All Activity

The line about the travesty of a mockery of 2 travesties of a sham is going to stay with me for the rest of my life. That was quite a courtroom scene. The strawberry line didn't stay with me, but the farm and the giant food always will. Nice to see a new variation on "slipping on a banana peel." It's easy to slip on a banana peel when the peel is from a banana that's bigger than a human, and you're being chased!

35 seasons. 8 other versions, not counting overseas airings of the US version. (It airs here sometimes, I expect it airs other places, also.) You really have ignored it a lot. Although, in fairness, I used to ignore it. I've watched most of the seasons now with my family.

In case there's any doubt, "Christian Training Centers of Texas" is the "CTC of Texas" to which I refer. Again, as of right this moment, their website is down, but it looks to me like a temporary thing.

Wierwille took B.G. Leonard's definitions. Initially, he copied them word-for-word, but he quickly began changing the wording, making them more ponderous and less obviously plagiarized. (They were STILL plagiarized because changing the wording of something you plagiarized doesn't change how stolen it is, nor does it make this any less intentional. What it does is hide your tracks, and prove you knew it was wrong but tried to hide your sin and crime from others.) Since vpw didn't really understand Leonard's definitions, his changes didn't necessarily improve them in any way. He had a technical, intellectual understanding of them, it that. What he did NOT have was a practical understanding. So, he repeated what other people said who DID have a practical understanding. This strongly suggests that he'd heard all about them but had never EXPERIENCED them. In other words, in these subjects, he was a FRAUD, a FAKE, who PRETENDED he had done these things but had never performed any of them. Otherwise, he would have understood them better and have had first-hand knowledge of them other than observing other people. Furthermore, his technical understanding of them- that is, his understanding of them based on description and the words of those who had performed them- was not deep. Otherwise, when he made changes, he would have actually made the definitions clearer rather than simply making them more multisyllabic and sesquipedalian. What those accomplished was to hide the plagiarism better (it was still plagiarism) and to make it sound more as if he knew what he was talking about by pretending to make them more scholarly-sounding. All of this suggests strongly that a heavy study of what wierwille wrote and said on the subject won't bring you any closer than a cursory study of what he said. If there really is such a thing as an "expert" on this, it would be the late B.G. Leonard, who taught lots of people on this subject, and whom wierwille shamelessly plagiarized at great length. Right this moment, it seems as if the website for "CTC of Texas" is down, but that would be the place to look. His "Gifts of the Spirit" class- still available on recording, if I understand correctly- is what wierwille plagiarized in its entirety when he presented "his" class on "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today." Word for word, this class was the same as Leonard's class. He taught it a few months after taking Leonard's class. It had no syllabus and no charts other than a blackboard. When he taught that class, he asked Leonard permission to reteach Leonard's class one time locally since Leonard could not be everywhere. Leonard agreed. What vpw told the class was, that this was vpw's class, and gave it a different name. At the end, he took a class photo and mailed it to Leonard, who considered the matter closed at the time. vpw then continued to teach the same class, never telling Leonard, continuing to plagiarize Leonard, and continuing to claim he himself was the sole originator of that class. Later, he padded it out with more material from Leonard's other classes, and with J.E. Stiles' book "GIfts of the Holy Spirit", material from E.W. Bullinger (like "How to Enjoy the Bible) and changed more phrasings, and added more stories, eventually constructing the 3 PFAL classes from plagiarizing those sources and hiding his actions by rearranging the contents. By doing this all locally, and avoiding all official notice, he was able to hide how completely "his" class ripped off his sources. (Anyone who doubts this can check a copy of Bullinger's book, and see how much of sessions 5-8 are lifted directly from "How to Enjoy the Bible.") Wierwille ripped off some other books of Bullinger. If you look at the list of all the references to "holy spirit" in the Bible, you look at something lifted directly from Bullinger's book on the Spirit. (And so on, and so on.) Some people claim- completely erroneously- that what vpw did was plagiarism. By any sensible definition of plagiarism, it was plagiarism. He knew it was wrong- they'd said so in school, and he'd gone to actual schools all the way through getting his Master's degree. He tried to hide what he'd done, so we know he was aware of it. We know he claimed he was the sole source in the class and in the books of the class. Dissenting voices claim that his occasional comments on tape when not in the classes of learning from other people count as properly citing his sources. if he'd meant it, he would have failed pitifully to have accomplished this. However, he never claimed anything of the kind. He claimed he learned from other people, then worked it on his own, "and got the error out." When we all study, we all learn from other people, but we don't all plagiarize. Furthermore, if you find, somehow, a copy of the book, "the Way-Living in Love", buried somewhere about a hundred pages in is a passing comment he made that "nothing I teach is original" and that the original part was "putting together" the class. Supposedly, this also counts as citing his sources. Again, this is a pitiful attempt to smokescreen the issue. vpw meant for everyone to think he'd learned some things from other people, then went off and completely reworked what they taught, with God Almighty at his shoulder, and the result was what was in the classes. He implied as much all through the classes, he insinuated as much all through the classes. He gave himself some wiggle-room to allow for plausible deniability. That way, if he was caught, he could back-pedal and pretend he never meant for us to believe he really did that. Ever hear vpw was a basketball player on the Sheboygan Redskins? Well, technically, vpw INSINUATED he played on the team. His exact wording was he was "INVOLVED WITH" them. People all came away with the idea that he claimed he was a player. A check of the complete list of players that ever played for the team showed his name was missing. In other words, he never played for them. But he would have claimed- if anyone had caught him- that he never said he did. What he did was phrase things DECEPTIVELY to get people to believe he had said so outright, but he left himself an out. That's the kind of behavior one sees from a serial liar, from someone who is a complete fraud from start to finish, from someone who spends all his time deceiving people. He was caught lying occasionally, and his back-pedals were fascinating, and at least one has been documented and discussed here and elsewhere. So, all of that is to say, if there's anything to learn on the subject, look up B.G. Leonard, look up his "GIfts of the Spirit" class, and look up his books. When the CTC of Texas website is back up, look at them, also.

