Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

Power for Abundant Living Today™


OldSkool
 Share

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Nathan_Jr said:

Right. So who manufactured the error of Jesus' bastard bar mitzvah? Whose faulty, dishonest methodology manufactured this error? Did Raf manufacture this error or did victor?

After following the evidence, I am convinced Victor contrived this error to make his opinion of dating Jesus' birth fit like a hand in a glove - a glove that knows how to interpret itself.

If victor is wrong about this, what else is he wrong about? Observe with a mind free of indoctrination and conclusions to find out.

 

I must correct myself, as I think I'm conflating this error with one of the many, many others, including the birth dating. The birth date was not the point here. I am not convinced he lied about the bar mitzvah to prove any dating. But (a conjunction) I am convinced he lied to manufacture error.

I now remember my initial astonishment upon hearing this erroneous  "teaching." It was that his evidence of the lost document was no evidence at all! And what was his point? That Jesus was a bastard? His point was to disparage Jesus as a bastard Jew - an epithet taken very seriously by Jews of any era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except that he wasn't a "bastard" since his parents were legally married at the time.  It was after she was betrothed but before she was married that she became pregnant.  It's highly likely that the time between betrothal and marriage was only a very short time - though long enough for Mary to realise.  And for the angel to have words with Joseph.

If you read your OT, if a man had sexual relations with a woman before marriage, they were compelled to be married, because he'd sullied her honour.  It was considered rape.  But there is absolutely no inference that the child so conceived would be subject to any abuse, penalties, exclusion, etc.  In fact, it was all about protecting that child and its mother.

Lots about this (and other sexual relationships) in Numbers and Leviticus, but right now I don't have time to look it up.  You can have a rummage around in BibleHub to find the references if you want.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nathan_Jr said:

I must correct myself, as I think I'm conflating this error with one of the many, many others, including the birth dating. The birth date was not the point here. I am not convinced he lied about the bar mitzvah to prove any dating. But (a conjunction) I am convinced he lied to manufacture error.

I now remember my initial astonishment upon hearing this erroneous  "teaching." It was that his evidence of the lost document was no evidence at all! And what was his point? That Jesus was a bastard? His point was to disparage Jesus as a bastard Jew - an epithet taken very seriously by Jews of any era.

In making up this story from whole cloth, what did vpw accomplish?

A) He made Jesus Christ sound more like a maverick.  Since vpw fancied himself a maverick (go over his own accounts of how he handled his first pastorate if you need proof), he tried to make JC sound more like himself.  

B) He made The Establishment sound WRONG.   Again, putting Religious Authorities on one side, and himself and Right on the other side.

C) He made it sound like all other Christian teachers were WRONG- and you could only trust HIM to get it right. 

 

All of that was part of vpw's campaign to carve out his own little empire among the young Christians.  From the beginning, he'd preferred older Christians with money, but he wasn't able to impress them, he was able to fool the young and naive.  So, he slowly tried to assemble the parts of a machine that would allow him to fleece a flock of young Christians.    When his machine was ready, he still couldn't do it- until he heard about the Christian hippies of the House of Acts.  He arrived there and did his full act- in between things like asking what orgies were like and saying God was ok with orgies-  and manage to impress a handful of genuine Christians who were naive, and used them as his recruiting arm all through the 1970s.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Twinky said:

Except that he wasn't a "bastard" since his parents were legally married at the time.  It was after she was betrothed but before she was married that she became pregnant.  It's highly likely that the time between betrothal and marriage was only a very short time - though long enough for Mary to realise.  And for the angel to have words with Joseph.

If you read your OT, if a man had sexual relations with a woman before marriage, they were compelled to be married, because he'd sullied her honour.  It was considered rape.  But there is absolutely no inference that the child so conceived would be subject to any abuse, penalties, exclusion, etc.  In fact, it was all about protecting that child and its mother.

Lots about this (and other sexual relationships) in Numbers and Leviticus, but right now I don't have time to look it up.  You can have a rummage around in BibleHub to find the references if you want.

