Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

The Wierwille Legacy: Who Will Write The Book?


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Mike said:

I'm not fully getting the meaning of:  " That's why you have the shorthand? "

You said used two question marks to be brief.  

Why would you need to be brief if not to save time?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 593
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

After thinking about one poster’s recent attempt at revising history...or was it creative writing....I dunno - whatever the he11 you want to call his perspective on PFAL ‘77 - - I thought I’d give it

It's a good thing this site doesn't have "smell-o-vision". The stench of bull crap would be overwhelming.

In the grand scheme of things, wierwille was no "compiler"..........he was a deceiver and a fraud. Sure, he gave a passing "credit" once or twice.......but then, would discredit their work as mis

Posted Images

3 hours ago, Mike said:

So_crates have you read here the post done by Research Geek around 12 years ago on Pikes Peak? He actually went there to research it out a little. His post bears repeating. I should look for it. Your objections to Pikes Peak are not appropriate dud to incomplete data. If you or anyone here knows how to do the advanced search stuff, please find that.

Ragging on Pikes Peak is common here and repeated often. Research Geek's post giving the whole story, should be repeated often, just like Oldiesman's post on plagiarism.

Hi Mike,

I would suggest you also use the search button here.  I have personally posted threads on Pike's Peak.  It was a correspondence college whose address is a house in Manitou Springs CO.   I also stopped by there many years ago.  Several single residents of that house as roommates and theology students started the "college" after obtaining their ThD's and being unable to obtain pastorates.  

Curriculum consisted of mostly mailing in papers.   There was an in-person requirement to deliver a sermon so they could check homiletic skills.  The time VP took the family out there is documented well in Mrs. VPW's book.

Calling Pike's Peak seminary a "degree mill" is kind.  That would mean they actually had a lot of students.  It was more like mailing in a cereal boxtop along with a few papers and some money for a doctorate degree.  Oh, except you did have to give one sermon that you wrote a paper on.  VP's was on homiletics.

It's fine to have a separate opinion but please stop posting misinformation.  The whitewash sites are at the Way.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, chockfull said:

Hi Mike,

I would suggest you also use the search button here.  I have personally posted threads on Pike's Peak.  It was a correspondence college whose address is a house in Manitou Springs CO.   I also stopped by there many years ago.  Several single residents of that house as roommates and theology students started the "college" after obtaining their ThD's and being unable to obtain pastorates.  

Curriculum consisted of mostly mailing in papers.   There was an in-person requirement to deliver a sermon so they could check homiletic skills.  The time VP took the family out there is documented well in Mrs. VPW's book.

Calling Pike's Peak seminary a "degree mill" is kind.  That would mean they actually had a lot of students.  It was more like mailing in a cereal boxtop along with a few papers and some money for a doctorate degree.  Oh, except you did have to give one sermon that you wrote a paper on.  VP's was on homiletics.

It's fine to have a separate opinion but please stop posting misinformation.  The whitewash sites are at the Way.

I'm referring to a post Research Geek did here long ago that had some interesting details usually omitted here.

Best I can recall, it had something to do with that institution going through some radical changes. I think his whole analysis ended with his summarizing that VPW's degree, though far from stellar, was legitimate. Remember, it's ONLY theology, and not Physics or Chemistry or Math.  Those kinds of degrees mean much more to me than the arts and letters.

That post may have been removed for various reasons. I will try again to learn the Advanced Search engine here.

I must also learn to operate the new search engine in Windows 10. I have that thread archived, but searching .htm and .mht files I can't do any more. Must learn.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Mike said:

Best I can recall, it had something to do with that institution going through some radical changes. I think his whole analysis ended with his summarizing that VPW's degree, though far from stellar, was legitimate. Remember, it's ONLY theology, and not Physics or Chemistry or Math.  Those kinds of degrees mean much more to me than the arts and letters.

"Legitimate' has to be measurable.  It was not accredited.  He did receive a doctorate from a correspondance school seminary.   This seminary did not have classes of any kind, not math, physics, chemistry OR Theology.  It was a correspondance college.  Correspondance college at that time meant that the only curriculum consisted of a series of papers graded by the seminary professors.  The house in Manitou Springs has 6 or 7 bedrooms, which at the time were all rented out to tenants.   At that time those tenants were the teaching board of the correspondance school called Pike's Peak Seminary.

So in reality the only time the teaching professors of Pike's Peak Seminary ever met VP Wierwille was during the 2 week or so period documented in Mrs. VPW's book where he traveled out there and delivered a sermon to fulfill partial requirements for his doctorate and to receive the degree.

I've done the actual research here.  I'm presenting you with facts.

