Goey

Mike,

My analogy was not about root causes. We could say that the axe caused the wound, but was it really the axe or the person wielding the axe? Or does it go even deeper. I supose it depends upon one's prospective. But in any case, without the axe there would be no wound.

Get this straight Mike. Dr. Victor Paul Weirwille used his position of authority as a supposed man of God as a vehicle to feed his lust for sex and power. He betrayed and abused those who looked to him for spiritual help and guidance. He did it repeatedly and without repentance. He was a serial abuser and he led other down the same path. Oh, and yes, he happened to write a few books with some pretty good Bible stuff in them as well.

But telling those that he betrayed and abused to get healed by mastering those books is absurd and laughable, even if the keys to being healed were in them. The reasons should be rather obvious.

Why would a rape victim want to rely upon books written by the rapist in order get healed? Suggesting such is rubbing salt into the wounds. It is naive and unthinking and it slaps the victims in the face. Besides, if a spiritual solution is being sought, there are other books and sources with the same and even better information - books that were not written by the rapist, but rather by folks with integrity and true compassion that did not go around betraying and abusing their followers while trying to fulfill their own lusts.

Mike, If you cannot get this then you are as dumb as a box of rocks or you just don't give a damn about anyone or anything but yourself and your own ideas.

Goey

quote:

---

The feelings of hurt I see people expressing cause me to want to help. It hurts me to see people I care about hurting.

---

Mike, you can't heal an axe wound with the axe that caused the wound in the first place. Trying to heal the wounds caused by VPW's dispicable actions by exalting VPW's words into the Word of God, and then telling the victims that the only way to heal is to master these words is... well, rather ludicrous.

Goey

quote:

---

I see a religion here, and the god is vpw, or the image of him that is currently held in mind. It?s a religion where the ultimate inner quality is hate, and to move this hate to others. Instead of praise, it?s cursing, and the more eloquent the cursing, the greater a call of ?Helleluia? from the choir. It?s a negative praise, worship in reverse. (If the shoe fits...

I choose different. I thank the True God for being able to work with me, a sinner, and He works with other sinners, too. Even VPW. I?ll bet that if we were to poll ALL the grads of PFAL, the vast majority would have more to thank God about than negative memories.

I urge that we seek ways to forget the past unpleasantness, from mild to traumatic, and focus on him... the perfect one... On this thread lets talk about Jesus Christ more, ok?

---

Mike, you see what you choose to see with your rose-colored telescope. One of your mistakes is presuming that this thread an/or the participants attitudes and beliefs concerning VPW represent the sum total of their spiritual life. You presume that hatred for VPW is at the forefront of peoples thoughts. Not so. It is your denying, belittling and glossing over of the well documented facts and negatives about VPW, PFAL amd TWI that brings them to the forefront. The spiritual lives and "religion" of many of the folks here extends far beyond GS cafe and your threads. You mistake "hate" for speaking the truth about your idols.

I know of very few here that deny that any good came from their time in TWI. Yet they are not so foolish and deluded as to ignore the bad that happened as well. To understand and truly make sense of TWI/VPW/PFAL one must honestly and critically look at all sides. Seeking to forget or ignore the unplesantness, errors and evil can only lead to an unbalanced and false notion of what is real. If we forget the negatives - the error, evil, and the abuse it will likely return upon us. Remebering the negatives does not mean that we focus on them. That is a false and absurd presumption. The lessons we learned from the negative are just as important as the lessons from the positives. They teach us what not to do, what won't work, and in many cases, what not to believe. They prevent us from falling into the same traps and errors over an over again. They have also taught us how to sift through much of this delusional and unbalanced hogwash that you are trying to feed us here.

Goey

So Mike, let's see if I got this right.

The memory of someone who was drugged and raped by the great doctor may be accurate at first. But as time goes by the memory "fades". It becomes less accurate each time it is refreseh from memory or by recounting the story because it cannot be refreshed by the original source. It should not be recounted or told to others, because it will only become more inaccurate - and we can't have that now can we? So eventually, after a period of time, the memory of being drugged and raped becomes so "faded" and/or inaccurate that it must be totally discounted, glossed over, and/or denied that it ever happened. As the memory fades so does the evil act itself - Then one day voila! - It never happened.

