WordWolf

waysider: Mike: [seems to me that this supposed Sanskrit meaning was cobbled together years later to add legitimacy to what was already a practice that had become NORMATIVE. When I asked about the 'horn of plenty' of a corps grad, I didn't get "well, it's from the Sanskrit..." I got an answer about symbology.] Ok, here we go again. The subject being questioned is vpw's coming up with the way tree structure, and making sure all the money went to him and stayed there-as opposed to any staying locally like had happened before and was directly what he was ending. Mike claimed that Jesus did it first. "Didn't Jesus have a horn o'plenty passed around to collect money for his enterprise and give the people an opportunity to give above their temple tithes?" I challenged him to prove this claim. He came back with verses saying that when Judas was said to hold the money for the apostles, this meant the SAME THING. I disagree. I say these verses show Judas handled the money for the apostles, but say nothing of how they GOT the money. Any of several possibilities could explain how they got the money. However, to invoke ANY of them in the absence of a verse is what vpw called 'private interpretation.' (And what other people might call 'pulling it out of your donkey.') On the other hand, Judas took the money meant for Jesus, and spent it on himself, embezzling it. Now, THAT sounds like the way tree in action. ========= We're still supposedly discussing the way tree and how it was used as a substitute for the movement of God that immediately preceeded it, and stole all its money. Is there any chance Mike will stay on-topic, or will we see a trip to the land of "let's change the subject and hope nobody notices?"]

You'd say a great deal. Some of it, at times, is sensible to the average, literate adult. Leuchter supposedly wanted to test a surface for the presence of a poison that was present over 40 years before. As I learned back in high school, one problem with poison gas is that it is highly reactive-that's why it's poisonous. (That's why I can clear out chlorine fumes by introducing an open flame, which forces a chemical reaction called burning-but technically is OXIDATION, meaning I force it to react and combine with oxygen. Nobody had to tell me I could do it, either.) Given 40 years, the amount of chemical present somewhere would be extremely small, due to the passage of 40 years, and re-reaction at the microscopic level like always happens. Given exposure to the elements (WEATHER), 40 years of exposure will dilute the presence of any chemical. Given rebuilding, some of the bricks that had been exposed to poison had been moved, and some bricks that were NOW there were introduced later and were never exposed to poison because they hadn't been around when the poison gas was released. So, Leuchter, who acted on his own without permission and desecrated a grave, took some bricks- which we would call STEALING FROM A MONUMENT. He either knew that he might have taken the wrong bricks, and if they were the right bricks, they might have been exposed to poison and been purged of it in the DECADES since due to weather and time, or he did not. If he DID know, then he deliberately engaged in fraud. If he did NOT know, he's just as incompetent as even one of his own history revisionists called him. Then, he sent the "sample" (which was grossly below standards for a sample when I was in HIGH SCHOOL) to a lab. He then made an amazingly elementary "mistake"- he didn't tell them he wanted the SURFACE tested. So, they pulverized the sample and tested the AGGREGATE. Either he knew this would ruin the sample-which means he engaged in fraud- or he did not know-which means, again, he's an incompetent. The lab took the sample, and judged the aggregate as having no discernable level of poison. Of course, if there HAD been discernable levels, they would have been on the SURFACES, and the AGGREGATE diluted what little there was further yet. So, the "sample" might have been from bricks that hadn't been AT the facility when people were getting gassed. If they HAD been, they'd been exposed to time and weather for DECADES. Whatever was left was then DILUTED by combining the exposed surfaces with the unexposed majority of the brick. The presence of poison was not detected. DUUUUUHHHHH. If one pulled aside people from the labs in my old HIGH SCHOOL, they could have made the same conclusions the rest of us do- the sample was so badly compromised that the results won't tell you ANYTHING if they come back negative-and the chance of the sample coming back positive after exposure to poison and then the conditions this sample was exposed to is almost nil. It doesn't take a LOT of science to understand that-a high schooler's understanding of practical chemistry is enough. However, WTH's understanding of "basic laws of physics" gets invoked here. WTH thinks the understanding of all this contradicts the "basic laws of physics." What results is a pastiche of parrotting back whatever Leuchter said, and lots of insults to anyone who disagrees. ========= Frankly, the last time I saw someone trying to misdirect this badly was when someone claimed their doctrine was correct, and for it to not work, "God would have to change the laws of the universe." Now, we have "basic laws of physics would have to be broken." SSDD.

