WordWolf

I can't speak for free internet service

providers (ISPs).

I CAN tell you something about free e-mail

services.

I disdain hotmail and yahoo.

You can find free e-mail services by going to

http://www.fepg.net/

and using their "Posty" widget. Select from

their list what advantages you want, and they'll

tell you which free services offer it.

*grabs pen and paper*

Let's see. Three-thousand people, prayer for

60 seconds each. That's 50 hours a day each day

to pray for them all one minute.

Let's cut the time in half. Thirty seconds of

prayer a day, for all 3000. That's half the

time, or 25 hours a day , each day.

(Reminder: each day has 24 hours.)

Let's cut it in half AGAIN. This means 15

seconds of prayer a day, every day, for all

3,000. That's not a lot of time to pray for

someone.

*steps away for a moment*

Having just timed 15 seconds of prayer, I have

indeed determined that 15 seconds of prayer CAN

cover the basics for a person, although it

leaves no time for specific needs or intentions.

So, let's suppose 15 seconds. (My experiment

showed LESS time would be insufficient unless

you were PRETENDING to pray.)

That's half the time AGAIN, or 12 1/2 hours a

day, each day, CONTINUOUSLY, without a pause,

to pray JUST for the WOWs. Pulling that off ONCE

would be taxing, and be a peculiar absence of

the person 1/2 the day. This does NOT include

any prayers for the WC, the onsite staff, the

grounds, or the "huge network of believing"

to protect the USA.

Adding even 15 seconds-worth of prayer for each,

EVERY day, would require the ability to pray and

believe at speeds exceeding a tobacco auctioneer.

That's not in the Superhero category?

The Flash could keep up with you, but Batman

couldn't.

Remember, he wasn't a machine in the basement-

he needed to at least spend minimum amounts of

time eating, sleeping, meeting the fans, and

blessing a few of them in the back of the

prayermobile once in a while.

--------------

Man, Dot beat me to it.

We could give life and take it away.

-----------------

I think IGotOut and Dot Matrix's combined

believing was what saved us from Y2K returning

us to the Dark Ages, before the internet and

cellphones. Well done, you two. :D-->

A) When discussing any work, whether in the

spoken or written medium, it is always

understood that the CONTEXT and FORMAT affects

the discussion.

In the case of storytelling to little children,

(or adults), the expectation unless told

otherwise is that you are passing along a story

that you've heard. I've enjoyed hearing such

stories, and enjoyed passing them along.

(Having a high-recall is great for reciting

entire stories verbatim.)

When referring to things anecdotally, however,

I always give my source. That's usually

considered intellectually honest, and is

expected of my by everyone whom I respect.

(Including some sharp children.)

In any literary format, including comic books,

the writer is morally and LEGALLY bound to

cite his references.

Now, unless you're trying to say that vpw's

collateral readings were morally and

situationally equivalent to bedtime stories to

children, that's another strawman.

------------------------------------------

B) Technically speaking, I suppose I could dream

up dozens of theoretical ways that vpw's

sentences could mysteriously duplicate those of

other authors that he'd been previously

exposed to. That's a mental exercise, though.

To state that any or all of them have any

reasonable chance to have happened, though, is

silly. One addresses the possibilities that

had any reasonable chance to have occurred.

I've seen some sad conspiracy theories. One

thing they have in common is an absence of

facts. Another thing they have in common is

the concealment of a lack of data by

insinuating and suggesting that various

theoretical possibilities are likely.

Unless one is trying to blindly push an agenda,

though, this is never seen with respect.

I suppose Johnny Cochran sees this differently

than I do.

C) Yes, you caught me. No denying it.

I assumed you had NOT spent extensive amounts

of time among Christians outside the OLG twi

framework you are fond of.

The reason is very, very simple.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Since there are PLENTY of wise, experienced,

learned Christians out there, and you STILL

have the expectation that only the pfal grads

know stuff, there were 3 possibilities:

A) Mike has met other Christians, and utterly

dismisses their knowledge as effectively worthless

(especially compared to pfal)

B) Mike has met other Christians, but had

somehow missed meeting any with significant

knowledge due to being sheltered from them

C) Mike has NOT met other Christians, and is

honestly overgeneralizing.