But on the other hand, if something the great doctor said or wrote is recorded on tape, video or book, then the fact that it is "recorded" in one of these media makes it true and reliable - never mind that his actions did not necessarily follow his words. The actions that folks recall are merely inaccurate, faded memories and must not be brought into the analysis. Only "recorded" words should be used, because being "recorded", not in faded, unreliabe memories of eye witnesses, but in a book, tape or video, they therefore must be true and accurate.

It that how it works master Mike?

Goey

Mike Posted:

quote:

---

So far it looks like we have a division of the labor here. Most of you folks want to work on emphasizing the negative aspects of Dr?s actions, which you only have fading memories of, and I?ll work on emphasizing the positives, which we have a record of.

---

Only fading memories? Is that what they are Mike? Ditto to what Karmicdebt said. That is truly insensitive.

Goey

Posted by What The Hay:

quote:

---

I believe Mike is just one of those people who happened to get stuck back in the "PFAL popularity" of the '70s. Really people, he is just someone who is crying out to get out and get "unstuck".

---

Stuck in the 70's? - Hardly. Mike's theories were developed witihin the last few years. When in the 70's was PFAL promoted as the Word of God that supersedes the scriptures? When in 70's TWI were the scriptures considered unreliable remnants? When in the 70's was VPW's alleged 1942 episode where God spoke to him taught to be a new covenant between God and mankind? When in the 70's was it taught that VPW was genetically gifted giant who caused the earth to shake wherever he walked?

None of this stuff was a part of 70's TWI.

Mike is not stuck in 70's and neither is he "crying to get out and unstuck". Mike has sold out to his own beliefs and will not be moved. He thinks he has found something and will not be swayed. He is here to try make proselytes - to promote PFAL as the only reliable Word of God - to declare VPW a man after God's own heart. That is why Mike is here.

Crying to get out and get unstuck? - Talking about naive. Sheesh !

Goey

quote:

---

Moses, David, Saul, etc etc were trained by God too. Solomon given total wisdom.

And let's not forget Adam's perfectly "renewed" mind. Trained by God.

---

Training implies, study, practice and and usually a teacher. "Trained by God" you say? Well it depends upon what is meant by training.

God put wisdom in Solomon's heart. There is no biblical record of any direct training that I can tell. The scriptures certainly say nothing about "total wisdom". If he had "total wisdom" I doubt he would have gone after idols and false gods. There seems to be no record of David having been "trained" by God. My best guess is that as a good Jewish boy he was trained by his parents via the scriptures.

Where is there any record that Saul received any "training" directly from God?

These men no doubt received revelation from time to time, but "training" from God? What does that mean? Seem rather esoterical and contrived. It proves nothing in regards to VPW.

Adam had a perfectly renewed mind? - Says Who? Why should I need to remember that? This is just parroting of PFAL - an unprovable teaching of VP's that had no real substance or any particular signifigance for that matter.

The only point I see that is trying to be made here is that VPW somehow belongs in the same class as David, Solomon and Saul. I reject that premise for several reasons that have already been discussed by others here. VPW was a charleton and an abuser. He also happened to teach the Bible, sometimes pretty well.

quote:

---

He was given an overdose of brains and brawn; wherever he walked the ground shook. There are people born in the population who are like that, genetically gifted, even over gifted. If these prodigies don?t burn out in adolescence or their early twenties then they go on to do either great good or evil with their natural abilities, usually more evil except more and more subtle so as to hide it. Dr, spent an inordinate amount of time in the good side compared to other members of his physical class...

