They won’t respond. From their view they have corrected the error with the latest believers family class where they define adultery as wrong and things in standard Christian fashion.
They will never admit past wrongs as that would open them up for litigation.
They will whitewash, ignore and move on. The next generation know nothing of the sins of the past generation and pretty much don’t care.
More's the pity. Those who don't remember the past are doomed to relive it.
Tautology = the saying of the same thing twice in different words...
Yeah. It's ALMOST saying the same thing twice.
One saying relates to the Word being issued,
and the other relates to the Word being absorbed.
The issuer is forbidden to attach a private nuance to the message.
The implication is clear that the absorber is similarly forbidden.
*/*/*/*
It is a settled issue to me.
In order for a scripture to be valuable it has to be the clean and pure Word from God, and not contaminated by personal perspectives of humans who happen to write it or read it.
IF it is the case that the scripture grammar does not allow this, then it should be recognized as self-evident.
The Bible is OF no private interpretation, and the Bible is FOR no private interpretation.
Besides, in 1968 it was very stylish for people to "do your own thing," and for me to hear VPW teach back then that I should not absorb the Bible in a private, personal way was good advice.
Yeah. It's ALMOST saying the same thing twice.
One saying relates to the Word being issued,
and the other relates to the Word being absorbed.
The issuer is forbidden to attach a private nuance to the message.
The implication is clear that the absorber is similarly forbidden.
*/*/*/*
It is a settled issue to me.
In order for a scripture to be valuable it has to be the clean and pure Word from God, and not contaminated by personal perspectives of humans who happen to write it or read it.
IF it is the case that the scripture grammar does not allow this, then it should be recognized as self-evident.
The Bible is OF no private interpretation, and the Bible is FOR no private interpretation.
Besides, in 1968 it was very stylish for people to "do your own thing," and for me to hear VPW teach back then that I should not absorb the Bible in a private, personal way was good advice.
Even though Saint Vic had his own private interpretation of the bible? Witness what happened to the adultery paper. Witness Penworks book illuminating how Saint Vic used the bible to back up whatever principle he wanted to use to control the masses.
No private interpretation. Yah, sure. That's why Saint Vic said,"I know there's a manuscript out there somewhere supporting this, we just haven't found it."
How about just reading scripture with faith that God is perfectly capable of communicating himself in written form and just read whats written.
...
Just read the Bible with confidence and trust in whats written without letting wierwille's fake theology throw you off base dude. I mean do you not believe the following? Hers' the correct choice Mike:
1 John 2:27
But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
I agree that reading what is written, and even in an easier version like NIV, is a good thing to do.
After I finished my 20 year review of the collaterals (1998-2018) I turned to my KJV and started reading for pleasure again. I also started, for clean smooth reading sessions, my own private digital version of the Bible that is largely KJV with corrections.
It is only in a few knotty verses here and there that I fall back on VPW’s teachings these days. Most of my Bible reading is with most of the collaterals way in the background.
I noticed in the 1970s that many of my contemporaries were not doing a lot of reading in the Gospels. I had lots of questions as I was an avid reader back then, and I was very concerned about the trinity and things like that. I was always checking up on PFAL as I read Jesus’ words. It took some time for me to shift to what Jesus taught Paul in the next administration.
*/*/*
As for the 1 John verse you quoted, I remember what we were taught about that, and it is easy to see in the context.
We don’t need any teaching to hold on to our new birth is the clear context of that one verse. Why? Because it is seed; a done deal.
*/*/*
Meanwhile, that one verse appears in a larger text that is teaching us on a VERY NEEDED topic: staying in fellowship and guarding against idols.
This major teaching of the whole Epistle has nothing to do with teaching us how to hold onto pneuma hagion, but it does teach us how to hold on to our renewed mind and fellowship.
No private interpretation. Yah, sure. That's why Saint Vic said,"I know there's a manuscript out there somewhere supporting this, we just haven't found it."
