T-Bone

I did that for 2 years in-residence at Rome City…it was boring and it sucked…but to comment on your recommendation to see how it went after studying PFAL stuff – in my case, 2 years straight – I’ll try to be brief. In one sense (in keeping with the theme of this thread) my way corps training was a non-accredited 2-year program in theatrics with a minor in bait-and-switch. It was like going to school for the performing arts where we studied the master – no, not Shakespeare - but wierwille…although what I remember from a catholic university, I think we would probably have learned a lot more about practical matters, social interactions, and human nature if we had studied Shakespeare in Rome City instead of that PFAL nonsense. What’s the worst time to find out a strategy doesn’t work? When a crisis hits. One of the great watershed moments of TWI was the passing of wierwille. when the “great” cult-leader passed away what I saw was a ministry in complete turmoil, upper leadership vying for power, and I heard a lot of my corps saying when they get out on the field, they’re going to run PFAL classes back-to-back. Like that’s going to solve everything. Know what that tells me? The way corps – which was wierwille’s baby – was NOT about teaching people to be disciples of Christ and how to serve and shepherd the Lord’s flock…No! The way corps was really a clone factory to mass-produce mini-wierwilles! TWI only has one playbook – and it was written by wierwille. Everything flows from that: business plans, financial plans, marketing plans, operational plans, contingency plans, succession plans…and it’s all based on the egotistical / delusional musings of a pathological liar…a malignant narcissist...a thieving plagiarist…a Drambuie-guzzling-chain-smoking, abusive & exploitative sexual predator with a flair for the dramatic. And that's all rolled into one person. depending on how you slice-and-dice those attributes you'd probably come up with an alternate nine manifestations . come back to written PFAL, study nothing but those collaterals for 3 months, and see how it goes? Hell, I did that for 12 years! And how long has PFAL been around? How many other peoples’ lives, families, marriages, friends, careers, finances, physical & mental health suffered from CONTINUING to believe in the PFAL collaterals for years on end!

