Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

Power for Abundant Living Today™


OldSkool
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Mike said:


So you AGREE with me on the grammar,
but reject the assertion.

I can accept that.

By any chance, are you a grammar expert?

 

There's always a minority opinion. Of course you can accept that he agreed with you on anything- now he's going to be cited as an "expert" that "agreed" with you on what that meant.   Actually, the literal was correctly explained before- that the Scriptures (which are God-breathed) were contrasted with the work of several men including vpw. 

One thing I didn't mention now- but have before- is vpw's tendency to vaguely imply things without saying them outright.  That way, he could technically say he didn't say something, but had people believe he did because he IMPLIED it, he deceived by implication.   He did this when he got people to believe he played for the Sheboygan Redskins basketball team.  One document claimed he did- but their source for that was the sentence where he IMPLIED it, and the writer mistook the meaning, not realizing it was deception.   He said he was CONNECTED WITH THEM.  He never even said he handled the ball or practiced with them- but he got people to believe he HAD said that.   So, similar weasel-wording could leave well-intentioned people to believe that he'd actually said some of what he wrote or taught would be God-breathed-  when he left it unstated but with enough IMPLICATION that people would THINK he said that and go along with it.   The grammar of the passage says otherwise, but if one fixates on the implication, that is easily ignored.

Then we start to get several rounds of "of course he implied it, he hid it as secret information so that we could find it decades later and God wants us to think this" and so on.    For someone determined to go down with the ship- and insist it's not only not sinking, but is handling exceptionally well on the ocean,  this sort of thing is EXPECTED.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 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. 

*snip*

To most people, it's obvious that, even if it's true that you'd "NEVER be able to do that had the class not been there consistently",   and you could "love the Epistles of Paul, and see them as Jesus Christ's ministry to us in THIS administration",  and even be "extremely blessed when first learning PFAL"  

all of that could be completely true without the notion that God taught vpw. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This one time, in the dead of winter, I was outside at work and, just like that, the snow directly in front of me turned a shocking yellow and had steam rising up toward the heavens. No one else witnessed it, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's distill this right back.

WW states this: 

1 hour ago, WordWolf said:

How DID the 1st century Christian church know God's Word?

They knew the Torah/Old Testament.  They knew the SPOKEN word, They knew The Word BY EXPERIENCE AND POWER.  ...

The 1st century Christians preached-but were known because they had power and could deliver where they spoke. 

They knew the Torah.  And the other books that comprise what we know as the OT.

The leader of the early sect that became known as Christianity - one Jesus Christ - distilled the law and the prophets down very simply in Matt 22 to:

37Jesus declared, ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’e 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’f 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

 

THAT is "knowing the Word as it hadn't been known since the first century."  Anything else is puff, really.  "How to" but not the thing itself.

FIRST: Love God

NEXT: Love (not just be nice to) your neighbour

I strongly suspect people knew how to do that in the first century.  And in the second, third, and subsequent centuries.  And hey, even in the 20th and 21st centuries. 

How does this fit with administrations, dispensations, whether God spoke (or not) to VPW?  It doesn't.  It overrules them as unnecessarily.  Those things are nitpicking, frills, wish-lists for naysayers to argue about.

Hey!  God has spoken audibly to me on two occasions (and less audibly on other occasions via various diverse means).  The audible words were personal for me and I don't plan on building a ministry out of it. 

No doubt others here can say much the same.  It would be a sad and empty thing if God never spoke with those who love him.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Twinky said:

THAT is "knowing the Word as it hadn't been known since the first century."  Anything else is puff, really.  "How to" but not the thing itself.

FIRST: Love God

NEXT: Love (not just be nice to) your neighbour

I strongly suspect people knew how to do that in the first century.  And in the second, third, and subsequent centuries.  And hey, even in the 20th and 21st centuries. 

It might be much more pertinent to discuss how we love God and how we love other people.  Instead of discussing how other people claim to love God. 

(As a matter of fact, I can't recall hearing that VPW ever said he loved God.  His actions - like the actions of a child - show otherwise.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Twinky said:

How does this fit with administrations, dispensations,

 

Funny thing is dispensations didn't exist as a formal doctrine until John Nelson Darby in the 1800. BTW - the link I am posting is simply a random link. There's a lot of sources out there that documant the history I am referring to. I have no affiliation with then, and nor do I NECESARRILY agree with them...lol

Dispensationalism doctrine, or administrations, as we know it didn't exist in the first century. So the 1942 promise falls flat on that note too. Think thats a pretty big flop though...God would teach VPW the word like it hadn't been known since the first century and one of the doctrines God taught Wierwille didn't exist before the 1800s.,,,not the only doctrinal point either...law of believing fits here as well.

https://christianobserver.net/the-history-of-dispensationalism/

Edited by OldSkool
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OldSkool said:

There's a lot of sources out there that documant the history I am referring to. I have no affiliation with then, and nor do I NECESARRILY agree with them...lol

Have you checked them for grammar errors?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I wlll teach you the Word as it has not been known since the First Century."

