Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

Misquoting Jesus


Belle
 Share

Recommended Posts

Oh, and Dan?

(Sorry to keep bugging you.)

Sorry about this interruption to your thread.

I hope you're at least getting entertainment value

while this plays out...

Thank you for your tolerance.

WW,

(lol) It's not my thread - it's Belle's.

And from every indication from her initial, inspiring post, she's having a blast

learning a lot of new things, and she (as well as others here) are doing quite admirably without any of my superfluous input, thank you. And I'm extremely happy for her, wherever her learning journey

leads her, because all this stuff is so mindblowing and exciting.

Hell, like her, I'm still learning new things! I'm eagerly awaiting a couple books I ordered online with my

Christmas money, such as Herzog's "The Parables of Jesus as Subversive Language" and Price's classic

"The Restored New Testament" which I'll add to my newly arrived "Gnosticism at Corinth".

God I'm so f$#*@# happy.

Danny

Edited by TheInvisibleDan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 194
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

WW,

You wrote: "The vast majority of the texts DO agree with each other- compare any 2 interlinears for evidence. Sheesh, I did that back in twi..."

All you need is one interlinear that is footnoted to show many texts.

Mine has the Stevens text as a base, and the footnotes document all the deviations that about ten other texts take from it.

EVERY PAGE is littered with footnotes of deviations...

[THAT might be a subject worth discussing-

with someone interested in intellectual honesty on the subject..]

and these are in the CLEANED UP versions

[unsupported assumption.]

of the tattered remnants.

[sTILL an unsupported assumption you keep sneaking in there...]

We were taught that if ONE WORD is changed we no longer have THE Word of God. I believe that. I saw how Eve didn't believe that, and succumbed to a huge lie as a result.

[Actually, disagreements as to spelling and tense of verbs rarely

result in changing the meaning of a sentence,

as anyone actually conversant in the field would tell you first-off.

You'll find notes on "disagreement" between "Jeremiah", "Jeremias"

and "Jeremy", for example, and the meaning is identical.

vpw himself tended to cherry-pick the tenses that suited his

theology best, even in pfal. Even so, the greatest divergence

is between the English versions, not the Greek texts of note.

If this is news to you, it shouldn't be.]

***

Lots of people are still waiting for some examples of the innovations in textual studies you alluded to.

[i didn't allude to them-I claimed outright they existed.

No grey areas to my comments.

"Lots of people" haven't produced "lots of posts".

If you want to claim they're all in private contact with you,

I'll not buy that one.]

Are you balking due to the innovations having a pointy headed overintellectual inapplicability to our spiritual life?

[No, I'm being consistent and playing by one set of rules.

"Tattered remnants" is still UNSUPPORTED.

So, I wait.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh,

and, different people have different opinions,

based of course on their own sources.

One person's opinion, I thought, was worth quoting on this

"tattered remnants" thing.

======

"To get the Word of God our of any translation or out of any version,

we have to compare one word with another word

and one verse with another verse.

We have to study the context of all the verses.

If it is the Word of God, then it cannot have a contradiction

for God cannot contradict Himself.

Error has to be either in the translation or in one's own

understanding.

When we get back to that original, God-breathed Word-

which I am confident we can-

then once again we will be able to say with all the authority of the

prophets of old, 'Thus saith the Lord.'"

That's vpw himself, pg-128 of the Orange Book.

He, for one, thinks that this is an attainable goal.

Plus, this was in the Orange Book,

which a few people credit with Divine Inspiration.

So, I'm unsure whether Mike is more fond of his

"tattered remnants" doctrine, or his

"pfal is inerrant and from God" doctrine,

but in this instance right here, they're

mutually-exclusive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me, especially after seeing Smikeol go literally ape-s**t on this thread, that the only thing that's 'tattered' is his ..... preciouusssss.

