WordWolf

Ex? Do you have many of these videos? Might you even say you have a "plethora" of these videos?

"If the VPW antagonists are nothing but whiners, liars, idiots, etc. and the VPW apologists are also whiners, liars, idiots, etc, therefore the most sensible thing YOU could do is find the 'middle ground' if you ask me- not to go about finding someone, or accusing somebody of calling you a whiner, liar, idiot or whatever." Actually, WTH, YOU decided that both sides were extreme, and therefore both sides were wrong, so you DID call them liars, etc. Second of all, the reason nobody asked you what's sensible is that you're demonstrating logic fallacies. ========== Courtesy of the Nizkor Project. "Description of Middle Ground, Also known as Golden Mean Fallacy, Fallacy of Moderation. This fallacy is committed when it is assumed that the middle position between two extremes must be correct simply because it is the middle position.... This line of 'reasoning' is fallacious because it does not follow that a position is correct just because it lies in the middle of two extremes. This is shown by the following example. Suppose that a person is selling his computer. He wants to sell it for the current market value, which is $800 and someone offers him $1 for it. It would hardly follow that $400.50 is the proper price.....the claim that the moderate or middle position is correct must be supported by legitimate reasoning." =======================

Saw the video. Sometime during the past several years, out in the fields, a pod grew, and a double of John Rupp grew in it. One night it replaced him. That's the best explanation I can offer for the stiff caricature of the man John Rupp USED to be. That, or they hooked him up to a machine and sucked his personality dry. Whatever they did, they took his moustache, too. Maybe there's a REAL John Rupp on the run, with the moustache, trying to avoid capture. ================================================ Was it just me, or did it sound like Terry was reading a script prepared by twi and its lawyers? It sounded like a dry recital of their website when he spoke. They even included the "international countries", which is a real giveaway. Man, what a waste of....something. How many people here think that dry, inhuman drone of a piece will draw new flocks to their coffers? I bet they never recoup the cost of the video.

Seeking God's will and studying the Bible-good things. Rattling off a pat answer to all problems without actually getting involved with the people-bad thing. Beware, lest any man beguile you with "pithanologias", pithy sayings, catchy phrases, clever sound-bytes. God was issuing a warning for a reason.

Oh, and if you're using Windows, make sure you're getting all the critical security updates. Otherwise, your system has a correctible flaw you're ignoring.

Actually, I've had VERY good results from downloading free software. I prefer to go off recommendations from people who've used it. I currently use AdAware and Spybot Search & Destroy to knock out dataminers, registry keys, spyware, etc. Spybot was recommended here at the GSC. I've had GREAT results with both. (I use both and keep them updated.) If you're not using a Popup Blocker, I recommend using one. I recommend using at least one spyware killer every day. (I tend to use 3, but one isn't free. The third actually isn't particularly impressive, either.) If you're not using a firewall, you're insane and are just begging for trouble. There are free reliable firewalls. I also recommend using an antivirus program. Yes, there are free reliable ones. :)--> In general, an ad offering you a free program is trouble, and the program has bad stuff attached to it. Everything I've enjoyed using, I had to find on my own. The ones on the pay ads-popups and so on-are seeking to make their money back SOMEHOW by giving your computer access to it- usually, it is by making your computer accessible to THEM in some way. I'm no expert, but that's what I've learned.

Actually, I remember us discussing this before. It's on one of the threads SOMEWHERE....

Goey, I thought leaving out the context made it sound like he rattled that off once, in passing, in one sentence. He went on for a few paragraphs. That, I thought, was relevant. Oakspear, Interesting, and I agree. He always said "Estrangelo Aramaic", not "Aramaic from Estrangelo Text." I wonder who fixed his sentence. I recall hearing that some twi "scholars" sounded like idiots when they ran into real linguists and Bible PhDs who knew "Estrangelo Aramaic" wasn't a language.

