WordWolf

The search criteria differ, so A) they DON'T search the same places B) the results don't come up in the same order, prioritizing differently C) MSN is a corporate-sponsored engine, which means people like twi pay to have their entry come up first (we discussed this a long time ago) D) MSN's search will show FAR fewer results, and may miss what you're looking for (It did when I used MSN search, back when) E) MSN passes an entire "plate" of "cookies" when you even log in to their page. I really don't trust MSN monitoring my searches, especially when their engine isn't that hot. Will you go to hell for using MSN? Heck, no. However, I do not know anything for which it is the BEST engine to use. (Even Yahoo's best for something...)

Johniam, while you're waiting for the hall monitor to sort this all out or something, I started a new thread in this forum that may interest you.

In the interests of fairness, I thought it would be a good idea to have one thread where all the people who have the perception of feeling persecuted could post, and not have the rest of the forum interfere. So, the purpose of this thread is to have a place where people who want to say NICE things about TWI, or VPW, or PFAL or stuff along those lines can post, WITHOUT hearing anything about criminal acts or ruined lives or anything. So, here it is. I'll even set it up as best I can.... ================ You see a meadow, with large tents overhead, covering areas. Above the tents is a clear sky, without a hint of clouds, and there's a cool breeze in the warm air, keeping it warm but not hot. You see several benches unoccupied under one tent, and there's some pitchers of lemonade and other items here, along with glasses.

Technically, he said he was using MSN search, not Google search. (Give him time to work up to using Google and easing off MSN.) However, it appears that's what happened. He did a search, found some links, posted the links. It's a LOT faster than vetting your sources. That step, frankly, is unnecessary to some people. After all, when you start from the position that "all religious figures are at least as corrupt as vpw", all you have to do is ignore any evidence to the contrary, and seize any pretext to label or badmouth any leader. ==== Bullinger's book "Word Studies on the Holy Spirit" (formerly "the Giver and His Gifts") was used extensively by vpw for the White Book, the pfal class, and doctrine in general. (IMHO, it's one of his sources for his outright hatred of Catholicism.) Anyway, Warren Wiersbe wrote a Foreword to it in 1979. It includes the following statement: "We may not agree with him, but at least we have the opportunity to examine our own convictions in the light of his thinking. It has been well said that he who knows only his own position does not know even that. It is good to widen our outlook even if we do not change our position, for, as Dorothy Sayers wrote, 'There's nothing you can't prove if your outlook is only sufficiently limited.' " I thought it was worth remembering.

May I suggest we address rfr to the best of our ability, then see what we have on the others? That reminds me-you'll need to remind me who's in charge there at the moment-at least on paper. From what I've seen, rfr is undeniably anal-retentive, that is, extremein the degree of rules and regulations she insists on using, and requiring things conform to official policy-no exceptions. That's been unanimous among EVERY story of EVERY person who's mentioned her here. As to whether or not she's a lesbian, some people don't care, some people don't think so, and some people do. One person mentioned someone accidentally walking in on her just "after". One person mentioned that-despite rfr loving luxury-she regularly stayed in a hotel room with a single bed, sharing it with another adult female. In and of itself, that is proof of nothing, but it IS peculiar, since it obviously wasn't to save money. It is a matter of public record that she had a lesbian couple staying on as borders in her home. That also is proof of nothing-except this was during the "homo purge", so there's a degree of hypocrisy there. You may reach your own conclusions on that. Some people can argue either way on that, and others can say "so what?". Finally, if you've heard positives about rfr, please share. I've been looking for some for years now. If you just accepted EVERYTHING someone said here, you'd need professional help. :) I'd say that's an exagerration about a question becoming a "fact". The part about the thread getting derailed for a bit with toilet humour- well, that's not uncommon. Then there's someone attacking people for posing the question, or for trying to answer it, and THAT becomes a discussion as well... I, for one, have made attempts to coherently connect the dots, and it has NOT been difficult. One example was the thread where I asked about vpw's secret ceremony with the robes. I wanted to see if it EVER had some sort of serious component of some kind. Those who had witnessed it came on and LOUDLY put an end to the possibility. It was always just a stupid joke. So, all joking aside, that was the end of that topic. As for the rfr thread, I grouped the relevant posts together on the last page for easy reading. You may find that more useful than just paging thru the jokes and derails.