"Myyyyyy pprreecciiioooouuuusssssss!! ..... Nnnnooooooooo!!!"

smikeol.jpg

:confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BELLE!!! I say, Belle! are you here :wave:

We interrupt our current programing for this special message

I read a lot--I have not read this particular book but I have read the Gnostic gospels, also recently two books by Orthodox Jews called "The Myth Maker" (a repudiation of the Apostle Paul) and "Why the Jews Reject Jesus" plus many others over my lifetime. I have found them all informative -learned something from all of them. It is a weak faith that cannot listen to another viewpoint without collapsing. So get the book, read the book, read it like you read any other piece of information, learn what you can, if your opinions become altered--this is not necessarily a bad thing- and reject what you have to. It is a bad thing to close ones mind to any thing new , it prevents growth

We now return to our regularly scheduled event with the artistic Garth and the InvisibleDan as commentators

We find our combatants in their respective corners--Mike a bit bloody while Wordwolf bounces contentedly on the ropes waiting for the bell.

Edited by templelady
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WW,

As you posted, Dr wrote on page 128 in the PFAL book: “When we get back to that original, God-breathed Word - which I am confident we can - then once again we will be able to say with all the authority of the prophets of old, 'Thus saith the Lord.'”

Then you wrote: “That's vpw himself, pg-128 of the Orange Book. He, for one, thinks that this is an attainable goal. Plus, this was in the Orange Book, which a few people credit with Divine Inspiration.”

Yes, he did think it attainable in 1967 when he first spoke those words in the film class and then in 1971 when the PFAL book was published.

His statement indicates that there was a problem at that time, and that the problem was not having the accurate Word. This problem has a SMALL component in the ancient texts. I admit the tatterations are small.

But there are also components of this problem involving translations which are LARGE, and then with putting it all together MINUS the cultural/religious bias we’re all saddled with from birth, which is HUGE.

In the late 60’s and early 70’s Dr states that the problem exists, but that it was solvable. How?

Notice the “we” in his page 128 quote. Getting back to the originals and solving this three pronged problem involves having Dr included. Why? Because he was appointed by God to be the man to help “us” so that “we” could get back to the original understanding accurately.

This is the spiritual authoritativeness I referred to in previous posts and to which Dr refers when he said “say with all the authority of the prophets of old.”

The sense knowledge task of getting back to the original understanding is daunting when the adversary is seen as the instigator of the problem. It’s a SUPERNATURAL problem and no natural solutions will get us back there. No academic inquiry can thwart the devil’s power to subvert the Word. Only God can get us over the hump and back to the originals. It takes revelation to REALLY know which ancient fragments are to be trusted, how to translate them, and how to integrate them into our thinking. God selected Dr as the man to receive that revelation and then pass it on to us. Without his contribution we cannot get back.

***

In 1982, a decade after writing that page 128 in the PFAL book, Dr announced that the problem HAD BEEN SOLVED basically, and that we had obtained the Word. The first two obstacles had been basically overcome, and only the last remained.

Yes, Dr said we could get back to the originals in 1971, and then 1982 he announced that the job was almost totally done. Three years later he told us all to master the end-product of all that work, to master the written forms of PFAL.

Hardly anyone heard Dr’s announcement of the successful getting back to what God wanted us to have. It was on a SNS tape of Craig’s Installation and it’s timing was either a minute or two before or after placing the mantle on Craig. This announcement was either the last one of Dr’s as president or the first one in Craig’s new ministry. No one really noticed, but it’s still there on the tape.

When the getting back to the originals was totally complete and we were told to “go at it” and master the collaterals, but Dr’s statements were ignored and the entire teaching, his last, was lost to most grads.

Yes, WordWolf, Dr did say we could get back, and then ten years later he said that we did get back, but all ignored it and walked away from the solution provided by God. Only now are people slowly hearing these things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve often mentioned that we need to WATCH THE TIMES!

To view Dr’s writings as occurring at one static time in history is to miss the development of a HUGE story. It’s the story of God making more and more available to us. Unfortunately, most of us OLGs had pretty well tuned Dr out by the time the exciting things were coming down in the very early 80’s.

Thank you WW, for giving me the opportunity to mention all this again. With repetition, some of these things may start sticking in the attention and focus of readers here. For most, these are the first times to ever hear such wonderful things of God’s blessings to us through the PFAL writings He inspired in Dr and his editors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since WW so diligently wanted to thoroughly explore this sub-topic, for which I just thanked him, I thought it would also be nice to mention that these things have been discussed here before.