I have posted several times on 3 different SNT tapes I heard VPW say things like that. It took me years to understand them. I posted on this fairly recently also.
I have posted several times on 3 different SNT tapes I heard VPW say things like that. It took me years to understand them. I posted on this fairly recently also.
You mean you rationalized. I'm always suspicious when someone has to do mental gymnastics to explain a point.
No private interpretation. Yah, sure. That's why Saint Vic said,"I know there's a manuscript out there somewhere supporting this, we just haven't found it."
Easily one of the most intellectually and spiritually dishonest phrases ever uttered by a human being.
Right off the bat in session 1 of PFAL, wierwille asks what's the greatest sin a person can commit, from which he launches into HIS OWN INTERPRETATION of Matthew 22 on the greatest commandment - wierwille says something along the lines "as long as you love God and neighbor you can do as you full well please".
I am a little confused by this.
It looks like you fused two things together that don't belong together.
Could you please cite your source for: wierwille says something along the lines "as long as you love God and neighbor you can do as you full well please".
I don't think that is in Session One at all, or anywhere in the class.
If you have the exact wording, I can check the transcript.
*/*/*/*
This "as long as you love God and neighbor you can do as you full well please" quote is floating around a lot lately, and I would like to get a hold of the context in which it appeared.
*/*/*/*
As far as VPW interpreting the greatest sin being breaking the greatest commandment I absolutely LOVED that interpretation the instant I heard it.
As a child Catholic, I spent a young lifetime trying desperately to keep track of the many grades of sin, to my endless confusion. That one line in the class gave me my money's worth.
I have seen other Catholics react similarly to this one line in the class. It really is SHEER logic. Count VPW's interpretation correct.
Could that be because we were actively discouraged from doing so?
Were you paying attention?
Maybe you've just forgotten that part. It's alright. Lots of old grads have, too.
I never felt discouraged from reading the Gospels. I felt a liberation in knowing they were for my learning, and that the direct applications for me were in the Epistles.
It looks like you fused two things together that don't belong together.
Could you please cite your source for: wierwille says something along the lines "as long as you love God and neighbor you can do as you full well please".
I don't think that is in Session One at all, or anywhere in the class.
If you have the exact wording, I can check the transcript.
*/*/*/*
This "as long as you love God and neighbor you can do as you full well please" quote is floating around a lot lately, and I would like to get a hold of the context in which it appeared.
*/*/*/*
As far as VPW interpreting the greatest sin being breaking the greatest commandment I absolutely LOVED that interpretation the instant I heard it.
As a child Catholic, I spent a young lifetime trying desperately to keep track of the many grades of sin, to my endless confusion. That one line in the class gave me my money's worth.
I have seen other Catholics react similarly to this one line in the class. It really is SHEER logic. Count VPW's interpretation correct.
Actually, I heard it as: "Love God. Love your neighbor. Do as you damn please."
I never felt discouraged from reading the Gospels.
So, you weren't taught about dispensationalism like the rest of us? How the epistle were exalted above the gospels because of the administration difference?
You don't remember being shamed for seeking the milk of the word instead of the meat? Who wanted their spiritual prowess to be questioned for seeking something less spiritually enlightening?
Yeah, sure. Nobody outright said "Don't read the gospels!" The discouragement was undeniable there and it was obvious to anyone who was paying attention..
This is actually very telling. The class that teaches 6 out of the 9 “manifestations” brought up in PLAF is “conspicuously missing”.
So by your belief 2/3 of the “holy spirit” field is not necessary to master?
Written materials by VP include the work covered in penworks book as well as the “By the Way” articles which are a whole other category of material.
Or do you specifically limit that to “Studies in Abundant Living” hard cover books volume one thru five?
Do you REALLY think I am believing that we should not master 2/3 of the manifestations? That would be kinda crazy, wouldn’t it?Were you more HOPING that I believed that,so you’d have an easy target to pounce on?
*/*/*
My belief is the AC is missing from VPW’s final instructions for a couple of much better reasons.