Actually, Billy Graham doesn't concentrate on bringing people to HIS organization. If they're led to Christ and work with their LOCAL churches, that's FINE with him, and is MUCH preferred to them not being connected ANYWHERE. Now, twi has always been "It's US or NOBODY". Billy Graham has also been in the public SPOTLIGHT, the glass goldfish bowl , for DECADES. The internet has had LOTS of time to expose twi, and LOTS of time to expose Billy Graham. There's lots of site exposing evils of twi. How many can you find "exposing" Graham? He's been found "blameless", which is a requirement of leaders. Sexual scandal? He won't even allow himself to enter an ELEVATOR alone with a woman not his wife. Want me to compare that with the twi standard on sex scandal?

Ok, Continuing the rules. (I also went with a better-documented list, so these are all "official", being directly from Paramount sources, generally tv episodes.) ======== Rule 052. "Never ask when you can take." Rule 059. "Free advice is seldom cheap." Rule 060. "Keep your lies consistent." Rule 062. "The riskier the road, the greater the profit." Rule 074. "Knowledge equals profit." Rule 075. "Home is where the heart is, but the stars are made of latiunum." Rule 082. "The flimsier the product, the higher the price." Rule 097. "Enough...is never enough." Rule 098. "Every man has his price." Rule 099. "Trust is the biggest liability of all." Rule 106. "There is no honor in poverty." Rule 109. "Dignity and an empty sack is worth the sack." Rule 111. "Treat people in your debt like family...exploit them." Rule 121. "Everything is for sale, even friendship." Rule 144. "There's nothing wrong with charity...as long as it winds up in your pocket." ======== BTW, I have a correction on 2 Rules, which actually make them MORE relevant. Rule 012 is "Anything worth selling is worth selling twice." Rule 013 is "Anything worth doing is worth doing for money." Considering the twi Rules would include "Rule 14: Anything worth selling twice is worth selling three times", twi can be considered greedier than Ferengi.

I bumped up and updated the rfr thread. Were you asking about the others? Did you need more about rfr than was on that thread? "vp and me in wonderland" has some more on Donna, if you want to read thru it a few pages.

Its strength (ease of use) is its weakness (lack of filtration). It's a handful of teenagers who are going to save the world,being watched by a few hundred adults staring at them. It's unofficial, but the wayGB and some of us are also lurking. If they give away too much, they'll get the same fate as the Family Tables did. These kids are free to make their own board for their opinion just like anyone else. I'd recommend avoiding it, or at least being respectful when you're on "THEIR" board. Screaming at the kids may make some people feel good, but it WON'T get them to listen. They're naive, not stupid.

Ferengi Rules of Acquisition: ================== Rule 001: "Once you have their money, never give it back." Rule 002: "The best deal is the one that brings the most profit." Rule 003: "Never spend more for an acquisition than you have to." Rule 006: "Never allow family to stand in the way of opportunity." Rule 008: "Small print leads to large risk." Rule 009: "Opportunity plus instinct equals profit." Rule 012: "Anything worth doing is worth doing for money." Rule 013: "Anything worth doing is worth doing twice." Rule 016: "A deal is a deal. (Until a better one comes along.)" Rule 019: "Satisfaction is not guaranteed." Rule 021: "Never place friendship before profit." Rule 022: "A wise man can hear profit in the wind." Rule 024: "Latinum can't buy happiness, but you can sure have a blast renting it." Rule 025: "There's always a way out." Rule 026: "As the customers go, so goes the wise profiteer." Rule 029: "What's in it for me?" Rule 033: "It never hurts to suck up to the boss." Rule 041: "Profit is its own reward." Rule 047: "Don't trust a man wearing a better suit than your own." Rule 048: "The bigger the smile, the sharper the knife. Rule 050: "Gratitude can bring on generosity." Ok, that's from the first 50.

Fans of Star Trek know about the imaginary Star Trek race called "the Ferengi." Physically, they're shorter and slimmer than humans, and have big ears (and thus, great hearing)-at least the males do. They have been characterized as similar to "Yankee traders" whose motto is "let the buyer beware." They all want to make money, lots of money. The Ferengi currency is Latinum (gold-pressed), which comes in slips, strips and bars. (They seem not to be big believers in electronic funds transactions.) People who expect to deal with Ferengi make it a point to study the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition. Although the fans have never seen all of them (the writers never wrote a complete list), we have seen some repeated a few times. So, there is a partial list out there. I've read these lists. Some of these rules remind me of some of the practices in effect at different eras in twi-including now. Perhaps they'll sound familiar to you. I'll post the relevant ones in blocks. Feel free to discuss them. :) ==============

