i remember correctly, along with john lynn and boob moyihan by vic at new knoxville at a special sns.

btw, steve was (imo) a really great guy!

to this day i regret not being able to offer more tangible support to him and sandi when they were fired by vic during the ac in rye, ny in april of 1972.

this was not too long after jim and judy doop were fired publicly from the way west during "the way presents" fiasco in ca.

steve was a genuine minister and friend-and he was NOT wrong!

as another interesting side note, it was chris geer who provided the "inside" covert support for vic in all the shenanigans they pulled to fire steve during that ac.

his reward was to be made the lc in massachusetts in june of '72!!

as i stated in the previous post, it was john townsend who was "pranced out" to teach the way tree seminar on video, not fugit.

fugit was the "evangelist" who taught the first video seminar on witnessing and undershepherding, which was later replaced by a seminar of the same name, filmed during "living victoriously" in june, 1982 including vince finnegan and ralph dubofsky as the teachers.

the real push for formalizing and establishing the way tree structure in twi began in the spring of 1972,as i stated above, in order to "lock in" vic's absolute control over the leadership and money....especially the money.

prior to the spring of '72, all the 'limbs"-i.e. the way west, the way east, etc.,-

were independent "corporations".

each "limb" decided on its own how much money wouyld be "abundantly shared" with "the farm" in nk.

as did each area or branch decide how much it would send to the limb.

.all expenses (like rent, salaries, cars, gas, "petty cash", refreshments for meetings, etc., etc.,)were handled by and at the local level by the local leaders, all decisions regarding allocation of the money were made at the local levels, until......

the ominous spring of '72...

this was when hq in nk became the vatican of twi-the only rule for faith and practice, no more questions!!!!

the info provided by johnj in his post on this thread augments the facts surrounding the "circling of the wagons" by vic and da boyz in '72.

btw...

.the "original" bot was established in 1957, when vic and harry incorporated the way after getting the ancestral family farm to be "the ministry's" after vic "left" the church in van wert.

the board of directors never really wielded much real power over the corporation other than "nominally"-

from '57-69-basically "rubber stamping" what vic, harry and ermal decided with occasional disputes over money..............

but the bylaws of the corporation from 1957 clearly gave final say to the original 3 bot members.

this was totally "etched in stone" by early '71 if not earlier.

so, when the money became "serious" by 1972, vic made sure he and harry were totally in control of ALL OF IT!

hence the teaching and institutionalization of the way tree provided them the exclusive authority to control doctrine, practice and (most importantly) ALL THE MONEY that twi had..............

I think wordwolf and belle have hit on the 2 major "ideological" tipping points regarding why vic really pushed the consolidation and eventual "denominationalization" of twi doctrines.

From a chronological perspective, i think the tipping point came in the spring of 1972, when vic pranced out john townsend as the "frontman" for the teaching and establishment , the "formalization" of the way tree.

Prior to that time, there were only "fellowships", not twigs, we weren't' "joining twi"-there WAS no twi, it was "the way, inc."....back then,"the way ministry".

the brc had the word "ecumenical" stamped on its dedicatory placque, hung at the main entrance, we were "getting into the word", becoming "born-again christians".

"Getting into the ministry"- back in 1970 (when i "got in") consisted of, "headquarters" in new knoxville ("the farm"),

the way west, the way east, the way of north carolina (the ecu crowd, et al), the way of kansas (primarily fugit in wichita, followed shortly by townsend), the way of indiana, the way of ohio, and the way of australia.

After the "summer school" sessions of 1969 and 1970, at hq, things really began mushrooming all over the states.

In the way east, we went from nothing in early 1970 to thousands of "grads" all over the northeast.

