I think what might cause a lot of us to look at the fans of PFAL with a jaundiced eye is that, after leaving the cult atmosphere and maybe gaining a little bit of maturity, in retrospect we find the teaching so farking LAME.
Lord have mercy, "THE LAW OF BELIEVING"? What a crock. It has far more to do with 1950's pop-psychology than anything biblical. Likewise with the "LAW" of "giving and receiving". Not much biblical there either, just a cool way to fleece the unsuspecting flock. Or all the lesser (and mistaken) things like "thoroughly" vs. "throughly" (UTTER nonsense), the "four crucified with Christ", "the cry of triumph" and so on. It made for a lot of "gee whiz" moments to the uninitiated, but the end result of which was - not much.
So do I think less of folks who STILL hang onto the odd, eclectic mix of Bible trivia and religious pablum that was PFAL?
Yeah, you bet I do. It's our seventh year into the new millenium, grow up fer gawdsake...
I think what might cause a lot of us to look at the fans of PFAL with a jaundiced eye is that, after leaving the cult atmosphere and maybe gaining a little bit of maturity, in retrospect we find the teaching so farking LAME.
Lord have mercy, "THE LAW OF BELIEVING"? What a crock. It has far more to do with 1950's pop-psychology than anything biblical. Likewise with the "LAW" of "giving and receiving". Not much biblical there either, just a cool way to fleece the unsuspecting flock. Or all the lesser (and mistaken) things like "thoroughly" vs. "throughly" (UTTER nonsense), the "four crucified with Christ", "the cry of triumph" and so on. It made for a lot of "gee whiz" moments to the uninitiated, but the end result of which was - not much.
So do I think less of folks who STILL hang onto the odd, eclectic mix of Bible trivia and religious pablum that was PFAL?
Yeah, you bet I do. It's our seventh year into the new millenium, grow up fer gawdsake...
Thanks for expressing your intelligent views. Now I can make a more mature, sound decision concerning PFAL.
While I believe that some of what is contained in PFAL lines up with the bible, the class as a whole is such a mix of made-up definitions of Greek words, illogical conclusions, shaky application of the rules of grammar, keys to research that aren't necessarily so, and ideas that apparently were pulled out of his foot, it is my opinion that anyone who is using PFAL in any way as a basis for their beliefs hasn't really done any objective research.
Recently on another site, a contributor posted something, using something Wierwille said as his "proof" that it was so. Something from PFAL that most of us wouldn't even think of questioning. Others challenged him on it and asked for independent verification. It took a month a googling to come up with something that indicated that Wierwille was right, and even then, there was some room to take the opposite view.
My point is, there's more to researching what's in PFAL than merely reading the verses and verifying that they read the way Wierwille said that they do. Or even cracking open a concordance. A lot of what we learned about how to "work the Word" is freighted with assumptions that aren't necessarily true.
NP, like Oakspear so wonderfully put it, most folks who say they've re-evaluated what vee pee taught have really only re-read what he taught and not compared it with other scholars, sources, points of view or even entertained the idea seriously that there could be flaws in what he taught. They start from a position of defense instead of objectivity.
Here's a great place to start if you're really interested in re-evaluating what we were taught: PFAL Review. Jerry started out as a staunch defender of vee pee, PFAL and all things TWI. His goal was to really, genuinely work through the material and prove to himself that we were not lied to, manipulated and made fools of. He ended up with a much different view of PFAL, vee pee and TWI as well as a much stronger conviction of what he believes and why he believes it.
Now, I see in the beautiful redecorated Cafe are additional pertinent articles related to the fraud that vee pee was:
For even more, I highly recommend WordWolf's threads on vee pee's life.
BUT, one has to really want to evaluate what they've been taught, what they believe and the person at the foundation of all that. Most folks don't really care to put that much work into it for whatever reason.... usually because they refuse to accept that vee pee was a plagiarizing, lying, stealing, rapist and false prophet.