And what you are coming back with is a vague recollection of a 12 year old post where someone said it was going through "radical changes"?  and their impression was that his degree was "legitimate" as opposed to "stellar"?  Yeah.  What one of the professors couldn't come up with rent?

Again Mike, please do some research yourself before posting misinformation on this thread. 

Edited by chockfull
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, chockfull said:

Again Mike, please do some research yourself before posting misinformation on this thread. 

Wierwille already did the research so we dont have to. :dance: 

Now my comment would perhaps be laughable if it werent for the fact that they actually taught us that in residence....you know....the greatest leadership training in the world.....lol

Edited by OldSkool
Link to post
Share on other sites

OS and Chockfull, reading over the last couple of days' exchanges you had with Mike, my distinct impression is that Mike's quasi-intellectual verbosity constitutes a strong example of what Paul warned Timothy about in II Timothy 2:16.

16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

To put it terms I've used frequently on my blog -- it's mostly bull$hit.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rocky said:

OS and Chockfull, reading over the last couple of days' exchanges you had with Mike, my distinct impression is that Mike's quasi-intellectual verbosity constitutes a strong example of what Paul warned Timothy about in II Timothy 2:16.

16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

To put it terms I've used frequently on my blog -- it's mostly bull$hit.

Rocky, leave it to you, to call Mike on his Bull Shucks!  I have been reading all the posts with interest, and wondered when someone would call him on his posts.  I think most of the posters have been very polite, but Bull Shucks are still BS!

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Grace Valerie Claire said:

Rocky, leave it to you, to call Mike on his Bull Shucks!  I have been reading all the posts with interest, and wondered when someone would call him on his posts.  I think most of the posters have been very polite, but Bull Shucks are still BS!

Indeed, it is. :)

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2017 at 9:39 AM, So_crates said:

Snip....

Now, how did people so obsessed with stringing chairs and making sure every object at HQ was cleaned within an inch of its life allow errors to creep in?

Typos, okay. But, again, the collaterals were transcribed. How many mistakes do you think court reporters make in their transcriptions?

And if Saint Vic is that bad at recieving revelation why should we trust any of his revelations?

 

That's some very good points, So_crates ! Your post reminded me of all the boot camp tactics during my residency in the corps program...almost like being a prisoner shackled to the icon of wierwille “the man of god for this day and time and hour” ....

...and that makes me think of that old saying - “a chain is only as strong as its weakest link”...

 knowing what I know now while reflecting on my time in the corps program - - there’s so many obvious weak links in the life and work of wierwille that a person would have to keep their eyes squeezed so tightly shut not to see how puny and dilapidated those shackles were.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not able to locate the original post by Research geek which Mike mentioned. All I find are pastes by Mike of the post where it is described as from October 4. 2002 in a thread titled "Why Lie?" I cannot find that thread nor the actual post and context by Research Geek.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, T-Bone said:

That's some very good points, So_crates ! Your post reminded me of all the boot camp tactics during my residency in the corps program...almost like being a prisoner shackled to the icon of wierwille “the man of god for this day and time and hour” ....

...and that makes me think of that old saying - “a chain is only as strong as its weakest link”...

 knowing what I know now while reflecting on my time in the corps program - - there’s so many obvious weak links in the life and work of wierwille that a person would have to keep their eyes squeezed so tightly shut not to see how puny and dilapidated those shackles were.

I believe that many, if not most, in-residence corps stayed and gutted-it-thru the program, because they were endeavoring to fulfill "their vow" (to God).  Perhaps, it seems rather irrelevant in the scheme of things.......but highly motivated people are not quitters.

Then.......there's the relationships/social element.  Once graduated, a corps grad is known for this "elevated status of respect" and is constantly going to meetings, corps week and roa that strengthen this bond.  And, then there is the marriage commitment.......if said corps grad is married (two corps grads, a couple.......going to corps meetings).

Emotional bonds, marriage bonds.......there is a very strong reason why the cult insisted that corps only marry corps.

A culture of salt........and who has the balls to pepper it with questions/dissent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, skyrider said:

I believe that many, if not most, in-residence corps stayed and gutted-it-thru the program, because they were endeavoring to fulfill "their vow" (to God).  Perhaps, it seems rather irrelevant in the scheme of things.......but highly motivated people are not quitters.

Then.......there's the relationships/social element.  Once graduated, a corps grad is known for this "elevated status of respect" and is constantly going to meetings, corps week and roa that strengthen this bond.  And, then there is the marriage commitment.......if said corps grad is married (two corps grads, a couple.......going to corps meetings).

Emotional bonds, marriage bonds.......there is a very strong reason why the cult insisted that corps only marry corps.

A culture of salt........and who has the balls to pepper it with questions/dissent.

