T-Bone

I think we can shorten the discussion by just getting right to the heart of the matter; two notable scholars F.F. Bruce and Sir Frederic Kenyon – both with expertise in the historical reliability of the New Testament have stated that very little has been lost as to what was originally written in the New Testament docs, in The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? by FF Bruce... it says on pages 14 and 15: “The study of the kind of attestation found in MSS and quotations in later writers is connected with the approach known as Textual Criticism. This is a most important and fascinating branch of study, its object being to determine as exactly as possible from the available evidence the original words of the documents in question. It is easily proved by experiment that it is difficult to copy out a passage of any considerable length without making one or two slips at least. When we have documents like our New Testament writings copied and recopied thousands of times, the scope for copyists’ errors is so enormously increased that it is surprising there are no more than there actually are. Fortunately, if the great number of MSS increases the number of scribal errors, it increases proportionately the means of correcting such errors, so that the margin of doubt left in the process of recovering the exact original wording is not so large as might be feared; it is in truth remarkably small. The variant readings about which any doubt remains among textual critics of the New Testament affect no material question of historic fact or of Christian faith and practice. To sum up, we may quote the verdict of the late Sir Frederic Kenyon, a scholar whose authority to make pronouncements on ancient MSS was second to none: ‘The Interval then between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.’ “ == == == == == Bruce’s point is simple – with the increase of hand-copies comes the possibility of scribal errors – but that also means you have that many more “witnesses” as to what was originally said. And another thing to consider is what type of scribal errors occurred. Was a word misspelled, or repeated or transposed, etc. - - these would be easy to spot and corrected by comparing other copies... It appears wierwille is somewhat removed from analyzing the actual texts that are still in existence; in the PFAL book, page 128 in chapter 11, “The Translations of the Word of God”, wierwille states: “Since we have no originals and the oldest manuscripts that we have date back to the fifth century A.D., how can we get back to the authentic prophecy which was given when holy men of God spoke? To get the Word of God out of any translation or out of any version, we have to compare one word with another and one verse with another verse. We have to study the context of all verses.” == == == == == I see two issues with wierwille’s approach: First: He’s off by about a century and a half on the oldest manuscripts in existence – Bruce notes on page 10 of his book that there are in existence over 5,000 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament in whole or in part and that the best and most important of these go back to somewhere about AD 350. Second: wierwille is not comparing Greek manuscripts – instead he is comparing translations or versions of the Bible! That’s like playing the telephone game - the first person states a message and by the time it goes through a whole line of people the message might sound somewhat different from the original. wierwille is at the end of the line - comparing how one translator interprets a phrase in the Greek to how another translator handles the same phrase. Frankly I don’t have much faith in wierwille’s ability to see beyond his own doctrinal preferences to note differences or similarities in translations since he would come up with goofy phrases that blurred variations like “all without exception” and “all without distinction” – which is the same thing. == == == == == Here are multiple challenges: First challenge: how can wierwille claim he can get back to the authentic prophecy when it was first given if he is only looking at translations and versions instead of the manuscripts written in the original biblical languages? In my humble opinion, it is doubtful wierwille was even competent to read and understand any of the biblical languages anyway. Second challenge: what standard or criteria are you using to declare that the KJV or other translations lack validity and authority in matters of the Christian faith? Third challenge: specifically what errors are there in the KJV - or in other translations, for that matter - that need to be addressed because it is mission critical to the church and/or one’s Christian faith? Or to put it another way - what errors does your manifesto confront and resolve to make your unique creed a better version of Christianity? Fourth challenge: How is PFAL God-breathed if all wierwille did to put it together was just supposedly compare translations /versions …oh and plagiarize the work of others too? Fifth challenge: If God’s breath gave life to scripture (II Timothy 3:16) and in a way that represents an extension of God himself then doesn’t that make God a liar and thief if you believe that a bundle of plagiarized material (aka PFAL) is God-breathed?

Mike, you’ve used interchangeably the words “thesis” (a theory put forward as a premise to be proved) and “manifesto” (a published declaration of intentions, motives or views of the issuer; when related to religious matters it’s referred to as a creed). Whether it’s a manifesto or a thesis - I think you have some more research to do; I think your complaints in this post are groundless when you ignore specific questions and challenges to many of the points in your thesis / manifesto ; if you’re referring to a post of mine as pouncing on you - you make it sound like you’re an innocent victim - but what I was doing was calling BS on you forwarding false assumptions about the corps program - something you have openly admitted you’ve never experienced; I also challenged you on the false dilemma you forwarded over the KJV and other translations as lacking validity or authority in matters of faith because they’re not the original first-edition documents from the Almighty’s publishing company. Mike, have you ever given much thought as to why wierwille’s books, teachings, etc. never gained much traction outside of TWI? In my humble opinion, it’s because wierwille’s shoddy workmanship, blatant plagiarism, and gross incompetence would NOT survive the close scrutiny, peer review and academic standards of the real world. The only way he could get his stuff to fly the friendly skies of fandom - was by persuading followers to buy into his delusion of greatness. If any folks didn’t “get” his message or see his greatness they are labeled critics, unbelievers, possessed, stupid... or whatever fit the bill to counter attacks on his ministry ...whenever those rank unbelievers “pounced” on him.