Also, the idea that anyone thought there was anything odd about Jesus' parentage and that he wasn't the child of Joseph and Mary was completely vpw's idea, as far as I can see.  It certainly isn't in Scripture.   The only ones who knew anything else were Joseph, Mary, and Elizabeth (not counting Gabriel.)  Joseph found out Mary was pregnant, and quietly considered his options, planning on letting her go quietly but otherwise taking no action.  After Gabriel updated him, he acted as if Mary was entirely his wife, and Jesus was entirely his son, with nobody outside the family knowing otherwise.

Any references to the contrary in the Gospels were in the mind of vpw. He saw a verse here and there, and decided that it meant EVERYBODY knew Joseph wasn't Jesus' dad.   Jesus challenged the Pharisees when they went on about Abraham being their father.  When he did, they made a comment about not being born out of wedlock.  vpw jumped to the conclusion that they were taking a shot at Jesus' actual parentage- but how would THEY know?   Jesus and his family took their annual visit to Jerusalem and Jesus hung out at the temple.  vpw jumped to the conclusion that this was Jesus' bar mitzvah, and that it was a year early, and that was because everybody knew he was not Joseph's kid-  all despite  1)  there being no such bar mitzvah for many centuries to come       2)  nobody knowing that      3) that having absolutely nothing to do with the actual account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/5/2022 at 2:19 PM, Mike said:

 

I know. 

Plus, I might not even be right about that quote.

But I like the idea. 

IF God taught Dr, and Dr taught us, then that explains how extremely blessed I was when first learning PFAL, and it continues to this day.  I love the Epistles of Paul, and seen them as Jesus Christ's ministry to us in THIS administration.  I'd NEVER be able to do that had the class not been there consistently. 

I agree ! VP's stuff may not be all 'God breathed' BUT he put it ALL together like no-one else could have or would have...I believe THAT was 'God inspired'. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luke 2:41- 50     (KJV)

41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover.

42 And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast.

43 And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it.

44 But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance.

45 And when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him.

46 And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions.

47 And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers.

48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

49 And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?

50 And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them.

=====================================

The family went to Jerusalem every year at Passover, and returned home by caravan after Passover, with the other tourists.   At the end of the first day of traveling, they realized he wasn't in the caravan, hanging out with the homies.  So, they ran back to Jerusalem, and found him at the temple, asking questions and answering, and doing so well above what was expected at his age. 

None of that says anything about a "bar mitzvah" or being "presented to the temple" or anything. It was a routine Passover vacation until Jesus ran off to the temple for heavy discussion.   EVERYTHING about the bar mitzvah fiction, the old document fiction, and so on was added by vpw, and had no place here because it was completely off-topic in addition to being factually incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Allan said:

I agree ! VP's stuff may not be all 'God breathed' BUT he put it ALL together like no-one else could have or would have...I believe THAT was 'God inspired'. :)

I'd give that claim a LOT more credence if it had a matching track record.  If there were no Actual Errors for an Actual Errors list, I'd say that was remarkable, to say the least.  pfal- and all of vpw's teachings-  were visibly flawed- visible unless one refuses to consider the possibility they were flawed.  

For most people, that wouldn't really be a problem. 

Anyone teaching can mess up (although this particular field calls for harder work at quality control than some.)   It's only when someone goes around saying God Almighty was personally involved with it, so it has no errors, THAT is when the errors REALLY become an issue.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Twinky said:

Except that he wasn't a "bastard" since his parents were legally married at the time.  It was after she was betrothed but before she was married that she became pregnant.  It's highly likely that the time between betrothal and marriage was only a very short time - though long enough for Mary to realise.  And for the angel to have words with Joseph.

If you read your OT, if a man had sexual relations with a woman before marriage, they were compelled to be married, because he'd sullied her honour.  It was considered rape.  But there is absolutely no inference that the child so conceived would be subject to any abuse, penalties, exclusion, etc.  In fact, it was all about protecting that child and its mother.