Since "C" was the most intellectually-honest,

I assumed that was the correct answer.

That is, you have NOT met other Christians and

blown off all those whose opinions differ from

your own.

-----

So, if I NOW understand correctly, you've been

exposed to the learnings of OTHER CHristians,

and you STILL honestly believe there's no

REAL wisdom outside of pfal? And that the

English versions of the Bible are nearly

worthless "remnants", made virtually useless

by time and forgery??

Let me know if you really do want to address

the whole idea-theft concept. Normally, you

evade it whenever possible, but I'm game to

supporting my view if you're game.

Translation for the home audience:

Yes, Mike thinks it's perfectly fine for vpw

to lift exact quotes from the books of others

and put them in his own book, without citing

that they are quotes, or citing the source.

He does NOT view that as intellectually

dishonest, since he deems that the end-teaching-

justifies the means-misrepresentation, and

what's now referred to as "idea theft".

Further, the act of citing would have cluttered

up the book and make it difficult to read, despite

the fact that many books group all their footnotes

at the END of the book or chapter to prevent just

that sort of thing. Since vpw was a genius with a

degree, he obviously considered such an approach,

but obviously deemed his normal method-absence of

citation-would be so much more beneficial to us.

That's how much he loved us-he would use an

approach unpopular among intelligensia and in

virtually all 'research' books in order to provide

the maximum blessing to us.

Further yet, since those approaches were typical

of the establishment, he used his

'anti-establishment' posture to claim solidarity

with us.

___________________________________________________

I am unsure if his current stance also reflects a

belief that vpw did NOT lift whole sentences

word-for-word out of the books of others; his

earlier statements had reflected a stance that

got "airlifted" whole sections verbatim to vpw,

coincidentally using EXACTLY the same words as

writers vpw just happened to have read before.

That assertion was alluded to on page 10 of this

thread and addressed.

--------------------------------------------------

Mike,

If you spend significant amounts of time among

learned Christians who never heard of vpw or twi,

you'll make at least one amazing discovery....

They've learned amazing things that somehow were

never part of our "education". Among them are

far MORE detailed studies of the history of

Scripture than we were exposed to. If you go

out there expecting you know it all, you will get

a rude awakening from experts in areas you've

barely scratched the surface in.

Our education was grossly deficient in showing

the history of the texts. However, some information

DID reach us. What do the names "Masoretic Text"

and "Samaritan Pentateuch" mean to you?

(That's in initial response to the question you

claim no one wants to address.)

It's only fair, since you've made an attempt at my

question, that I make one at yours. This is not

my FINAL word on this subject, just as I'm hoping

for a definition of mastery. (Seems someone else

is asking for it, as well, Mike-perhaps you didn't

define it as clearly as you thought?)

Dizzy:

A) Yes, you were right.

You didn't come to the same conclusions he did,

therefore, you didn't REALLY arrive. Mike

knows the material better than you. QED.

B) Dizzy, if you return to the "discussion",

PLEASE cite page, paragraph, etc, and provide

a quote.

C) Please consider returning. I hate being the

only canine in the discussion.

------------------------------------------

Mike,

A) I honestly thought I did a fair job of

summarizing your previous statements on what

I cited. With the exception of a single

parenthetical editorializing, they were

near-verbatim quotes of what you've said on

various subjects, As someone pointed out, they

may not be the WAY you'd like them summarized,

but they are the same points. Frankly, although

they're phrased in a way that most GSC'ers would

disagree with them, that does not mean that

any point was misrepresented.

Honestly, pick ONE. If you'd like a point-by-

point analysis, we can do that, but you seem

inclined against it. So, pick ONE and make a

case. Just because I disagree doesn't mean I'm

going to misrepresent you, intentionally or no.

(Unless you're convinced that's impossible.)

----

B) Technically, I'm still waiting for a

"definition" of mastering. You provided a

checklist of things to do to GET to mastery,

but you still haven't defined the end-gial,

the destination. That's a partial answer, and

does give me some information.

As I said from the beginning, I thought about

what you wrote on the subject. I will think

some more on it before coming to any

conclusions, and I'd prefer the rest of the

information before forming an opinion.

The world is not filled with 1) your acolytes,

2) your enemies 3) people who've not heard

enough to believe the doctrine of Mike.

