WordWolf

There's a few ways. The easy way: 1) Find the post you want to quote. 2) Look at the bottom right corner of the quote. 3) Click the "quote" button. 4) If necessary, erase the parts you DON'T want to quote. You might add "(snip)" at those points to make it obvious you're cutting out part of the original post. 5) Post your comments after the quote block.

Now, I'll give them this: if someone's supposed to know the material in all those books first (which was effectively what happened ANYWAY before it was a real requirement), then they should have that as a prerequisite: read and learn the contents of these books. Back when, I COULD have been tested on the contents of those books. Instead, the tests I took were divided into 3 sections: A) PFAL itself-class and Orange/White Books (I filled in those answers as fast as I could write; finishing a 90 minute section, complete with triple-checking answers, in 27 minutes) B) the Studies in Abundant Living (I paced myself and finished this in about 47 minutes, including double-checking answers) C) the practical: doing Word Studies then and there (I never liked to rush those, so I deliberately paced myself to use the entire time, less 3 minutes, and chose the shortest options, maximizing my time) Now, I probably COULD have taken tests on the other books. Oddly enough, the process of being fully ready to take tests on all of these was almost antithetical to vpw's vision. He saw any person as potentially able to take Foundational, Intermediate, and Advanced classes all in ONE YEAR. Me, I saw it-bare minimum-as one year EACH, with 2 years more practical if you want people to actually spend time on the material. That's why I buzz-sawed thru the exam- I didn't even seriously consider taking it until I had absorbed the material to MY satisfaction. Actually, I joined a study group of people preparing for the Advanced Class, and had to drop out due to the physical details (I couldn't attend without arriving consistently late, so I bowed out.) The people running it said it was ok, since, apparently, I was pretty much ready for it based on my performance to date, and didn't NEED the study group. So, interesting how the vision for taking the Advanced Class is now 180-degrees from what vpw used to say.

Igotout, on the subject of having crews to set up for phone hookups nobody attended:

This would be disconcerting if the GSC was supposed to be a church or a Christian ministry or something. It is not. It is a board designed to allow as much free speech as possible, and is dedicated-not towards Christianity- but towards exposing the truth about twi, past and present (for the past EXPLAINS the present.) People dedicated to being contentious and argumentative would be kicked out of twi in a hot second, but they're allowed in the GSC so long as they don't completely abandon taste or completely impede discussion. (And those get warnings before anything really extreme happens.) Posts can sound worse than current twi problems here, of course. Then again, discussion of twi problems is verboten in twi, and there's few places to discuss them, past OR present. Further, the current problems ARE the result of decisions made and actions taken in the past. Example: rfr is in charge now. Why? She was in a position of authority because she knew how to suck up once in the inner circle to work her way up to the top. She did this with lcm. How did she get there? vpw lacked the ability to hear God's voice warning him about her untrustworthiness, and she presented an image of competency to him while feeding his ego-which he thought he deserved. So, you can trace THAT back all the way to vpw. lcm would never have HEARD of her otherwise. How did she get to displace lcm and take the brass ring? lcm was caught in acts of sexual misconduct. Why did lcm commit acts of sexual misconduct? vpw taught him that he would need to "loosen up sexually". vpw set the "example" with his OWN sexual misconduct. Why was lcm in the big chair in the first place? vpw hand-chose his successor. He asked everyone to recommend who they thought would be a good replacement for him. They named a small handful of people. vpw then dismissed their suggestions, and chose out lcm entirely on his own. See, lcm was one of the most loyal unto painful death to vpw himself. So, a man with no life-experience or training outside of twi (he went straight from college to the corps), picked solely on the criteria of blind loyalty, was placed in charge of tens of thousands of people, possibly more. Worse, his "training" consisted of what vpw said training should consist of, so he "inherited" all of vpw's weaknesses on top of his own. So, that also goes all the way back to vpw. Now, then, can you see the relevance of discussing the past of twi when looking at its present?

There's possibly 2000 people still in, among them some teenagers who still think they can fix everything, and have no idea of the depth and number of problems- or their perpetrators. I'd hardly call 2000 people "nobody". Jesus talked about joy in heaven over ONE sinner that repented.

