WordWolf

I'll play the "Oldiesman sidetracks the discussion" game. Hebrews 7 "1For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him; 2To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; 3Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually. 4Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils. 5And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law," According to Hebrews 7, Abraham gave a tenth- of the spoils- returning from the slaughter of the kings. According to Hebrews 7, this is different from the Levites, who take a tenth "of the people according to the law." Was this a one-time thing Abraham did, or did he do it all his life? "9And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham. 10For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him." Looks like Abraham didn't pay tithes during the lifetime of Levi. ============== What does the actual account say? Genesis 14: " 1And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of nations; 2That these made war with Bera king of Sodom, and with Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, and Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar. 3All these were joined together in the vale of Siddim, which is the salt sea. 4Twelve years they served Chedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled. 5And in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer, and the kings that were with him, and smote the Rephaims in Ashteroth Karnaim, and the Zuzims in Ham, and the Emins in Shaveh Kiriathaim, 6And the Horites in their mount Seir, unto Elparan, which is by the wilderness. 7And they returned, and came to Enmishpat, which is Kadesh, and smote all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites, that dwelt in Hazezontamar. 8And there went out the king of Sodom, and the king of Gomorrah, and the king of Admah, and the king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (the same is Zoar;) and they joined battle with them in the vale of Siddim; 9With Chedorlaomer the king of Elam, and with Tidal king of nations, and Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar; four kings with five. 10And the vale of Siddim was full of slimepits; and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, and fell there; and they that remained fled to the mountain. 11And they took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their victuals, and went their way. 12And they took Lot, Abram's brother's son, who dwelt in Sodom, and his goods, and departed. 13And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew; for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner: and these were confederate with Abram. 14And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan. 15And he divided himself against them, he and his servants, by night, and smote them, and pursued them unto Hobah, which is on the left hand of Damascus. 16And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people. 17And the king of Sodom went out to meet him after his return from the slaughter of Chedorlaomer, and of the kings that were with him, at the valley of Shaveh, which is the king's dale. 18And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God. 19And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth: 20And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all." Recapping in the closing verses, "12And they took Lot, Abram's brother's son, who dwelt in Sodom, and his goods, and departed. 13And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew; for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner: and these were confederate with Abram. 14And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan. 15And he divided himself against them, he and his servants, by night, and smote them, and pursued them unto Hobah, which is on the left hand of Damascus. 16And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people. 17And the king of Sodom went out to meet him after his return from the slaughter of Chedorlaomer, and of the kings that were with him, at the valley of Shaveh, which is the king's dale. 18And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God. 19And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth: 20And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all." Abraham tithed ONCE. To Melchizedek, of the spoils of war. (NOT HIS INCOME.) Abraham was called "The Friend of God." YES, the Bible says Abraham tithed ONCE. Find the SECOND TIME if you can find one. Here's a hint: look for the word "tenth" or "tithe" in Abraham's lifetime. Heck, throw in "firstfruits" just for fun. If you find ANYTHING relevant to Abraham tithing (which wasn't already mentioned), sing out. Here's another hint: I already looked, and it's not there. Abraham tithed ONCE. To Melchizedek, of the spoils of war, not his income. Oldies, why did you ask this question when you have decades of training in how to read the Bible, and understand it, and supposedly remember things more fairly than the rest of us? Shouldn't you have found the results and returned to educate us as to our failure to read and understand it correctly- IF YOU COULD FIND AN ERROR? Or was throwing a question into the discussion your goal?

That's what twi taught me as well-about Abraham. However, the previous statement is true-regardless of what twi taught. Raf mentioned this earlier. "According to the Bible, Abraham tithed once, and not of his income, and was called the friend of God. Well, shucks, I tithed once too. Guess I'm covered." dmiller's response: "Right. He tithed to Melchizedek once (from the spoils of war --- Genesis 14). NOT from other income. " If twi really DID hew to what the Bible taught- instead of flying upon the spoils and maximizing the "pass the loot" strategy, you would have been taught THIS, instead.