---

Yea, he had so much "brains" that as a PHD he could not even pronouce the word "probleN" correctly. Why he did not even have the "brains" to cover up his blatant plaigerism. And where is the brawn? Oh that's right he invented the "hook shot." What a crock!

quote:

---

For those of us OLGs who personally witnessed the former, for those of us who witnessed the great good Dr did when he walked with God, our first responsibility is to help our grad brothers and sisters with that damage that did occur. And that can only occur by mastering that great good in its final form: the PFAL books.

---

I witnessed VPW teach the Bible. He cooked me a hamburger once. Good for him. This is hardly earth shattering. I know of few "OLGS" that "witnessed the former". I did not.

I do agree that we should help our brothers and sisters with the damage that was done, but not by mastering PFAL. We can help them rather by telling the truth about VPW, about how he plaigerized the works of others, about how he used his position of authority to sexually abuse women, about how many secummed to his charms and deception because we put too much emphasis and trust in the man rather than upon God and Christ. We can encourage folks to get help from other sources where we are not qualified. That is what we can do. Mastering PFAL will do nothing to heal the many wounds that VPW intentionally inflicted upon folks to fulfill his own lusts.

PFAL while having some good stuff in it was used by VPW as a tool to fulfill his own perverted lusts and to feed his overblown ego.

Rafael, I am with you. This is so entirely abusurd that I am not even going to address this baloney anymore.

Goey

Ginger,

quote:

---

In your apology to SGA, you mention you assumed ~ perhaps from some preconceived call ~ that he was evil because he may have been agnostic ????

(or something to that effect ~ I can't cut and paste here)

Being agnostic makes you evil isn't in my book.

Is it in yours?

---

Ginger, you are so far off the mark here that it is rediculous. Either that or you are attempting attribute a view upon me that I do not esposue. It was Todd that called my repsonse to Mike evil. I never in any way referred to Todd or agnostism as being evil. Never. I don't know what you were reading, but is was not my post. You should be more careful or more honest. I do not appreciate being misrepresented -if that is the case.

Agnostism is an admitted unknowing. I actually have much more respect for that than for someone like Mike. My first (errant) response to Todd was about prospectives. My point, though errantly aimed, was that what is "evil" to an evangleical, scripture-believing Christian would certainly be different than what evil is to is to an agnostic. The Christian would define evil in the context of scripture, while the agnostic would define evil in a humanistic or secular way.

I suggest you go back and read again and try reading what I actually wrote.

Goey

Mike,

quote:

---

Gosh! Goey, you sure made my response easy. I?ll just paste in a modified version of what you said to Todd.

Goey, My sincere apologies. For some reason I thought I recalled a post of yours a while back that was admittedly believing that ?the ?handed down remnants of the Bible? ARE the Word of God.? It must have been someone else. Again, my apologies.

---

Is that the best you can do Mike? Another dodge. And quite insincere I think. See Mike, the truth is that I did indeed mix Todd up with another poster and I apologized for that.

But I doubt that you mixed me up with another poster. You just made a presumotion by failing to read what I really wrote and now you are just regirgitating my words back to me to be cute. A real piece of work. I bet you are really liking all this attention.

Goey

Todd,

My sincere apologies. For some reason I thought I recalled a post of yours a while back that was admittedly agnostic. It must have been someone else. Again, my apologies.

Goey

Mike,

You asked:"...May I ask you how it is that you think the handed down remnants of the Bible are THE Word of God and not another gospel?"

Mike, I did not say that I think that the "handed down remnants of the Bible" ARE the Word of God. Boy, you really missed that one. You are reading between the lines. Go back and look again, then get back to me when you read and try to comprehend what I actually wrote. Need a hint? - I used the word contained.

Goey

Sirguessalot,

quote:

---

That was quite an evil thing to say, Goey.

In fact, that whole last paragraph seems quite worthless and destructive.

---

Todd, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. And I am certanly entitled to blow it off as "worthless" if I choose. In this particular case I choose to. Nothing personal.

But understand that I am comming from a prospective that espouses the authority of scripture and the message that it brings to mankind. Whereas your prospective most likely does not.