Lots about this (and other sexual relationships) in Numbers and Leviticus, but right now I don't have time to look it up.  You can have a rummage around in BibleHub to find the references if you want.

That's right, Twinky. I didn't call Jesus a bastard, vic did. It's an intentionally demeaning epithet. That was his point. That's why he lied about the whole thing.

 If he will go to such lengths to lie about and demean the name of Jesus, what else will he lie about? Who else will he demean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Nathan_Jr said:

. . .

 If he will go to such lengths to lie about and demean the name of Jesus, what else will he lie about? Who else will he demean?

Deep down VPW, as an NPD, hated himself the most.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/10/2022 at 9:38 AM, Mike said:

 

That answer is flat and empty.  

I am SO THANKFUL, that when I was struggling with that verse as a young babe in the Bible, there was someone who had the right answer for me. 

This is a very insightful response.  It indicates that pure looking into scriptures without the distorted goggles of PFAL leaves someone flat and empty.

Next comes an ad hominem attack laced with ego really communicating a persons self vision is a real expert in scripture.

I would exhort all to discard your distorted goggles from PFAL they have detrimental effects.

VPW made up the same personification I’m talking about with all scripture interprets itself.  That whole statement is a personification.

Very telling how personification in scripture leaves you flat and empty but personification of a fictional idea by a snake oil salesman really flips your switches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bolshevik said:

Deep down VPW, as an NPD, hated himself the most.

 

Yeah, I keep trying to remind myself of this. But (conjunction!) liars make me so angry and nauseous. I crave righteous justice to be visited upon them - and I want to watch! BUT (conjunction) my work is to let go and forgive.

My ex-wife is an C-NPD. One of my last, desperate concessions to appease her, to save our marriage, to give her another chance, to trauma bond one more time before I snapped out of it was to take the "class." One of her family members was Corps, "taught" fellowship, and administered the class.

So, her flying monkeys are the entire fellowship, comprised mostly of her family, and her stick is the narcissistic Vic Paul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Nathan_Jr said:

That's right, Twinky. I didn't call Jesus a bastard, vic did. It's an intentionally demeaning epithet. That was his point. That's why he lied about the whole thing.

 If he will go to such lengths to lie about and demean the name of Jesus, what else will he lie about? Who else will he demean?

Now that is a very good point.  And it puts the face-meltings and slanderous remarks that were so commonplace in TWI in perspective. 

If VPW can "face-melt" and pour scorn upon Jesus in this way - hey! those of us that suffered face-meltings for from him (or in my case from his protege Craig) are in very good company!  I heard many such slanderous remarks about "cop outs" and other perceived transgressors, usually well after they'd been ejected.  I used to wonder how such evil people could possibly have hidden in our midst - I knew some of the slandered people well and found the allegations hard to even begin to fathom.  And over a decade after M&A-ing me, I was told about slanderous comments that had been made about me at the time.  Absolutely no basis in reality.  They were so slanderous they were hysterically funny, as anyone who actually knew me would know.  (At least, I hope so!  Unless they were wearing PFAL-coloured glasses.)  Perhaps we should see such face-meltings as a badge of honour?!

Jesus, now.  Had plenty of unprovoked and vile attacks, both slanderously and physically, in the time he walked on the earth.  His ministry disparaged at every turn.  Others apparently using his name in vain.  No doubt Vic's insults would just have elicited a shrug from him: not important enough to bother about.  Jesus would have swatted away the fly that was VPW and just gone along on his way.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Twinky said:

Now that is a very good point.  And it puts the face-meltings and slanderous remarks that were so commonplace in TWI in perspective. 