Bra-vo, Oldies. You can recall some incidents in the 80s when you disagreed and werent blasted. THOSE incidents are not ALL incidents. Since YOU didn't see them, that does NOT mean OTHERS did not. You were never drugged by vpw-does that mean NOBODY was? This is NOT a difficult concept for most people. Further, supposed leadership "being perturbed" (I'm picturing YELLING involved- was that a nice word for "he went into face-melting mode?" BTW, "face-melting" was lcm's term, not a GSC invention- he called it that. Is leadership entitled to call disagreeing people who VOLUNTEER under him "a-holes"? Is this acceptable behaviour to you? "And that's the end of the story." Weren't living on grounds, I take it? If you had this same disagreement with vpw himself, you would have been off-grounds within the hour. If you had this same disagreement with lcm himself, you would have been off-grounds within the hour. If the "leader" had connections and you didn't, they might have stopped for now. But now, the wheels have just BEGUN to turn when you're not looking, and things "coincidentally" all seem to work AGAINST YOU. Nothing you can say "you're all being a-holes to me because I wouldn't bend over for that staff leader twit" about, not with any guarantee it wasn't all a "convenient" coincidence. As for elsewhere, similar things might happen, depending on who was in charge. Most of twi in most of the 90s, disagreeing with leadership ANYWHERE was a ticket to "mark-and-avoid" land, and you were kicked out. Some people here WERE kicked out for refusing to conform when face-melted. "Dear twi: I was wondering. Is it twi policy that the president of twi is entitled to drink alcohol in large amounts daily, claim the work of others is his own, and to rape the women of the congregation, and kick out any woman who looks like she might tell someone?" "Dear Joe Believer: It is not and has never been a policy for twi to ever approve of or do any of that." "Dear twi: Well, your word is good enough for me! Glad we had this little chat!" ================ "Up to the individual believer to decide for themselves".... which, in the 90s certainly, meant "conform or accept all the social sanctions for refusing to conform, all the confrontations, all the rumours they spread smearing your name, and the recommended ostracism of you by leaders". Technically, that IS a choice.

[Or they might be the perfect excuse to claim they never existed. Example follows:] [it wasn't in the Orange or White Books, therefore Oldies can claim it was NEVER taught by twi that SIT is required for salvation."I didn't see it, it didn't happen!" Oldies is not aware that there WERE people who were very insistent. God help you if you flubbed Session 12 and the class coordinator was one of those "gung-ho" corps people! Then you were screwed! Off you get whisked off for 30 minutes to an hour and you will have LITTLE CHOICE about speaking in tongues or not! I'm sure he's never heard jokes like "Is this seat saved?" "Well, I've never heard it speak in tongues..." It was a short hop from "only saved people can speak in tongues" to "if you're never heard to speak in tongues, you're not saved", and LOTS of people crossed that line in the 80s, and MORE crossed it in the 90s. As for questioning that type of thing, that's "questioning leadership", and lots of people were subjected to screaming matches for that. Since Oldies never got one from leadership for anything stupid (neither did I), he concludes THOSE didn't happen either. I DID, however, get a pointless lecture from someone in-residence AS corps, who obviously was trying to REHEARSE the face-melt. I tried to reason for a moment, then stopped when it was obvious he was not in listening mode. So I let him go on, and when he was done, I simply said "You were waiting all week to give that speech, weren't you?" and he relaxed after I didn't force him to fit into any specific "role", like authoritatian leader or questioned leader or what-have-you. Never apologized-just pretended he never made the speech.] [sINCE some leaders DID get that simple concept wrong, and that keeps eluding Oldies, it does not surprise most of us that plenty of things went on that Oldies never saw and asserts they never happened.] [And if you DID have it in writing, we move on to the next phase, creative reinterpretation of the printed text.]