Hundreds of classes, hundreds of thousands of dollars in "tithes and offerings, bookstore sales, class registration "donations"....etc., etc.,.....

the only "formal doctrines" were the foundational, intermediate and advanced classes (with accompanying syllabi), "the collaterals" (a collection of about 62 pamphlets, including "pamphlet" versions of christians should be prosperous and adan) and whatever notes people took at summer school and/or family camps!!!

the structure was incredibly "loose" compared to what many came to know in the years following the spring of '72!!!

thousands of details are flying through my mind right now, but, suffice it to say, the incredible increase in cashflow and "membership" provided a major windfall for vic and the boys in nk!!!

in 1972, vic "brought it all home" to the farm.

way east and way west leaders were axed with the various "rumors" of misuse of the money, "ego problems" and not "listeneing to the man of god" at headquarters.

almost over night, "blue forms" appeared, all money was deposited directly into newly established "limb" bank accounts., fellowships became twigs, branches, areas and limbs with "leadership" ordained and appointed by headquarters and then "down the tree".

going wow and corps was now the only "right" way of moving the word and growing "spiritually".

vic consolidated financial and doctrinal control over "his ministry" centralizing and dictating all in and from new knoxville!!!.

he was our "father in the word" now, not merely "the teacher" any more..

suddenly there were new seminars, jcing became the "big deal" in 1973...and the money just kept pouring in!!

if you did'nt line up with hq, you were "out of fellowship"-usually "possessed", "tripped out".

the pfal series was dogmatized, the way tree institutionalized and the "way ministry" was denominationalized into "the way international"!!!

so, to gain and maintain control over the leadership and the money, vic went about full force giving twi it's unique identity, tatooing his way over "the way", his teachings over "the word" and his lifestyle upon the "followers of the way".

the doctrine became "written in stone" and its purest form was available only from "the farm",through "the teacher", our newly crowned "father in the word"-bringing new light to our generation by formalizing all the stuff he plagerized, stole and "received from god" into HIS ministry....and personal "cash cow"!!!

hence "the scarcity" of the "rightly-divided word, as it has'nt been taught since the first century" became an ever more necessary "club" in the hands of the apostle vic used to bludgeon the identity of his ministry into the hungry minds of his faithful "grads".

the spurious doctrines hinted at in the pfal series now became books, seminars, research projects, films, public ex's, rock of ages, etc., etc.,....ad infinitum!

so....the "WHEN"......as far as "putting some teeth into the ministry".......imo........truly was in the spring of 1972 with the imposition of the way tree structure upon those who were formerly simply "followers of the way".............what a toxic spring that turned out to be!!!!..........................peace.

Sorry, I had to structure this. I left your words the same, except for punctuation, and I think I dropped

one (redundant) word.

The Way Tree was established by VP Wierwille in about 1971 to give him authoritarian control and centralized power over everyone in TWI. Early leaders such as Dave Anderson, Steve Heefner and Peter Wade left because of this new authoritarian structure with Wierwille (and his yes-men, his brother and Ermal Owens as trustees) at the top.

Heefner left in 1972 because of "tight controls, centralization and money disputes" with "one authority and no avenue of recourse" (Ft Wayne Jorunal-Gazette Mar 14, 1979)

Anderson left in 1973, aserting that Wierwille began to use the Way Tree to contriol everyone in TWI, saying

"By the time I left The Way, there was no longer any room for challenge. There was one leader with complete and absolute control. The Man of God whose revelation was unquestionable, could turn liberty into license without the possibility for correction from anyone on earth. In 1965 I heard 'the greatest of these is love,' in 1973 I heard 'the love of God does not work- we're going to put some teeth in this ministry'" (Anderson, letter to the editor of The Evening Leader, St Mary's Ohio, Jan 17, 1979)

Peter Wade added, "since 1971 when VP Wierwille decided to put 'some teeth into the ministry' and succeeded in draining the life out of it, TWI now deserves its chapters in recent books such as 'Youth, Brainwashing and the Cults'... five top leaders departed in one year'" (The Evening Leader, 1979)

This was part of the reason for the complete failure of the First Way Corps (the 2nd Corps was renamed the 1st to cover its failure)

Since we have no info on the group called "the Zero Corps" (to cover how the 2nd Corps was

renamed the First to hide what happened), I'd appreciate it if you shared what you have

on them. That question's come up before.

Before 1971 there was a "Board of Directors" (not trustees) which actually had some influence over the direction of TWI. But that was terminated by Wierwille when he put himself at the top of The Way Tree. It never was a tree, with roots at the bottom, it was a pyramid, with himself at the very heavy top, burdening all under him. A very self-serving structure. He used TWI to serve all his desires, for ego gratification, money, women, travel, hunting, keeping control of his family farm, (it would probably have been lost or sold had TWI not taken it over), etc.