The 1982 SNS tape where Dr says that his 1967/71 statement of being confident that we could get back to the originals with spiritual authoritativeness was basically accomplished was discussed in a thread titled “News Flash! LCM Never Installed Spiritual Leader of The Way!” and can be found at:

http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...topic=1620&st=0

There are a number of other surprises on that tape that should bring some relief to those who have been so perplexed as to why Dr appointed Craig to be president of TWI. It’s also noteworthy to see that this announcement came at the 40th anniversary of Dr being appointed God’s spokesman.

***

Then, the total fulfillment of Dr’s confident expectations that we could get back to the original can be seen in Dr’s very last teaching where he TWICE tells us in those very few dying last words that we should master the FINISHED writings that are part of PFAL.

Watching the times over a ten year span from 1975 to 1985 we can see Dr slowly urging more and more of us (and with stronger and stronger wording) to master the PFAL writings as they were being published. When they were finally completed in 1985 he tells all of us, point blank, to master that complete set of God’s revelations to us.

This discussion can be found in the thread titled “Dr's Last Teaching - LOST for 17 Years!” and it is located here:

http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?showtopic=4226

***

Templelady, don’t worry about me, it’s only a flesh wound. It is my privilege to become slightly bloodied (in your eyes) as I make these things known, very much against the will of the adversary who’s hid them for years, and very much in line with the heart of the True God.

Edited by Mike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

God selected Dr as the man to receive that revelation and then pass it on to us. Without his contribution we cannot get back.

And here is the crux and foundation for all your arguments. Truth is truth it is not confined to one ministry or the works of one man instead it is manifest in many ways and many places shining for all who seek to see. The fact that for you truth is confined to the limitations of VPW and PFAL in and of itself gives the lie to it being truth. You cannot compare the teachings of one man, VPW, to the teachings of the Bible where the same truths are repeated by different authors over the span of centuries, the same can be said of the Book of Mormon. Truth does not demand that you look in only one place--instead truth demands you seek everywhere for it and embrace it when you find it. VPW and PFAL are seriously lacking in this arena.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[WordWolf in bold & brackets again...]

WW,

As you posted, Dr wrote on page 128 in the PFAL book: “When we get back to that original, God-breathed Word - which I am confident we can - then once again we will be able to say with all the authority of the prophets of old, 'Thus saith the Lord.'”

Then you wrote: “That's vpw himself, pg-128 of the Orange Book. He, for one, thinks that this is an attainable goal. Plus, this was in the Orange Book, which a few people credit with Divine Inspiration.”

Yes, he did think it attainable in 1967 when he first spoke those words in the film class and then in 1971 when the PFAL book was published.

[And, incidentally, this put him on opposite sides of this discussion-

if this discussion is whether or not this is an attainable goal verses

the "unreliable fragments" and "tattered remnants" of another position.

Did everyone else catch that?

Mike's too busy trying to sneak in his commercial to see it.

Plus, he never let's vpw's words interfere with what he's saying

ABOUT vpw's words.

His statement indicates that there was a problem at that time, and that the problem was not having the accurate Word. This problem has a SMALL component in the ancient texts.

I admit the tatterations are small.

[To clarify, then, Mike,

about that last comment

"I admit the tatterations are small",

does that mean "I, Mike, have reconsidered my position, and find that

evidence does not support calling Scriptures 'unreliable fragments'

and "tattered remnants',

and have changed my thinking in light of evidence?"

That's what it looks like.

Please clarify.

If it IS true, then your previous position no longer applies,

and that affects the discussion.

If it is NOT true, then please clarify what you meant.]

But there are also components of this problem involving translations which are LARGE, and then with putting it all together MINUS the cultural/religious bias we’re all saddled with from birth, which is HUGE.

[Funny-the Orange Book mentioned NONE of this, but it DID say

we could get back to that point...]

In the late 60’s and early 70’s Dr states that the problem exists, but that it was solvable. How?

["..we have to compare one word with another word and one verse with

another verse. We have to study the context of all the verses."

Amazingly, that's not dissimilar to the work done by scholars studying

the uncils, cursives/minuscules, parchments, papyri, other texts, and so on.]

Notice the “we” in his page 128 quote.

[As vpw himself has stated (in pfal), you're supposed to include YOURSELF

when talking about people in general, especially your audience.

He said he was taught this in divinity school.]

[so. then, what did "we" mean on page 128, as in

'how do we do this?'

Well, we follow vpw's most basic rules, such as

"to whom is this addressed?"