Some of those folks are running off shoot ministries. Some of those folks aren't involved with any offshoot ministry. Not all of the off shoot folks are vee pee worshippers and I never once indicated that all (with or without anything) are. Some are just following the crowd and not really concerned whether or not what they believe is "the truth" or not, they're happy to have someone else do all the work and tell them what to think. Others are getting their non-religious needs met and the fact that doctrinal lies, vee pee worship and any other evil that may be lurking around aren't important to them.... Like I said to PinkLady, we are all on our own path - to each his own - I've done the TWIt / man worship thing and don't need to repeat it in an offshoot - some do - some don't see themselves that way ... good for them. I wish them well on their journey. :)
Regarding the offshoots.... I HIGHLY recommend listening to the Episode 8 interviews with John Juedes, if you only have time to listen to one of the segments, start with the second one as it addresses those who carry on PFAL and TWI doctrine under a different name.
I appreciate the view points that you have stated.
I know that PFAL is not perfect. (duh)
Unless you can point me to THE GUARANTEED, ABSOLUTE CORRECT TRUTH and DOCTRINE, then I'm keeping PFAL as my basic approach to understanding the Bible. (You have thousands of doctrines/denominations/religions/beliefs/interpretations/re-interpretations, etc. to choose from)
If I'm wrong...won't be the first time.
I'm glad for you both if you have found the "TRUTH".
I will not attempt to prove anything from PFAL to you or anyone else. As you know, that would be an exercise in futility. We have all made up our mind on these matters.
I do not worship VPW, nor do I condone or excuse any of his unchristian or unethical behaviour.
Could say much more, but I'll just leave it at that.
You have thousands of doctrines/denominations/religions/beliefs/interpretations/re-interpretations, etc. to choose from)
Many of them are far far advanced from Wierwille and PFAL interpretations --(in fact imo more than not)
Curious how many of those thousands you have actually given an honest listen to, studied and reflected on for any length of time.
being unwilling to search out the answers you seek or to even listen to what thousands of highly qualified theologians and scholars over centuries have had to say would qualify to me as being pretty darn close to MOG worship if not right on the button--
Wierwille was a minute fish in a gigantic ocean --- not even really an asterick in the history of Christendom ( maybe a half a$$terick??----but choose your own poison -its your life
I appreciate the view points that you have stated.
You're welcome
Unless you can point me to THE GUARANTEED, ABSOLUTE CORRECT TRUTH and DOCTRINE,...
Ah...you and I apparently operate from a different premise. I don't believe that such an animal exists.
...then I'm keeping PFAL as my basic approach to understanding the Bible.
Despite my position that no such thing as "GUARANTEED, ABSOLUTE CORRECT TRUTH and DOCTRINE" can be found, it can easily be demonstrated that PFAL did not do what it was advertised to do. My beef with PFAL is not whether or not there was "truth", or even usable, practical teachings, in it, but that the premise of PFAL is that there is a GUARANTEED, ABSOLUTE CORRECT TRUTH and DOCTRINE and that PFAL is it. The so-called keys to research were flawed and much of what was taught was not based on the scriptures that it was claimed they did, but on one man's opinion.
I'm glad for you both if you have found the "TRUTH".
If by "TRUTH" (wow! caps and quotes ), then, no. I found some things that work for me, but I am under no illusion that they have universal application.
I will not attempt to prove anything from PFAL to you or anyone else. As you know, that would be an exercise in futility. We have all made up our mind on these matters.
No offense meant, but that's a the same song that most, if not all, PFAL fans sing.
I do not worship VPW, nor do I condone or excuse any of his unchristian or unethical behaviour.
I believe you. I've not seen anything in your posts to indicate that you do.
Ah...you and I apparently operate from a different premise. I don't believe that such an animal exists.
We do differ on this.
I accept certain basics in PFAL. I won't claim to have mastered the material or that I believe every word.
From the time I first got involved in TWI (late 70's) THE CLASS and THE TEACHER OF THE CLASS where so heavily promoted that I never paid much attention to the actual content of the class. THE CLASS always took precedence over the (if you don't mind me saying this) the Word. So I am acquanited with the fanatical side of PFAL.