John

According to my Way Tree syllabus, each "twig" is to be self-supporting, self-propagating and self-governing.

That doesn't sound like a very accurate description of the tree in my backyard.

HMMMMM!-----Come to think of it, it doesn't sound like a very accurate description of the Way Tree either.

True.

Can't be "self-supporting" since all the money goes from there to hq and vanishes.

Was occasionally self-propagating, but mechanical efforts were pushed from above,

with all sorts of events.

Was never self-governing, from the early 70s on- vpw was in charge, period,

and his rule was extended thru the Limb leaders to the Branch leaders.

As stated in the conlcusion from my previous post: I'll go on record saying they (refering to Mr Hammeroni and WW) are putting forth a whole heck of a lot of effort into believing a lie - the lie and myth regarding the Holocaust. It may indeed have become a "religion" - although a false one.

I'll go on record saying that I'd be amazed if anyone but WTH thinks this is me putting any significant

effort into something.

As for WTH thinking the Holocaust is a "lie", "myth", or any type of religion, he's entitled

to think that, but we're entitled to examine the evidence more closely.

Such as, everything we've mentioned in the thread that he's skipped over, such as footage

from the sites, and discussions of non-Jews who said what they saw, and bore the

serial #s on their skin.

Exactly WHO's believing something false is really not that difficult to determine.

If one is really honest and trying.

Not that they have become martry's for their cause mind you - but I realize they are putting a lot of effort into it.

And throwing taxpayers money toward Holocaust education is magically going to make that lie go away?

A) Still not putting in SIGNIFICANT effort, let alone "a lot."

B) I never said anything about adding more education on the Holocaust.

However, since the subject's been raised, I believe WTH himself has provided the

strongest evidence that some REAL education on this subject needs to be

introduced in some places.

Otherwise, you get what we've seen on this thread....

Myself, I think education in general could always use some improvement,

and that's when things are less dire than this....

I'm giving the occasional players a chance to ring in.

Here's how the quotes ran down.

"Do unto others-then run."

That was part of a routine where they were singing, and the jokes were all captions.

While BH was singing, one set began

"Benny lives by the following maxims...Do unto others-then run."

"Relax. Do you understand 'relax'?"

"Yes-a little piece of dark chocolate."

That was when "Fred Scuttle" was trying to hypnotize the mystic,

"Pinch-Me-Body." No, "Prince Mivati." (Played by Jack Wright, that little

bald guy.)

"'Omelet', ja, to be, or not to be, that is the question!"

"And this is the answer! *smack* Dumbkopf!"

A foreign language cooking show.

"After the meal, you will want an after-dinner mint.

You will need an after-dinner 'mint' to pay for the bill!

But ve, of course, haff conquered inflation.

Just as ve conquered Poland. And Czechoslovakia..."

This German on television, who "got carried away a little bit."

"No, I'm wearing black for my poor, departed husband."

"Oh... how long's he been gone? "

"Ten minutes. He won't be back till 1."

This was a throwaway sequence, where that was almost all of it.

"Drink and sex. That's what killed your uncle - drink and sex!"

"Yeah. He couldn't get either, so he shot himself."

A number of times, there were arguing couples as characters.

"With the way you treat me, people would think I was the cook here."

"Not if they came to dinner."

This was another arguing couple.

"How do women get ahold of your Lotharios?"

"Not as often as I'd like..."

Fred Scuttle was running a male escort service. Henry McGee meant to ask

how women arrange escorts.

"Hello? Brown Owl here. No, not brown ale, Brown Owl. Is that the Black Fox?

Is that YOU, BF? Yes, well this is...BO. Of course I know Moscow. It's where

the Kremlin lives."

"Dagger? Oh, he poisoned her. Well, when you said he 'gave her arsenic', I thought..."

These were from "The New Avengers."

"How did you choose him?"

"I chose him because he represents the youth of Great Britain."

"How old is he?"

"58. He's a late developer."

"He looks older."

"Well, he worries a lot."

When Captain Fred Scuttle made his spaceship, Indestructible the Second,

he chose his assistant, played by Jack Wright.

"That's because I'm using Fairly Liquid. It contains lemon juice."

"Lemon juice?"