If you meant me, then "envy" was a miss. However, one quick dictionary check suggests "bitter" was on the mark. Here's what I found: 1. "having or being a taste that is sharp and acrid" 2. "causing a painful or stinging sensation" 3. "difficult or distasteful to accept, admit or bear" 4. "resulting from or expressive of severe grief, anguish or disappointment" 5. "marked by resentment or cynicism" I think all of those might refer to my posts in this thread. I won't speak for anyone else's posts.

socks, in a discussion on twi's Advanced Class requirements, which includes "monthly updates" on everything you might conceivably pack for said class, for the next 17 months, including a monthly update on "snacks"....

[so, at the time you FIRST took pfal, you came away from the sessions saying "all this material came from others, but vpw assembled their work into classes"? That's REALLY what you said?] [vpw claimed he was THE TEACHER. You said he was your "INSTRUCTOR",which means exactly the same thing as he was your "TEACHER." If you had made the claim to vpw-aka "THE Teacher", that others "taught" you during the 12 sessions of pfal, you would have been subjected to one of the famed face-melting sessions he showed lcm how to conduct. When he called himself "The Teacher", did you actually come away saying, "No, he didn't 'teach' during those 12 sessions'? And if he really was incidental to everything you learned, why try to defend him so vociferously?] [We're not blaming them for vpw's poor conduct and self-centered 'ministry'. (I summed up some of the basics on that above, in case you forgot what I meant by 'self-centered'.)] [You said it, but that's not what happened. vpw spent one of his hour-blocks on the whole thing. Then the students were shown a photograph from a page in a book. If what you're saying was true, the students would have been told, "vpw got this section from Bullinger, and this is one of the things Bullinger used to back up his claim of this material." Instead, they were told "this is a picture that supports vpw's claims in this session." That's what I heard EVERY TIME I sat thru that session, from a variety of teachers, mostly corps. If it was an attempt for vpw to say "I got this from Bullinger", then he did a pretty poor job of it- vpw "forgot" to mention it in the taped session vpw "forgot" to mention it in the edited books vpw "forgot" to mention it in the syllabus-even the Advanced class version vpw "forgot" to mention it in the Home Studies]

[i suppose you had an average education for the 20th century. If so, then you heard about Martin Luther independently of twi, more than a little. Christians in general know more than a bit about him. If vpw sent his people out with Martin Luther's comments on justification by faith and not works, and sent them out to interact with other Christians-or even attempt to graduate a good high school or college- there would have been a rather disturbing event. I know that in high school, I learned MORE about Martin Luther than I ever learned in twi. Now, John Calvin isn't QUITE as famous to the average Christian, to the average American. Calvin spent a lot of time on the subject of free will. (A LOT of time.) vpw claimed he spent more time teaching on free will than they do in any seminary. Considering the seminaries teach Calvin, and vpw KNEW they did because he supposedly went to decent schools, he knew he was lying. However, the students he told this to didn't know Calvin NOR his teachings, so vpw was able to take credit for this subject to them.] [Luther never claimed to speak for God. Luther didn't take the money from God's people and spend it on luxuries for himself. Luther, in fact, argued vigorously against such. Luther never molested or raped God's women. Whatever Luther was, he was a man who was of appropriate character-at least as laid out by Scripture. So, Luther wasn't a false ANYTHING. Did Luther claim to speak on God's behalf? This statement lacks logical support, and thus lacks merit.]

Most people don't have any problem seeing this point, but I'll explain it anyway. Leonard, Welch, Kenyon and the others: none of them endorsed vpw or twi. Neither did Oral Roberts-who first taught the "Red Thread". Plagiarizing their work does not mean they endorsed the end result. Plagiarizing their work and then teaching it does not mean we were "taught by them." They were the source of the material. Look- when Jesus was tempted by the devil, the devil quoted Scripture. That did not mean God endorsed the devil doing that, and it did not mean that Jesus was getting instruction in Scripture as God sees it. God was not "teaching" at that moment. See the connection? As to the other Christians vpw ripped off, their legitimate work was subverted by the supposed source, who slapped his name on it, to take all the credit and make it all about him. The merits and faults of the material is a SEPARATE ISSUE from vpw plagiarizing and being a criminal. Anything that he taught that was true will still be true once the person has examined it free of the framework vpw put in place to claim it was all HIS. Anything that can't withstand independent scrutiny without resorting to vpw's framework to "prop it up" is not worth keeping and should be replaced with material that CAN stand up. The most dangerous element of vpw's framework is- the framework. People refuse to consider whether vpw was in error on many things, because they buy into the image of him that he originated and propagated, and others passed on. Truth will always remain true. However, supposed truth from a source of known FALSEHOODS should be examined exceedingly carefully, since its origin places it under suspicion. ==== This really is not difficult for most people to understand.