Must there only be two points of view? A) VPW was a shining example who was fully justified in what little harm he may have caused B) VPW was a manipulative evil troglodyte who only came out of his cave to peddle some slick new way to garner money, power and women. How about all of us who think C) There was some merit in things we learned, but it wasn't ALL meritorious. There were times he may well have sincerely helped people out of genuine altruism, and other times he ground them up and threw them out. There were times he regretted of his sins, and then times he went out and did them again. What? Our POV is not valid because we didn't erect those ugly statues of vpw? Are we now guilty of vilifying him? Don't we exist? I just want to be loved is that so wrong?

Welcome to the cafe, Teknon! Congratulations on having the courage to face this. It's NOT easy, but, as many of us know from experience, it IS survivable. (Most of us have faced it, at least.) There's a LOT of material accessible from the main page of the website, http://www.greasespotcafe.com from the menu on the left. In the meantime, feel free to start private topics if you want to ask some questions privately. We understand the need for circumspection here- most of us, anyway.

You left out part of the context. PFAL, page 127-128. "As far as anybody knows, there are no original texts in existence today. The oldest dated Biblical manuscript is from 464 AD and written in Aramaic in Estrangelo script. There are older Aramaic manuscripts written in the Estrangelo script which predate 464 AD, but thay are not Biblical texts. What students or scholars refer to as "originals" really date from 464 AD and later..... Since we have no originals and the oldest manuscripts that we have date back to the 5th century AD......" He gets VERY specific. BTW, copyright on the orange book is 1971. "Copyright" on the snowstorm is 1952, if I remember correctly. Ok, VPW gives the cutoff at 464 AD, correct? Well, the Dead Sea Scrolls date back to about 100 BC. They were discovered in 1947. They were well-known in Biblical circles by 1956. However, the Dead Sea Scrolls aren't the only documents. The Chester Beatty manuscript is from 180-225 AD. The Bodmer manuscripts, the same, for II, XIV, XV. The Rylands manuscript, 130 AD. (Gospel of John.) The Codex Vaticanus and Codex Siniaticus are between 325-450 AD. So, even if the Dead Sea Scrolls are at 200 AD, that makes 7 manuscripts plus the ones from the Dead Sea Scrolls, all predating 463 AD. Oh, yes, the Septuagint is 200 BC. 8 manuscripts. So, history says "8 plus the Dead Sea Scrolls", vpw says "none." Yep, that's another error. If Brady hadn't reminded us the difference between accreditation and non-accreditation, this would be more of a surprise. Still, he didn't learn this studying for his Masters? BTW, please check my numbers. I know they all predate 464AD, but I may have swapped AD & BC in haste.

You have to admit he was right on the money about Return of the King, though.... One caveat I must make is about the Army of the Dead. I agree they were more compelling in the movie than the book. However, they also appeared in a scene in the movie that they DIDN'T appear in the book. Remember: the coasts couldn't send reinforcements to Gondor because corsairs were about to attack them. In the book, Aragorn uses the Paths of the Dead to get to the coast doublequick, and the Army of the Dead to wipe out the crews of the corsairs. Then the soldiers of the coast were free to man the corsairs, and sail to Gondor and ambush the ambushers. In the movie, Aragorn leads the Army of the Dead onto the boats and into the main battle. Dramatic, true, but a different concept.

I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it..... I'm glad I got in, and I'm glad I got out.