I had a 1967 Chevy Malibu – sort of a gold/copper-ish appliance color with a black vinyl roof; my brother was a motor-head and he had that little baby tuned to a very responsive gas pedal…trunk was just big enough to haul my Fender bass amp to practice and gigs…When Soul Makossa came on the radio I would tap out the rhythm of the words with my gas pedal…”mama ko mama sa maka makoosa” ….now in Chevy Malibu-ese it sounds like "vroo vroo vroom vroo vroo vroom vroo vroo vroo vroo vroooom"…yeah you guitarists can brag all you want about your wah wah pedals - - but my finely tuned “instrument” had a gas pedal.

True Waysider......but for those who need a sign - maybe you could also claim there was an inverted snowstorm in July...similar to Forrest Gump’s experience in Vietnam “sometimes the rain even seemed to come straight up”

I get that...actually I was just fascinated that she was WOW, corps and pro-PFAL and yet from Mike’s version of the story - at the conclusion she seemed to have had the same reaction to Mike’s spiel as the folks on Grease Spot... that just struck me as extremely funny....oh I’m sorry - was that story meant to bolster his thesis? ....my bad...maybe I “should have read it in the original”.

I would really like to hear her version of the story

Mike, actually the way corps motto came from the gospels - during Jesus’ temptations in the wilderness, his reply to the devil began with “it is written” By that phrase Jesus was obviously referring to something specifically noted in a certain text...to OT passages applicable to the situations presented by the devil. So what specific errors are you alluding to? to me it seems that Jesus' use of the OT scriptures was perfect...I don't see any contradictions...misapplications...or that there's anything missing from the accounts. Do you mean you don’t think Jesus’ response was adequate to thwart the devil’s temptations? So what do you mean "it is written with flaws"? I've heard wierwille teach on the temptations of Jesus several times and he NEVER addressed any textual errors in the KJV - and the KJV was all he used for those teachings. You’ve got my curiosity up now- - - could you please provide a detailed list of “the flaws” in the KJV passages used in the corps program as well as the reason why they should not be considered “God’s Word” ....and also could you explain why there wasn’t a disclaimer issued to that effect in any corps material we studied (for example: “this isn’t God’s Word but the reason we quote from it is because this is the only thing currently available ”) Or better yet WHY didn’t wierwille just use his own translation all the time? like those literal translation according to usage...I wouldn't trust those now - especially after reading "Undertow" and Penworks' account of how wierwille pressured the research department to kowtow to his doctrinal preferences. Seems like a clunky or precarious way to communicate or teach God’s Word if there’s yet another undefined step to truly understand a different meaning from KJV ...I mean wierwille used KJV to provide “retemories” to support way corps principles, besides the fact that it’s almost exclusively the only version quoted in PFAL - - - so how are all the passages he quoted NOT Gods Word? sorry to ask so many questions but it does seem odd to me that you say you're really into PFAL as being uniquely the God-breathed word and so critical of what the corps program was all about - yet you never were in the corps program. I was in the corps program and I can tell you flat out – it was all about PFAL… and wierwille, as well as the entire faculty used the KJV in their teachings; and often that (the KJV) was referred to as “the word” or “God’s word”. And I don't recall a whole bunch of text corrections as being a big part of the curriculum - or any part for that matter. I mean, even in teachings for the general public we’ve all heard TWI-teachers announce “I’m going to teach on what God’s word says about finances” and then they open up their KJV bible and start teaching. anyone can say that they’re going to share the word of God on a particular subject from any number of decent translations available – but I think the more critical thing to consider is whether or not they’re handling the word of God deceitfully...that's a fascinating point mentioned in II Corinthians 4:2 - "not handling the word of God deceitfully" - so it is possible to have in your possession the word of God and yet by your preaching or teaching you can use it deceitfully...wierwille's smoke and mirrors led people to believe he was going for the original text - - but in reality he was altering the intent of a passage. ...and that's why I am suspicious of anything wierwille taught and why I have nothing to do with PFAL and TWI. wierwille and company have a proven track record of being consummate hypocrites and have mastered the art of being crazy-smart-deceitful...in the corps, we learned "the word" alright - really it was wierwille's skewed interpretation of the word of God. …Mike, I suspect you may have allowed some logical fallacies perpetrated by wierwille to cloud your ability to think clearly. How can you discount the KJV or any reputable translation as not being God’s word? What bearing does PFAL have on the great doctrines of the church? I asked you this earlier in another post but I’ll bring it up again. what great impact would PFAL have to the Christian faith? what difference would it make to a Christian who already follows the Bible as his only rule for faith and practice? I tend to think wierwille presented a false dilemma with his rhetoric of having to "get back to the original God-breathed word" - almost like how a shell game is used to perpetrate fraud; "where are you going to find the word? is it in that denomination, or from that minister? no, I (wierwille) have it right here because I'm the only one who really knows how to rightly divide the word". he made it sound so scholarly how "we have to compare texts"...i have over 40 different versions of the Bible in book form - a lot more if you count the eBooks and Bible apps I have on devices...taking into account the different types of translation used (dynamic equivalence, literal, paraphrase, etc.) I am hard pressed to find any major or even minor theological shifts due to a variation in the text... but wierwille had lots of people going with his shell game - you have to trust him to show you how the text should be understood....you even admitted this in an earlier post - when you referred to wierwille's writings as more along the lines of commentaries...I suggest you get into some commentaries by scholars who are honest and don't have a hidden agenda...if you're interested I can make a few recommendations. and to me there is something very deceitful about giving folks the idea that "this is what it should read in the original text" - when all he was doing was throwing a lot of weight into his own interpretation. honestly - wierwille was not about getting back to the original God-breathed word - it was all about him manipulating folks to get on board with what he thought the Bible should say, plain and simple. And he would often refer to this as "the word", "God's Word", "the original God-breathed word"...what a fraud ! what a liar ! wierwille was an incompetent plagiarist...he stole Bullinger's work on the keys to the interpretation of the Bible but wierwille's conclusion differed from Bullinger's in a dramatic way. The text they both referred to was II Peter 1:20 knowing this first no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation...Bullinger emphasized the genitive of origin - i.e. no scripture originated by private interpretation or one's own ideas...wierwille twisted it - to infer that no scripture may be privately interpreted - and then forwarded the idea that the Bible must interpret itself - which is a totally preposterous ! And another thing, how can anyone trust wierwille's interpretation of a passage or how the original text should read in the Greek text when he lied about taking any Greek classes through Moody Bible School correspondence courses...he said he did...but it's a matter of public record that he never took any of their courses. what a liar! What a fraud! so deceitful!