Highlights from pg-9-11. Dougie73: "I do know VPW taught a live Christian Family & Sex class in lower NY. He showed a clip of a porn at it called "DOG Day Afternoon" Well need I say what it was about ?! I was shocked when I first heard this and it was used as an example to demonstrate how the devil perverted the beauty of sex. I think it was in the early 70's & it was much to much for the students at this camp where they met . It really freaked some of the students so it was never repeated again. Are there any early day wayfers who were there ? I remebered that reading this thread & the person I know that took it was a teenager at the time ! Anyone here ever hear about this. I don't think I would want this ask this person now to recall that memoery so I'll you my friends on the "talk radio of ex-wayfers' to comment! I better "renew my mind" so I can get this posting out of my head now !!!!!!" Skeptical Texan: "If I had been one of a victim of his sexual appetites, perhaps I, too, would ascribe his motive for offering CFS to his sexual lusts. But I don't think it was that. I ascribe his motive for offering to CFS to revenue generation. Seriously, I think the purpose of CFS, and TWI generally, was to make money. VPW may have been evil, but he wasn't stupid. VPW's sexual appetites, and whatever scriptural justifications he made related to them, had to be kept private or any normal person would have left. Then he'd lose the money and access to young women. Promiscuous behaviors and the doctrines justifying them were lockbox for Corps and other Wayfer insiders. I certainly was never privy to them and I don't recall any such justification in CFS (and, being single, I was listening carefully.)" Valerie: "I thought the class was disgusting. I also felt, as GOEY does that it was a class for VP to get every woman in the mind frame to worship the men's penis, thus ATEMPTING to make us promiscious. It only ....ed me off. I also felt that he was very demeaning to women and I just hated the class. It depressed me and made me cry every f***ing time. I think I had to suffer throught it maybe 3-4 times. Then of course I cannot forget the wife who's name rymes with Boynihan, that told me that we are here only to give pleasure to our man even if it hurts. what a stupid b***tch."