Fine, then. I shall apply it SWIFTLY the NEXT time the 12 nations of Israel are taken captive and carried away to another nation because they forsook God.

Your initial post seemed to say that. Your most recent posts seem to say-more specifically- that's not the case at all. Therefore, I'll consider the former to be bad communication and scratch it as a dead issue. That was an ERROR propagated by vpw.If we were to "split hairs", then the Gospel of John will ALWAYS be an exception, since it was written approximately AD 57-58. The Gospel of John is traced back-at the earliest- as AD 80. The Gospel of Luke is traced back-at the earliest- as AD 58. Therefore, if Paul were to strain at a gnat here, he might be saying that Matthew and Mark are "for our learning" and didn't apply to us, since they were penned before AD 57, BUT Luke and John were written AFTER, and therefore TO us, since their date EXCLUDES them from being simply "for our learning." HOWEVER, no matter what vpw said- it seems obvious that Paul wasn't trying to place the Gospels as "written aforetime." The books of the Old Testament were written over a period of time ending some 400 years before Paul arrived on the scene, and their canon was considered fixed at his time. (Let me know if you need documentation.) Stuff that's 400 years old-or older- was written "aforetime" to now. The books of the New Testament were being written at the same timeframe as Paul was writing Romans. Rather than divide things by what month they were written-and even suppose he KNEW which books were being written while he was writing- it seems obvious-WHEN WE LOOK AND ASK THE QUESTIONS- that Paul referred to stuff centuries ago as "aforetime", and did NOT mean "what was written a few years ago" as "aforetime." Therefore, Paul did not intend to exclude anything from the "New Testament." The Gospels were written ABOUT a time before Pentecost. The Gospels were actually WRITTEN AFTER Pentecost. Well, previously in this thread, you said there was NO REASON to do so, but I'll accept this-"It's not something I read"- as a more honest represenation of your position. It was written after Pentecost, and as early as 68 AD.(After the "aforetime" cutoff, if you're absolutely wedded to the concept.) Therefore, it was written to Christians, same as the Epistles. I can really go off on this one, but I'll leave it at this.... You have no idea what vpw did in the beginning. You know what he TOLD someone he did in the beginning. If you want an introduction to what he did, check out the "wonderland" threads, if you want to know specifically what he did "in the beginning", check out "the way:living in wonderland".