If I am not mistaken your prospective does not even acknowledge the existence of God or salvation through Christ. So how can you call it an "evil thing to say". I would not think that evil exists in your world except possibliy in a secular or humanistic kind of way. So it seems pretty clear that your view of evil and mine are most likely not on the same page - at least not in reagards to Mike. My view of evil is based upon scripture, your is based on ... well who really knows.

Regards,

Goey

Shaz Posted:

quote:

---

Mike,

I don't recall using the word "evil" about you in any of my posts. Please don't put words in my mouth that I didn't say. I don't know you well enough to make such a judgment, so I didn't make it. I have suggested a few things about you based on your words here, and those comments I have no reason to rescind.

---

Yes, but I HAVE used the word "evil" in regards to Mike. On March 12th I posted:

quote:

---

"Jesus did not mince his words with the Pharisees - he called them whited sepulecres and hipocrtites. Paul calls folks idoloters and fornicators. Lest I be charged by someone as equating myself Jesus or Paul, my point is that by example - all "name calling" is not necessarily unwarranted. Evil is evil, even if it "acts nice" and seems to have good manners.

Maybe some folks longer believe that there are deceivers, or enemies of the cross of Christ. But I am not one of them. I happen to believe that Mike's doctrine is evil and that Mike is spiritually deceived. As he attempts to spread this false doctrine and recruit others into it, he becomes a deceiver himself. I reserve the right to call a spade a spade. I think others might as well. What do you think Linda? That we ought to be nice to Mike? God forbid that someone might call evil evil or an idoloter an idoloter. Poor Mike.

---

I'll make no bones about it. I think that Mikes doctrine is evil and that Mike is either knowingly or unknowingly ( I cannot tell) promoting a lie. I suspect the former because of his willingness to abandon any form of an intellectually honest approach.

Mike posted ( to Shaz):

quote:

---

...who made you the paragon of virtue that you can call me evil? I?d also like to know how you, in this powerfully lofty position, avoid the corruption of power that the people under your scrutiny have succumbed to. Did you get this power while at TWI?

---

Mike, one does not have to or need to be a "parqagon of virtue" to call something or someone evil. Evil can be discerned in several ways. One is by the standard set in the true Word of God contained in what you call "unreliable remnants". Yet your doctrine convienently casts aside the true Word in favor of another - which is not another ( Gal 1:7). You eliminate the standard itself, by casting it aside. You honor the works of a man above the true Word of God and attempt to deceive others with this false doctrine of yours. It is evil because it attempts to deprive folks of the goodness of the true Word of God which is contained in the scriptures. It exalts a man.

Mike, maybe no one else has called you evil outright, but I certainly have no problem with it. By actively promoting and recruiting folks into your false doctrine, you become a messenger of evil - a deceiver.

But the good news is that what you are promoting amounts to little more than "Evil Lite", but evil nonetheless. It will come to nothing. There is a little chance that anyone will truly buy into your deception because of the many, many, obvious flaws in your logic and methodology and becasue of the abject abusurdity of it all. Anyone with a lick of sense can see right through your deception.

Goey

Sirguessalot,

By Mike's logic, if he "sees" something that in his rather isolated and limited experience has not been brought to the front and elevated according to his standards, then is only stands to reason, that everyone else must have missed it. This is pure arrogance IMO.

Goey

quote:

---

Most of what I've been trying to do here at GSC is report new data, things I?ve found in the record that I?ve perceived to be hidden from sight, or not present in our collective memory, or not part of the common discussions between us older grads of PFAL.

---

New Data? What new Data?

Datum - Something given or admitted; a fact or principle granted; that upon which an inference or an argument is based; -- used chiefly in the plural. -

(Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.)

Data implies facts or principles that are used to base an inference or an argument. This means a process of rational logic of some sort. In other words you use the "data" (facts) and apply logic to come to a conclusion.

Mike, one of the problems here is that your "data" is missing. You have no data. What you are calling data are your concusions and theories. You present your theories as facts or "data." You have put your conclusions up front, making most ( if not all) of your logic circular and your conclusions invalid

Take your word list for example. You postulate that these words empahasize the spiritual in VPW's writings, yet you offer no facts or examples to substiate this hypothesis - you just declare it to be so by fiat. Why? Because it fit's with your preconceived and rather absurd notion that PFAL is God-breathed.