It's labeled as "pinned". It's what's normally CALLED a "sticky", just labeled differently. The title is "Welcome to the Greasespot Cafe" and it's up above the other topics here. You can click on it here: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?showtopic=7913

$65 for 5 hardbound books, syllabus, 1-year subscription. The books were cheap and easy to produce (so long as you have access to the reproductive facilities), and these were not big textbooks-they were little novel-sized things, with not much print on a page. The largest have pages with 1/2 the text of a standard textbook on it, with fewer pages than in a standard textbook. The expenses were all covered in-house- -The supposed author was not needed to be paid separate royalties -No license fees were ever paid for the material from other sources -the printing's stages were ALL done in-house and thus only cost (once the machines are paid for) were a factor -distribution was handled FREE by us locals -limited amounts of tapes were produced, and used over, and over, and over, showing signs of wear no normal tapes would show The costs to print up all the materials for a $65 class were less than $20. The RETAIL PRICE at a bookstore for the $65 class would be under $40 in the year you took it, and that's adding PROFIT of various kinds-for distributor, seller, author, publishing company. They made a considerable amount per class, if 6 people were paying students per class. ==== Mind you, whether or not you feel like you got something useful for the money is a separate issue- they were WELL-PAID for what you received, whether or not you got a benefit. (And good for you-you feel you benefitted from it. Me, I feel I got some benefit as well.)

you may challenge me to that.... Right after YOU show from Scripture (The Bible) that Jesus "had a horn o'plenty passed around to collect money for his enterprise and give the people an opportunity to give above their temple tithes." (Or EQUIVALENT, of course- if you can find it but it's called something else or shaped differently, of course, that would still count. You first.... Your source on "Eastern culture" being? A plumber gets charged by the job- or works for a company that does, and receives a fixed salary from them for doing so. A waiter or waitress' salary is minimal. They work with the expectation that they will receive tips for good work. Therefore, as most people would consider it, to skip tipping them is to deprive them of part of their livelihood. (Don't like it? There's places where the tip is automatically deducted and assigned to them, and you don't have to calculate. Still don't like it? Eat at Mc Donald's. No tipping expected.) A minister can receive a salary, and that's fine with me. His church either gets a tithe, or survives on donations. One or the other is EXPECTED in our society. Expecting a "tip" for preaching is a lot like expecting a "tip" for voting in the Senate. We call that a "bribe." Both men already GOT a salary-a living wage they can support their family on. Preaching is part of the JOB of a minister- a basic expectation for all ministers unless specified otherwise. Voting on bills is EXPECTED for Congressmen. Psychiatrists get paid by the hour-and don't draw a salary otherwise when doing so.I have no doubt that you believe vpw's dismissal of Psychiatrists as "give a good feeling" is a fair and accurate summary of their job. However, it's woefully ignorant. A Psychiatrist must go to MEDICAL SCHOOL, and is a MEDICAL DOCTOR. That's why they have "MD" at the end of their name. A Psychiatrist is trained in both medicine and in Psychology, which is years of training all by itself. You either spoke on the field of someone who spent 4 years in college, 2 years or more in Medical School, and then 2 or more years in internship before BEGININNG their career lacking a basic understanding of their training, or knew all that and dismissed most of a decade's work casually. A Psychiatrist doesn't just sit on a couch so you can get a good feeling. Both they and LICENSED Psychologists spend years in training so they can offer more than that. If sitting there and making appreciative noises was all it took, every Theater major in college would be able to get a Psychology license upon graduation. "COUNSELING" contains the word "counsel". That means they're supposed to be offering COUNSEL. (and every PARTLY-competent one DOES). I'm not going to try and summarize what type of counsel they offer. In the case of a Psychiatrist, however, it's often for more severe cases, since a Psychiatrist is called in when someone requires the use of Psychatric medication to function properly in society. (That's so people don't go into violent fits in public, or hallucinations, or suicidal depressions, or any of dozens of other things.) They have to monitor the effects of the medication, the non-effects, the other symptoms not affected by medication, drug interactions with everything from what's perscribed to the advil they took for a headache last night, all while still listening and offering professional counsel. THAT's why we pay a Psychiatrist by the hour. It's our poster's expectation that this is what's broken. Real ministers make a decent salary. And they don't do it for the money. Or for cars, motorcycles, planes, or free labour at their home. And they cover their shopping trips from their salary, not from the collection plate the church gets. If a supposed minister doesn't find that sufficient, he is in the WRONG line of work, for he has let a love of money interfere with his love for God and God's people. A minister making enough to satisfy all his needs and his family's needs (food, home, transportation, education for kids, clothing, basic entertainment and so on) should not feel the need for ONE PENNY MORE. He should be focusing on DOING HIS JOB.