From Mike's post 2/5/04, 11:33am, this thread... "WordWolf: Thank you for the promo. This is what I meant when I said to WhatTheHay that my detractors keep stirring the pot so more can become aware of the Good News I'm saying. I too was concerned that a lot of this thread would get lost to others who come in late. You've just given the more diligent ones a reason to go back and check the context in which I made those statements and the followups. They then can decide if you misrepresented me in your abbreviations and in which items of my many statements you selected. I'm not trying to convert the Bozos here, just those who are tired of the complaining and want some answers. You and your busload of Bozos will eventually see the writing on the wall when carloads of PFAL returnees get blessed and start making even more noise than I do. You're just a band wagon follower, and this one your on now one is going to end soon. You might want to start thinking about a new outfit when these fashions change and an new handle to hide your eventual shame (I John 2:28)." First of all, I didn't even show up on this thread until several pages into your diatribes. Personally, I think it's very important that new arrivals become aware of ALL the ramifications of your posts, not just the ones that look good on tv. I posted the dates to make it easier for them to look up the context. Your old claim of "misrepresentation" falls hollow when I post the ENTIRE CONTENTS of your post. (Such as your response to Vickles.) I provided the context and everything. Once again, "misrepresented" means "showing me in an unfavourable light". Since that was direct posts of your sans editorializing, my actual involvement in how you are portrayed is pretty small beer. I LIKE my fellow posters to do their own thinking and reading-I don't tell them they MUST conform to my thinking. *counts* Four insults AFTER that. My, that ill-behooves you. Name-calling and slandering. After all, I only report what YOU say. "Busload of Bozos"? That particular insult was more in vogue 4 years ago during the last Presidential campaign. "Band wagon follower"? On what bandwagon? Confucius say: "A wise man does not concern himself with alliances, but when he sees Right, he ranges himself alongside it." You make it sound like there's this organized anti-Mike movement that's been orchestrating protest-marches for years. It's just a bunch of individuals who've read your posts and each independently said "yuck!" when they read them. It's a bit sad to see you put yourself forth as understanding the innermost hearts of so many of us, when the most obvious things about us elude you. Was that REALLY the best response you could think of to what I say? "You're a jerk, your friends are jerks, and you'll be sorry when flocks of people validate my existence by embracing my POV." It also sounded like you were claiming that it is misrepresentative of what you posted to say you said Jesus IS a big ssupporter of PFAL and he told you so in one of your many talks. Why does it irritate you that I pointed that out? I mean, if it didn't irritate you, you would just have said "thank you" and gone on your merry way. But you DID post that. More than once you claimed Jesus' endorsement of PFAL, which, since your raison d'etre is to push PFAL with every typed syllable, means you're saying Jesus endorses your post content and subject matter. I mean, isn't this something you take pride in? Why would you NOT want it mentioned again?

For those of you who are just skimming this thread, here's an exchange you may have missed. Mike: 2/2/04 12:17am "When you see Christ in his glory he will be holding a PFAL book in his hand and teaching you from it." Mike 2/3/04 5:22am "Jesus Christ appointed Dr his spokesman. Jesus Christ is VERY interested in PFAL. He told me so." Vickles 2/3/04 7:51pm "So, Mike, you weren't kidding about JC coming with a PFAL book in his hand." Mike 2/3/04 7:53pm "Totally serious. I've already seen him this way more than once." =========================== With all the speed this thread's had, I figured a lot of people missed that. For those of you who think I made up Mike's position on the current Bibles, most of it's already reiterated on this thread. However, his most concise comment on it was from the "Sincere Answers Please" thread, 1/9/04 1:19am. "God's Word was LOST in the first century." On this here thread, his most concise comment on the same subject was (pg-9 2/3/04, 6:55pm) "...your present approach has failed for all those who tried it for 2,000 years." So, you decide if I'm misrepresenting or exaggerating. (If anything, I think I'm understating.)