Some highlights from the other thread.... (pg-1-pg-8) Zix: "CF&S was an unusual class--they didn't give a syllabus when I took it. The first part was the "Family" part, man head of household, children unruly, etc. Those verses and the like. Second part was the sex part. VP runs through all these slang terms for genitalia because "you can't minister to someone if you don't understand what they're talking about" Roll Eyes (Hello? Word of Knowledge, anyone? Oh well...) He shows diagrams of all sorts of different breast and penis shapes (which drew laughter from the women in my class, "Look, honey! There's yours!" (My TC's wife)) Mrs. Wierwille is there and she looks embarrassed and miserable, wanting to be anywhere in the world but on that set. He has Dr. Winegarner talk about some physiology, tells women how to spit-lubricate their partner if necessary, makes an offhand reference about masturbation preferable to being unblessed with sex, etc., etc. Ick. I feel like I need a shower just remembering all that stuff. My TC told me VP used to use married Corps people for live demonstrations of the positions, but had to stop because it was freaking the students out. Don't know if that's true, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was." WhiteDove: "The CF&S class filmed in 1974 was a video version of the early live camps.The sessions are: 1. The way of a man with a maid,man wonderfully made ,attitudes toward sex 2. The threefold cord, The Virtuous Woman 3. I Corinthians 7:1..ff The original sin 4. Anticipation,Realization, Memory, New Morality, general anatomy and language barrier(Dr. covers slang terms for male & female parts and sex ect.) 5. Male & Female anatomy 6. Childbirth,lovemaking, birth control,masterbation 7. Art of dating responsibilities of Men & Woman , Question and answer session. Lots of good pictures of Tick the wonder dog." "They did not give out syllabus except for a scripture sheet and a handout on The Virtuous Woman. The Corps classes did have a syllabus about 40 pages and as Im looking the ever present Final exam. also a instructers guide." Mr P-Mosh: "I can verify what Zixar said. I didn't get a syllabus either, but I did take notes, which I don't know if I still have or not. I just thought it was weird for VPW to be going through all the slang terms like that; I had always thought of him as grandfatherly but I think sitting through CF&S changed my mind towards him being like a dirty old man." Goey: "CF&S was a sneaky little class where VPW slyly taught his personal preferences and perversions for sex as if they were the defacto standard. VPW taught that a man's penis was beautiful and magnificant while a woman's vagina was ugly. I'll bet old Vee Pee never knew how to sexuall satisfy a woman, or never really cared to know. He was into getting his own satisifaction - taking care of the Man of God. He taught in this class that" the way to a man's heart was through his penis", opening the door for premarital and promiscous sex and to women trying to get a man's heart by taking care of that magnificant and beautiful penis. Well, we know what got to old Vee Pee's heart now don't we? Don't recall if he taught how to get to a woman's heart - but it certainly was not through her vagina because that thing is ugly. Best not look at it. It was also a class that subtly made men superior to women in most every way. This class was about VPW's disdain for women, relegating them to sexual and domestic servants of men. I never took this class seriously. WordWolf: "A) It was the only class where 7 sessions made for a 2-page syllabus. That should be a sign that it's a little sparse on substance. B) It's the only class I ever took where I was embarrassed of the name. "I have to head out-I have a Bible study class tonight." "Really? What on?" "Um, Christian Family." C) The "original sin", Proverbs 31:10ff was covered, as was I Corinthians 7:1ff was also covered. How he could read I Corinthians 7:2, commit adultery many times, and look himself in the mirror is beyond me. D) Everyone remembers the session with all the slang terms. It seemed to relax us a little, since you can't be embarassed while laughing, but other than that, wasn't necessary. E) It was largely a Sex Ed or "Hygiene" class. Complete with photos and illustrations. F) I honestly don't remember vpw's comments mentioned above. I do remember (and even back then, others had commented) how beautiful he thought a woman's funbags are. (Funbags, you know, Thelma and Louise.) G) I remember him saying a few things here and there about various sex topics. The most off-the-wall ones will stay with me till I die. Like, how a man wants a woman who's a bit of an angel and a devil- an angel in public, and a devil in the bedroom. Or, concerning one position I have no intention of trying, "ever couple probably tries it at some point". To which, I say, "Ew, ew, ew, ew, ew." If someone out there has tried it, DON'T TELL ME. I do NOT want to know. And of course, in my class, he described-but did NOT show- that pornographic video with 2 women and a dog. He said the dog was trying to get away from the women, which showed it had more sense than they did. THANKS FOR SHARING. WHY did I need to know ANYTHING about that video? Was that instructive in some way? H) One of the main points, one that was repeated in several sessions, was the destigmatizing of sex as "dirty". Oddly enough, the proper place of a sex life in a MARRIAGE and not as OUTSIDE a marriage seemed not to be repeated in several sessions. Strange sorting of priorities for a Christian class. I) Of course, the one thing that I still find TRULY bizarre was that wierd "casualwear" outfit he wore teaching that class. I can understand getting out of the suit, but was that thing actually worn in PUBLIC? That thing was uglier than a leisure suit! J) The hero of that class was Tick. Anything else you want to know? Kudos to whoever managed a session breakdown-my goal was to just get thru it." Pirate: "This class was the beginning of the end for me in twi. It was just so ridiculous. The long list of slang terms was very educational. I learned a lot I had never heard before. "Taking the dirt road" is the one that has always stuck in my mind, no matter how hard I've tried to get it out of there. Of course everybody remembers the pictures right out of "101 Sexual Positions." Basically, they were just cheap black & white 50s-60s era pornography. I can remember VP pointing out one that was supposed to the best for getting the deepest penetration. Thanks, Doctor. I don't know if they did this in every class, but at the end we were supposed to answer a list of questions like "How old were you the first time you had sex?" "Have you ever had a homosexual/lesbian experience?" "Have you ever participated in oral sex, anal sex, group sex, etc. etc. etc." This was supposed to be anonymous and for "research purposes" but it was pretty bizarre and I really wonder what they really did with those. The weirdest thing for me though was the whole "original sin was masturbation" teaching. When we broke up into our little discussion groups after that one, I remember asking the other people if they really believed that and they all did. Our group leader said something like "We might not understand it all but Dr. Weirwille does and that's good enough for me." What a crock. I was on the way out the door after that." diazbro: "At the time (75 or so) we in my area were all young with an abundance of hormones so it made sense that there might be a class to deal with this topic. On the other hand no one in the room needed an explanation on slang or needed to see pictures of dongs." " CF&S was some half-a$$ed stab at trying to make recommendations on how a christian should approach the topic of sex but it failed as it didn't deal extensively with issues such as sex before marriage and/or adultery which are only two of the more obvious issues." Trefor Heywood: "It was far more about sex than the Christian Family." "The class did seem to be fairly denigrating towards women. "I remember VPW using a phrase like "A wife should be an angel in the kitchen and a whore in the bedroom". When she wasn't cooking, was he renting Dotsie out?" Wow 76-78: "It seems to me that I came away from that class with a distinct sense that it was mainly directed at the women. -How she should treat her man (we're just little boys, all grown up). How she shouldn't nag at him, how she should look pretty for him, she should have sexy nighties set aside for special times, she should have the home peaceful for him when he comes home from work, etc, etc. But I must add that I (myself) also thought that if a man was to receive such adoration from a woman, he must be doing something to deserve it. This was my take on it, I could not imagine someone getting this kind of treatment just because that is the way it is supposed to be. Looking back, I now see how lopsided the teachings and exhortations were. I think it is in this class where he makes statements like "there is no clear cut teaching about fornication in the New Testament" and "if you knew the freedom you had in Christ, it would blow your minds". These statements, made in this class setting, clarified the meaning of the statement made in plaf: 'love God, love your neighbor and do as you damn fool please' Makes ya wonder if vpw had an agenda, huh?" Zix: "Yes, VP taught that crap about the Original Sin being masturbation (i.e. must have been a banana, not an apple...) in CF&S. Fortunately, right before the segment started, our Limb C stood up and said "The biblical evidence for this next segment is still under review, so don't take it as set in stone." Not surprising that he didn't stick around long after LCM's "Obey or Die" letter... Apparently, VP took the phrase with the Serpent showing Eve that the fruit of the tree was a thing "to be desired" and declared it meant "to be desired sexually". Funny, then, as how masturbation is not mentioned again in the Levitical cleanliness laws, although it does go out of its way to legislate that you can't touch the saddle upon which a menstruating woman has sat. Must have been an oversight... :blink: " Dot Matrix: "I took the class more than once, maybe three times. I NEVER understood how VP got "masterbation" from scripture. I found that class to be in poor taste. Now, looking back, it was about old horny men having a great time at the expense of young believers. Why did he think he needed to teach such smut to young adults? We already learned about it in school or with our own experiences. It was inappropriate. Never understood the masterbation stuff, but then I never understood "corps night" I used to sit there like I was in a foreign country unfamilar with the language. I still thnk VP used our "birth to the corps" papers as "beat-off material." (Some had some racey things written in it.) In CF&S, I bet VP watched us through a little peep hole, through which he peeked and played "yankee doodle" on his dandy." "If I believe TWI was OKAY then went bad, I feel better about me.... Then, I was not REALLY deceived, I got into a GOOD ministry and it went bad. To recognize VPW was a sexual pervert who took us all for a ride --- means you have to deal with yourself/myself/ourselves in understanding we WERE THAT tricked!!! That deceived!!!! That taken advantage of!!! To say VPW taught some good Bible is like saying John Wayne Gacey wasn't all bad because he could paint." WayferNot: "I first took this class when I was a youngin (19 yrs old). I scratched my head about masturbation being the original sin. But then when veepee tried to teach women how to masturbate, I really scratched my head. I thought now if Adam and Eve did it and got booted from the Garden of Eden, why it is OK to do it now? And then the suggestion he gave to women on how to masturbate was not a good one. In case you are wondering, he said that women/girls needed instruction because they weren't as knowledgeable in this area. (Go figure.) I don't remember needing any lesson on this. I guess he thought that because he thought women were more reserved in this category of life. He said men/boys didn't need it because their hands always found their way to that part of the body."