One it that since we had failed to adequately master the foundational and intermediate classes, we ought to focus FIRST on the first 3 manifestations.But really, we were told to not only master those manifestations but the entire classes and the written collaterals also.
I don’t know why you zeroed your question down to just the manifestations.
*/*/*
Another reason I see for the AC being missing from the master list is because VPW’s understanding and teaching were not refined to that point.In hindsight, I see the 1942 promise ending up in the collaterals, and not so much as the classes.The classes were introductions to the collaterals.
*/*/*/*
As for the “By the Way” articles in the local newspapers, and the “Our Times” articles in the magazine, I am not sure how to handle all of them.Some are obvious gems, and others seem less so.
There are things I am still working on, and the exact boundaries on what should be regarded as worth special attention are still a bit of an unknown to me.
*/*/*
Worth mentioning again is the process may college professors use to write their books, with most of the dog work going to grad students.This process is not well known, but I think it is justifiable.I know that within this framework, some authors are unfair to their workers in not crediting them, but that is the university system.
"aslong as you love God and neighbor you can do as you full well please" - VPW
At this time, I have no reason to doubt that victor said this. Partly because several very trustworthy, honest, sane posters confirm it, and partly because it just fits like a... well, you know.
But I would be curious to know when victor put forth this ethic. It seems like it might be a later, enriched, crawfished version of the 1973 ethic of "Do as you full well please - it's only a problem if you beleeeve it is."
"Teaching" Romans to the Corps, Q&A:
LCM: How much does your behavior that people do not see influence your example to them?
VPW: It doesn't, unless you believe it will.
LCM: You understand what I just asked?
VPW: I sure did and I gave you the proper answer.
LCM: I asked, How much does your behavior that people do not see influence your example to them?
They won’t respond. From their view they have corrected the error with the latest believers family class where they define adultery as wrong and things in standard Christian fashion.
They will never admit past wrongs as that would open them up for litigation.
Yes, they have told me about their new CF&S class, but I am repeatedly letting them know that both the old policies and the new policies need to be written in one document like an ECN to properly change a corporate policy.
I understand the tort fears. They will subside in coming decades. In the meantime roundabout methods are being explored.
But I would be curious to know when victor put forth this ethic.
I don't recall a time when he DIDN'T push this idea, starting very early in PFAL. He rephrased it many different ways and used it as a way to say the 10 commandments didn't apply to the Grace Administration. (They're for spiritual sissies.)
More's the pity. Those who don't remember the past are doomed to relive it.
I hope to see an unvarnished history of TWI written outside TWI-4, but well read within TWI-4. For it to be well read will mean cleansing it from exaggerations. I think some GSC people can help with such a document, if they are able to change their writing styles to more civil and loving ways.
I don't recall a time when he DIDN'T push this idea, starting very early in PFAL. He rephrased it many different ways and used it as a way to say the 10 commandments didn't apply to the Grace Administration. (They're for spiritual sissies.)
I hope to see an unvarnished history of TWI written outside TWI-4, but well read within TWI-4. For it to be well read will mean cleansing it from exaggerations. I think some GSC people can help with such a document, if they are able to change their writing styles to more civil and loving ways.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
358
229
215
220
Popular Days
Mar 4
144
May 2
83
Apr 29
77
Mar 5
70
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 358 posts
So_crates 229 posts
OldSkool 215 posts
Nathan_Jr 220 posts
Popular Days
Mar 4 2023
144 posts
May 2 2023
83 posts
Apr 29 2023
77 posts
Mar 5 2023
70 posts
Popular Posts
chockfull
I believe that the real deal is possible and the path toward it is to address and correct all the doctrinal and practical error introduced by VPs box top doctorate research. isolation from other
chockfull
The Corps is a necessary cult element providing free labor at the expense of volunteers lives. Any imagery like the Marines promotes extremist behavior. No other Christian seminary or school use
Nathan_Jr
"Teaching" Romans to the Corps, Q&A: LCM: How much does your behavior that people do not see influence your example to them? VPW: It doesn't, unless you believe it will. LCM: You u
Posted Images
So_crates
More's the pity. Those who don't remember the past are doomed to relive it.