For those of you just joining us, Mike's position concerning the Bible is as follows: A) the Bible was the Word of God "in the First Century". B) Sometime after "the First Century", the Bible was no longer "the Word of God". C) After the "First Century", the written "Word of God" was not available. Period. The only things that were available were woefully-inadequate Bibles, which he claims were altered sufficient to invalidate the contents. D) Sometime in the middle-to-late 20th century, God worked in tandem with vpw to rewrite "the Word of God" entirely from scratch. This is also known as the collected works of vpw-including pfal and the collaterals, plus various articles and tapes. Outside of materials written by vpw, "the Word of God" is inaccessible. E) According to Mike, vpw definitely thought of his books as replacing the Bible as the Word of God. He concealed all mention of this cabalistically in his materials (where only Mike sees it) for several reasons-mainly the unbelief of the students, and to hide it from the devil. F) So, according to Mike, there WAS no written "Word of God" for nearly 20 centuries, and this only ended once vpw set pen to paper. UNTIL vpw set pen to paper, it didn't EXIST in any written form. G) All references to "the Word of God" by vpw, according to Mike, either refer to the version lost centuries ago, or refer to the new improved testament vpw himself was writing. H) Mike has dogmatically declared that he absolutely will not even entertain the notion that his position might be wrong. I) Mike has previously been noted as having held this opinion for many, many years. In fact, he's compared tape transcription-work to the dictations Paul did to others. His position concerning pfal has fundamentally remained the same for many years, minus some minor tweaking. If you ask Mike, however, he will adamantly assert that he gave other positions an honest look for a considerable amount of time, and then eventually concluded his current POV (also known as his original POV) is the correct one. If you point this out, however, be prepared to be called several brands of liar. Please carefully note the positions concerning "the Word of God" and the Bible, as this will become critically important soon. That's why I was so redundant-I wanted to make sure the main points weren't missed.

"The Passing of the Patriarch" is in the documents accessible from the GSC Main Page! Once a year, I recommend reading thru them all.

Oh, and you would be able to do the scene, fire bullets from a fake gun, and NOT go "bang-bang" the first time? :)--> I think if there was SOME kind of noise when he pulled the trigger, he could have restrained himself.

I agree with you about "Running on Ice." :)--> Is the "Lonely Is the Night" by Air Supply the same song Billy Squier did by the same name, or another? ========================= Let's see, little or hardly any "airplay".... Rush: "Hand Over Fist", "the Pass", "the Trees" Styx: "Half-Penny, Two-Penny", "Nothing Ever Goes As Planned" John Mellencamp: "Let It All Hang Out" Robert Plant: "Billy's Revenge" Spin Doctors: "You Let Your Heart Go Too Fast" "What Time is It?" Living Colour: "Funny Vibe" The Beatles: "Hey Bulldog" The Smithereens: "Beauty and Sadness" The Call: "For Love" "When" Steve Earle: "the Devil's Right Hand" Cake: "Sheep Go To Heaven"

One of the things that I think that was of genuine benefit in the foundational class (yet was not written by the finger of God) was the rule: "If you don't know, say you don't know...It's wrong to indicate that you know when you do not know, when you guess..." Yes, I think the last book was beyond vpw's level of ability. Yes, I think it is not of primary importance, since it addresses events I'm going to miss for almost the entire book, and, like most people, I am first concerned with MY skin (and admit it.) I think it was a good idea that he did NOT tackle it. Can you imagine what would have resulted? lcm couldn't make sense of Genesis 3, and vpw had our financial plans stuck in Malachi, not even in the New Testament, or whatever.... ====================================== That having been said, I believe this thread belongs in "Doctrinal". That also having been said, I'm willing to clearly state that I have opinions on a few things, and I'm willing to share some. Bullinger-type calculations put 666 as 3 sets of 6, where 3 signifies completenes, and 6 is the human number, always falling short of 7, the Divine number. Thus, Bullinger would say "complete imperfection" or perhaps "complete human." I suspect the second answer may indeed have merit. My suspicion stems from II Thessalonians 2:3-11. I have an opinion about the wording used in those verses. I suspect they might give us some insight as to this person. "The man of sin", literally, "sins". I found it interesting that out of several Greek words translated "man", this one was "anthropon", which is the same word used by people who try to claim that man started as some sort of proto-ape, anthropologists. (I'm not speaking of ALL anthropologists, but some use their "science" as a religion and a creation story.) So, a natural man of sins, plural. He's not a specialist in one sin, but a sort of general practitioner. He "opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped, so that he, as God, sits in the temple (Holy of Holies) of God, showing himself (setting forth) that he is God." Speculating again here.... He's actively hostile to all forms of organized religion ("opposes"). He claims HE's God and sets himself up to be worshipped. So, he raises a new, alternate religion to supplant the ones he's shoving down- one where HE is worshipped. II Thessalonians 2:8 calls him "that Wicked". "Wicked"..Greek word "Anomos", used also as "anomia", a state of normlessness, where there is no right or wrong, only moral relativism. The next verse says he's have lying wonders. My speculation is that this man will claim a religion of moral relativism, one of those feel-good "nothing is wrong" ones, that also preaches the perfectability of man, and setting forth that he, as a man, hasd reached that state of perfectability and therefore is to be worshipped and seen as exemplar. The lying wonders will appear to lend credibility: he's not all talk, and the people can see he can obviously do SOMETHING. So, that's my best guess. Make of it what you will, but try not to make a NEW RELIGION out of it, please... or if you do, at least make a better looking statue of me than that ugly thing they did of vpw....