How can I refuse a specific request like that? (I'm presuming I'm the "WW", and it's not WashingtonWeather or WaywardWayfer, both of whom haven't posted in a while.) ====== *Looks at the choices* Well, I consider it a bit of a trick question. That's because none of them existed "in a void" from each other. (Except one.) So, they AFFECTED each other. Therefore, an honest answer from me that actually tried to answer the question would give my opinions on the suitability of each as a leader. 1) Pope Benedict XVI I honestly don't know much about him. I thought John Paul II was pretty good for the most part, and Benedict (the man who became Pope Benedict 16) acted in a sort of "Chief Operations Officer" capacity for him. Votes for him as JP2's successor were seen as a conservative choice-to maintain the direction set by JP2. IIRC, the predecessor to JP1 (JP2's immediate successor who passed away shortly after assuming the office) didn't have nearly the same public outcry when he passed away, so I think the people considered JP2 very highly, and that included NON-CATHOLICS. So, people who had no reason to just fall in behind him (besides me) felt a need to show respect and so on. Do I think that some things in the RCC need reform? Yes. Do I blame Benedict for them? No. So, he'll PROBABLY come out on top in this dustup. (BTW, you can scratch "they were all good" or "all bad" for me.) That leaves me with the "4" twi top dogs. 2) Rosalie F. Rivenbark. This woman seems bereft of a conscience or the milk of human kindness. From the beginning of her exposure to twi, she seemed to have the skill of keeping things organized to the degree all humanity was squeezed out of them, and the other skill of sucking up to the boss. (Ferengi Rule of Acquisition 33: It never hurts to suck up to the boss.) She kisses vpw's foot when he was looking- and backstabbed HIM like everyone else when he wasn't looking. She had a standing policy of "tell him I'm not in" when he phoned her office. She made it a point to cozy up to whoever looked to be in power. When vpw made lcm his successor, she was unable to get in with lcm-but she made nice-nice with lcm's wife. She is FINE with having one standard for herself and one for everyone else. When others on twi payroll were ORDERED to get rid of their pets (like cats), she got to keep her cats. When corps were forbidden even once cent for luxuries of ANY level, she got a boat and sailing lessons, and she has a swimming pool-all maintained by twi worker drones. Spiritual? The rare times she's supposedly said or done anything at the podium like that, she's read-not taught-and then mostly lists of verses. She demonstrated the ability to run programs in twi-and have her workers go out of their way to avoid her. NOBODY ever said a single nice thing about her, EVER. (Even the other twi people have had one or two nice things said about them.) There have been questions here as to if she was ever an actual Christian, or if it was just an elaborate charade, a scheme to get money and comfort, a cushy job. 3) Chris Geer. My PERSONAL dealings with him were quite nice. On the one hand, they were limited; on the other hand, I was SCRUTINIZING him, ACTIVELY LOOKING for mistakes and failings. I didn't find any at that place and time, and, looking back, I believe I didn't miss any clues I was exposed to. (I found a very minor error in one session at the time, and I still don't think it's a big deal.) As to his personal failings, they seem to center around his blind worship of vpw. He accepted that vpw was justified in screaming at people when it suited him, and-apparently- yelled at some people in imitation. (Not as OFTEN as vpw, but the principle's the same.) He assisted with the support network vpw put in place that facilitated vpw's molestations and rapes- presumably because he believed vpw was honestly entitled to rape. 4) L. Craig Martindale. This man is ANOTHER man who accepted that vpw was justified in anything he did. Before vpw, lcm was an athlete in college who was a Christian. If he never met vpw, he might have matured into a good Christian. However, vpw "spellbound" him from the beginning with his persona of a man who had the exclusive Scripture and connection to God, and lcm fell in line. So, lcm was slowly taught to care less and less about people, and more and more accept vpw's actions as always correct. So, where vpw did things subtlely and hidden, lcm-convinced they were acceptable-did them less hidden- and was caught. lcm was a student who studied vpw, and applied everything he learned. It's a wonder that didn't land him behind bars. 5) vpw. What can I say about the ringleader? He set up an organization with the specific purpose of channeling the money and power to himself, and his lack of skills and lack of caring about people put everybody ELSE on this list in positions to hurt others-and taught them to hurt others in 2 cases. (How do I support this claim? The way it was all done- he centralized money and power to himself, and that's a matter of public record.) So, who was the BEST of that list? Probably Pope Benedict XVI. Who was the WORST of that list? Making a cold analysis, I can't make an easy distinction. HOWEVER, people who DID take real leadership training all know that you accept the responsibility for the success and failure for those under you. Since the triple-disaster of lcm, rfr and cg was all under vpw's regime, it is all HIS failure, and thus all his fault. That means the evil deeds of the others are charged to vpw's account as well as their own accounts. That's how I see it-others may disagree.

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.