According to the introduction of this same book,

"This is a book containing Biblical keys. The contents herein

do not teach the Scriptures from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21;

rather,

IT IS DESIGNED TO SET BEFORE THE READER THE BASIC KEYS

IN THE WORD OF GOD so that Genesis to Revelation will unfold and

so that the abundant life which Jesus Christ came to make available

will become evident to those who want to appropriate God's

abundance to their lives."

So, the "we" refers to "the readers" when it discusses getting

back to the originals using the methods of page 128.

That wasn't difficult to see.

However, some people, in their rush to make more out of a

simple 'we', will rush to compose an entire doctrine out of it.

Is this a surprise?]

Getting back to the originals and solving this three pronged problem involves having Dr included. Why? Because he was appointed by God to be the man to help “us” so that “we” could get back to the original understanding accurately.

[This is STILL one of the many unsupported suppositions of

Mikean pfal, and STILL something Mike is unable to invoke when

discussing just about anything. We're supposed to just take Mike's

word for it.]

This is the spiritual authoritativeness I referred to in previous posts and to which Dr refers when he said “say with all the authority of the prophets of old.”

[That would be interesting, if it had anything to do with what was

actually WRITTEN. As it is, it's based on a buildup from vapor.]

The sense knowledge task of getting back to the original understanding is daunting when the adversary is seen as the instigator of the problem.

[That's not what vpw said. I thought you believed him..]

It’s a SUPERNATURAL problem and no natural solutions will get us back there.

[The formula on page 128 can be performed by believer or UNbeliever,

and is thus a "natural solution."

Unless, of course, you're saying page 128 of the Orange Book-

and thus vpw-

is in error.]

No academic inquiry can thwart the devil’s power to subvert the Word. Only God can get us over the hump and back to the originals.

[vpw said WE-not GOD- can get there by comparing one verse with another,

one word with another, and studying the contexts of same.

Adding to the word of wierwille means you no longer have the word

of wierwille.]

It takes revelation to REALLY know which ancient fragments are to be trusted, how to translate them, and how to integrate them into our thinking.

[No,

it takes diligent study and lots of hard work.

An atheist of impeccable integrity, extensive study and the desire,

could, with access to the documents, get the job done correctly.

And integration into our thinking is a non-issue.]

God selected Dr as the man to receive that revelation and then pass it on to us. Without his contribution we cannot get back.

[A) Unsupported supposition.

B) It contradicts the Orange Book (see above.)]

***

In 1982, a decade after writing that page 128 in the PFAL book, Dr announced that the problem HAD BEEN SOLVED basically, and that we had obtained the Word. The first two obstacles had been basically overcome, and only the last remained.

[Make your specifics, rather than just claiming

"Oh, he said this." Produce the source and the exact quote.

You're famous for completely misrepresenting simple text

and announcements, so we'd need to compare this for

ourselves.]

Yes, Dr said we could get back to the originals in 1971, and then 1982 he announced that the job was almost totally done.

[still supposed to just take Mike's word for it...]

Three years later he told us all to master the end-product of all that work, to master the written forms of PFAL.

[His advertisement of pfal had NOTHING to do with the

current discussion. Amazing how you completely abandoned any

discussion of texts to make your OWN advertisement-again.]

Hardly anyone heard Dr’s announcement of the successful getting back to what God wanted us to have. It was on a SNS tape of Craig’s Installation and it’s timing was either a minute or two before or after placing the mantle on Craig. This announcement was either the last one of Dr’s as president or the first one in Craig’s new ministry. No one really noticed, but it’s still there on the tape.

[specifically? This isn't hard. What was the exact announcement?]

When the getting back to the originals was totally complete and we were told to “go at it” and master the collaterals, but Dr’s statements were ignored and the entire teaching, his last, was lost to most grads.

[Thus spake Mike. Somehow, his say-so lacks power,

mainly because it's pulled out of his hat.]

Yes, WordWolf, Dr did say we could get back, and then ten years later he said that we did get back, but all ignored it and walked away from the solution provided by God. Only now are people slowly hearing these things.

[And I'm supposed to believe Mike because?]

Thank you WW, for giving me the opportunity to mention all this again.

I did nothing of the kind, but that never stops you from dragging

in non-sequiturs and commercials anyway...