If VPW can "face-melt" and pour scorn upon Jesus in this way - hey! those of us that suffered face-meltings for from him (or in my case from his protege Craig) are in very good company!  I heard many such slanderous remarks about "cop outs" and other perceived transgressors, usually well after they'd been ejected.  I used to wonder how such evil people could possibly have hidden in our midst - I knew some of the slandered people well and found the allegations hard to even begin to fathom.  And over a decade after M&A-ing me, I was told about slanderous comments that had been made about me at the time.  Absolutely no basis in reality.  They were so slanderous they were hysterically funny, as anyone who actually knew me would know.  (At least, I hope so!  Unless they were wearing PFAL-coloured glasses.)  Perhaps we should see such face-meltings as a badge of honour?!

Jesus, now.  Had plenty of unprovoked and vile attacks, both slanderously and physically, in the time he walked on the earth.  His ministry disparaged at every turn.  Others apparently using his name in vain.  No doubt Vic's insults would just have elicited a shrug from him: not important enough to bother about.  Jesus would have swatted away the fly that was VPW and just gone along on his way.

 

Thanks, Twinky. Your voice here at GSC has always been so encouraging. I can't say it enough: Thank God for GSC, and all the brave voices of Truth here. And for all the voices of bull$hit so we can know what it looks like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, chockfull said:

. . . 

I would exhort all to discard your distorted goggles from PFAL they have detrimental effects.

VPW made up the same personification I’m talking about with all scripture interprets itself.  That whole statement is a personification.

Very telling how personification in scripture leaves you flat and empty but personification of a fictional idea by a snake oil salesman really flips your switches.

The Word takes the place of an Absent Christ.  

An inanimate object takes the place of a human being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, modcat5 said:

Are we back to the make-believe "old piece of literature" that manufactured a Jewish tradition out of nowhere...? That was a fun one.

Nope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nathan_Jr said:

Thanks, Twinky. Your voice here at GSC has always been so encouraging. 

Thank you, Nathan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Nathan_Jr said:

That's right, Twinky. I didn't call Jesus a bastard, vic did. It's an intentionally demeaning epithet. That was his point. That's why he lied about the whole thing.

 If he will go to such lengths to lie about and demean the name of Jesus, what else will he lie about? Who else will he demean?

If he WOULD? Would he if he still could... btw, he demeaned a LOT of people... anyone who disagreed with him or disobeyed or disappointed him in anyway, as I recall.

Edited by Rocky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Rocky said:

If he WOULD? Would he if he still could... btw, he demeaned a LOT of people... anyone who disagreed with him or disobeyed or disappointed him in anyway, as I recall.

Yes. I know this is true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He also demeaned people he made up SOLELY to demean.   The church elders he supposedly mouthed-off to insolently as soon as he began his first pastorate, to begin with.  He couldn't even keep straight where he was when they had their blow-out.   According to vpw, the church elders gave him advice before his first sermon- he could teach on anything he wanted, so long as he didn't mention money.  Naturally, he spent the next FOUR WEEKLY SERMONS focused on tithing.  After this MONTH had passed, they came over to talk to him about it. He said that he never mentioned money, only tithing, and that they should leave him alone and he'd run the parish the way he thought it should be run.  They responded by leaving him alone and dropping the subject.

If that whole story doesn't ring false, I don't know why.

 

Another time, he made up an old man he'd known when he'd grown up, whom he visited in the man's retirement, in a retirement home paid for by the community.  He said he'd gone to the man's son and complained both about him letting the man end up there, and not visiting him and bringing him things.  He said the man's son replied by saying "Well, he's old- let him die."   The most interesting part of this story, to me, was how it grew WHILE HE WAS TELLING IT.  At the beginning, this was a single visit to the man.  By the end, he was visiting the man regularly and bringing him chewing tobacco.

vpw didn't need real people to demean. He was perfectly capable of making up imaginary characters for the sole purpose of demeaning them- and he did so.  Naturally, they didn't complain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, chockfull said:

This is a very insightful response.  It indicates that pure looking into scriptures without the distorted goggles of PFAL leaves someone flat and empty.