If you REALLY think I've been coming after you,

you grossly underestimate my persistence.

Dizzy, let me brief you on a little that you

missed.

Mike has rather proudly proclaimed, on several

occasions, that vpw's writings-pfal as a class

and the collateral books-are of superior value

than that Bible you respect (as did vpw, in

that SAME class.) He's called the modern

Bible versions "remnants", as if they were

left-over pieces of something useful left

behind. He's said it's of dubious benefits to

study at all, and thinks believing it is silly,

simply a kow-towing to religious traditions and

blind acceptance of leadership's statements.

On the other hand, Mike has PROUDLY proclaimed

that pfal and all vpw-written pfal materials are

of far surpassing benefit. He's said they are

God's communication to us, just as Romans, say,

was God's communication to Christians in Rome.

He views them as superior in every way to that

Bible-thing you value. He bases this claim

on the "1942 promise" and the snowstorm, and

vpw's claims that vpw heard from God, saw a

miracle vision of snow, and received all his

important writings at the direct communication

of God Almighty.

In the event vpw's work and the Bible in your

hands contradict, your Bible is in error and

vpw is right.

That's because vpw was superior in both the

mental and physical categories.

-----------

Mind you, that's not me, that's from various

posts Mike himself has made. (I'm not counting

anyone else's claims to Mike's account.)

----------------------------

There's a lot more, but that's the basics.

This post directly above mine illustrates the

contrast.

"..the not-so-God=breathed KJV..the very-much-so-

God-breathed PFAL writings..."

--------------------------------

Let me know if you need to be directed to specific

threads where he's made claims.

Anyone here heard the claim that we expected

Jesus Christ to show up during vpw's lifetime?

'Cmon, don't be shy, I know SOMEBODY heard it.

You don't even have to admit you said it...

This thread's purpose is NOT to claim that all evil in the world proceeded from vpw. (Some did, most did not.)

This thread's purpose is NOT to claim that vpw's works-his

teachings, his books, etc. were of zero usefulness

whatsoever. (Some were quite nice, some had considerable

error, in doctrine as well as phrasing, as written by the

author.)

Since certain people keep trying to claim this is the stance

of anyone who fails to fall in a prostrate manner and

venerate his writings, I felt the need to get that out of

the way AGAIN.

------------------------------------------------------------

This thread IS, specifically, for the wild, grandiose,

inflated claims you've heard over the years. Some of you've

heard all sorts of wild fanboy adulation about vpw. I

suppose anyone's entitled to be a fan(atic) when they want to

be, but there's a limit to REASONABLE claims. I'd like to

see some of the ridiculous abilities, experiences and claims

attributed to vpw.

-------------------------------------------------------------

I'll start off.

I was told, back in 1989, one of the reasons there were

problems after vpw's death was that, as a direct result of

his death,

"that huge network of believing vanished."

That is, an ex-corpse person, who was in "active rebellion"

against twi's draconian statements in 1989, had said that

during vpw's life, his believing, and his believing ALONE,

acted like a huge net over the entire USA, thwarting the

devil like some huge construct of Green Lantern's ring.

Once vpw died, it vanished, forcing the rest of us mortals to

deal with things as best we could.

-------------------------------------------------------

Please chime in anytime, on any subject-I know we've got TONS

out there....

ALL of us are quoting from "fading memories"?

Guess you've missed a LOT of threads. A lot of

us post with quotes directly from book or

tape, with citations.

If we're quoting word-for-word from a source

directly in front of our noses, how then could

it be a "fading memory"?

---------------------------------

No, wait, I know-

anything that shows vpw as unfit somehow is

unreliable. Either it's a deliberate lie or

forgery, or the frame of mind of the reader

somehow invalidates a direct quote, or it's

a misquote, or something. Whatever it is,

anything that depicts vpw as somehow tainted

must be suppressed, ignored or somehow

discounted. No matter who said it, or how much

documentation supports it, it must NOT be true,

since that would invalidate vpw as the

MOGFOT.

So. direct quotes become "fading memories."

OK,

now THAT one I'd call a 2 plus 2 equals 5

error, when documented and stated that way.