With repetition, some of these things may start sticking in the attention and focus of readers here.
Without any documentation, and ONLY repetition, all that's

accomplished is a sideshow act. You're peddling snake-oil, and

we're not buying.

For most, these are the first times to ever hear such wonderful things of God’s blessings to us through the PFAL writings He inspired in Dr and his editors.

For most, the advertisements are seen as exactly that.

And I won't belabour the last comment again at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since WW so diligently wanted to thoroughly explore this sub-topic,

[Actually,

I claimed Mike had no proof for his "tattered fragments"

comments, and that any attempts to prove it would end

up in misdirection.

As you can see, we're in the middle of a huge misdirection

calculated to draw attention away from Mike's lack of support

for his "tattered fragments" assertion.

From there, Mike took one instance of the word "we",

completely distorted its meaning, then went off on another

advertisement. (Scroll up a post or 2.)]

for which I just thanked him, I thought it would also be nice to mention that these things have been discussed here before.

[We've discussed many things before-

among them Mike's inability to cease pulling stuff out of

the air, and actually DOCUMENT them.

Of course, those rare times he DOES, it's easy to show he's

tortured a quote to try to make another claim.]

The 1982 SNS tape where Dr says that his 1967/71 statement of being confident that we could get back to the originals with spiritual authoritativeness was basically accomplished was discussed in a thread titled “News Flash! LCM Never Installed Spiritual Leader of The Way!” and can be found at:

http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...topic=1620&st=0

[17 pages of thread, and Mike's not going to attempt to indicate

WHERE on the thread this is supposedly supported.

Until he does, that's PRETENDING to support a claim.]

***

Then, the total fulfillment of Dr’s confident expectations that we could get back to the original can be seen in Dr’s very last teaching where he TWICE tells us in those very few dying last words that we should master the FINISHED writings that are part of PFAL.

[vpw's commercial for pfal has nothing to do with

Mike's new claim that this meant that textual reconstruction

was complete. However, it's become a sort of Rorshach test-

Mike can see ANYTHING in this tape.]

Watching the times over a ten year span from 1975 to 1985 we can see Dr slowly urging more and more of us (and with stronger and stronger wording) to master the PFAL writings as they were being published. When they were finally completed in 1985 he tells all of us, point blank, to master that complete set of God’s revelations to us.

[More and more commercials does not equate with a mandate from The Almighty.]

***

Templelady, don’t worry about me, it’s only a flesh wound. It is my privilege to become slightly bloodied (in your eyes) as I make these things known, very much against the will of the adversary who’s hid them for years, and very much in line with the heart of the True God.

[Translation:

"I'm completely hiding that my initial comment was lacking in merit-

and SKIPPING a literate discussion of textual reconstruction-

in order to post the same old commercials I've posted before.

I consider the results of me looking like a fool to almost the entire

reading audience (everyone minus about 2-3) to be a privilege

before God as I declare his new Bible-

not pfal,

but pfal as interpreted by me,

plus tapes and magazine articles ALSO as interpreted by me.

Any person who points out all the flaws and errors in my

doctrine, presentation and so on is an agent of satan."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if Wierwille said the problem "had been solved," I wouldn't believe him, nor would I accept the ludicrous thesis that his written works comprise said solution, seeing as those written works contradict each other and contain errors which prove (according to the very standards of those written works) that they are not what Smikeol claims them to be.

I do not start with the premise that PFAL is not "The Word of God." On the contrary: to prove or disprover a thesis, you must start with the presumption that said thesis is true, then test it. As I test PFAL, as ANY HONEST PERSON tests PFAL, they can ask themselves simple questions to determine its veracity. If PFAL is true, then it will not contain any errors nor will it contradict itself. PFAL fails on both counts, proving the thesis false. On its merits, not on (verified and documented) accusations of plagiarism or (verified and documented) evidence of the lecherousness, vindictiveness and dishonesty of its "author," who is VPW and not God.

To whatever extent PFAL has something positive to offer, praise God. But everything positive that is offered in PFAL is available elsewhere to anyone who chooses to seek it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It takes revelation to REALLY know which ancient fragments are to be trusted, how to translate them, and how to integrate them into our thinking. God selected Dr as the man to receive that revelation and then pass it on to us. Without his contribution we cannot get back.