"Yes, lemon juice. That's what gives it its nice sparkle."

"Sparkle?"

"Yes, sparkle. That's what makes everything all lovely and fresh."

"Fresh?"

"Yes, fresh. Are you bloody STUPID or something???"

A send-up of those commercials where the narrator is an idiot, and the

people on-screen have to completely explain EVERYTHING, while the

narrator feigns ignorance of even the tiniest aspects.

I thought this was a hysterical exchange.

"I think for me, the most memorable moment in films was when you played the doctor to that sick family."

"'Inherit the Wind." Yes, I remember."

"Opposite Margaret Lockwood's nurse . . ."

"That's right. Yes, I know what you're going to say, the scene in the operating theatre."

"That's the scene. You kissed her when she least expected it."

"I beg your pardon?"

"You kissed her when she least expected it."

"Oh, I thought you said 'where'. "

Sometimes he was interviewed as some actor or other.

"What about him? He makes an Egg Foo Young, it's not 'egg', it's not 'young', it's just 'foo'!"

"He should have put more men on the job!"

This was another interesting skit. There was a labour dispute between the employer-

who ran a restaurant and overworked his employee,

and the worker, who apparently was a lousy cook.

(The most-repeated line was "he should have put more men on the job!")

The judge/arbitrator found in favour of the employee, and ordered the employer to pay money.

When he asked why, the judge said it was to support the man's wife and children.

The employee made a correction- he was happily married, but had no children.

Employer:"You know what you should do about that, right?"

Employee""What?"

Employer:"PUT MORE MEN ON THE JOB!"

"Then he marry sixteen wives."

"Sixteen?"

"Yes-four richer, four poorer, four better, and four worse!"

Chou Minh being interviewed.

"I thought she was talking about her boyfriend."

"She no have time for boyfriend-she too busy getting hold of the Husbands."

"How many husbands are there?"

"Six."

"Six?"

"One of the Husbands is a girl."

"One of the husbands is a girl?"

"Yes. That's Murray Husband.

Then there is, uh, Donny Husband....

and little Jimmy Husband, who sing 'I'm a Rong-Haired Rover from Riverpool'."

A different interview with Chou Minh.

Last time I posted this, someone questioned the timing, whether or not the Osmonds

and Benny Hill were active at the same time. However, the Osmonds were active

earlier than they probably thought.

"Long-Haired Lover from Liverpool", by Little Jimmy Osmond, according to Wikipedia,

was a UK #1 single in December of 1972, bumping Chuck Berry's "My Ding-a-Ling".

(That's about a little toy with a bell on it, approximately.) At 9 years, 8 months,

he was the youngest singer to take the UK #1 Singles spot.

"How is the old reverend gentleman?"

"He's a Canon now."

"Wow. My Daddy, a Canon. Well I'll be a son-of-a-gun!"

"You've been at 'the front', fighting for peace."

"Now I'm home, now I want a piece of what I was fighting for!"

A spoof on a soldier returning from the Civil War.

"Listen to this: *reads aloud*

Define the following words:

'relax'- 'a piece of dark chocolate'

lagoon- 'a French idiot'

'macadam'- 'the first Scotsman'

'What is a sausage?' 'A hamburger in tights'???"

This was from early in the SuperTeech segment, where the teacher-in his

non-superhero guise- was reviewing answers one student gave.

Yes, Benny Hill.

In the pfal class VP held one hand above the other while he was saying "if your needs are down here and your wants are way up here, it won't flow", but when he actually said "your needs and wants must be parallel" his hands were side by side, forming an 8" line which happened to be "parallel" to his bible, which was directly underneath his hands.

Well, since the Orange Book mentions NOTHING of this 'parallel to the Bible' stuff,

it's interesting-maybe- but certainly is not what he MEANT to teach.

=========

Orange Book, pg-19 to 21.

"If we are going to tap the resources for the more abundant life, we must not only know what is available, how to receive it,

and what to do with it; but we must also get our needs and wants parallel. If our needs are light and our wants are heavy,

we are not balanced. If our needs are light and our wants are heavy, we are not balanced. If our wants are light and

our needs are heavy, we will never get an answer. When we believe, we get results in prayer if our needs and our wants are equal.