If I were to take a guess at what Eagle means, I would say he meant "they find no error in anything these mean taught, even if the error had been found, dissected, and is common knowledge at the GSC." Examples could include -"Speaking in tongues is PREREQUISITE to revelation." -the 1942 promise -all the "actual errors" discussion material -the differences between "kingdom of heaven" and "kingdom of God" of Bullinger's, which the others (except cg) all picked up, and was proven wrong. (And cg beat us to it, actually.) So, around here, those are "obvious". If the ex-twi communities weren't cowering in fear from open dialogue, they would be "obvious" THERE, too. However, some shut down open dialogue forums, and some never allowed them to START.

I'm not on the clock or something. I'm asking if someone could post quotes in their spare time like in the other ("wonderland") threads. The "the way:living in wonderland" thread has quotes almost entirely from "the way:living in love." "vp and me in wonderland" discusses "vp and me". "Outreach Outside twi's congregation" (I think that's the name) quotes a bit from "Born Again to Serve." The first 2 are threads I worked on, and covered excerpts from all over the book. A week or so, or anytime in August, really, would be appreciated. It's not like you get a salary for posting here, and you're too savvy for a "loyalty to the website that taught you t3h tr00th" speech. (At this point in life, certainly...) Frankly, if Tom LB and the Sudos split up all the quotes, it would be more of a side-thing and feel less like a job for any of them....