But things like the integrety of the Word, nine manisfestations, body,soul and spirit...I still believe these things.
BTW, I did the church thing (classes and all) for two years after leaving TWI - great folks, but it just didn't work for me.
"No offense meant, but that's a the same song that most, if not all, PFAL fans sing. "
Might be a bit of that from anti PFAL fans at times as well.
Why,if people are fond of the "academic" aspects of PFAL, they don't simply go to the sources from which VPW conveniently lifted them? Those sources can be found right here at GSC if one is so inclined to do a little research.
Why,if people are fond of the "academic" aspects of PFAL, they don't simply go to the sources from which VPW conveniently lifted them? Those sources can be found right here at GSC if one is so inclined to do a little research.
Food for thought.
Waysider,
Please don't be puzzled any longer.
I do not have any of VPWs material...not a syllabus, not a PFAL book, nothing.
These items were donated to the city landfill when I left TWI several years ago.
All I have currently is some of Bullinger's stuff. ( I realize that some don't like him either.)
If you're happy in your chosen path and it works for you then good on ya.
I'm with Oakspear in that I think there is no "ALL TRUTH", but I do think that some other folks have done a darn good job with the things that they have focused on and I've gleaned from them. I keep what I like and toss what I don't. IMO, there isn't much to keep in PFAL and the few things I do keep, I certainly don't attribute them to PFAL or vee pee, but to the true sources.
I just don't see any point in holding onto something that's so obviously flawed and full of... full of.... well, just so obviously flawed and from a rotten, putrid foundation. To me, holding onto PFAL and sticking with offshoots is like living in a slum of an apartment where the bathroom constantly burbles up sewage and saying, "Yeah, it's got some flaws, but none of the other apartments out there are perfect either." Maybe not, but there are an awful lot of 'em that are sure as he11 a lot better than that one.
I've had fun apartment hopping and plan to continue doing so till my dying days. I've found things that work for me, excellent explanations for things I didn't previously understand and learned a lot of great things.... some just sound good, some enhance my life and the things that don't - well, at least I've learned about them and I'm all the better for it, imo.
Which brings me back to Sushi's signature: The lessons are repeated until they are learned - I'm fairly confident in my having learned the lessons that came with PFAL and TWI. I don't care to repeat those lessons in any way, including through offshoots or by holding onto such flawed non-research. Stopping at PFAL isn't necessarily worshiping vee pee, but it is severely limiting God - in MY opinion.
NP-------It seems you may have misunderstood the essence of my post.
My point was that if a person is fond of a particular section of the PFAL class such as "four crucified" or "figures of speech" and so on, why not simply look at the sources from which these portions were gleaned? References to direct interested parties toward the originating sources are abundant here at the Cafe. My apologies for not stating this in a clearer fashion originally.
Recommended Posts
Ham
what's a "hellover"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Hope it doesn't weigh too much. I'll call two men and a truck..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
I think what might cause a lot of us to look at the fans of PFAL with a jaundiced eye is that, after leaving the cult atmosphere and maybe gaining a little bit of maturity, in retrospect we find the teaching so farking LAME.
Lord have mercy, "THE LAW OF BELIEVING"? What a crock. It has far more to do with 1950's pop-psychology than anything biblical. Likewise with the "LAW" of "giving and receiving". Not much biblical there either, just a cool way to fleece the unsuspecting flock. Or all the lesser (and mistaken) things like "thoroughly" vs. "throughly" (UTTER nonsense), the "four crucified with Christ", "the cry of triumph" and so on. It made for a lot of "gee whiz" moments to the uninitiated, but the end result of which was - not much.
So do I think less of folks who STILL hang onto the odd, eclectic mix of Bible trivia and religious pablum that was PFAL?
Yeah, you bet I do. It's our seventh year into the new millenium, grow up fer gawdsake...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewParadigm
Thanks for expressing your intelligent views. Now I can make a more mature, sound decision concerning PFAL.
