WordWolf

[WordWolf in brackets and boldface.]

Hello. Your English is fine. :)

Some people would be surprised how many of us would agree with you about this. Except maybe the "no hard feelings" part. :) In other news, hello. I take it you've already read the greeting and Greasespot 101, so I've nothing useful to add beyond them at the moment. The others will be along with their own greetings.

He may not have wanted the auditorium named after him, but I think he thought of twi AS Wierwillites without calling them that. Think about it. The PFAL class started with another man's class with vpw's name slapped on it. Why? So it could be about him. The White Book originally mentioned another (anonymous) man taught Wierwille-who vpw clearly remembered was JE Stiles, and later editions edit any mention of another man out- despite Stiles' book being the original White Book with vpw's name slapped on it. Why? So it could be about him. He went to Haight-Ashbury personally and put forth he had a unique knowledge of the Bible, and convinced some of them to be his advertising arm. Great Christians acted on both coasts, and people believed when they saw THEM in action. Once the Great Christians brought the numbers in, vpw kicked them out, and ordered all authority to come FROM him, and all money to go TO him. Why? So it could be about him. Oh, and bring in the money. Less than 1% of twi income ever went out ANYPLACE to benefit people. And of that, most of it was to cover twi mistakes- like paying for rehab for injured Christians. vpw lacked ANY formal training in programs and experience in programs, but wasted no time setting up programs-all of which were designed to make a profit. Which, of course, they did. Anyone who entered those programs-which were written or verbal "gentlemen's" agreements-was required to live up to their agreements, but vpw reserved the option of kicking them out if they failed to grovel sufficiently. He exercised this option at least twice-once with the Zero Corps and once which is documented in "VP and Me." (That incident apparently was what lcm drew on when he demanded HIS loyalty oath.) Anybody who was around when he was in one of his GOOD moods heard him call everybody in twi-or whichever portion was present- "MY KIDS". That one's even in TW:LiL. He also called himself "THE TEACHER" years before PFAL was stolen from Leonard. He continued this IN PFAL. Why? So it could be about him. So, would vpw want the label? I think he'd HATE the label. Did he want the blind obedience implicit in such a label, without the label? I think that's what he wanted ALL ALONG, and acted accordingly. Of course, this is my opinion, but it appears to fit the facts. Does it fit his PUBLIC IMAGE? NO. That was of him being an "aw shucks" homespun humble teacher who just happened to have the most special revelation since the First Century Christians stopped writing. However, the discrepancy between Wierwille the Public Image and Wierwille the Man He Was When He Thought No One Was Looking...is massive. Correct.Some of us, however, feel that the deliberate deceptions were wrong, and the felonies they covered were worse, and feel vpw was thus not worthy to be considered a leader at ANY level. That's true of you but not of SOME people. To challenge anything in pfal, to challenge vpw's doctrine, is tantamount to challenging the Bible, since it challenges their understanding OF the Bible, and their own self-image as a Bible-believer. Now, everyone ELSE can have civil discussions on content and meaning, but those with a hair-trigger can derail a nice conversation. Well, with you it is not a problem. (Or if it is, it's a little problem and you function as a normal citizen.) With a few, this IS a problem.

Actually, what usually bugs them is attacking them for NOT believing him, or attacking their organizations, or accusing those who expose his evil hidden deeds of having a motive BEYOND 'exposing his evil hidden deeds'. I can tell the difference between internal consistency and hypocrisy,and I'm not retuning my detectors to match YOUR priorities. I'll answer your question, and I'll do it simply, so anyone who WANTS to know the answer CAN understand the answer. Using the term "apologist", IN AND OF ITSELF, is not antagonistic. HOWEVER, depending on who'se using it, sometimes it's a statement of fact, a word used in a single post (good thing) and sometimes it's in indicator that the poster is beginning to go on the warpath and pick fights with other posters (bad thing). Now, you've got a track record of picking fights with posters and derailing threads. So, what might be an innocent question from ONE poster is often a LOADED question from you. That's why TL BEGAN with a disclaimer, so that she expressed a desire NOT to pick a fight. Your response? You picked a fight. TL asked you not to continue, and you chose to do so anyway. THEN you called everyone who disagreed with you "mockers and criticizers", which WAS meant as an inflammatory phrase, then accused OTHERS of making it personal. That's got all the internal integrity of "I don't understand why all you peckerwoods, rednecks, and hayseeds gotta take everything so personal! You're almost as touchy as the niggers, jigaboos, spooks and spearchuckers-they get angry every time I post! They must object to the substance of my argument." Well, we agree on that, at any rate. BTW, we WERE talking about this when the thread started...