By 1988, the Teen Stage had been renamed the Afternoon Stage, since it had proven to be so successful that believers in their 20s (and older) would also hang out there, aka "Teen Vets." The same stage was also used for a "Coffee House" (a talent show, really) one night each ROA. Both the afternoon activities and the talent show were Bible/twi-based. In other words, it was a rousing success. As with all rousing successes, lcm would either slap his name on it, or destroy it. He chose to destroy it. And as a younger person, I never got the memo that we were supposed to be attempting the horizontal mambo during the ROA. Looking back, I'm glad I didn't.

Anyone got a copy of "Uncle Harry:a Biography", and willing to share some of the best quotes with us?

Those of you who have something to share, (relevant to the time-frame), PLEASE add it here...

Has anyone who was around in the old, old days checked in? ANY account, no matter how fragmented, would be very appreciated.....

Most of you are aware that there were 2 types of book that say "by Victor Paul Wierwille" on the cover. The SECOND type-which came later-were written by committee, and the research staff wrote 100% of the contents except the introduction/preface. That's books like "Jesus Christ Our Promised Seed" and "Jesus Christ Our Passover." vpw himself otherwise provided zero percent of the contents. The FIRST type-which describes most of "vpw's" books- were the result of taking one book of one author and retyping its contents, or taking more than one book and inserting chapters and retyping their aggregate contents. Almost all of vpw's "signature books" fall in this category. =========== Ok, then, starting off.... The White Book, "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today"... RTHST's 1st edition was Jack E. Stiles' "the Gift of the Holy Spirit", with a few words moved around. Its introduction included an anonymous reference to a man of God who taught him on this subject. That's the Stiles whose book this was a complete photocopy of. Later editions deleted all mention of ANY man teaching him on the subject (3rd edition and later). Later editions also featured EW Bullinger's "the Giver and His Gifts". (This book is currently available under the name "Word Studies on the Holy Spirit.") The Bullinger book is the source of the 385 occurrences of "pneuma" in the New Testament. (Which vpw was unable to even pronounce correctly.) ========= Juedes documented some of this very well, years ago... http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/vp_stolenrthst.htm http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/vp_stiles.htm http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/vp_sources.htm ================= The "Power For Abundant Living" book was, of course, a transcription from the class of the same name. The Orange Book's origins therefore are the same as the origins of the class. In its first iteration, that meant it was the exact same thing as Leonard's CTC Gifts of the Spirit course. Later iterations pruned out the Advanced class from the "PFAL Foundation" class, and filled in the remaining space with Bullinger's "How to Enjoy the Bible", and culminating the class with Sessions 9-12, which were Stiles and Bullinger's works on Holy Spirit. dmiller: "I have a few books by Bullinger, including Word Studies on the Holy Spirit and How To Enjoy the Bible. Word Studies is the list of the 385 usages of pneuma hagion, with a short commentary on each verse. Imo -- everything you have ever heard docvic say about the various usages of PH, seem to have come directly from this book by Bullinger. How To Enjoy The Bible has many sections with familiar headings: *No Private Interpretation*; *define words by their biblical uage*; *All scripture .....*; *context of where it is written*; *absent from the body, present with the Lord*; and more." ============= The "original" PFAL (what I call its first iteration) was a clone of Leonard's class in EVERY detail. Leonard's class had imaginary characters called Maggie Muggins, Johnny Jumpup and Henry Belocco. (I'm not sure about Snowball Pete or Herman B.) Leonard was Canadian. Maggie Muggins was a children's television character easily recognizable by his audience by name. (As if you said "Captain Kangaroo then said..." or "then Big Bird said...) Johnny Jumpup is the name of a plant. Using those 2 names as characters in a class, however, that was straight out of Leonard. Herman Belocco probably started due to an inability of vpw to precisely recall EXACTLY what was in Leonard's class-so sometimes it was Henry, sometimes it was Herman. Snowball Pete was mentioned ONCE in pfal, and doesn't match the pattern Leonard normally used-normal first name, possible normal last name. This suggests-if I may engage in wild speculation-that this was made up by vpw in a pitiful attempt at originality. One of our posters-who took Leonard's class-said that vpw even ripped off Leonard's speech patterns and style, which made it eerie to hear Leonard teach after hearing vpw imitate him. Leonard handled publishing under Canadian Christian Press. vpw handled publishing under American Christian Press. Someone also pointed out that one of Leonard's books contains an introduction that slightly resembles one of vpw's claims. Expand it, add grandiose claims, and an imaginary snowstorm, and you have the 1943 promise. (Leonard never claimed God told him he was unique nor mentioned the 1st century church to him.) Leonard never made a claim of a "miraculous" event. This, however, is from Leonard's foreword to his book "Gifts of the Spirit"... "One day God spoke to me. 'If thou wilt wait patiently before me, I will give thee the revelation concerning that which is written in My Word touching these things; the revelation my people need to bring them out of their chaos and confusion.' I believed God. For months I waited before His presence in solitude. During those wonderful days, He revealed the truth to me concerning the gifts of the Spirit. As He did, these things were proven by acting upon the knowledge thus received, and by examining the results in light of His Word." ================= In other news.... "Are the Dead Alive Now?" is a compilation of some of Bullinger's works, most notably "the Rich Man and Lazarus: an Intermediate State?" and "King Saul and the Witch of Endor: Did the Prophet Samuel Rise at Her Bidding?" Most readers will note that vpw also ripped off the "title with question mark" in addition to the content of the books. "Studies in Human Suffering", later called "Job: Victim to Victor", was taken from Bullinger's book "the Book of Job". That became a large chapter in one of the "Studies in Abundant Living". ====================