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Yeah. It's ALMOST saying the same thing twice.
One saying relates to the Word being issued,
and the other relates to the Word being absorbed.
The issuer is forbidden to attach a private nuance to the message.
The implication is clear that the absorber is similarly forbidden.
*/*/*/*
It is a settled issue to me.
In order for a scripture to be valuable it has to be the clean and pure Word from God, and not contaminated by personal perspectives of humans who happen to write it or read it.
IF it is the case that the scripture grammar does not allow this, then it should be recognized as self-evident.
The Bible is OF no private interpretation, and the Bible is FOR no private interpretation.
Besides, in 1968 it was very stylish for people to "do your own thing," and for me to hear VPW teach back then that I should not absorb the Bible in a private, personal way was good advice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Even though Saint Vic had his own private interpretation of the bible? Witness what happened to the adultery paper. Witness Penworks book illuminating how Saint Vic used the bible to back up whatever principle he wanted to use to control the masses.
No private interpretation. Yah, sure. That's why Saint Vic said,"I know there's a manuscript out there somewhere supporting this, we just haven't found it."
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
"If you ever have a question, write:
The Teacher
P.O. Box 347
............."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I agree that reading what is written, and even in an easier version like NIV, is a good thing to do.
After I finished my 20 year review of the collaterals (1998-2018) I turned to my KJV and started reading for pleasure again. I also started, for clean smooth reading sessions, my own private digital version of the Bible that is largely KJV with corrections.
It is only in a few knotty verses here and there that I fall back on VPW’s teachings these days. Most of my Bible reading is with most of the collaterals way in the background.
I noticed in the 1970s that many of my contemporaries were not doing a lot of reading in the Gospels. I had lots of questions as I was an avid reader back then, and I was very concerned about the trinity and things like that. I was always checking up on PFAL as I read Jesus’ words. It took some time for me to shift to what Jesus taught Paul in the next administration.
*/*/*
As for the 1 John verse you quoted, I remember what we were taught about that, and it is easy to see in the context.
We don’t need any teaching to hold on to our new birth is the clear context of that one verse. Why? Because it is seed; a done deal.
*/*/*
Meanwhile, that one verse appears in a larger text that is teaching us on a VERY NEEDED topic: staying in fellowship and guarding against idols.
This major teaching of the whole Epistle has nothing to do with teaching us how to hold onto pneuma hagion, but it does teach us how to hold on to our renewed mind and fellowship.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I have posted several times on 3 different SNT tapes I heard VPW say things like that. It took me years to understand them. I posted on this fairly recently also.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Only victor is allowed whimsical, arbitrary, nonsensical interpretations, but that’s it! No one else!
Rely not on your own understanding. Rely only on victor’s.
Are you a doctor? Didn't think so. Shut up and absorb. Let the intellectual and spiritual anesthesia wash over you like a warm bath.
(Pay no attention to the floating dead baby.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
You mean you rationalized. I'm always suspicious when someone has to do mental gymnastics to explain a point.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
It plainly does not say that. Viewing scripture through the collaterals isn't what I'm talking about. But who cares at this point...do what u do.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
That's Mike's private interpretation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Easily one of the most intellectually and spiritually dishonest phrases ever uttered by a human being.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Could that be because we were actively discouraged from doing so?
Were you paying attention?
Maybe you've just forgotten that part. It's alright. Lots of old grads have, too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I am a little confused by this.
It looks like you fused two things together that don't belong together.
Could you please cite your source for:
wierwille says something along the lines "as long as you love God and neighbor you can do as you full well please".
I don't think that is in Session One at all, or anywhere in the class.
If you have the exact wording, I can check the transcript.
*/*/*/*
This "as long as you love God and neighbor you can do as you full well please" quote is floating around a lot lately, and I would like to get a hold of the context in which it appeared.