Mike, I think this is critical to presenting your thesis here; you can provide the link but I would think if this is indeed the basis for your theology then you should be able to quote them here; i mean if someone asked me for biblical info about my belief in Jesus Christ I could quote tons of verses for them...if this is so important to your belief system you should know it and be able to quote it.

(please note: i deleted this post - had problems in formatting - but re-posted it properly on the next page)

Well, so much for my questions then...

Mike , I understand wanting to reconstruct the original text of scripture hot off of God’s breath - or for someone like you seeking a new God-breathed text — - but I was wondering exactly what great impact it would have to the Christian faith ... ....or perhaps I should rephrase the question - what difference would it make to a Christian who already follows the Bible as his own rule for faith and practice?

I understand what you’re saying - but I don’t think that (“the greatest secret ...finished PFAL”) can be a legitimate inference from the way it’s stated in the PFAL book... and to answer your question concerning the basis for the way corps motto - all “retemories” for the way corps principles as well as any teachings to the corps used the KJV in English.

Mike I really appreciate your responses to our questions; I’m kinda getting an idea of your rule for faith and practice.

Hey Mike, this is related to what Waysider asked and I too apologize in advance if I’ve misconstrued anything- that is not my intent: If PFAL takes the place of the scriptures as the only thing currently that is God-breathed, then are we to assume that any any passages of the Bible NOT referenced in PFAL can be disregarded?

Hmmmm...control-freak, likes to intimidate others, sullen look on her face all the time...yup, she’s Corps. Moderators, might want to think about moving this to open forum.

ya know...I'm an old city boy and don't know my trees very well...but I must say - that is one fine piece of ash.

Excellent proposal , Chockfull…I’ve been stuck in a very linear thought process of scripture - - with all the records of generations, ornamental trappings of the temple, ceremonial procedures, the book of Numbers, genealogies, Young’s Analytical Concordance, teachings on the Red Thread…the best that I could come up with was Listerine.

now let's think this through - for starters, I wonder what mouthwash he would use.