Many thanks for both links.

Not ironic to most people. See, Neither CM nor WW ever claimed they didn't believe the Bible. Neither claimed they dismissed all information that vpw said just because vpw said it. We rejected the stance that "BECAUSE vpw said it, it is automatically gospel." So, we examine each thing individually. If it stands on its own merits, it stands. If it falls on its own merits, it falls. The things that stand on their own merits are no guarantee that the things that failed suddenly did NOT fail, nor that unexamined items suddenly get a free pass. I don't know how much looking up one verse in the Greek counts as "Biblical research", though. As it was, I had my Ricker-Berry handy, so if YOU had asked what it had said, I would have just grabbed it and posted it, too. Did it disprove your point? Did it support your point? Whatever. We meant different things. I meant "take it off the list, but WE get credit for taking it off the list, because WE looked at it, examined it, and found it didn't belong there." So, it comes off the list, but the WHY I quibbled on.

No, score one for the "ACTUAL ERRORS" team. Mike's method is "pretend it always said that and NEVER look it up. If someone claims otherwise, rather than gather evidence, insult the person, and change the subject." It's not one for Mike because MIKE has yet to successfully refute ANYTHING. The rest of us having intelligent discourse HAVE, in both directions.

The Gordon Ricker-Berry from the Stephens Text.... II Timothy 2:15, King James Version. "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." The Stephens Text (ibid) (English lettering) "Spoudason seauton dokimon parastesai tpstheps, ergaten hanepaioxhunton, orthotomounta tov logon tes aletheias." So, the Stephens Text has "orthotomounta". I do NOT have my Nestle's handy. (I need to buy a new copy.)

Since you're no longer baiting Mark about his beliefs but ARE still baiting TL's on her beliefs, I'm curious if this is due to him being male and this being some sort of misogynistic impulse- going after the wimminfolk and leaving the men alone. If not, perhaps you can progress in your temperance to the point that you can refrain from attacking her religion at every pretext.

"OBSERVATIONAL SELECTION", or "COUNTING THE HITS AND IGNORING THE MISSES." Every morning, thousands upon thousands of mothers send their kids to school. Every morning, thousands upon thousands of mothers worry something terrible will happen to their kids. Every afternoon, thousands upon thousands of mothers greet their children as they return home from school. The fear in the hearts of those mothers did precisely NOTHING to those children. Two guys, the same age. One has a mother who's terrified that something will happen to him, all through his childhood. The other has a mother who's concerned, but never obsessed over the whole concept. One of them is struck by a car and nearly killed. His mother was NOT the one who worried-her kid was fine. What was the difference? Cars are not "fear-seeking-missiles." Anecdotes don't "prove" a supposed universal "LAW". However, they can DISprove something doesn't ALWAYS work....

I don't know Hendricks. However, the more time I spend here, the more complete a picture I am able to form of who and what Dr Wierwille was, both on and off camera. Therefore, any time I hear someone say "this man considers it his mission to continue the work of Dr Wierwille", my first response is to reply "RUN!!!!! RUN LIKE THE WIND AND DON'T LOOK BACK!" (If you want more information on vpw himself-Dr Wierwille- I can direct you to the 2 "Wonderland" threads, which reveal an amazing level of details about the man.)

Well, you ALMOST got to their point. You operate APPLIANCES. You switch them on and off. They are cold, lifeless tools. That's how your MIND is supposed to be- a cold, lifeless tool. That way, when terrible news arrives, you "renew your mind", and throw the switch that separates sorrow from your existence. Now you can function again, just like an appliance. So, we'll see you on-time at the next meeting, then... Life, in and of itself, is NOT permitted by twi. Life has inconveniences, life is messy, life does not conform to clockwork. twi doesn't like anything that can't be told what to do, when to do it, and how to do it. So, they legislate life right out of the picture. That reminds me- if you are a twi'er, and the news that a friend died made you very sad and filled you with remorse, (especially now), many leaders will chide you for inept control over your emotions. Contrast that to the shortest verse in the Bible.... "Jesus wept." That was Jesus' response when he heard his friend Lazarus had died. Good thing Jesus was not in twi- but it's not like they miss him anyway.....