*/*/*/*
As far as VPW interpreting the greatest sin being breaking the greatest commandment I absolutely LOVED that interpretation the instant I heard it.
As a child Catholic, I spent a young lifetime trying desperately to keep track of the many grades of sin, to my endless confusion. That one line in the class gave me my money's worth.
I have seen other Catholics react similarly to this one line in the class. It really is SHEER logic. Count VPW's interpretation correct.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I never felt discouraged from reading the Gospels. I felt a liberation in knowing they were for my learning, and that the direct applications for me were in the Epistles.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Actually, I heard it as: "Love God. Love your neighbor. Do as you damn please."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
So, you weren't taught about dispensationalism like the rest of us? How the epistle were exalted above the gospels because of the administration difference?
You don't remember being shamed for seeking the milk of the word instead of the meat? Who wanted their spiritual prowess to be questioned for seeking something less spiritually enlightening?
Yeah, sure. Nobody outright said "Don't read the gospels!" The discouragement was undeniable there and it was obvious to anyone who was paying attention..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Do you REALLY think I am believing that we should not master 2/3 of the manifestations? That would be kinda crazy, wouldn’t it? Were you more HOPING that I believed that, so you’d have an easy target to pounce on?
*/*/*
My belief is the AC is missing from VPW’s final instructions for a couple of much better reasons.
One it that since we had failed to adequately master the foundational and intermediate classes, we ought to focus FIRST on the first 3 manifestations. But really, we were told to not only master those manifestations but the entire classes and the written collaterals also.
I don’t know why you zeroed your question down to just the manifestations.
*/*/*
Another reason I see for the AC being missing from the master list is because VPW’s understanding and teaching were not refined to that point. In hindsight, I see the 1942 promise ending up in the collaterals, and not so much as the classes. The classes were introductions to the collaterals.
*/*/*/*
As for the “By the Way” articles in the local newspapers, and the “Our Times” articles in the magazine, I am not sure how to handle all of them. Some are obvious gems, and others seem less so.
There are things I am still working on, and the exact boundaries on what should be regarded as worth special attention are still a bit of an unknown to me.
*/*/*
Worth mentioning again is the process may college professors use to write their books, with most of the dog work going to grad students. This process is not well known, but I think it is justifiable. I know that within this framework, some authors are unfair to their workers in not crediting them, but that is the university system.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
"as long as you love God and neighbor you can do as you full well please" - VPW
At this time, I have no reason to doubt that victor said this. Partly because several very trustworthy, honest, sane posters confirm it, and partly because it just fits like a... well, you know.
But I would be curious to know when victor put forth this ethic. It seems like it might be a later, enriched, crawfished version of the 1973 ethic of "Do as you full well please - it's only a problem if you beleeeve it is."
"Teaching" Romans to the Corps, Q&A:
LCM: How much does your behavior that people do not see influence your example to them?
VPW: It doesn't, unless you believe it will.
LCM: You understand what I just asked?
VPW: I sure did and I gave you the proper answer.
LCM: I asked, How much does your behavior that people do not see influence your example to them?
VPW: Alright, Kurt?
Kurt: In verse 15.....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Yes, they have told me about their new CF&S class, but I am repeatedly letting them know that both the old policies and the new policies need to be written in one document like an ECN to properly change a corporate policy.
I understand the tort fears. They will subside in coming decades. In the meantime roundabout methods are being explored.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I don't recall a time when he DIDN'T push this idea, starting very early in PFAL. He rephrased it many different ways and used it as a way to say the 10 commandments didn't apply to the Grace Administration. (They're for spiritual sissies.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I hope to see an unvarnished history of TWI written outside TWI-4, but well read within TWI-4. For it to be well read will mean cleansing it from exaggerations. I think some GSC people can help with such a document, if they are able to change their writing styles to more civil and loving ways.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Ok...gonna do some whitewashing eh?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Good advice. If I ever write a history of Jack The Ripper, I'll be sure to paint him as a real swell guy.
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.