I'm just casting my vote. :)-->

Actually,

you'll want to read up on Harry Houdini before

calling yourself an authority on him. (No, you

didn't go that far yet-I'm going somewhere.)

Harry Houdini was perhaps the biggest SKEPTIC

of his time. He was well aware that his OWN

skills were not supernatural, but practised.

So, much of his later life was spent debunking

hucksters and frauds. (The Amazing Randi

currently does this type of work.)

Even in his death, Houdini left a lasting

challenge. He challenged anyone to bring him

back in a seance. He left behind secret

passwords that, if they ever were revealed to

someone in a seance, should prove that they

really DID speak to him. (Or at least, someone

legitimately supernatural.) To this day,

people keep trying to "call him up". No

successes.

-----------------------------------------

Does anyone have access to Catharist materials?

I was just reminded of them. This entire

thread just drove home to me that certain

people view everything as having EXACTLY 2

positions, no more, no less.

Examples:

It's either natural, or spiritual.

It's either 100% the Word of God, or 10 % dross.

Either he never spoke anything of God, or his

every utterance was God's ultimate expression.

Either pfal is perfect, or God gave no real way

to learn, to us.

No middle ground, ever. No room for dissent,

either-only announcement and recitation.

(Either I'm 100% right or 100% wrong.)

----------------------------------------------

Mike,

I went back and fixed the odd margins.

I was honestly surprised you addressed my

question. You gave me 1/2 my answer, which is

a lot more than I expected. You gave an

outline on "how to master pfal". Well, that's

part of what I was looking for, of course.

My specific question was on a definition of

some kind about what it means TO master.

You gave guidelines to getting there, but still

haven't provided a definition of the destination.

-------------------------------------------

BTW, in the last teaching you quoted, vpw said

"the only criticisms I've ever seen in God's

Word that Jesus Christ ever gave were to the

religionists."

That statement sure make the "religionists"

(whoever disagrees with us) look bad. However,

it sure leaves out a lot.

Jesus criticized Mary, his mother, at Cana.

"what do you wan't from me? It's not my turn!"

Jesus criticized Peter, a LOT.

"Get thee behind me, Satan". "No, you can't go

where I'm going."

Jesus criticized the Samaritan woman who came

for her daughter's healing.

"It's not meet to take children's bread, and to

cast it to the dogs."

Awfully selective memory there.

However, it allowed vpw to dichotomize the

Christian world-there was twi, and the

religionists. (No middle ground.) Just US and

THEM.)

-------------------------------------------

Mike,

in your reply to me, you said you try to

judge only in a nice way. You said you were

"assistance-judging". So, do you finally admit

that you actually DO judge, no matter how

pretty the judging seems to you? Sounds

like you did, 4/13, 1:46pm, this thread.

You claimed I never answered your question about

what I'd do if you answered me.

Go back. I thought I was very unambiguous.

I said I was going to pay attention to it,

and, primarily, THINK.

(There's a longer answer earlier in this

thread.) ("Algorithm"? Well, your answer

WAS "sequential"...)

You also seemed to have completely dodged my

"B" point about promoting a man.

(Nice dodge, though. Quite skillful.)

You completely misread my "D" point.

First of all, I did not say I condemned vpw-

I said I formed a definite opinion. (At least,

on this thread.) I did state what I based the

ability to form the opinion on-some of the

evidence.

I pointed out that there are plenty of other

people, whom we've all heard of, on whom we

all formed opinions. However, those people

we've had no direct contact with. Golly gee,

looks like we can all agree that being able

to reach out and b!tch-slap someone is NOT a

requirement for being able to form an opinion

on them. Also, you skipped that I added I

have an opinion about you, too, having never

met you. (I'll bet you have one of me, as

well.)

You then made a quick strawman by claiming that

the evidence should show vpw is a lot nicer than

the rogues gallery I cited.

DUH.

I cited the names of serial killers, torturers,

tyrants and mass-murderers.

I never said he or you were as evil as them.

(I'll add I'm not, either.)

My point was that, having never met them, we

nontheless all have a consistent opinion of

each of them. In the case of vpw, we have a

lot of first-hand source material to work from.

I made NO reference to what KIND of opinion

anyone should form about him. I was saying

there is PLENTY of material to form an opinion

about him, even if we never sat at the head

table with him, sat up at hoot owl's with him,

read his report on the mission fields, or

played chess with his chess set.