That would make SOME sense, Littlehawk, but, "no dice". One of the complaints about twi is that they've been teaching "all debt is evil" for over a DECADE now, but-no matter how many people ask-and MANY people have asked- they have offered NO practical alternatives to debt. So far, the only examples they've given of people with no debt are people who inherited money from dying relatives. So, the closest thing they've gotten to giving advice about that is "believe for family members who like you to drop dead". Otherwise, it's "just find a way to make it happen. And don't forget to send us 15% of your income each month- you still owe THAT."

Nice bait-and-switch of your own. You took a poster saying "I find the Bible a useful thing that I treat respectfully, for I believe it makes God known to me" and turned that into "The Bible is useful, but by itself can be very dangerous". The Bible should never be used as a substitute for God. The Bible-regardless of what certain criminals said-is not God, and never was. The Bible MAKES KNOWN God. Anything that MAKES KNOWN God should never be confused for God HIMSELF. This leads to worshipping the created thing rather than the CREATOR. (Romans 1.) The brass serpent was raised in the wilderness, at the direction of God Almighty. It was very useful, and was meant for healing from the God that heals. So, that showed an aspect of God for the people, YHWH-Rapha, YHWH Who Heals. However, some people later worshipped the brass serpent. What was the proper response then? Trash it and smash it to pieces. It was now leading people AWAY FROM GOD. === I'm also a little curious what led to an analogy between "trying to understand God by reading the Bible" and pornography. THAT struck me as going to ridiculous lengths to defend twi/vpw.

Since this followed a period where they were taken prisoner for over a generation, this is VERY plausible. That was the timeframe where the language of the people went from Hebrew to Syriac, and the split between Israelites (those kidnapped and returned) and Samaritans (those who never left) dated from. So, when they recovered the scrolls of Scripture, one priest (priests and Levites exercised their Hebrew so the usage didn't die out) would read the scroll aloud in Hebrew, while another would provide a fair translation into Syriac. This was the first instances of a Targum (translation from the Old Testament to another language.) I've heard this explanation from at least 3 different sources, at least 2 of which never heard of twi, and all 3 of which were completely independent of each other.

Nice try, but it's STILL not a reflection of what the verse meant. Points for the attempt, however. I WOULD recommend more sleep before posting.