Point taken Skyrider…sorry if I sounded like I was speaking on behalf of a majority…was really just thinking of my own whacked-out priorities back then. To be honest, I had so much awe and respect for wierwille in my TWI days (or daze) it was like that misplaced loyalty trumped even the most powerful bonds of emotion, marriage, familial or social. It’s a wonder my wife didn’t leave me for being such a ministry workaholic…

maybe it was just me having a problem with too abstract a concept as keeping a vow to God…I mean…being raised in Roman Catholic church you get spoiled having a Jesus on a crucifix that gives you something to focus on…i think I'm the type of person who follows the leader more than being self-motivated about a cause...I dunno

sometime I ought to dig out my notes from watching “VP and Me” while in residence - - I remember one of the things that resonated with me was when LCM described god working in him - - it was first something like him hearing wierwille say what he needed to do  – as if that was the predecessor to hearing god’s still small voice…goofy the way I thought back then…

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, T-Bone said:

That's some very good points, So_crates ! Your post reminded me of all the boot camp tactics during my residency in the corps program...almost like being a prisoner shackled to the icon of wierwille “the man of god for this day and time and hour” ....

...and that makes me think of that old saying - “a chain is only as strong as its weakest link”...

 knowing what I know now while reflecting on my time in the corps program - - there’s so many obvious weak links in the life and work of wierwille that a person would have to keep their eyes squeezed so tightly shut not to see how puny and dilapidated those shackles were.

Both are critical questions, T-Bone.

Considering the chair stringing and cleaning made us detail minded, how does a detail minded person let and other error than a typo slip into a body of work so vital as something God-breathe?

Then, if we accept the PLAF collaterals are God-breathe, then them being transcribed means it went from God's mouth to Saint Vic's ear, from Saint Vic's mouth to the transcriptionist's ear, then onto paper. So were is the room for glaring errors in PLAF?

And if it was Saint Vic's misunderstanding, then he's not very good at recieving revelation. Which leads one to ask, how many other revelations has he misunderstood?

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Rocky said:

-- it's mostly bull$hit.

Only "mostly," Rocky?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What the heck is Mike's great long post/transcript at the bottom of page 10 about?  I have better things to do with my time than read all that, got through a few paragraphs. Anyone care to summarize?  

Nah, don't bother.  I think maybe picking one's nose would be a better way to spend the time. 

Time for another glass of Merlot, methinks. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, T-Bone said:

Point taken Skyrider…sorry if I sounded like I was speaking on behalf of a majority…was really just thinking of my own whacked-out priorities back then. To be honest, I had so much awe and respect for wierwille in my TWI days (or daze) it was like that misplaced loyalty trumped even the most powerful bonds of emotion, marriage, familial or social. It’s a wonder my wife didn’t leave me for being such a ministry workaholic…

maybe it was just me having a problem with too abstract a concept as keeping a vow to God…I mean…being raised in Roman Catholic church you get spoiled having a Jesus on a crucifix that gives you something to focus on…i think I'm the type of person who follows the leader more than being self-motivated about a cause...I dunno

sometime I ought to dig out my notes from watching “VP and Me” while in residence - - I remember one of the things that resonated with me was when LCM described god working in him - - it was first something like him hearing wierwille say what he needed to do  – as if that was the predecessor to hearing god’s still small voice…goofy the way I thought back then…

No apology needed, T-Bone......

I had this misplaced loyalty to "biblical research" and believed that twi would break thru the barriers of wierwille's arrogance/manipulation.....

Having "fought" thru deprogramming to marry my fiancé  (5th corps)........two years later, I found solace to be on the field and away from headquarters.  Especially, our three years in Canada......1984-1987.  Yeah, I could have voiced my dissent much earlier.....and probably tanked my marriage.  Not sure how all that would have played out.  Anyhoo........we hung in there far too long, but exited together nearly 20 years ago.

What a difference these past two decades have been.   :dance:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Twinky said:

What the heck is Mike's great long post/transcript at the bottom of page 10 about? 

It's VPW citing his sources on tape.

It's one of the ways VPW cited his sources when the ministry was very small.

He would talk about them extensively. Sometimes even invite them to HQ, as the transcript reveals.

It's part of history. It might give some more material to find contradictions even, if your into that kind of thing. I could care less about that.

Edited by Mike
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Twinky said:

What the heck is Mike's great long post/transcript at the bottom of page 10 about?  I have better things to do with my time than read all that, got through a few paragraphs. Anyone care to summarize?  

Nah, don't bother.  I think maybe picking one's nose would be a better way to spend the time. 

Time for another glass of Merlot, methinks. 

It's supposed to be an explaination from the horse's mouth of how Saint Vic cites his source via a SNS tape transcript from 1965, specifically an excerpt from SNS Tape #214  Selling Plurality: Acts 4:34 (sometimes called "Light Began to Dawn").