----------------------------------------

Lastly, you asked Rafael, but I'll take a shot

at answering. He can correct me if I

misrepresent his answer.

You pointed out that he said there was no

hurry about addressing the errors on the list,

and also referenced a brevity of time. You

considered that a contradiction. After

hearing your question, I think I see what the

confusion is about.

Let me use an analogy.

It doesn't matter WHEN they send the next

space shuttle off. Could be months, years,

or decades. No rush.

However, BEFORE they try to use the thing in

space for extended periods, and launch and

re-enter the atmosphere, they will need to

overhaul all the parts and insure they aren't

faulty and will blow up upon use.

I think that's the same point he was making

with you.

------------------------------------------

Sorry about those dizzy margins the other day,

and I'm still surprised you even answered 1/2

my question on mastering.

WordWolf.

Ok, addressing points in the order I saw them...

A) Mike,

I did read your "many many words posted on mastery." I noticed that at no point in ANY of the posts is a definition given that is not reflexive. My junior-high school history teacher refused to let us use a word in its definition. (This came up when we could not use the word "fur" in explaining what a fur trapper was, since we had not explained what a fur WAS.) That was a legitimate lesson,and AFAIK, a proper rule in teaching.

You've posted that we're supposed to master, that we are supposed to master until we reach certain goals, but not once did you explain what it means to master. I can't perform an action I have no idea how to perform. You're saying we failed to master something, but, without any explanation of what "mastering" is, I just have your say-so I didn't do it. Not good enough. Plain English, please. I'm not asking for a perfect definition, or an explanation of cold fusion.

What will I do with this definition?

THINK.

I can then evaluate what I've done to date, what you're saying should have been done, and what you're saying should be done in the present and future. Without a simple (or semi-simple) answer, you provide no tools for doing so. Don't worry your answer can get too technical for me-I can keep up

at any level you take it, when I choose. For someone who wants me to perform an action, you sure are impeding the process for doing it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

B) Mike,

You said

"In no way have I promoted the human author."

Hm. Let's see. You've stated that his writings are of superior canonicity than any Bible extant,including critical Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew texts, including the Masoretic text, which doesn't change. You claim that his connection with God was so surpassing excellence that any sin of character would be unable to alter one word of his writing's canonicity. You claim that, since the "first century Christian church", no one in the intervening 18 centuries and change has had

such a connection to God, and received revelation from God. (I'm stopping there.)

You know, to everyone except you two, that looks like you're promoting that human.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C) Mike,

You also said

"...nor do I post my judgements on other people's hearts."

In the same post, you used the term "spiritual babies", and implied all your detractors at GSC

(or possibly just the ones on this thread) are the "spiritual babies" you mentioned. You've called those who disagree with you "unfit workmen" based on how you view their hearts.

You've claimed-repeatedly-that those who are not "old-school" are incapable of reading vpw's

writings and REALLY understanding them the same way a semi-literate, mildly-retarded man who took pfal in 1975-76 can.

You know, to everyone except you two, that looks like you're judging people's hearts, and posting on those judgements.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

D) Mike,

You also said

"You never met Dr, yet you condemn him."

Based on the evidence, including videotapes he made, audiotapes he made, and books he wrote, I'll

say 'yes, I never met him, but I have very definite opinions about him.'

I would say the same of YOU, and I have NOT seen videotapes nor heard audiotapes from you.

Further, I never met Charles Manson, David Berkowitz, John Wayne Gacy, Adolph Hitler, Josef Stalin,Caligua, Lucrezia Borgia, Ivan the Terrible, nor the guys who ran the ovens at Auschwitz, but,

you know, even WITHOUT having seen video or heard audio, I think I can make a conclusion based on the evidence at hand. I'm silly that way.

----------------------------------------------------------

E) Mike,

a footnote.

BTW, I'm fairly confident, although not certain, that you will NEVER provide an explanation about "mastering". That's because I'm convinced the lack of an explanation will allow you to play the old twi "shell game". That's the game that, no matter what tragedy befalls you, it's always your fault, and it's never twi's fault. Refusing to explain allows you to change the meaning whenever you want, to keep "mastering" forever out of people's grasp, and thus vulnerable to the charge of "well, if you'd REALLY mastered, this would never have happened.