It doesn't takes revelation as much as it takes the proper training. Anyone who has been properly trained can pretty much accomplish the same thing. For example, CES has a much better work of disproving the doctrine of the Trinity in their book "One God and One Lord" than the original book "JCING" published by TWI. I agree. Without VPW's initial contribution, CES's book: "One God & One Lord" would likely never have made manuscript form, much less would we see a book that even made it to press - or a book ex-TWI members would ever consider purchasing and owning.

I am sure you heard VPW say his ministry was to raise up leaders and teachers who were better qualified than him in many ways. But what many find questionable though I believe is whether or not that goal was accomplished. Perhaps to some degree it has been, while to another degree it has completely gone the opposite direction. It all depends largely on the particular individual or the particular group of individuals and exactly what their particular desires happen to be, you see.

The only reason why some people believe it has gone completely the opposite direction is because (as aptly said in episode IV of Star Wars) all this pointless bikering is getting us no-where. The VPW antagonists and their: "Sermon on Mount Plagarism" makes up a small portion of all that "pointless bickering getting us nowhere" and is the main reason why some people are still stuck in the same lousy episode of "TWI-Wars".

Edited by What The Hey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

... the selfsame 'TWI-Wars' that you seem to be stuck in as well, What The Hey. For if you think all this such a waste of time, ....... why are you still here?

Face it, chief. The well hidden but abusive crap from your precioussss leader VPW has risen to the surface, and there is nothing you can do to hide it again. Or to effectively deny it.

:nono5:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't takes revelation as much as it takes the proper training. Anyone who has been properly trained can pretty much accomplish the same thing. For example, CES has a much better work of disproving the doctrine of the Trinity in their book "One God and One Lord" than the original book "JCING" published by TWI. I agree. Without VPW's initial contribution, CES's book: "One God & One Lord" would likely never have made manuscript form, much less would we see a book that even made it to press - or a book ex-TWI members would ever consider purchasing and owning.
I'm not sure about that last line. It absolutely does not apply to me. But that's neither here nor there.

I actually agree with what you said here, WTH. I think CES did a bangup job with that book, and they wouldn't have had it not been for JCING. Are there flaws with CES's book? I think so. But there are good points as well.

One of my beefs with the CES book is that JCING is not in the bibliography (I'm going to check again to make sure I am not mistaken). JCING belongs in the bibliography of that book.

The only reason why some people believe it has gone completely the opposite direction is because (as aptly said in episode IV of Star Wars) all this pointless bikering is getting us no-where. The VPW antagonists and their: "Sermon on Mount Plagarism" makes up a small portion of all that "pointless bickering getting us nowhere" and is the main reason why some people are still stuck in the same lousy episode of "TWI-Wars".

This, of course, I disagree with entirely. It's self-serving and stupid. Why are people who are trying to grow in their knowledge of scripture "bickering," while idolatrous sycophants who have no desire to grow beyond the limited perspective of a lecherous plagiarist held to no account whatsoever?

Please. If you ever decide to grow beyond PFAL, there are plenty of genuine Christians who'd love to help you see a more excellent way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my beefs with the CES book is that JCING is not in the bibliography (I'm going to check again to make sure I am not mistaken). JCING belongs in the bibliography of that book.

Raf -- just looked at my copy of OGOL by CES.

Bibliography starts on page 639, and goes to page 644.

No mention of JCING.

David

(Ps. -- for those that do not know ------

OGOL = One God One Lord

by: Graeser, Lynn, and Schoenheit.)

Edited by dmiller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that's just dishonest. Isn't one of the chapters of OGOL called "The Man-Man's Redeemer"?

You've SUNK when you're plagiarizing Wierwille. :)

By the way, did anyone have trouble following JCOPS, with all those footnotes and references to other books, including the book by Ernest Martin that beat Wierwille to the punch on Sept. 11, 3 B.C.?

I'm just curious, because I've been told footnotes are a distraction. Meanwhile, I've never heard anyone accuse VPW of plagiarizing Ernest Martin (because he didn't).

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've only asserted that academic style footnotes would be a distraction to new students in the more elementary books. I was not distracted by JCOP footnotes. In my very early years (and especially early months) in the Word I would have been distracted, if "The Bible Tells Me So" had been needlessly clogged with footnotes. I still am glad footnotes are not in that book and the others.