Next comes an ad hominem attack laced with ego really communicating a persons self vision is a real expert in scripture.

I would exhort all to discard your distorted goggles from PFAL they have detrimental effects.

VPW made up the same personification I’m talking about with all scripture interprets itself.  That whole statement is a personification.

Very telling how personification in scripture leaves you flat and empty but personification of a fictional idea by a snake oil salesman really flips your switches.

Some people think unadorned truth needs some lies to liven it up, to make it more interesting.  Psychologically-healthy people disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/11/2022 at 12:24 AM, WordWolf said:

In making up this story from whole cloth, what did vpw accomplish?

A) He made Jesus Christ sound more like a maverick.  Since vpw fancied himself a maverick (go over his own accounts of how he handled his first pastorate if you need proof), he tried to make JC sound more like himself.  

B) He made The Establishment sound WRONG.   Again, putting Religious Authorities on one side, and himself and Right on the other side.

C) He made it sound like all other Christian teachers were WRONG- and you could only trust HIM to get it right. 

 

All of that was part of vpw's campaign to carve out his own little empire among the young Christians.  From the beginning, he'd preferred older Christians with money, but he wasn't able to impress them, he was able to fool the young and naive.  So, he slowly tried to assemble the parts of a machine that would allow him to fleece a flock of young Christians.    When his machine was ready, he still couldn't do it- until he heard about the Christian hippies of the House of Acts.  He arrived there and did his full act- in between things like asking what orgies were like and saying God was ok with orgies-  and manage to impress a handful of genuine Christians who were naive, and used them as his recruiting arm all through the 1970s.

Yes WW you have the underlying truth right there.  PFAL was filmed to accomplish those exact goals.

Build a maverick Jesus and a corrupt system full of seed of the serpent men as a cause to trick young naive Christians into following.  Then build VP as “the teacher” a substitute for the maverick Jesus.  Build an empire off of “the teacher” and ride off into the sunset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/11/2022 at 12:19 AM, Twinky said:

Except that he wasn't a "bastard" since his parents were legally married at the time.  It was after she was betrothed but before she was married that she became pregnant.  It's highly likely that the time between betrothal and marriage was only a very short time - though long enough for Mary to realise.  And for the angel to have words with Joseph.

If you read your OT, if a man had sexual relations with a woman before marriage, they were compelled to be married, because he'd sullied her honour.  It was considered rape.  But there is absolutely no inference that the child so conceived would be subject to any abuse, penalties, exclusion, etc.  In fact, it was all about protecting that child and its mother.

Lots about this (and other sexual relationships) in Numbers and Leviticus, but right now I don't have time to look it up.  You can have a rummage around in BibleHub to find the references if you want.

Twinky this is why I think the Way is anti Christ.

VPs teachings in their least common denominator denigrate our Lord and Savior.  And make shipwreck the family faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/11/2022 at 1:24 AM, WordWolf said:

In making up this story from whole cloth, what did vpw accomplish?

A) He made Jesus Christ sound more like a maverick.  Since vpw fancied himself a maverick (go over his own accounts of how he handled his first pastorate if you need proof), he tried to make JC sound more like himself.  

B) He made The Establishment sound WRONG.   Again, putting Religious Authorities on one side, and himself and Right on the other side.

C) He made it sound like all other Christian teachers were WRONG- and you could only trust HIM to get it right. 

 

All of that was part of vpw's campaign to carve out his own little empire among the young Christians.  From the beginning, he'd preferred older Christians with money, but he wasn't able to impress them, he was able to fool the young and naive.  So, he slowly tried to assemble the parts of a machine that would allow him to fleece a flock of young Christians.    When his machine was ready, he still couldn't do it- until he heard about the Christian hippies of the House of Acts.  He arrived there and did his full act- in between things like asking what orgies were like and saying God was ok with orgies-  and manage to impress a handful of genuine Christians who were naive, and used them as his recruiting arm all through the 1970s.

very insightful WordWolf !

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.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...