Not so sure about that. As an "International," the way I use a knife and fork are very different from the way Americans use these utensils. Dorothy always said that we should keep our own "national" table manners, and eat appropriately - but neatly! We Internationals weren't encouraged to eat American-style.

I was mistaken. The Amazing Race is actually on CBS. There was an episode this evening. George

Wierwille took all these definitions, line by line and word for word, from another source. (Leonard, perhaps?) If you try to put this stuff into practice, one of three things is going to happen. One: You'll delude yourself into believing they actually work. Two: You'll feel ashamed and embarrassed you're the only one who doesn't quite "get it". Three: You'll come to the conclusion it was all a bunch of nonsense all along.

He might put them in the lockbox, but he'll pretend to pull them out of "daddy's cookie jar".

I'm not at all surprised some "HQ guys" interpreted it that way. When we used it in FellowLaborers. however, that is not at all the message we were expected to draw from it. In fact, it was just the opposite. We were to adapt to other cultures, not expect them to adapt to us. If you're at an event where it's common practice for everyone to eat with their fingers, you should do the same to put others at ease, adapt a "when in Rome" sort of attitude.

“In our study, narcissistic children also felt more comfortable leading peers with low self-esteem.“ Easy prey. How can an NPD, finding himself dumbstruck at his good fortune of amassing such a large group of followers, find the most vulnerable among them? He might mandate his dupes to each write an autobiographic confession of their lives. Their personal histories will be safe in the lockbox. They could mail them to: The Teacher, P.O. Box… ** Never, ever, tell a narc a secret. NEVER. EVER.

Since we KNOW... or recognize a consensus that Victor Wierwille was a malignant narcissist, I found this article particularly intriguing. I put it in the OPEN forum because it's not about TWI. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-narcissists-emerge-as-leaders-even-in-childhood/ probably not behind a paywall. Many children choose to follow peers with more narcissistic tendencies—and self-esteem may be part of the complex power dynamics involved Narcissistic leaders both fascinate and repel us. They can be charming, act assertively and articulate visions that may inspire confidence, especially in times of uncertainty. This can attract many followers. In 1931 Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, echoed this belief: “[Narcissists] impress others as being ‘personalities’; they are especially suited to act as a support for others, to take on the role of leaders and to give a fresh stimulus to cultural development or to damage the established state of affairs.” But narcissists famously have a dark side as well that includes unethical, autocratic and aggressive behavior. They often stifle collaboration and dismiss expert advice. Given those trade-offs, why do narcissists often end up in positions of leadership, and who is drawn to them? (much more)

Yes. But since I started the thread, I am not bothered about it.

I've seen a couple of the movies, but no common actor coming to mind (yet). George

AKA Woody Allen. Correct. First quote from "Bananas." Second from "Sleeper." Third also from "Bananas" (though I think he used almost the same line in a different flick). George

I think it shows on our local CW station, but I've ignored it so much I don't even remember seeing it. Kind of like my brain ignoring visual "floaters." George

The Hurt Locker Hail, Caesar Strange Days The Forgiven Great Expectations The Dig 28 Years Later The Menu Sunshine

Oh, and now I get it, that's him isn't it?

Oh, and now I get it, that's him isn't it?

BLANK

This is the age of machinery A mechanical nightmare The wonderful world of technology Napalm, hydrogen bombs, biological warfare

Allan Konigsberg.

That's it.

I still have that book at home. Some "HQ guys" said off the record that it was meant to "level" or "standardize" the customs/habits/patterns of believers from different countries to the "standard" of God's Word - God's Love in the "Renewed mind in manifestation".

"Mary, I'm becoming confused again, aren't I?" "Of course not." "Don't lie to me! Not you!" *** "Stop talking nonsense. I am telling you, you did not kill anyone." "Then how do you explain all this blood? WELL?"

Is there any expert/book about this? Would you recommend me or guide for that matter? I've read all TWI books and Classes and also CES,STFI books but I still feel ignorant about that topic