Please refresh my memory, and adjust it where I'm remembering incorrectly. After the first few years, ROA was held on-grounds. (Rental fees for site: $0.) 90% or more of the total setup was performed by way corps and staff who were already there, staff receiving regular pay, corps working for free. (Setup cost: $0.) That includes pipes for showers, rows for Tent City, stages, etc. I'm not sure if the big tents were set up by twi'ers or by contractors, and what the cost for the tent rentals were. (I know the Big Top was not owned by twi-no idea about the other stuff.) There was an admission for the week for the event. There was a (small) fee to take a shower on-site. Housing was either a tent onsite in Tent City, provided by you (cost to twi: $0) a large tent for corps or intl outreach or whoever, provided by them (cost to twi: tent rental) RV on site (which was charged a fee to the user for all services) or staying in a hotel offsite (cost to twi: $0.) Camping supplies were staffed by twi'ers and sold at retail. (Earning a profit.) Food services were staffed by twi'ers and sold at retail. (Earning a profit.) The bookstore was staffed by twi'ers and (always) sold at retail. (Earning a profit.) Events were either the keynote teachings or performed by volunteers (musical groups, etc.) (cost to twi: $0.) =========== So, except for the tent rentals, twi incurred NO expenses, and provided no free services except a few of the group tents, and a place to pitch your OWN tent. Since those staying in the tents paid for showers and bought all food (retail) from twi, even that turned a profit-and people DID pay for the entire event. Seems to me that for a "non-profit" organization, twi-as always- turned a tidy profit on the event. Rental of the tents could not POSSIBLY match the admission fees alone, plus the bookstore sales-retail and food sales-retail turned a tidy profit on their own. (Anyone who thinks they didn't after giving it thought, well....) Does anyone remember differently? Am I overlooking some great expense incurred by twi? Ok, electricity, I expect, cost something, since the main tents and stuff had full power.

No need. They advocated kicking out any child with 'inconvenient' needs. One recommended using a stick and giving the beating of the child's life at the FIRST infraction, then telling him the second time will be worse than this. Another recommended fostercare or putting them up for adoption (I forget which). A third recommended abandoning the child in the woods or by the roadside (I forget which.) Someone curious can look them up- I read all 3 of those here.

http://www.oneishy.com/personality/personality_test.php :)