This whole thing of insisting that standards of the academic and commercial markets be applied to the Way of a Father with His family is stupid, inefficient, and failing to recognize the TRUE owner of the ideas, the words, the message, and the logos. God gave revelation to Styles, Bullinger, Leonard, and many others who taught Dr and God gave Dr the revelation as to how to piece it all together for us.

I see the whole process as a team effort on the spiritual level, which is eternal. On the human level, which is collapsing to nothingness along with all the second heaven and earth, it’s not worth even bothering with trying to figure it out and dispense justice as a vigilante court for writers who didn’t even ask for help. Besides, who here has even tried to see where Styles got his material from, where Kenyon got his? Anyone? It may have been a similar process as Dr used, stretching back centuries. God is the owner of all truth. All words that explain and declare God accurately belong to Him.

If this is not true, what I just stated, then all the plagiarism charges are valid. HOWEVER, if PFAL and it’s HUMAN sourced elements are ultimately of and from God, then there are a lot of people here who will be answering to charges themselves some day. Place your bets knowing the EVERYTHING is riding on it.

Edited by Mike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whole debate about the accuracy of God’s Word still amazes me.

We talk about where we can find God’s Word, where the accuracy of it lies, what gives it its authority. There is one point that is repeatedly ignored, I’ll make that point shortly but I want to ask a question before I make it.

Were the scriptures that Jesus Christ quoted originals?

The scriptures he himself spoke of and quoted, were these the originals? He quotes the scriptures in many situations. How about Luke 4:17-19? When he read from Isaiah chapter 61, was he reading from the original document? How about when he quoted Deuteronomy to the devil in the wilderness, what original document was he quoting from? Did he even have a document with him, or did he just know the scriptures that well that he could quote them. Did he quote the words verbatim? How did he know if they were verbatim or did he speak that which God gave him with the authority God gave him to speak them. Once again, what gives God’s Word its accuracy, or more important what gives it its authority?

If it’s true that the devil has done his utmost to hide, disprove and utterly destroy God’s Word over the last 2,000 years or so what did he do to them in the Old Testament? It’s pretty clear that God’s Word was all but lost on a number of occasions. It says in Jeremiah 15:16 “Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O LORD God of hosts.” God’s Word was buried in the ruins of the temple.

Satan’s ability to wrack and ruin the world had no restraints in the Old Testament, at least with the coming of Christ he can be rebuked. If his nature is to destroy God’s Word what did he do to it in the Old Testament? If we base our dubiousness on what the devil has done to the scriptures over the last 2 millennium then logic dictates we should be equally dubious about what he did to it in the time between Adam and the Gospels.

And yet, Jesus Christ himself commented on searching those scriptures. John 5:39 –

“Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.” (KJV).

Does the truth of this change if we read it in the NSV?

"You search the scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that testify on my behalf.”

How about the ESV?

“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me,”

Weymouth is particularly insightful.

“You search the Scriptures, because you suppose that in them you will find the Life of the Ages; and it is those Scriptures that yield testimony concerning me;”

It's interesting to note that Jesus Christ was actually being critical of his audience when he commented on their searching of the scriptures. He was making the point that these men thought they would have salvation through the exercise of study, and yet they missed the real point of those scriptures, him. Nicodemus had a similar problem in John 3. Many today also have this problem.

Which scriptures were Jesus Christ declaring when he said they testify of him? Were they the originals? Were they utterly without error? Were they translated perfectly in every page and word? Were they complete? Were the documents they had in the temple at this time all the documents God had revealed over the thousands of years that God had been giving his Word to holy men? Remember - the temple was tended by the priests, high priests and Pharisees that demanded the execution of Jesus Christ. Was God’s Word kept and translated in a Godly manner by these men who Jesus Christ said were of their father - the devil?

Over and over again the point is the same, that Jesus Christ gets revealed when God’s Word is revealed. Is John 10:10 now given authority because VPW taught and revealed it in PFAL? How about Romans 10:9-10? John 3:16? Ephesians? Thessalonians? What about the record above, just because VPW taught and wrote it in this day and time does that now give it authority? No this puts the cart before the horse.