Look at Matthew 18:19.

...If two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

In the Greek text the word 'agree' is ' symphonized'. If the two people agree, they are in harmony; they have their needs and wants

parallel because 'it shall be done.' John 14:13 is another tremendous truth.

John 14:13

And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

Again, whatsoever we ask in Jesus' name, having our needs and wants parallel, he is going to do. In John 15:16 is another wonderful

promise.

John 15:16

Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

If we know what is available, how to receive it, what to do with it, and have our needs and wants parallel, then whatsoever

we shall ask shall be done unto us.

There is another promise in I John 5:14.

I John 5:14

And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us:

If we have our needs and wants parallel, we can ask him anything according to His will. How can we know His will without knowing

His Word? His Word is His Will. "

======

"Back in the days of caveman, history recalls,

Man had this burning desire to scratch his

messages on walls.

On these walls you'll find Joey loves May

Or Mavis loves Little Jim,

Or Little Jim love Charlie-

We're gonna keep an eye on him.

This is known as graffiti, graffiti,

You even see it on the tombstones in the ceme'try.

Beneath 'Here lies Dentist Rafferty',

Someone's written 'He is filling his last cavity.'"

"Stamp out vandalism-

Or I'll break all your windows."

"Clumsiness-is it catching?"

No, it's dropping."

Hmmmm.... Why do I recognize a particular historical pattern here that was established and confirmed a very long time ago, which is: You tell the truth - you don't have a degree (recongizable qualifications) - but then you end up being crucifed for telling the truth. Do you recognize this particular pattern? That particular pattern was established centuries ago by Jesus Christ.

I just wanted to point out that WTH did a compare-and-contrast between

Leuchter- who claimed expertise in an area he was a layman in and got caught

pretending he had credentials-

and Jesus Christ, The Son of God, King of Kings, who WAS qualified as a Rabbi

in addition to his being The Son of God.

"you tell the truth"-

true of Jesus, but not true of Leuchter, who decided what he believed and then

ignored any evidence to the contrary, and used poor science to invent "evidence"

to support his position

"you don't have a degree (recognizable qualifications)"

true of Leuchter-who had no education in the fields he claimed to be qualified in,

but not true of Jesus-who put in the time and was recognized as a Rabbi.

"then you end up being crucified for telling the truth"

arguably true of Jesus-who told the truth and was crucified for it, although the reasons

were more political than anything else, since he told a politically-inconvenient truth

and his death was plotted for it on the human level

(the devil, of course, wanted him dead long before Jesus taught ANYONE,

but WTH's skipping that)

but NOT true of Leuchter, who is currently ALIVE, and has never been hung on a

cross, nor, for that matter, executed by any other device, ancient nor modern

(no guillotine, no electric chair, no gas chamber, no lethal injection,

no hangman's noose.) Thus, Leuchter most obviously was not "crucified",

nor executed by any substitutional method.

He WAS, however, subjected to criticism.

Few people, when actually comparing directly to 6 hours of agony on a

cross after torture and physical duress,

would have the gall to compare criticism and harsh words to it.

WTH, however, has taken it upon himself to do just that.

And he expects us to respect his positions and take him seriously when he

addresses serious subjects.

I, for one, reserve the right to disagree with him, and to even criticize

his positions, his rationales, his documentation, and his conclusions.

Judging from the post I'm quoting, he'd be internally-consistent to

claim that people like me are crucifying him, and that it's like what

happened to Jesus.

========

I thought this comment by WTH was too interesting to skip over,

and wanted to make sure that those following this thread for fun

would not miss it.

The needs and wants parallel is simple. Needs and wants is a compound factor. They must be in harmony, making them one. In a math class it would be written as follows...

(n+w) = needs and wants (one sum).

Now. Get that one thing parallel to (not at cross purposes with) the word.

Interesting you don't have a source of vpw saying "this us what I've been trying to tell

you all" for your explanation. Doesn't mean your explanation is any better or any worse

than anyone else's in and of itself (it rises or falls on its own merits), just that it's not

based on vpw.

In the pfal class VP held one hand above the other while he was saying

"if your needs are down here and your wants are way up here, it won't flow",

but when he actually said "your needs and wants must be parallel"

his hands were side by side, forming an 8" line which happened to be "parallel" to his bible, which was directly underneath his hands.