Umm.. the Word was not known in the First Century. Most of it was not written in the first century. And no one had a collection of all the documents.

"Exactly!"

The Bible teaches that God is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. Wierwille tells us God reached him at a point he no longer believed the words Holy or Bible on the cover of the book.

The ministry of VPW was NOT the ministry of a believer. It was the ministry of a con man who wanted "abundance" and no longer believed the Bible was holy. No wonder he scratched out verses and replaced them with "literal translations according to usage."

In the end, he had no more respect for the Bible then than I have now.

He was a counterfeit. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let’s talk about the hidden agenda in the room.

There ARE NO hidden messages in PFAL – but to stubbornly argue that there is, might be a sign that the person claiming that has a hidden agenda. There ARE actual errors in PFAL, errors in logic, doctrine, textual criticism, philosophy and more. But to stubbornly argue that PFAL is perfect, God-breathed, might be a sign that the person claiming that has a hidden agenda.

The following are some signs of a hidden agenda I got from two different websites – mixed in with some wisdom I’ve garnered from my own experiences in life. I took the liberty of revising and adapting the websites’ text for this thread – my source links are at the end. 

One-track-mindedness is often a telltale sign of a hidden agenda. This is more than people who are just self-centered narcissists. They keep redirecting conversations back to certain “issues”, sometimes with skilled segues, sometimes with a blatant flip of a switch. Those with hidden agendas are on a mission, and their impatience often seeps through the cracks…you may become suspicious of being manipulated when you start noticing that the same topic keeps resurfacing…when the discussion strays from a direct route of being on topic – you’ll often find yourself wondering was that a natural or a subtle redirect.

When someone cycles through different tactics with the same end in mind, it tends to give me the feeling they’re trying to sell me something or sway my thinking. If something a person says doesn’t ring true – I tend to feel they’re being disingenuous and are trying to manipulate me. When sorting out manipulative people sometimes we have to depend on our powers of intuition as well as our other cognitive skills. Sometimes a manipulator can trigger a gut feeling in us. That’s when it’s wise to be alert to look for other warning signs that this person may not be as he or she seems.

Nobody is above telling a little white lie to protect themselves or someone else, and we learn the deceptive art at an early age. However, consistent lying becomes a character flaw that can be detrimental to personal or professional relationships. There is no bond without trust and honesty…A toxic person will often tell lies about the most senseless subjects. Does he or she create big whoppers about their past, career, associations or abilities? If their lying is so apparent about common issues, what other deceptions are they feeding you?

What can be more frustrating than to be stuck in a conversation with an egomaniac? Healthy dialogue is like a game of tennis, where the discussion volleys smoothly from one side to the other. If a person continually monopolizes discussions, take note of it…Narcissistic people secretly battle low self-esteem and fear, so they are compelled to stay in the limelight and belittle any perceived competition. You know the type, no matter what you know or have done, they can one-up you. If all they can talk about is themselves, be assured that their agenda is just as selfish.

There’s an old saying that states that anything done in secret will always come out. If he or she has something that they’re hiding, there is a reason for their secretive nature. It’s often their toxic intentions that are not ready to be exposed.

Oversized responses are common when someone has a hidden agenda. Some may say these reactions are caused by their anxiety, kicking up as mentally they’re going into that fight or flight response…However, others may say that the real reason the person is on edge is that they can become emotional at anything that derails their plans. It can also be that their apparent use of emotions serves as an attempt to shut down discussion in resistance to their goal.

It’s often the case that many people will start seeing the holes in a story long before the truth about it comes out. If you add the components together and find inconsistencies, it could be forth-telling about the big reveal…If you find that things don’t make sense, trust your gut feeling.

It’s often the case that many people already know that something is off before anything is revealed in a toxic relationship. Always trust your gut instincts as they are there to protect you…If you are genuinely caught off guard and had no clue what was happening, then you can use these red flags to keep you from getting into a situation like that again.