What data Mike? --- You have none.

Goey

Shazdancer Asked:

quote:

---

Given that we see narcissism/sociopathy traits in VPW's life, pretend for a moment that he is still alive. How should we treat him? Should we try to empathize? Should we rebuke him (or M&A him) and warn others? Should we work with him quietly behind the scenes and let him go on preaching and teaching? Should we cast out devil spirits?

---

Good question. I am no expert, but I do not think the rehabilitation rate is too good for folks like VPW. You cannot work with someone who does not want to be worked with or does not see the problem. One of the symptoms of narccissim, sociopathy and alcoholism is that the person does not see that they have a problem. It is everyone else that has the problem. Once this kind of person is in a position of ultimate authority like VPW or LCM in TWI, they will run over and abuse folks until they die or until they get the boot.

You might try an exorcism, but if it does not take, I'd run like hell. Most likely, you'll be the one getting M & A'd. -- :D-->

Goey

VPW "mentally ill" ?

Quite possible, and maybe even likely, but probably a little more than just a little more "mentally ill" than many of us who blindly or not so blindly followed him and TWI for large chunks of our lives.

I only met VPW a couple of times and was not privy to his behind the scenes behavior. But if only half of the accounts are true, then he he had some pretty serious "character flaws."

Habitual liar, plaigerist, sexual deviant, adulterer, cult leader, narccisistic, sociopath, depressed, histrionic, alcoholic...

I have heard first-hand accounts of behaviours that may lead some to conclude all of these things.

But these are psycological descriptions, the Bible just calls this kind of person a ravening wolf in sheep's clothing.

Goey

Wow Mike,

You got one person to agree with you in part. That really sets it in stone, huh ?

quote:

---

I do NOT see this sentence as equivalently saying “Then, after this confession of guilt, it was written in the Bible that David BECAME a man after God's own heart for the first time right then and there.” Why would it say that? What would be the point? Why would Dr want to say that?

---

Why? Because Wierwille made a mistake - that is why. It is not even a big mistake, but a mistake nonetheless. He got the chronology wrong.

You do not see it because your hermeneutic approach will not allow you to see it. You have thus become blinded to any errors in PFAL.

But as Zixar noted, not only did VP get the chronology wrong he also gets David's actions wrong as well.

VPW writes:

“Nathan said, "You are the man." At that moment David recognized the truth of what Nathan was bringing from God and David said, "Well, I am sorry." He turned to God and asked God to forgive him.

This is a VPW's commentary on 2 Samuel 12:7 - 13. VPW claims that David turned to God and asked God to forgive him. Actually he did no such thing. The record in 2 Samuel 12:13 says: " And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the LORD. And Nathan said unto David, The LORD also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die."

According to the record, David did not ask God for forgiveness, he instead confessed his sin to Nathan.

Goey

Mike,

Paul was speaking to the Corinthinans as a father because he had initiallly brought the Gospel of Christ to them. By his personal and direct preaching they got saved. They were made Christian's by his preaching of the Gospel. Paul then entreats them to "be ye followers of me".

This entreatment is further qualified in Chapter 11 verse 1, where he says, "Be you followers of me, as I also am of Christ. In other words, "Follow me as far as I follow Christ."

MJ got it right. VPW was an instructor - and a pretty bad one by his example. He did teach some good stuff at times but the bulk of it was not the Gospel of Christ. Some of it crossed purposes with the Gospel of Christ.

I doubt that Wierwille, like Paul, directly "fathered" too many with his preaching. Others did that - those that went out on the field and actually preached the Gospel of Christ within the confines of TWI. That in itself was difficult.

I got saved long before PFAL as did many others. Wierwille did not bring Christ to me. He is NOT my father in any sense of the word.