Mike, in my opinion, these are some of your best posts of late – because it seems to me you are making an effort to be honest. I may totally disagree with someone on a certain point – but I can understand and respect their viewpoint if they walk me through their thinking process on how they got to that point…I think we all have taken interesting journeys through TWI and beyond. I often think my belief system is like a Turducken we’ve had that a few times for the holidays - - mmmmm sumptuous …a blend of so many flavors and spices…I’m no chef - so if someone didn’t tell me how it was made I would not be able to deconstruct it to figure out how they came up with that…sort of like the riddle-wrapped-in-a-mystery-inside-an-enigma thing (Winston Churchill used that phrase to express his inability to predict what Russia would do during WWII)… …But I’m speaking in reference to my own belief system…it’s a mix of many experiences, contradictions, emotions, etc.…and sometimes manifests itself in unpredictable ways…sometimes I am a mystery to myself - - where was I ?...oh yeah... being raised in a Christian home I believed in a Creator ever since I was a child…did a lot of searching like you did…got involved with TWI for 12 years - thought my searching was over…”the journey” was complete… but experiences proved my “odyssey” was incomplete with TWI being a long and arduous detour…my journey continues…I still believe there is a Creator…I enjoy reading the Bible…I believe all scripture is God-breathed – but what does that mean? I believe that it is unique documents written by imperfect people inspired by the Creator; my definition may vary quite differently than other folks' definition of God-breathed…when it comes to Bible study I look for the interpretation and application of scripture that stay true to the text and natural sense of the passage. That has bearing on this thread, by the way – in that one of the reasons I left TWI was that wierwille through semantic shenanigans had a tendency to stray from what was actually written and the natural sense of scripture. I cannot prove there is a Creator…I cannot prove that scripture is God-breathed…I cannot prove that my interpretation of scripture is correct…but I can say unequivocally that for me the scriptures resonate with the heart of the Creator. sorry to go on for so long about me...just trying to give an example of walking someone through my thought process on God-breathed...have a nice day

Yes – I would probably alert the media that a leopard can change its spots. How big are those files? Are we talking 20…30…50 pages of threads with a whole lot of your posts just dodging and ignoring the questions? Actually no need to make like it takes some herculean effort to find those files - I'm familiar with that ruse...A simple, straight forward answer would suffice....You should be able to do that if you know your stuff like you say you do.

So_crates, that's a tough break, man - - my thoughts and prayers are with you

now we're talking - she was one of my favorite characters on Star Trek: Voyager !

Interesting thread So_crates ! Is PFAL god-breathed? I believe wierwille very subtly suggested just that in the PFAL book. On page 83 of the PFAL book in the chapter “That Man May Be Perfect” wierwille states: “…Let’s see this from John 5:39. “Search the Scriptures…” It does not say search Shakespeare or Kant or Plato or Aristotle or V.P. Wierwille’s writings or the writings of a denomination. No it says, “Search the scriptures…” because all Scripture is God-breathed. Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; not what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures – they are God-breathed.” wierwille makes several insinuations here. First off, he suggests that not ALL that wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; that implies SOME of it is…secondly wierwille is not as generous with conferring the God-breathed status on others. For example - he does NOT say “not all what Calvin said was necessarily God-breathed, nor all that Luther said…& etc.” Rather he simply states “not what Calvin said, nor Luther…”which suggests that none of their writings are God-breathed whereas at least some of wierwille’s writings are God-breathed. Another treacherous aspect of wierwille’s statement is the lack of specificity…WHAT parts of his writings ARE God-breathed? Perhaps it might have helped if he issued a red letter edition of the PFAL books – like Bibles with the words of Christ in red…This way when students needed a shot of the god-breathed wierwille – they could just go their red letter edition of a PFAL book and find exactly the passage of wierwille that was god-breathed. Now let’s see what a little wierwille-style-vagary does to II Timothy 3:16 using the NIV: Not all of Scripture is God-breathed but what part is God-breathed – is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness... Naw…I don’t like it…I’m really gonna have to apply myself to find the god-breathed stuff.

No I don’t Someone here once talked about devoted TWI-followers as being like the Borg with the hive-mind and that “resistance is futile” argumentative attitude…wonder what life would be like for a single Borg disconnected from the hive-mind.

It's not really a matter of finding any value in what Mike says…and I am aware of his “bait” tactic as you so eloquently pointed out on the legacy/who writes the book thread…I use Mike’s ultra-wierwille-centric monologues as a springboard that lends impetus to critical thinking…as I’ve said on other threads – I post in the hope that newcomers to Grease Spot and those still in TWI will mull over the way folks dissect the twisted and distorted doctrine and practice of TWI and all things wierwille…I think DWBH also said something along those lines on the legacy/who writes the book thread. Some folks like watching surgical operations on TV, like my wife….not me – I’m squeamish…but I do enjoy reading comments of folks with critical thinking in high gear…which lately in my humble opinion has been folks OTHER THAN MIKE on the legacy/who writes the book thread.