Sources:    

How to spot if someone has a hidden agenda

Actions revealing a hidden agenda

~ ~ ~ ~                                                                      ~ ~ ~ ~

 

Speaking of hidden agendas, I’ll leave you with a Motown track about family secrets. This song reminds me of one of Grease Spot’s big purposes – revealing the dark underbelly of TWI. In the song, the person’s father has just passed away. All the person ever heard about their father were bad things, so they start to investigate. It turns out that all the bad talk about his father were correct – from being a stealing preacher to having kids on the outside. So, the big secret is that all the bad things people said about his father were true…sequence-wise realizing I was in a cult tracks a little differently than this song – and it may be like that for some folks. I never heard anything really bad or thought anything was alarming about “our father in The Word” UNTIL I came to Grease Spot. And it’s not like it was all stuff I never heard about or wondered about. Some of it validated the red flags I had ignored or suppressed during my 12 years of involvement with TWI…anyway here’s the song…enjoy

 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, WordWolf said:

There's always a minority opinion. Of course you can accept that he agreed with you on anything- now he's going to be cited as an "expert" that "agreed" with you on what that meant.   Actually, the literal was correctly explained before- that the Scriptures (which are God-breathed) were contrasted with the work of several men including vpw. 

One thing I didn't mention now- but have before- is vpw's tendency to vaguely imply things without saying them outright.  That way, he could technically say he didn't say something, but had people believe he did because he IMPLIED it, he deceived by implication.   He did this when he got people to believe he played for the Sheboygan Redskins basketball team.  One document claimed he did- but their source for that was the sentence where he IMPLIED it, and the writer mistook the meaning, not realizing it was deception.   He said he was CONNECTED WITH THEM.  He never even said he handled the ball or practiced with them- but he got people to believe he HAD said that.   So, similar weasel-wording could leave well-intentioned people to believe that he'd actually said some of what he wrote or taught would be God-breathed-  when he left it unstated but with enough IMPLICATION that people would THINK he said that and go along with it.   The grammar of the passage says otherwise, but if one fixates on the implication, that is easily ignored.

Then we start to get several rounds of "of course he implied it, he hid it as secret information so that we could find it decades later and God wants us to think this" and so on.    For someone determined to go down with the ship- and insist it's not only not sinking, but is handling exceptionally well on the ocean,  this sort of thing is EXPECTED.

This!! This deceptive tactic is used ALL THE TIME for "correction" and "reproof" while "teaching." It's a cunningly subtle and sinister form of gaslighting. 

Just because victor states explicitly or implicitly that any or everything he says is necessarily god-breathed doesn't make it true. What vic says is demonstrably not true, even if he himself claims it to be true. It's not true even if someone believes it. 

WW, for the record I don't think I said I agreed with Mike. And I never claimed to be an expert. Your insightful posts have been so helpful over the years. Thank you. GSC is immeasurably important, including the foil of Mike's voice. Finding truth sometimes requires contrasting BS.

Edited by Nathan_Jr
Didn't know BS couldn't be spelled out in all of its scientific accuracy and mathematical precision.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey!  Chavoustie is on the crew.  

I once may or may not have irritated him with questions.

Someone should definitely ask him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Bolshevik said:

Hey!  Chavoustie is on the crew.  

I once may or may not have irritated him with questions.

Someone should definitely ask him.

Im sure he's been reassigned, but Chavoustie was the research department coordinator for many years when I was at HQ. Part time job back then....a biblical RESEARCH ministry with a part time, one man band reasarch department...lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, OldSkool said:

Im sure he's been reassigned, but Chavoustie was the research department coordinator for many years when I was at HQ. Part time job back then....a biblical RESEARCH ministry with a part time, one man band reasarch department...lol

He was New York Region coordinator when I knew him.  

All the research has been done.  I'm he had his hands full re-searching pat answers and avoiding the right people at HQ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Bolshevik said:

All the research has been done.  I'm he had his hands full re-searching pat answers and avoiding the right people at HQ

They should probably just rename it the Spin Dept.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Bolshevik said:

I'm he had his hands full re-searching pat answers and avoiding the right people at HQ.

Yea, that's pretty much how any self respecting way corps guy survived HQ>>>stay tf out the way...lol

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, waysider said:

They should probably just rename it the Spin Dept.

 

I laughed out loud on that one...because its TRUE! Too bad Spin Doctors name is taken. It's Wierwille and the Spin Doctors!

 

R.jpeg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

in case anyone missed it - here's the trailer for Power For Abundant Living Today

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The entire class is built on a false premise that is revealed in the first 20 seconds.

The Bible is not the revealed word and will of God. It's a collection of 66 ancient writings that have been cobbled together to promote a sense of literary agreement. It's filled with contradictions and errors. Any attempts to justify these imperfections are nothing more than linguistic sleight of hand.

  • Like 1
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...