It would be a lot less stressful to just admit what he was teaching was wrong,

than to go to this length to try to rehabilitate his statements.

Statement 1 is what he was trying to say-and actually SAID.

Statement 2 is an interesting interpretation of his gestures, which coincidentally contradicts

the first statement-which is what he actually SAID, and is meant to alter his statements

to match your understanding.

Even if what you said completely accurately describes his gesture,

you're ignoring equally- or MORE LIKELY- reasons he did so.

The most obvious meaning to me was that he incorporated his Bible into his gesture

intentionally, for a different meaning than you say. That is, he meant to imply

that the Bible was included in his statement- or, more to the point, that his statement

was included in the Bible- and meant to connect the two in the mind of the student-

"You believe the Bible"

"the 'law' of believing is in the Bible"

"therefore, you believe the 'law' of believing".

As showmanship goes, it's appropriately dramatic. As indoctrination goes, it's

subtle and effective. As homiletics goes, it's in-keeping with various methods

to hold the attention of the audience.

Otherwise, if you're going to insist that this PARTICULAR gesture completely

rewrote what he said, I'll await further internal consistency from you-

that is, a more complete guide to every hand-gesture he made during the

pfal class, and its translation into plain English and how the meanings of each

changed the meaning of what he was saying.

I've noticed you've gone into that mode where you're having a conversation that barely interesects

the thread again.

I don't need to read books with opinions about the guy to form my own opinion.

(I do this thing I like to call "thinking for myself". It beats cutting-and-pasting from others

exclusively.)

Guy announces to his wife their honeymoon's going to be visiting a concentration camp site,

I already seriously question his grip.

Guy goes to a site, and takes an inadequate sample, and jumps to conclusions based on

tests never meant to address the conclusions he was planning on making.

Even in high school, I knew to address sampling error and other problems that interfere

with an experiment. He either knew about them and chose to ignore them,

or was insufficiently-educated to be aware of them.

I don't need a PhD to know that if anyone endorses such a slipshod process, I don't respect

them as a scientist-since I was better than that when graduating HIGH SCHOOL.

Since you keep calling this guy a respected researcher or whatever-

and in a court of law, he was exposed as a layman with delusions of competency-

you'll forgive me if I remain unconvinced when you say someone ELSE is a respected

scientist.

He also wasn't afraid to LIE IN A COURT OF LAW, which carries the thread of

being thrown in jail for perjury or contempt of court, depending on how he did that.

Lying to the public, especially when it's a lie his public WANTS to hear? Piece of cake.

The judge exposed him as a self-labelled "expert" who was no such thing.

That meant his testimony is shot.

As for it still meaning something to someone, that's hardly noteworthy.

Some people are firmly convinced the Moon landings were faked,

and tv wrestling is real.

David Koresh was able to convince his congregation that he was married to all

the women, including the underage ones.

"Do" of "Heaven's Gate" convinced a bunch of people to commit suicide.

So, somewhere, there's a bunch of people embracing this guy's thoughts.

Then again,

that's really more of an EXAMPLE, and not a DEFINITION.

Back when lcm drew his line in the sand in '89,

I knew a man who thought this account was really all he needed to understand to grasp the

main problem.

==========

John 13:1-15. (NASB)

" 1Now before the Feast of the Passover, Jesus knowing that His hour had come that He would depart out of this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end.

2During supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray Him,

3Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He had come forth from God and was going back to God,

4got up from supper, and laid aside His garments; and taking a towel, He girded Himself.

5Then He poured water into the basin, and began to wash the disciples' feet and to wipe them with the towel with which He was girded.

6So He came to Simon Peter. He said to Him, "Lord, do You wash my feet?"

7Jesus answered and said to him, "What I do you do not realize now, but you will understand hereafter."

8Peter said to Him, "Never shall You wash my feet!" Jesus answered him, "If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me."

9Simon Peter said to Him, "Lord, then wash not only my feet, but also my hands and my head."

10Jesus said to him, "He who has bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean; and you are clean, but not all of you."

11For He knew the one who was betraying Him; for this reason He said, "Not all of you are clean."