Geek moment... Zixar, it was GIANT-SIZE X-MEN #1 that first featured the "new" X-Men- Sunfire, Storm, Colossus, Nightcrawler, Thunderbird, etc. X-Men 94 was the first issue in the regular series after they replaced the original team. The X-Men as a whole have always (since the 70's, at least) been symbolic of outsiders and discrimination of various kinds, regardless of the type. That's what makes them so accessible. :)-->

Hm. I got Professor X also. Yeek. If lcm's a TimeLord, does that mean he'll keep coming back with different "face"?

Zix, does lithium go up when it hits water, or does it just get wet like most things? Now I'm thinking it was probably sodium.... All I know is they STOPPED doing that "experiment" before I got there. That never stopped another guy I know from waiting until he was alone at the end of the day in a lab, putting clorine bleach and dishwashing detergent together in a container, then making for the door and locking up behind him while the thing bubbled over like crazy. "I told you not to do that experiment anynore!" He did it anyway. He was nutty like that. I was nutty in a different way. I would do things like getting a few extra chairs for the gang at lunch, then KEEP getting "a few extra chairs" until told to stop-usually after about 6-8 of us had maybe 20 chairs surrounding us. :)--> Then, for variety, I started arranging them in geometric patterns and things. :)--> I went back the year after I graduated, showed up VERY early one time, made a geometric pattern of the chairs like I used to, then slipped away. When the others arrived, they knew I had to be around SOMEWHERE.... :)-->

Ok, that's where vpw got it from, but do you have any independent sources corroborating that? WhatTheHay sounds like he's seen a wealth of evidence supporting this. Can he cough up a link or two so the rest of us can catch up?

Actually, the reason the air smells cleaner after a rainstorm is because it IS cleaner. There's pollution in the air, plus pollen and all kinds of stuff. Releasing charged particles in the air (like with an ionizer or with a rainstorm) causes the pollution, etc, to become charged, which results in them "settling out", or sticking to objects that are NOT the air, nearby. So, the air has less pollution in it. The one drawback to this is that you now have a tiny increase in the amount of residue on all the surrounding material. That's why homes with ionizers in constant use have cleaner air but need to paint a little more often. :)--> I'm curious about the "current" use in hospitals of magnetism to aid in the regrowth of bone. Do you have a resource on this one? It's news to me. On one of the older tapes, vpw was claiming that the effect of the body of eating a heart meal with starches, etc resulted in consuming more grain alcohol than if you had a few drinks. I'm not familiar offhand with how the body breaks down starches and carbohydrates and the like. However, I don't remember hearing that a by-product of regular digestion was alcohol. Last I heard, alcohol is broken down, and starches are broken down. If memory serves, both are broken down into SUGARS. Alcohol doesn't stay alcohol, and nothing in food (unless, perhaps, someone drugs your food) breaks down into alcohol. If someone with some real knowledge of this would speak up, I'd appreciate it. BTW, he followed it up by pointing out the medical doctor in the room (the Wine guy) and said that if you really wanted to know, to ask HIM. I'm thinking this was based on a misunderstanding of how starches are broken down in digestion, but, hey, I could be wrong....