BTW, a lot of you probably don't know or don't remember...... ....when twi finally put up a website, the first thing of any substance they put up was the Terms and Conditions. There was nothing of substance-even twi-level- but there were elaborate warnings to not use the material that wasn't even there. Is it a matter of the lawyers governing the ministry, or did they really think the most important part of what they had to offer online was the Terms and Conditions? If it's the latter, I AGREE. There's nothing else useful on their site. In other news, the only other time I saw an elaborate warning like that was on a DIFFERENT site with delusions of grandeur and ridiculous content.

These are pretty elementary mistakes for Leuchter to make. Back in HIGH SCHOOL, I would have gotten in trouble for making mistakes this basic in a lab. Then again, my high school lab teachers had a higher standard for accuracy than Leuchter has. They have titles, which reflect the study they put in, and that they know what they claim they know. That's why the don't make amateurish mistakes. (Mind you, even many amateurs would avoid such mistakes.) Then again, perhaps Leuchter DID know a CAREFUL analysis would risk disproving his thesis. So, either Leuchter is a barely-competent amateur, who made elementary mistakes that were easily avoided, and lacks the wit to acknowledge them when raised and said "Wait-they're right. This would compromise the results." or Leuchter knew FULL WELL in advance that he selected methods that were flawed, in order to deliberately obtain flawed results, which means he did NOT want ACCURATE results, but preferred FLAWED results. Either way, WTH's pinned his ideology on this. It's as foolish as pinning one's full understanding of the Bible on a sermonizer, or a homileticist, or something.

Just reviewing WTH's last post to me. WTH STILL isn't responding to lots of things posters here posted- like video footage and so on, and still pretending he isn't responding to them. I bet this convinces HIM he's responding to it or something. He's also under some misimpression-or considers it appropriate- to pretend anyone said this was a great scholarly study here. That's one of his pieces to change the subject when I pointed out what HE posts is what he can claim credit for, not discussions happening somewhere else. We're having A discussion here. (What's next, posting to announce he's not posting?) This discussion is here-which is not specialized as a Holocaust, history, or science board. Therefore, it's not a bunch of experts posting here. That having been said, the amount of information (this is the dawn of the Information Age) available for laymen (like me, WTH, Leuchter, Hamm, and simonzelotes, for example) is considerable. Most of us need not be experts to look over historical evidence, or claims of such, to see if they are reliable or sound. Feel free to click on the arrow and check it out. WTH quoted Lifted Up's post, which pointed out WTH claimed someone was talking about some CURRENT attempts to exterminate the Jews. That means he's claiming he's addressing Lifted's post. WTH then went on for several paragraphs, completely unrelated to Lifted's post. Someone's eager to change the subject and PRETEND some things were never posted-by himself and commented on by WTH..... but then again, someone's eager to PRETEND some things never happened, and some people were never imprisoned and subsequently executed WHILE in prison... There's a systematic pattern here for someone... Since WTH claims he's not skipping over anything, then he didn't miss your earlier quotes. He saw them and made the deliberate decision to not respond, disregard them, and otherwise pretend they don't even exist. However, he expects us to adopt his own doctrines, even to the point of pretending there are no flaws in what he's presenting.