12So when He had washed their feet, and taken His garments and reclined at the table again, He said to them, "Do you know what I have done to you?

13"You call Me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am.

14"If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet.

15"For I gave you an example that you also should do as I did to you. "

========

Unless I was completely mis-educated concerning this account,

the job given to the lowest menial in the house was to wash the feet of the guests.

That's why Peter was scandalized at the thought of Jesus washing his feet.

However, Jesus was teaching them something.

For most of us, this hardly qualifies as news.

And for the remainder, it qualifies as heresy.

Then again,

this being the dawn of the Information Age,

one need not phone the Museum.

Their website has some interesting information on this subject already up....

OK Mr. Hammeroni. So all you have proven so far is you have a beef with the testimony given by Mr. Fred Leuchter.

What YOU'VE proven, again, is that basic reading comprehension is eluding you.

Fred Leuchter is a crackpot. He claims he's an expert in areas he's a hobbyist in,

and most REASONABLE people can tell the difference.

I have a LAYMAN's interest in science, but nobody's going to put me in charge of a

science department at a university because I'm not a degreed scientist- an "expert".

Furthermore, when he went into court, he tried to pretend he HAD the credentials that

qualified him as an expert, and since he had none, his testimony was shot.

Hamm doesn't have to "have a beef" with someone to acknowledge they are a FRAUD-

meaning they claim to HAVE training in an area in which they LACK training.

Fine. If what he stated and what he found at Auschwitz bothers you, why don't you get your own engineering team together and go to Auschwitz and conduct your own study to your own satisfaction?

But degreed, licensed experts HAVE made their own reports- and since the results

are not to your liking, your verdict is "false report!"

I wonder just how far you will get? We all know the outcome of trying to do that, and that you already know (just as well as I know) that you won't get very far - for reason's that I've already previously outlined.

Or, more likely,

being a layman, he won't get any further than the LAST layman did.

Plus, it costs money to fly over there to accomplish nothing.

But I also made an earlier challenge and I don't think you picked up on the offer, (which I think is much easier than getting an engineering team together and going to Auschwitz to conduct your own study). Simply call the US Holocaust Museum. Let me say it again, (but I won't shout this time).

I'm willing to be convinced I'm wrong about the gas chambers.

Authentic physical remains or wartime-generated documents would do the trick.

I say the US Holocaust Museum displays neither.

Call the US Holocaust Memorial Museum and find out for yourself!

The telephone number is: (202) 488-0400.

Ask which (specific) Museum exhibits display prove gas chambers really existed.

Have this (or any) newspaper publish the result.

Then we'll all see what's what.

But I got a "certain feeling" you won't get very far doing this either, because the phone conversation might go something like this:

We're supposed to take WTH's imaginary scenario seriously?

It's based on WHAT- rhetoric from tinfoil-hat sources?

US Holocaust Museum Rep: "F*** off! You, YOU NEO-NAZI, WHITE-SUPREMIST, ANTI-SEMITE!"[/b] Click. (dial tone resumes.)

I've never had a phone conversation like that.

When I visited that museum, I didn't get the impression that the people who

work there are that excitable. I bet I have more experience with them than

WTH does, and I wouldn't pretend to know what they'd say on the phone one

way or the other.

This may have been the context when whoever first said this, but, as usually happens with new phrases, people began to parrot it out of context and it took on an entirely different meaning.

"I'm believing for this."

vpw was the one who told him, a number of times, and he passed it along to us.

In case someone's getting ready to say "vpw never said it like this, he said it

differently and other messed it up afterwards",

I figured I'd say that FIRST.

Faith is a positive or obedient response to a promise from God.

This I can agree with. And it's not hard to remember.

Here's where the quotes went.

" The entire point of something like this is to hand-make it.

Just as you have used Old England in a hobby of your own."

Geordi was awaiting the rendezvous with the USS Victory. He had made a model ship of the

sailing SS Victory. And seguewayed into discussing Data's Sherlock Holmes hobby.

"Look at all of the detail... and everything here has some significance?"

On the holodeck, in Holmes' office at 221-B Baker St., Geordi marvelling at the decor.

"He purchased this in a pawn shop in Tottenham Court Road for fifty-five shillings, which he considered

a very good investment."

Data on Holmes' famous violin.