As you can see, I DON'T have some secret agenda-all my cards are on the table. How about putting down a few of yours?

------------------------------

(edited only to fix margin changes-not one

letter of text was added, subtracted or changed-

except for the addition of this explanation.)

[This message was edited by WordWolf on April 13, 2003 at 15:50.]

I can argue either end of whether or not an

ellipsis and exclusion in discussion is

appropriate in this verse.

So long as an ellipse indicates the admission

something WAS deleted, I see no reason to call

this one an error outright, either.

It's open to differences of opinion.

Mike,

one of these years, in all the posting about

"mastering" stuff, will you ever get around to

a plain English definition of "mastering" that

does not contain the word "master" or

"mastering" in it? I'd like a clear under-

standing of what "mastering" is, since it's

supposedly something I'm supposed to be doing.

I keep asking, you keep ignoring.

-------------------------------------

JesseJoe,

at one point, you asked about whether Mike

thought the Advanced Class was canonical or

not. Mike's reply said he didn't say either

way, but that he hadn't determined what parts

were God-breathed and what parts weren't.

For those of us following along in English, that

means he has yet to determine which parts are

canonical. That means that it's NOT canonical-

it's under canonical review.

In case you are wondering, that will remain

in canonical review by Mike in perpetuity.

Mike will never commit to it, since there's FAR

too much material easily disproven in it.

...this same figure, in the Greek, is called

"fullashidamI", for those of you unfamiliar

with the Greek.

That's just it, though, Mandii.

As fas as Mike has said, without pfal, using

only the Bible (aka the Bible remnants,

fragments, tatters, debris, or whatever you'd

like to put as The Word there), those

Christians, no matter HOW many signs, miracles

and wonders they've seen, no matter how much

joy in their lives, no matter how much

deliverance, don't REALLY have a relationship

with Christ. They can't. They lack the tools

as much as someone without a rocketship can't

reach the moon.

Hey, CC, it's called keeping them honest.

If they're legit, like, say, Stanley, it's no

harm. If they're moneygrubbers, you catch it

fast.

Rafael,

in case you missed it, Mike reiterated his

previous assertion that you were a latecomer,

and, as such, are unqualified to read vpw's

books and actually comprehend what they were

about. If you had arrived in the "good old

days" like Jerry Barrax and Zixar and Research

Geek and Goey and ex cathedra and Mike, no

doubt you'd have no problem coming to exactly

the same conclusions Mike has, and probably

would be quite contrite for daring to suggest

that vpw's books were the work of man, not the

work of God, who now took this chance to fix

all the problems with His previous book, known

to many as the Bible.

Just thought you (and the peanut gallery) might

have blinked and missed that. Consider this a

recap after the commercial break. Carry on.

Weeeeelllll....

If you're trying to stretch interpretation so

that even the slightest wiggle-room is enough

to let vpw off the hook (which is a legit

position), then, yes, this would be enough of

an excuse to drop Error 1.

You want my opinion, though...

We can make a MUCH stronger case that the

Acts verse in no way addressed his point.

My take on the matter is that if vpw was right

and Acts "proved" it, it was by accident.

Otherwise, why not just cite the verse in

Acts? Heck, why not just toss it on the

verse-list for that session and let reviewers

look at it then?

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to run.

The sun's coming up.

Ok, I can see where you were going now.

I think the "metonymy" thing will probably not

be a major issue for a few reasons. It's

technical. It won't hold interest in many

people, and some of those won't be able to

fully understand it. So, either side, if

cleverly-phrased, could "convince" most people

who WANTED to believe in it.

It is on that principle that the Research Dept

got an easy ride for a LONG time.

Of course, feel free to pursue this-I just

wanted to point that out.

Over the last page,

I can't tell whose posts I like better-

Shazdancer's or Sirguessalot.

(*declares a tie*)

-------------

Mike,

a few posters have tried to point something out

to you, which you seem to be ignoring.

I'm going to borrow a page from your own

operations manual, and dumb it down from you.

meek master: "There is the natural and the

spiritual. There is a contrast and a great

difference between the two."

everybody else, in harmony:"NO SH!T!"