Follow Wierwille? Many have, and look where it got them. I mean the MOG mimicks. They are pathetic and mindless immitators. Many became tyranical and hurtful - "even as they were led."

Follow Christ instead. Master the teachings of Jesus and follow his example. If you must follow a man, choose one who follows Christ by example as well as by word. Wierwille missed the mark.

Wierwille is dead and gone, yet by his example, has left us a legacy of how NOT not to follow Christ.

Goey

Posted by Too Grey Now:

quote:

---

There is nothing that guarantees there will be a Ben Hur outcome where some ?lowly? person gets to "Save" the President of TWI... given that everyone is willing to go down with the ship or is chained to it... then the BEST THING that could happen would be to hear...

RAMMING SPEED!!

---

I agree, if TWI is to sink it most likely needs to be from a direct and fatal hit. They can dodge and absorb a few minor blows forever.

Even if all of the followers stopped giving their ABS or even if there were no followers, the BOD and core insiders would still be in control of about 65 million in cash and other assets. They would still be in high cotton.

The only thing that I see that could really take TWI down for the count, would be a successful class action suit for fraud and for rackeetering. Once the civil suit was successful the State and the Feds could mop up with the criminal charges and convicions, and the court could order a disolvement of the corporation - something like what happened Jim Baaker and the PTL Club.

I have heard rumors of a class action suit, but that was about a year or so ago. Nothing seems to have come if it. I don't know if the ex-TWI community could become organized or focused enough to actually put one together. It would not be easy.

Short of a class action suit or someting like it, I see nothing else that could do it. But then, maybe there is something that I do not see.

Goey

TGN,

What if the deception is intentional and done with full knowledge?

Dontcha think is is possible, if not likely, that TWI's BOD and other top leaders are in the business of deception?

Isn't is possible, that it is not so much that they don't believe that deception exists( certainly they must) but that their denial of it is just another intentional part of the deception itself.

I find it very difficult to believe that Rosie and gang actually do not believe that they have a problem.

It seems much more likely to me that they are just rotten to the core and that that they know it. These folks are frauds and cons IMO. Unlike the alcoholic who does not really know he has a problem, the con and the fraud uses deception as one of the main tools in his bag of tricks.

Goey

[This message was edited by Goey on March 07, 2003 at 18:12.]

Also consider that TWI's corporate structure is such that only a handful of people, being the deceivers themsleves, control everyting.

There is no process by which these deceicvers can be removed from their positions and be replaced with honest ones.

Hoping to change TWI from the inside is noble, but is still an act of futility.

Goey

quote:

---

I remember sitting in a class that Gxxxxd Wxxxn was teaching and we were watching a tape of the competition. He distinctly said she was either seed or possessed because it was impossible to score a perfect 10 in anything.

---

Aw Heck!

I guess that means Bo Dereck was a "seed girl." - I suspected there was something wrong with her.

Goey

On a serious note.

I do not think that the devil has the ability to create permanant seed within someone. Only God can do that.

Neither do I believe that there is such a thing as being "born of the wrong seed". It is is a doctrine pretty much unique to TWI and it's offshoots.

Biblically, Satan's "seed" are those that disobey God in a sinister/self- serving manner. - Like the Pharisees that Jesus confronted. (John 8:44)

The Bible says by metpahor that we are Abrahams's seed ( Romans 4:16). Yet Abraham did not create any kind of seed within us. Abraham is our "father" because we followed his example of faith. Jesus referred to Satan as these Pharisse's "father" because they followed his example of disobedience.

Satan being their "father", has nothing to do with being permanantly implanted with spiritual "devil seed".

This is just another one of TWI's errant doctrines.

Goey

Elvis

Billy Graham

Mohammad Ali

Oral Roberts

Ernest Angely

The Pope - (any Pope)

Most other religious leaders

The Beatles

Most all non-TWI musicians

Nelson Rockefeller

The Masons (Evil Devil Worshippers)

Led Zepplin

and.....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

ME!

.

.

.

Mouuuu hoooou hooou hooou haaah haaah haaah! ...

Goey