Ok, let's see, I Kings 8:50. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_...ter=8&version=9 "And forgive thy people that have sinned against thee, and all their transgressions wherein they have transgressed against thee, and give them compassion before them who carried them captive, that they may have compassion on them:" Captive? To whom is this verse addressed? Per vpw (Bullinger), if the explanation is not in the verse right where it is written, we look at the CONTEXT. (See the link for the entire chapter.) According to the chapter, this is not addressed to men (nor women), but to GOD, in regards to when His people mess up and reject Him, and end up in servitude to other nations. (Go ahead, read the entire chapter, or, if you're in a hurry, from I Kings 8:44 onward.) So, this verse is completely inapplicable to this discussion, as is made clear by using the techniques advocated by vpw. Any adherent to vpw or admirer of his should consider this obvious. ==== Moving on.... I see we have another person who has arrived and appointed himself the arbiter for how long a person should take to heal from wrongs done to them. I'm a little curious. Some people are DEAD because of wrongs done to them by vpw and lcm. Some others were ALMOST killed or ALMOST died as a result of wrongs done by vpw and lcm. What is the statute of limitations of considering that a wrong, and what is the source for this figure? Furthermore, "forgive and forget" the evils done by vpw. I notice no verse was supplied for man (or woman) to do this. Evildoers who DO NOT REPENT are to be treated as dangerous and we're to act accordingly. We are definitely not to FORGET. We are to be careful not to fall into their traps. I know Paul never "forgot" the evils done by others. II Timothy 4:14 "Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works." That's a record IN God's Word ("God has a purpose for everything He says"), where an evil-doer is named so Christians could be wary of him. That record is nearly 2000 years old. Apparently, this "forgetting" thing was NOT God's Will on this subject. "Forgetting" is a BAD thing, when it comes to evil-doers. Pray for them? Yes. Try to forgive? Yes-admitting this is a hard thing to ask. Forget? NO. People need to be warned. There are STILL people who arrive here, who were kicked out and hurt, and still trying to make sense of their suffering. They find some answers when they read up and see the evils that were done to them and DISGUISED as other things. vpw did evil to others in the setting up of "his" class, and the preparation of "his" materials. vpw did greater evil to specific Christians in "his" ministry, who were fooled into thinking all the excellent material "he" (others) produced meant he had a special connection to God-an image he originated and cultivated. vpw used this image and position to do specific acts of evil to specific Christians, and said it was God's Will. Repent? A few people claim that vpw's decades of plagiarism, rape, and other things were all wiped away by one claim as he was close to death, that he wished he'd tried harder not to sin. ("I wish I'd been the man I'd known myself to be.") Of course, a VAGUE and NONSPECIFIC claim like that is nothing at all like an admission of guilt to FELONIES and devastating the lives of Christians he assumed responsibility for. At best, it's a cheap imitation of such a claim; at worst, it's a sign he STILL cared nothing for the ruined lives- only that he wished HE'D been BETTER. (That is, "Yeah, it's a shame I ruined all those lives. If I'd been a better man, this wouldn't have ever happened. Too bad I wasn't a better man...")

I agree with MOST of this. What I disagree with was the idea that vpw's "work" was "the best of HIS ability." It's been documented that "vpw's" work was the best that he was able to plagiarize from the work of OTHERS. Bullinger wrote on death, and his stuff was rewritten into "Are the Dead Alive Now?" BG Leonard taught a class, and 3 months after vpw sat thru the entire class, vpw taught the EXACT same class with HIS name on it. JE Stiles wrote a book, and vpw rewrote it into the 1st edition of the White Book. Later versions of PFAL (originally taught as "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today" by vpw, later renamed by him) and the White Book itself ("Receiving the Holy Spirit Today") incorporated the work of OTHER Christians as well, in a cut-and-paste fashion. (Mostly Bullinger in BOTH cases.) "vpw's" later books- "Jesus Christ Our Passover" and "Jesus Christ Our Promised Seed" were written by the research dept, and vpw added an introduction and the words "BY Victor Paul Wierwille" to the cover. All of this explains why "his" "writing style" changes RADICALLY from book to book, and has NO common markers from book to book. He didn't "write" them at all. He either adapted them or they were ghost-written by the staff. None of this is news. We've been discussing it for years here.

For those who missed it, this should sound familiar. A) I don't care about the PEOPLE that were hurt in God's name by the evil actions of those people who supposedly were leaders in God's name and claimed to make God known to us. B) What I DO care about is the Bible, which I read everyday. Mechanical knowledge of the Bible isn't a bad thing, but it is only "spiritual kindergarten". Until you care for God's people, you're not ready for primetime. vpw himself quoted that people don't care what you know, until they know that you care. I Corinthians says that knowledge puffs up, but God's Love BUILDS up.

Except the Gospels, the record OF our Lord? Well, that leaves out the Gospels-they weren't written "aforetime". Then why did God bother having it written? I thought "ALL" of the Bible was good. Is this a case of "I do not know its value-therefore it must have none"? Oh, but that leaves out so, so much.... Why limit your fellow Christians to only what vpw knew at the time-or ANY Christian, for that matter? And are you currently teaching the occult-type doctrine that you can compel God to act by a supposed "LAW" of believing which has been thoroughly (and throughly) discredited? That WAS in twi, after all, and it's a doctrine that harmed a LOT of people.