Edited by So_crates
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mike said:

It's VPW citing his sources on tape.

It's one of the ways VPW cited his sources when the ministry was very small.

He would talk about them extensively. Sometimes even invite them to HQ, as the transcript reveals.

It's part of history. It might give some more material to find contradictions even, if your into that kind of thing. I could care less about that.

And what's wrong with doing them the conventional academic way? You know, the way every higher learning student is versed their freshman year? You know MLA?

Edited by So_crates
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2017 at 1:40 AM, Mike said:

And so I’d read the Word; I’d read it––I’d read it. Then I’d work, start looking––start working, and as we began working this Word of God, is when light began to dawn. And wonderful things that God did for us, He brought men and women across our paths who came just at the right time to help us in our light––men who had gone so far, but no further. But God brought these men so that we could go further because these men brought light. Men like Rufus Mosely; men like E. Stanley Jones; men like Albert Cliff; men like Star Daley; God brought all of these men and others––many of them, across our pathways, just at the right time to add to this revelation and enable us to walk on the Word and understand it. 

 

 

 
But there was a hunger in my heart and God said He’d teach me the Word if I’d teach it, but I had to study, I had to work. And revelation begins––this is why I know this so well––revelation begins where the senses cease. What you can know by your senses, God expects you to know. He expects you to study the work that have already been worked out. Men like Bulinger; men like Stevie Ginsberg; God expected me to work those men and countless others. But, He taught me how to get the error out when there was any. And out of that process He taught me then, what was truth. And when there was no way of knowing it, and I’d researched to my fullest ability––tried to find out, then, if there is no other way, He showed it to me by direct revelation. Time and time again, He’d take the scripture and make it this big. I’m reading along in a verse and all at once there it is, two words, this big, for instance. Well, you have to be stupid to miss it, you know.

This is not citation by any stretch of the imagination. This is simply Wierwille dropping names. It's a common sales technique, designed to instill a sense of credibility and confidence. Plus, it's an appeal to authority. Have you ever examined the history of any of these men who were named? I'm not sure I'd ever let you wash my windows, Mike. You don't seem to know up from down or in from out.

 

Wierwille placing Nicaea in France is not a typo, a proofreaders error or a mistranslation. It a factual error. More importantly, it's a factual error in material you claim was given by divine revelation, material that, at the very minimum, should be devoid of factual error. You should be ashamed of yourself for trying to pretend it's anything else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dropping a few names is not a citation or even an acknowledgement of the named people's input. It's simply a even dropping. 

And any real PhD should know how to include citations.  

I had to include proper references when I did my paper for my Honours degree (and that was some serious ground breaking work and study, and which my department wanted me to publish an abridged version in a leading professional journal).

 

Heck, you know what?  When I did my research paper in rez,  my first draft got sent back. I had only cited bible verses, maybe a bit fromantic Bullinger's works or some such. Not enough PFAL or collateral material quoted. How terrible ! Thing is, it was totally original work, have never seen anything like it before or since, and it didn't rely on any TWI material.  I had to go back through the paper to add in pseudo references. 

So (1) TWI knows what citations, or references, are; and

(2) they really don't care about research, only about how much parroting can be got into RPs. 

 

So don't be telling me that mentioning xyz or ABC by name in some random, obscure little talk is *anything* like citing their work. Unless maybe you were "citing" Donald Duck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Modgellan said:

I was not able to locate the original post by Research geek which Mike mentioned. All I find are pastes by Mike of the post where it is described as from October 4. 2002 in a thread titled "Why Lie?" I cannot find that thread nor the actual post and context by Research Geek.

Thanks, Modgellan. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Modgellan said:

I was not able to locate the original post by Research geek which Mike mentioned. All I find are pastes by Mike of the post where it is described as from October 4. 2002 in a thread titled "Why Lie?" I cannot find that thread nor the an actual post and context by Research Geek.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, So_crates said:

And what's wrong with doing them the conventional academic way? You know, the way every higher learning student is versed their freshman year? You know MLA?

I already explained that a few posts earlier.

The audience his booklets were aimed at were not scholars, but farmers and small towns folk. Scholarly citations would clutter the books up in those days. We're talking 3 years before the film class. The ministry was micro sized then.

The ministry was very unconventional back then, not conventional as you demand. I'm very glad they did the citations back then simple like that. That's what I needed in 1971. It wasn't a scholarly set of needs we had in that fellowship. My first teacher at fellowship was 17 years old. The 3 hippie chicks that witnessed to me were 14 years old. Scholarly citations were ENTIRELY out of place FOR US and BACK THEN.

Link to post
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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...