All of God’s Word has authority because of who it reveals, Jesus Christ. If Jesus Christ is not revealed and glorified then we do not have God’s Word. Is Romans 10:9-10 unreliable? Or is it only reliable when rewritten in PFAL? There is one man who has given us God’s Word in this day and time, Jesus Christ, and he’s still living.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[WordWolf in boldface & brackets.]

I've only asserted that academic style footnotes would be a distraction to new students in the more elementary books. I was not distracted by JCOP footnotes. In my very early years (and especially early months) in the Word I would have been distracted, if "The Bible Tells Me So" had been needlessly clogged with footnotes. I still am glad footnotes are not in that book and the others.

["Needlessly clogged with footnotes."

Most NORMAL books with footnotes are not "needlessly clogged"

with them. Most people have no difficulty reading books with footnotes.

And any writer concerned with them can do what Woodrow did with

"Babylon Mystery Religion" and "the Babylon Connection" and put them in his

endnotes. Nobody ever claimed those books were hard to read.

So, footnotes do not "clog"-hair clogs, and it clogs a drain.

Finally, footnotes are not "needless"-they're legally required.]

This whole thing of insisting that standards of the academic and commercial markets be applied to the Way of a Father with His family is stupid, inefficient, and failing to recognize the TRUE owner of the ideas, the words, the message, and the logos.

[This whole thing of vpw slapping copyrights on all "his" books when

just got finished ripping them off of other writers who HAD copyrights

was hypocritical. IF it had been a "family" thing, he would have left

off the copyrights. It's not like these things were marketed outside

twi-they were circulated solely among innies. Insisting vpw was

entitled to copyrights he so flagrantly DISregarded in others

is foolish and idolatry.

Ok, it's the RESULT of idolatry, not the idolatry ITSELF.]

God gave revelation to Styles, Bullinger, Leonard, and many others who taught Dr and God gave Dr the revelation as to how to piece it all together for us.

[According to you,

that's why vpw did all that.

His actions belie his reasons.]

I see the whole process as a team effort on the spiritual level, which is eternal. On the human level, which is collapsing to nothingness along with all the second heaven and earth, it’s not worth even bothering with trying to figure it out and dispense justice as a vigilante court for writers who didn’t even ask for help.

[You see all sorts of things, and miss all sorts of things.]

Besides, who here has even tried to see where Styles got his material from, where Kenyon got his?

[Actually, Stiles really WAS an original, which is why he was

heavier on PRACTICAL than on books.

Here comes another attempt to suggest OTHER writers plagiarized their work...]

Anyone? It may have been a similar process as Dr used, stretching back centuries.

[Or a purple dinosaur may have appeared, with the manuscript in his mouth.

So long as we're making WILD SPECULATION, let's be fun about it!]

God is the owner of all truth. All words that explain and declare God accurately belong to Him.

[but if someone had plagiarized vpw and he found out, man, he'd

have done everything in his power to stop them. He considered himself

entitled to sole "authorship".]

If this is not true, what I just stated, then all the plagiarism charges are valid.

[specious reasoning.

vpw went out of his way to present the work of others as HIS work,

not GOD's work. HE was "THE TEACHER",

even when he photocopied Leonard's class entirely.

vpw deliberately set out to deceive others, and most of them were

either dead or didn't hear about it.]

HOWEVER, if PFAL and it’s HUMAN sourced elements are ultimately of and from God, then there are a lot of people here who will be answering to charges themselves some day. Place your bets knowing the EVERYTHING is riding on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, WW, the bet concerns the God-breathed status of the PFAL writings, not the plagiarism charges. If they are of God, then all plagiarism is off.

It doesn't work in reverse, though. You can't logically charge plagiarism and then say that proves the writings are NOT God-breathed. To charge plagiarism you must first assume they are NOT God-breathed, so if that assumption is wrong so are the charges.

If they are God-breathed, that negates the ownership of the words as you presently perceive it, and hence the charges are void.

***

Raf, since you insist on telling God what He can and can't do then why would you even want to BE in a heaven where you CAN'T be the one in charge?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a fairly safe bet, considering the evidence is right there for anyone whose conscience is not seared with a hot idol.

Mike, I do not tell God what he can and can't do. I listen to him say what He will and won't do. When he said Thou Shalt Not Steal, I took Him at His Word. You didn't, and that's okay, because your faith is not in God, it's in a flawed man.

Anyway, back to topic...

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

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...