The patchwork monster, like some modern-day Frankenstein, slowly gave up its unnatural imitation of life, rotting away a piece at a time.

Assault is a felony. Are you going on the record advocating a crime? That can be called "conspiracy" or "inciting", you know. I believe lcm should be addressed within the boundaries of the law.... if for no other reason, to "Submit to every ordinance of man for man's sake." Law-abiding citizens don't take the law into their own hands. Besides, the confrontation thing was something lcm himself advocated. Shall we sink to his level to confront his evil deeds? Frankly, he needs more praying for than yelling at. If he lets God heal his heart, he'll be at the first step for offering reparations for ruining lives.

I noticed you selectively skipped around my post. It said: When vpw was around, there WERE allegations. There were far fewer than their might have been, BECAUSE vpw had a brilliant network in place to cover his tracks-from before the crime through cleanup after the crime. Did you know that women who have a past history of abuse are easier victims for later abuse? Did you know that all corps applicants were required to submit autobiographies before admission? Did you know that women who listed a past history of abuse were targeted FOR abuse by vpw? News to you NOW, right? Did you know that vpw taught IN PRIVATE that adultery and fornication were all right "if you were able to take it", and told lcm he'd need to "loosen up sexually"? Did you know that vpw arranged to have a private place on grounds-besides his home which was right there, and his office which was right there- which he called an "office" but was outfitted like a bedroom? Did you know that there was a small network of people who were in on this claim of his, who would separate out a "sheep from the herd" for him-including women who would tell other women that vpw needed to see them, and the result was them innocently heading to his "private office", where he was wearing a bathrobe and often nothing else? Where he offered them alcohol, and often it was spiked with something? Did you know that vpw arranged for people to check on his victims within the first few hours after their "encounter", to "counsel" them that it wasn't rape and not to press charges? Did you know that women who looked like they were likely to press charges were given the bum's rush off-grounds, and everyone was told she was possessed and to avoid all contact with her? Did you know that's happened a lot? Did you know that a number of people here either WERE vpw's PERSONAL victims, or his ATTEMPTED victims who slipped away, or know some of his personal victims, or saw the process of the coverup in progress, but didn't put the pieces together until years later? Did you know that some of the ex-leaders have admitted to having been told that by vpw, and having believed it to the point of acting on it, and knowing others who did? Did you know that lcm's main crime apart from vpw was in getting CAUGHT and not being as concealing as vpw? Did you know lcm learned it all FROM vpw? Did you know that-before the internet-it was easy for someone who's been victimized to just vanish with no notice? Did you know that-SINCE the dawn of the internet-it's been a LOT easier to put all the pieces together and form a COMPLETE picture of events behind the scenes? Did you really know all of this? If not, I recommend you do some reading and catch up. Around here, all of this is OLD NEWS.

I do, as do many of us. HOWEVER, that is NOT a requirement for posting here. I direct you to a brief introduction. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?showtopic=7913 aka, "Welcome to the Greasespot Cafe!" I also direct you to Greasespot 101, http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?showforum=12 The difference between "allegations" and "crimes", of course, is whether the speaker wants to pretend they didn't happen or not. vpw committed many crimes, and had a BRILLIANT network in place to cover his tracks-from BEFORE the crime thru cleanup AFTER the crime. It's shocking when one first starts hearing of this, but there's FAR too many eyewitness accounts from total strangers from all over the place, to REASONABLY dismiss them. Of course, you can decide to believe whatever you want. I originally thought the claims where exaggerated or false, myself- but I DID spend the time to review them, and changed my mind fairly quickly. (I'm a fast reader.)

I get the idea that this "donation" thing is a voluntary thing, for those who feel so inclined. Of course, if you want to send 10% of your income, you're free to do that, I'm sure.

["Handled", in this case, meaning "ignored the people on staff whenever they disagreed with my premise that the magazine articles were edited with a Divine Hand guiding it."]

Standard policy was: anyone seeming psychiatrically unstable was sent straight home. (See the thread "vp and me in wonderland" for 2 examples.) As for nobody going postal, that depends. T*m M blew his own brains own with a pistol because lcm was doing his wife. Does that count as postal enough? To my thinking, 'yes', but you may disagree.