[Just going by what they posted here, they said that the written pfal WAS the taped pfal, with THEM editing the thing, not vpw. They did the best job they could accurately reflecting what was on tape-content and intent. You said HE put in the time and effort. They said THEY put in the time and effort. THEY were eyewitnesses, primary sources. Therefore, whose account should I believe?] [The Orange Book is separate from THIS statement. THAT was them condensing his stuff. As to the "time-travel" thing, I'm surprised you're bringing that up, since that entire chapter contains a rather glaring error- Paul talking about someone he knew once who saw a vision of the future suddenly morphs into Paul himself- and can ONLY be correct if one discards vpw's basic assertion that Christians after the First Century church lost "The Truth". The ONLY possible defense of this glaring error is to go to church history, and find that-several centuries AFTER the First-a few Christian writers believed that was actually Paul rather than the account being explained "in the verse where it is written." PFAL's professed study techniques-when applied to this chapter- say this chapter is wrong. The only way to save it is to discard the techniques taught IN pfal, AND accept that vpw was completely WRONG about Christians descending into error- then finding the ones that agree with this chapter- AND IGNORING THOSE WHO DON'T. In short, you must accept that what you want to believe is true, is actually true-then seek the documentation to back it up. This method was derided BY vpw many times, and supposedly is a hallmark of the "inferior" Christians in denominations.] [so, the VIDEOS would be more important, if we were discussing neurosurgery.] [sub-vocalizing would mean that the readers were silently reading WHILE MOVING THEIR LIPS. Do "most (if not all)" people really do that?] [Right-and thus your image of him is based-not on the face-to-face encounters- but on what I already stated.] [False dilemma. I pick Door Number 3-I was correct as stated.] [Actually, I was GOING to spare you the FULL recall, since it wasn't fully germane, and HUMILATING you isn't a goal of mine, but if you insist.... To those joining us late, Mike has discussed vpw. Now, vpw, as many of you know, was a fair student as far as grades went, but lazy. That's why he consistently picked the softest options possible from his available choices (minister over business, homiletics over Bible languages, etc.) If he'd applied himself more, perhaps he'd have been a better student and less inclined to cut corners. vpw was a fair athlete as well, playing on his high school basketball team, but not his college one. He did like the atmosphere, though, and associated himself with a local professional team around that time. Now then, Mike has characterized this man as follows: "He was born with an overabundance of brains and brawn." He was "gifted, even overgifted." "When he walked, the earth shook." Mike genuinely believes this-that vpw was some sort of EXTREME GENIUS and EXTREME ATHLETE, and that his raw believing shook the earth. I didnt want to KEEP mentioning this, since to bring this up is to make Mike look delusional. However, Mike seems insistent that this SUPPORTS his case somehow. So, there you have it. Mike believes vpw was some sort of genius, gifted physically and intellectually. Now then, Mike has attempted to defend his statements by saying that there are professional athletes who are famous for being gifted, and it is no different when discussing their millionaire careers in athletics with the games of basketball occasionally played by vpw on an amateur level. Supposedly, it is perfectly reasonable to compare the two, and me NOT bringing that up DIMINISHES Mike's case. Further, Mike's DEMANDING I include the comments about vpw shaking the earth. vpw-whose own inability to assert his believing over his own body to counteract the poor health he was giving it- supposedly shook the EARTH with his believing. (But could not shake some cells.) His athletic prowess also was NOT reflected into later years, despite some UNexceptional athletes playing into their SEVENTIES, but vpw didn't stay in shape. Mike has also said that he thinks it is in no way idolatrous nor hero worship to consider the man exceptional both physically and intellectually, the paragon of human potential. Supposedly, me NOT bringing this up means I'm "swamped with dishonesty." Well, there's 2 points of view. A) I'm accurately reflecting Mike, and he's delusional or lying when he says I'm not. B) Mike's accusations are accurate, and I'm NOT representing him fairly. Feel free to read for yourself and draw your own conclusions. ] [The so-called "Law of Believing" is not a law. It fails as stated in the video. It fails as stated in the book. It fails as practiced by people. Its failure to sustain vpw's life really doesn't count as news around here anymore-and he was the supposed master of believing- and had sufficient amounts of it to "shake the earth". pfal didn't work, therefore twi failed US. Small wonder twi failed overall.] You mix fact with error. VPW had faults and he suffered consequences because of them. So did we. [but according to you, those faults did not bring down the ministry. That's the point I made-which YOU'VE made, and for some reason are now DENYING.] [And not because it was designed and implemented wrong, nor because its founder committed felonious sins, according to you. I said that and you accused me of lying.] [Tell you what- if you found some hidden messages in that, let's hear them. This might be interesting. At worst, it will be different.]

At this point, I honestly believe Mike has reached a state of delusion and hallucination great enough to make this an UNINTENTIONAL vicious lie-as opposed to the INTENTIONAL vicious lie it would be otherwise. Raf never "assumed" that PFAL is "not God-breathed". Raf took the clear meaning of the text for what it was. When Mike came in with his claim that the plain meaning of the text was to be discarded in favour of "HIDDEN" messages that declare pfal to be God-breathed, Raf took the standards GIVEN IN PFAL and applied the TO PFAL and proved that PFAL falls FAR short of God-breathed. To those who find pfal useful, this is NOT a shock. It's only upsetting news to those who have replaced their Bibles entirely with pfal as a new Bible. So, Mike-again-lied-again-about Raf's method-again, after having been corrected about that MANY TIMES. However, I suspect his delusions divert the plain meaning of any such correction, so Mike is more to be pitied for his delusions than blamed for his lies. Of course, it is MIKE who ignores the totality of what it says. The Orange Book says "this is a book on keys". Mike ignores that, and says it is a Bible REPLACEMENT, and not a tool for understanding the Bible. Raf refuses Mike's method because Mike's method requires one to discard linear thought. Mike refuses to use Raf's methods because the results are ones Mike has decided he will never accept. Never mind that the "method" in question was outlined IN PFAL to begin with.][/b] [unless that motivation, love and brains leads them to conclusions other than those Mike proposes- then they are "unfit researchers", "crybabies", etc.]

It was worth considering, but, yes, it would be illegal.