Edited by NewParadigmLink to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
"Thanks for expressing your intelligent views. Now I can make a more mature, sound decision concerning PFAL."
There ya go...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
While I believe that some of what is contained in PFAL lines up with the bible, the class as a whole is such a mix of made-up definitions of Greek words, illogical conclusions, shaky application of the rules of grammar, keys to research that aren't necessarily so, and ideas that apparently were pulled out of his foot, it is my opinion that anyone who is using PFAL in any way as a basis for their beliefs hasn't really done any objective research.
Recently on another site, a contributor posted something, using something Wierwille said as his "proof" that it was so. Something from PFAL that most of us wouldn't even think of questioning. Others challenged him on it and asked for independent verification. It took a month a googling to come up with something that indicated that Wierwille was right, and even then, there was some room to take the opposite view.
My point is, there's more to researching what's in PFAL than merely reading the verses and verifying that they read the way Wierwille said that they do. Or even cracking open a concordance. A lot of what we learned about how to "work the Word" is freighted with assumptions that aren't necessarily true.
Edited by OakspearLink to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
NP, like Oakspear so wonderfully put it, most folks who say they've re-evaluated what vee pee taught have really only re-read what he taught and not compared it with other scholars, sources, points of view or even entertained the idea seriously that there could be flaws in what he taught. They start from a position of defense instead of objectivity.
Here's a great place to start if you're really interested in re-evaluating what we were taught: PFAL Review. Jerry started out as a staunch defender of vee pee, PFAL and all things TWI. His goal was to really, genuinely work through the material and prove to himself that we were not lied to, manipulated and made fools of. He ended up with a much different view of PFAL, vee pee and TWI as well as a much stronger conviction of what he believes and why he believes it.
Now, I see in the beautiful redecorated Cafe are additional pertinent articles related to the fraud that vee pee was:
The Integrity of Your Word
Top 10 Doctrinal Errors of TWI
Actual Errors in PFAL
The Destruction of Self
For even more, I highly recommend WordWolf's threads on vee pee's life.
BUT, one has to really want to evaluate what they've been taught, what they believe and the person at the foundation of all that. Most folks don't really care to put that much work into it for whatever reason.... usually because they refuse to accept that vee pee was a plagiarizing, lying, stealing, rapist and false prophet.
Some of those folks are running off shoot ministries. Some of those folks aren't involved with any offshoot ministry. Not all of the off shoot folks are vee pee worshippers and I never once indicated that all (with or without anything) are. Some are just following the crowd and not really concerned whether or not what they believe is "the truth" or not, they're happy to have someone else do all the work and tell them what to think. Others are getting their non-religious needs met and the fact that doctrinal lies, vee pee worship and any other evil that may be lurking around aren't important to them.... Like I said to PinkLady, we are all on our own path - to each his own - I've done the TWIt / man worship thing and don't need to repeat it in an offshoot - some do - some don't see themselves that way ... good for them. I wish them well on their journey. :)
Edited by BelleLink to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Regarding the offshoots.... I HIGHLY recommend listening to the Episode 8 interviews with John Juedes, if you only have time to listen to one of the segments, start with the second one as it addresses those who carry on PFAL and TWI doctrine under a different name.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewParadigm
Oak & Belle,
I appreciate the view points that you have stated.
I know that PFAL is not perfect. (duh)
Unless you can point me to THE GUARANTEED, ABSOLUTE CORRECT TRUTH and DOCTRINE, then I'm keeping PFAL as my basic approach to understanding the Bible. (You have thousands of doctrines/denominations/religions/beliefs/interpretations/re-interpretations, etc. to choose from)
If I'm wrong...won't be the first time.
I'm glad for you both if you have found the "TRUTH".
I will not attempt to prove anything from PFAL to you or anyone else. As you know, that would be an exercise in futility. We have all made up our mind on these matters.
I do not worship VPW, nor do I condone or excuse any of his unchristian or unethical behaviour.
Could say much more, but I'll just leave it at that.
Thanks.