Right. Anything other than enthusiasm probably still marks you for further investigation by what's left of the WayGB.

I've recognized the song from the first quote, and I can sing the first quote. I can't name the song, though. Haven't heard it in a while, either. Maybe the next hint will trip a memory. Or I'll cudgel one up. Or someone else will get it.

When they made a year "Power for Abundant Living" the FIRST time, I was IN and I thought that was horribly unoriginal.... especially since there seemed NO CONNECTION between the supposed "theme" and anything going on that year. That was what-1987? ======= "OUR" Power for Abundant Living. Guess we can officially scratch GOD ALMIGHTY from twi's considerations. It's not HIS Power, it's THEIRS. They're still claiming a "founding" of 1942, when any 1942 origin is purely imaginary. Finally figured out why they did a night where attendance at hq was MANDATORY- they took photos of the not-empty auditorium and are going to milk those for a decade. And they still talk about those "international countries".

twi has always been pretty good at inflating self-images, and horrible at comforting those brought low. Those with big egos were seen by vpw as assets so long as they produced, but those brought low are liabilities-they take time and effort, so they were often cut loose. The way corps supposedly was training for Christian service, or Christian leadership, depending on who you asked. Why didn't it have significant time-expenditures on comforting the hurt?

Hello, sarckat. Few, if any, of us say there's anything wrong with BEING POSITIVE. Few, if any, of us say there's anything wrong with "saying bless you". I, for one, am in favour of both, and I say "God bless" to people all the time. (I like being specific about who I'd like to send the blessing, and did back in twi as well.) THAT's just fine. None of that, however, has anything to do with the discussion at hand, which is about MISTAKES and ERRORS in what we were taught concerning "believing." Being positive or saying "bless you" would not make you a "parrot." I'd say there's any number of GSC'ers who do that and are not "parrots." Let me explain what the "parrot" thing refers to. A parrot is a bird that can repeat phrases or sounds it hears. A parrot DOES NOT UNDERSTAND what it repeats back-it just repeats back sounds. If a person hears teachings, DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THEM and just repeats them back, then there's no LEARNING or UNDERSTANDING conveyed, just the repeating back of sounds. If you've done some serious Bible study on a subject- and not just "reread the twi materials until I agree"- and concluded that the twi position was correct- that's real thought. (I've concluded they were right a number of times.) If you're still repeating what twi said, and never took a hard look to see if the Bible agrees with this statement, then, sadly, you're not thinking on your own, you're just repeating back what you were told without understanding, just like a parrot. BTW, there's a sticky topic pinned up top with a welcome and some advice. I'd recommend reading it. Then again, I'm a little biased. (I wrote the first post.)

I wonder how that selective reading is working out for WTH. He QUOTED me as saying this.... (WW) and replied with this.... (WTH) Once again, WTH seems to forget that we're supposedly having a discussion HERE and not across many other messageboards. He can't take credit for discussions elsewhere- just his own participation in this one. As such, my point about "everything we've mentioned in the thread that he's skipped over" (exemplified by some things mentioned a few times and summarily ignored by him) can't LOGICALLY be addressed by saying "the revisionists have already covered" it, "So truly, nothing has been 'skipped over' like you claim they have." I don't see "the revisionists" posting on this thread and commenting on what was posted here- just him. And he's skipped over several things. That's his choice, and he's entitled to stick with it, but it's rather silly of him to pretend he's not doing it, and to attempt to obfuscate that by mentioning other people elsewhere are discussing it, which has nothing to do with whether he looks at video footage, for example. So, it's a matter of A) ignore the evidence that challenges his position B) pretend there's no problems with evidence supporting his position which are old twi tactics which are archaisms for most of us, but not all of us, just as vpw's comments concerning Jews (which were disproven with genetics) are archaisms for most of us, but not all of us.

Despite vpw saying-in print-something completely different.... Here's what you said vpw meant... 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.

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. 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.

Sorry, I had to structure this. I left your words the same, except for punctuation, and I think I dropped one (redundant) word.

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. 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.

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. 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.

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. " ======