We talked about this on the "vp and me in wonderland" thread. Here's what lcm said-in italics and my commentary-in boldface "Incident of Way Corps going home after Corps Week but prior to the ROA." "Corps Week was when the Corps got together, and was when the Corps did the set-up and assembly of all the physical details needed for the ROA. (Setting up Registration, the tents, Family Tables, food stands...) So, these Corps did setup and met together, then went home. They worked for free for the week preceding ROA." "Dr heard about it and reproved everyone in the corps household for the problem, for not helping to put it on." "Setting up all that stuff doesn't count as "helping to put it on"? That was a week's free labour! "Reproved" them? He should have THANKED them for the free labour! After all, there WAS an admission, we DID PAY for setup, so things COULD have been done with local workers, providing work for labourers locally. Of course, that would mean vpw would have to accept seeing money exit. " "He reminded everyone of the commitments that they had made regarding a lifetime of Christian service." "They served a week of hard labour. What about that? Further, when did 'a lifetime of Christian service' become synonymous with 'involuntary servitude for life at the whims of twi'? I don't remember MANDATORY ROA attendance being required in the corps signups-did anyone sign such a document?" "Every corps person needs to plan ahead one year or more so that they can be a part of these events. They need to be able to be a part of ROA and corps fellowship." "It occasionally came as a surprise to those people who never actually WORKED for a living (vpw went straight from school into pastoring, lcm went straight from school into the way corps), but REAL jobs have REQUIREMENTS and RESPONSIBILITIES. All these people made arrangements for a VACATION WEEK from work (for some of them, this was their ONLY vacation, or was unpaid leave), paid to travel to hq on their own from all over the country, and WORKED for a week, unpaid. Now you have the nerve to say 'Not good enough-work MORE for free!' NO! These people have families to support, jobs to perform, and lives to maintain. If they leave, it's because they HAVE to, not because they WANT to, simp! At the very least, you owed them profound thanks. To insult them after they worked for free is lacking in character, lacking in integrity, and lacking in Christian values. So, to you who said this, I say 'F* you, AND the motorcycle you rode in on!!!!' Or, as Andy Kaufman once said, ''You, sir, are a f*ing @$$h*, a F*ing @$$h*, a F*ING @$$H*!!!! '" ========= I would expand on it now, but really, I think that once you've said that, you've said it all.

I find I prefer the get-togethers that happen in a hotel with air-conditioning, but I like one or two a year also.

"So, something I've never understood...... What made the WOW burgers that darn good?" "Two things........1) Being really hungry and 2) Wierwille said they were (good). Just another "buy in" to wierwille's charisma." I'll add a few more reasons. 3) Decent sized-slab of meat (a Wendy's Double), broiled. 4) Someone mentioned how the get-together made stuff nicer. That's true here, too. I had a virtual twin of a WOWburger at a get-together last month. Tasted great. And until tonight, I hadn't figured out what it reminded me of. 5) They were the OFFICIAL Burger of the Word Over the World Ambassadors. They were a BRANDED product. 6) Add the 5 reasons together, and toss them into the stories of people who attended & had a good time. Then it is raised to iconographic status, like a beefy version of the Holy Grail, or a Krabby Patty or something. So now you almost HAVE to try one just to see what all the commotion was about. I related a similar experience about buying a designer latte when visiting an internet cafe some time ago. "I felt it enhanced the experience," I said when asked. There were similar attempts to lionize the chicken. Don't believe me? I think I still have a copy of the Way Productions tape with THE SONG ABOUT THE CHICKEN somewhere.

Never suggest that anyone or anything in twi was/is not superior to anything NOT in twi. That one was certainly active as of the 80s. I ran into that little brick wall myself.

Jung-Myers-Briggs test. http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes1.htm

From what I've seen, "the best of times" was either (or both): A) when I was new, didn't know the "behind the curtain" details, and before it got a lot more legalistic or B) when a bunch of us just went off and did stuff because we enjoyed each other's company, before that became mandatory Seems everybody has the same answers on that. (Except for a few who say it was always the best of times.)

THE BRIDGE BUILDER by Will Allen Dromgode, 1934 An old man, going a lone highway, Came at the evening, cold and gray, To a chasm, vast and deep and wide, Through which was a flowing sullen tide. The old man crossed in the twilight dim; But he turned when safe on the other side And built a bridge to span the tide. "Old man," said a fellow pilgrim near, "You are wasting strength with building here. Your journey will end with the ending day: You never again must pass this way: You have crossed the chasm, deep and wide -- Why build you a bridge at eventide?" The builder lifted his old grey head: "Good friend, in the path I have come," he said, "There followeth after me today A youth whose feet must pass this way. This chasm that has been naught to me To that fair-haired youth may a pitfall be. He, too, must cross in the twilight dim; Good friend, I am building a bridge for him."

Formal programs, that's something else entirely. Supposedly, everything not a class or program was entirely voluntary, but during the 90s, that became a fiction everywhere. (Before that, it was a fiction in some places but not others.) Now there's something I can agree with wholeheartedly. So long as "some others" means "the people carrying out Craig's orders."