NP (formerly WeWereScammed)
Edited by NewParadigmLink to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
Many of them are far far advanced from Wierwille and PFAL interpretations --(in fact imo more than not)
Curious how many of those thousands you have actually given an honest listen to, studied and reflected on for any length of time.
being unwilling to search out the answers you seek or to even listen to what thousands of highly qualified theologians and scholars over centuries have had to say would qualify to me as being pretty darn close to MOG worship if not right on the button--
Wierwille was a minute fish in a gigantic ocean --- not even really an asterick in the history of Christendom ( maybe a half a$$terick??----but choose your own poison -its your life
Edited by mstar1Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewParadigm
Thanks for the permission.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewParadigm
Thanks Oak,
You'd be amazed at how much we agree on this.
We do differ on this.
I accept certain basics in PFAL. I won't claim to have mastered the material or that I believe every word.
From the time I first got involved in TWI (late 70's) THE CLASS and THE TEACHER OF THE CLASS where so heavily promoted that I never paid much attention to the actual content of the class. THE CLASS always took precedence over the (if you don't mind me saying this) the Word. So I am acquanited with the fanatical side of PFAL.
But things like the integrety of the Word, nine manisfestations, body,soul and spirit...I still believe these things.
BTW, I did the church thing (classes and all) for two years after leaving TWI - great folks, but it just didn't work for me.
"No offense meant, but that's a the same song that most, if not all, PFAL fans sing. "
Might be a bit of that from anti PFAL fans at times as well.
Thanks.
Edited by NewParadigmLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
What puzzles me is this:
Why,if people are fond of the "academic" aspects of PFAL, they don't simply go to the sources from which VPW conveniently lifted them? Those sources can be found right here at GSC if one is so inclined to do a little research.
Food for thought.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewParadigm
Waysider,
Please don't be puzzled any longer.
I do not have any of VPWs material...not a syllabus, not a PFAL book, nothing.
These items were donated to the city landfill when I left TWI several years ago.
All I have currently is some of Bullinger's stuff. ( I realize that some don't like him either.)
Edited by NewParadigmLink to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
If you're happy in your chosen path and it works for you then good on ya.
I'm with Oakspear in that I think there is no "ALL TRUTH", but I do think that some other folks have done a darn good job with the things that they have focused on and I've gleaned from them. I keep what I like and toss what I don't. IMO, there isn't much to keep in PFAL and the few things I do keep, I certainly don't attribute them to PFAL or vee pee, but to the true sources.
I just don't see any point in holding onto something that's so obviously flawed and full of... full of.... well, just so obviously flawed and from a rotten, putrid foundation. To me, holding onto PFAL and sticking with offshoots is like living in a slum of an apartment where the bathroom constantly burbles up sewage and saying, "Yeah, it's got some flaws, but none of the other apartments out there are perfect either." Maybe not, but there are an awful lot of 'em that are sure as he11 a lot better than that one.
I've had fun apartment hopping and plan to continue doing so till my dying days. I've found things that work for me, excellent explanations for things I didn't previously understand and learned a lot of great things.... some just sound good, some enhance my life and the things that don't - well, at least I've learned about them and I'm all the better for it, imo.
Which brings me back to Sushi's signature: The lessons are repeated until they are learned -
I'm fairly confident in my having learned the lessons that came with PFAL and TWI. I don't care to repeat those lessons in any way, including through offshoots or by holding onto such flawed non-research. Stopping at PFAL isn't necessarily worshiping vee pee, but it is severely limiting God - in MY opinion.
Edited by BelleLink to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Hey, NP, wanna see some MOG Worship in action? Check out these types of posts.... Wierwille didn't INTEND to steal
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
NP-------It seems you may have misunderstood the essence of my post.
My point was that if a person is fond of a particular section of the PFAL class such as "four crucified" or "figures of speech" and so on, why not simply look at the sources from which these portions were gleaned? References to direct interested parties toward the originating sources are abundant here at the Cafe. My apologies for not stating this in a clearer fashion originally.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Another vee pee worshipper
Here's another one for ya, NP.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.