"To feel the thrill of a victory...there must be the possibility of failure.

Where's the victory winning a battle you can't possibly lose?"

Dr Pulaski claiming Data can't REALLY play Holmes, since he can't feel, and supposedly

can't use instinct and all the "human" processes like Holmes.

Furthermore, she didn't think he could see the appeal in an ACTUAL mystery,

trying to solve the clues, versus memorizing and acting from rote, solving it

from a script.

"Like the spider, I feel the strings vibrate whenever anyone new chances into my web."

Moriarity.

"I have read her expressions -- what she has not said is as important as her words..."

Moriarity on getting information from Pulaski.

"Does he have life?

He's a machine -- but is that all he is?"

"No. He is more."

"Exactly.

Is the definition of life 'cogito ergo sum'? I think, therefore I am?"

"That's one possible definition."

"It is the most important one and for me..the only one that matters."

Moriarity on whether or not he HIMSELF can be said to be alive.

"I don't know what you are talking about."

"The scones are likewise a must."

"Uh, it's really quite excellent."

"Strange. It actually pleases me to hear you say that."

"I have no idea what you're talking about."

"Of course you do, Madam. The more you proclaim your ignorance, the more you attempt to mislead me, the more I am on to you -- your every silence speaks volumes."

"Good, then if you know what I'm saying when I'm not saying anything, what do you need me around for?

Thanks for the tea and crumpets, but I guess I'll be going."

"Where? Back to here?"

" Yes, would you care to join me?"

Moriarity, trying to question Pulaski. She's clever enough to try to trick him into walking

off the holodeck, which would have wiped him out. The "here" was his sketch of the

Enterprise.

Some trivia on the episode:

A) They thought Holmes was public domain, and the gap between this and the other

episode was longer than they wanted- since they had to secure the rights before

airing the sequel.

B) There's something interesting in the episode that aired. This is another episode where

something leaves the holodeck-like a snowball one time. In this case, a paper note.

Farrand wondered about that, and the Nitpicker answer was written up that (as they

explained later) the holodeck has a holoemitter (for holographic "matter") and a

replicator (for regular matter). The note was replicated, as, apparently, were the scones

Pulaski ate. But when this aired, the question came up.

The script (no script is final until airing) adds a short scene at the end-

where Picard and Data mention the note having left the holodeck, and Picard

claimed Moriarity could have, also.

This probably was dropped because it contradicts how the holodeck works.

For Moriarity to leave, he would have had to 1) have a body of permanent matter,

not holographic matter

2) have a computer of some kind attached to the body to score his program.

They currently don't have the tech to "Frankenstein" him a body from replicators.

Then again, I like the solution they used in the sequel. Moriarity got what he wanted,

after all, if not the WAY he wanted it.

Go,

George.

It's one of the Moriarty in the Holodeck episodes. The first, I believe.

I think it was called "Elementary, My Dear Data."

George

Yes.

STILL your turn, Tom....

" The entire point of something like this is to hand-make it.

Just as you have used Old England in a hobby of your own."

"Look at all of the detail... and everything here has some significance?"

"He purchased this in a pawn shop in Tottenham Court Road for fifty-five shillings, which he considered

a very good investment."

"To feel the thrill of a victory...there must be the possibility of failure.

Where's the victory winning a battle you can't possibly lose?"

"Like the spider, I feel the strings vibrate whenever anyone new chances into my web."

"I have read her expressions -- what she has not said is as important as her words..."

"Does he have life?

He's a machine -- but is that all he is?"

"No. He is more."

"Exactly.

Is the definition of life 'cogito ergo sum'? I think, therefore I am?"

"That's one possible definition."

"It is the most important one and for me..the only one that matters."

"I don't know what you are talking about."

"The scones are likewise a must."

"Uh, it's really quite excellent."

"Strange. It actually pleases me to hear you say that."

"I have no idea what you're talking about."

"Of course you do, Madam. The more you proclaim your ignorance, the more you attempt to mislead me, the more I am on to you -- your every silence speaks volumes."

"Good, then if you know what I'm saying when I'm not saying anything, what do you need me around for?

Thanks for the tea and crumpets, but I guess I'll be going."

"Where? Back to here?"

" Yes, would you care to join me?"