-------------

Why did you need anyone to point that out to you?

"Well, the distinction is important!"

Yes, but so is green traffic light from red

traffic light. Since the distinction is SELF-EVIDENT,

few people lose sleep over the dichotomy.

------------------------------------

Reminder to the newcomers:

Unless Mike has reconsidered his position (which I

hope happened), Mike believes that the Bible which

was so lauded in pfal and in countless teachings,

books and tapes by vpw is essentially useless in

conveying what God wants us to know.

That job is exclusively handled by vpw's works,

centered around vpw's books.

Mike seems certain that the clearly-plaigiarized

pages in those works were NOT plaigiarized. The

books, instead, were developed during some meetings

as a joint-venture between God and vpw.

(The "absent Christ" remained "absent".)

Mike believes this to be true because he believes

that God gave vpw a promise of an exclusive

contract, and sealed it with some sort of miracle.

(The snow on the gas pumps, and the 1942 promise.)

Absolutely NOTHING must be allowed to sully the good

name of vpw's perfect materials, which are so good

us logical people keep confusing it for passable

writing. Mike's devotion to his preciousss is

all-encompassing. When he closes his eyes, he sees

it before him, like a great unlidded eye, or a

circle of fire before him. (Hm, that sounds

familiar.) Thus, everything it says holds great

promises, and secrets await the one who decodes the

introductions, acknowledgements, and copyright dates.

CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!

Zix,

have you forgotten everything you learned

from the groupthink?

Never apologize (implies you are less than

perfect), and, if caught, never admit to an

error. (Oh, wait-that's not from the old

groupthink, that's the new groupthink.)

CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!

*plays Revolution #9 backwards*

Hey, there's secret messages hidden in this!

---------

Mike, if you looked a the cracks in sidewalk

concrete long enough, you would find patterns in

it. That's a hard-wired function in the brain-

pattern recognition. However, like any

identification program, it can glitch, and

misidentify stuff.

People were killed in Europe when villagers sought

to find the person responsible for bad things

happening to them-like bad weather or disease in

crops. They refused to accept that there WAS no

guiding pattern, and kept looking until they

"found" one. So, people were killed for

"witchcraft". Even Sigmund Freud, whose entire

career was based on finding patterns said

"sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

There's a lesson, there.

CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!

Vickles, let me rephrase my point with an

analogy I think we can all relate to.

You walked into the room while the tv show was

1/2-way over, and had caught up on the plot

within 30 seconds. This means, partly, you're

sharp, but largely, that the tv show wasn't that

hard to understand.

(My point being that new arrivals who haven't had

time to dislike Mike yet find him transparent-

he might want to consider that everybody else

might be right, after all...)

--------------------------------

I think part of me comes to these threads the

same way some people spectate a car crash.

CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!

Let's see..

A) secret messages hidden because of the

Adversary

B) secret messages hidden intentionally by

God/vpw (as Mike sees it, interchangeable)

---------------------------------------

These secret messages are mainly about the

natural/spiritual realm distinctions.

Mike, this may come as a shock to you, but there

are quite a few specialists in this field.

If I forgot half of what I learned in the field,

I'm confident I would STILL know it better than

you, which makes me less enthused about seeing

you dig out a "hidden" message on it.

That's neither a boast, nor idle. Further,

there are Christians on the GSC who know more

on the subject than I do, and LOTS of Christians

who never heard of the farm or vpw who are

well-versed in the subject.

Actually, while you've been rereading vpw's

books, we HAVE discussed this. You'll have a

pretty lean harvest from this search, Mike.

Compared to some places, twi was pretty

lightweight on this subject. That's because

vpw didn't have any good source-material to

photocopy from.

So, I suppose, looking for details on this

subject, one MUST "pad" it with hidden messages,

backwards records, and other cabalistic methods.

Frankly, even WITH the photocopying vpw did,

I STILL don't think he had more than a moderate

understanding of the subject. (I've been

better, and I've SEEN better than I've BEEN.)

--------------------

Mike, you might wish to retain the option of

reassessing your position. Vickles, whoever

he or she is, just walked in and seems to have

made a full appraisal of you. Those of us who

have been around have a more detailed

conclusion. (I say this without rancor.)

----------------

CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!