I write this more for other Grease Spotters who have not reevaluated fundamentalism – and just to clarify my own position – which is usually sitting on the couch and binge watching some series with my wife - in theological discussions I don’t mean to come across as hyper-critical of fundamentalism – it’s a system of thought that has SOME merit. HOWEVER, in versions like TWI there’s heavy emphasis on the authority of leadership (under the guise of “This is what the Word says” ) and the dogmatism of creeds. In that regard, it was useful to a lying, thieving, plagiarizing, glory hound, sexual predator like wierwille. As I mentioned in my post – in PFAL, wierwille USED Jesus Christ as a symbol of authority – like a seal of approved doctrine – as a fisherman would bait a hook. (which reminds me of a live teaching by wierwille when he reinterpreted Mark 1:17 of Jesus saying to his disciples “I’ll make you to become fishers of men” – wierwille changed it to “make you fishers for the great accuracy of the Word” what the fvck ?!?! )…but alas, I digress… The most negative things I’ve noticed about fundamentalism (apart from wierwille’s twisted use of it) is that adherents often seem to assume they have ownership of the ONLY CORRECT interpretation of Scripture, “disciples” often lack relevancy since they tend to be locked into the outmoded time and culture of the Bible, some fundamentalists make like it’s forbidden to think outside their theological box, and lastly fundamentalism strives to maintain ingroup and outgroup distinctions in other words divide-and-conquer, akin to us-versus-them mentality. It’s interesting to read about what many consider the foundation of modern Fundamentalism: In 1910, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church identified what became known as the five fundamentals Biblical inspiration and the infallibility of scripture as a result of this Virgin birth of Jesus Belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin Bodily resurrection of Jesus Historical reality of the miracles of Jesus From: Wikipedia: Fundamentalism I believe in those 5 fundamentals – and if I may further elaborate on “the infallibility of scripture” – it’s NOT believing in the “mathematical exactness and scientific precision” of wierwille’s bull$hit – but rather it is the belief that what the Bible says regarding matters of faith and Christian practice is wholly useful and true. It is the belief that the Bible is completely trustworthy as a guide to salvation and the life of faith and will not fail to accomplish its purpose. FYI - there's a difference between infallibility and inerrancy - although some do not see a great distinction between them - I understand infallible as being trustworthy (not like a scientific textbook but as expressing the mind of God ) see Blue Letter Bible: difference between infallible and inerrant , Logos com: infallibility vs inerrancy of Scripture ...also see Christianity com: infallibility vs inerrancy Theological Touch Points: infallibility of Scripture ...note this also touches on the four most popular theories of inspiration - when you figure out which one appeals to you - then you'll probably better understand the inerrancy / infallibility issues see my post on another thread regarding the 4 most popular theories - here . Anyway...that’s just my understanding on what “the infallibility of scripture” means – yeah it’s got some vagueness to it – not like wierwille’s “it means what it says and says what it means” – where does it say that in the Bible? And it’s pretty silly if you think about it. He is suggesting the Bible is almost like a sentient being having intent – or maybe some universal-language-document. Then why would we need linguists, historians, anthropologists, archeologists, sociologists and others to help us understand a compilation of books written a long time ago in different cultural, geographical, political, and economical settings? ~ ~ ~ ~ I got a kick out of your reference to an incident of Solomon’s wise judging in I Kings 3:16-28 . A great story of a king who first prayed to God – not for fame, not for long life, not for riches or power over his enemies – he prayed for wisdom to properly serve the people of God: Now, Lord my God, you have made your servant king in place of my father David. But I am only a little child and do not know how to carry out my duties. 8 Your servant is here among the people you have chosen, a great people, too numerous to count or number. 9 So give your servant a discerning heart to govern your people and to distinguish between right and wrong. For who is able to govern this great people of yours?” I Kings 3:7-9 Some online definitions of wisdom are the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; the quality of being wise; the soundness of an action or decision with regard to the application of experience, knowledge, and good judgment…Even just being a loving parent I can understand the rationale in Solomon’s calling for his servants to cut the child in two to satisfy the dispute over who the rightful mother was. I don’t think he intended for the order to be carried out – I think he was banking on the maternal instincts of the real mother to settle the case. and it did - the real mother did not want her child to be harmed…How unlike wierwille’s divisive tactic “when it comes to the Word – I have no friends…This _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( insert any wierwille-doctrine here ) is what the Word says – and that’s what it means .” Which really means you’re either standing with his ministry (aka God’s ministry) or you can take a hike. Instead of allowing Christians the freedom to use their cognitive skills and listen to their conscience and the influence of the Holy Spirit - wierwille pontificated on how a passage should be interpreted. Speaking of dividing a baby – that makes me think of wierwille’s screwy concept of “rightly dividing the word” he conjured up out of II Timothy 2:15 . If you click on the hyperlink I just gave you’ll note there’s other versions of “rightly dividing”. There’s “correctly handles the word of truth” “correctly explains the word of truth” “accurately handling and skillfully teaching the word of truth” “who teaches only the true message” and “straightforward dealing with the word of truth”. Ellicott’s commentary says of II Tim. 2:15 “Rightly dividing the word of truth” - Better rendered rightly laying out the word of truth. The Greek word translated in the English version “rightly dividing,” literally signifies “cutting a straight line.” It seems most correct to regard it as a metaphor from laying out a road (see Proverbs 3:6, in the LXX. rendering, where the word is so used), “or drawing a furrow, the merit of which consists in the straightness with which the work of cutting, or laying out, is performed. The word of truth is, as it were, a road which is to be laid out straightly and truly.” So Ellicott. To affirm (see Alford and Huther-Meyer) that the notion of “cutting” had been gradually lost, and that the word already in the time of St. Paul signified simply “to manage rightly,” “to treat truthfully without falsifying,” and that the exact opposite is to corrupt or adulterate the Word of God (2Corinthians 2:17), seems premature. (Comp. Eur. Rhesus, 422, ed. Dindorf.) from: Bible Hub: commentary of II Timothy 2:15 What’s the difference from the way wierwille explained it? I’m glad I asked that question. In PFAL, wierwille made a big deal out of Scripture interpreting itself. That’s screwball misconception # 1. In PFAL, he also plagiarized Bullinger’s keys to interpret the Bible – or rather mangled Bullinger’s work to give students the idea that correctly interpreting the Bible – or rather rightly dividing the Bible is always possible as long as you adhere to those keys. That’s screwball misconception # 2. TWI-followers assumed wierwille always stuck to Bullinger’s keys. But if you take off those wierwille-colored glasses and look through the PFAL books you’ll find it’s fairly easy to spot his inconsistencies – a telltale sign of an imposter using someone else’s ideas - and that’s with the help of an editing staff! And when you observe him in a live teaching setting or speaking extemporaneously his amateurism is even more apparent. Now we’re at screwball misconception # 3. Going on the sense from Ellicott’s commentary (and I gathered as much from commentaries and Study Bibles I have – but it’s easier to copy and paste from online ) of II Tim. 2:15 rightly dividing is to treat truthfully without falsifying,” and that the exact opposite is to corrupt or adulterate the Word of God, I think wierwille pulled the wool over my eyes by getting me to believe he was teaching me how to correctly interpret the Bible – when all along he was altering and misleading me (like the teaching of the 4 crucified with Christ – interesting to note THAT actually was an erroneous concept that Bullinger cooked up – and wierwille copied that one verbatim ), fabricating stories of his greatness, spewing out illogic, dubious and amoral sentiments - "As long as you love God and neighbor you can do as you full well please" . So basically falsifying, corrupting, adulterating the Word of God. weirwille was keen on laying out a CROOKED road for followers to walk in. That’s screwball deception # 4 – and how I got screwed. Isn’t that something about pseudo-Christian cult leaders – they’re like devious cartographers who not only draw up a screwy map of reality - they also try to sabotage your moral compass...weird...I was in a supposedly Bible-believing group - a Biblical research, teaching and fellowship ministry at that - and never realized how lost I was. so glad I left! ~ ~ ~ ~ I think God still answers prayer…it's okay to ask God for wisdom...clarity...but He also encourages us to exercise our cognitive skills AND besides that, there’s the validation of truth through the work of the Holy Spirit within us. There’s something to be said for a little thing called intuition. Sometimes I can figure things out by using my little old pea brain. sometimes it might be spiritual instincts – I dunno – just thinking out loud here: Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own. John 7:17 Reflect on what I am saying, for the Lord will give you insight into all this. II Timothy 2:7

Talk about an answer to prayer. Our small Twig had just decided to go door-to-door witnessing. And truth be told I always hated it because I felt like I was trying to be a pushy sales rep. Just as we were about to leave, a door-to-door salesman rang the doorbell. Since I’m the first one to get real grouchy peddling classes about God, I put my foot on his traveling sales bag so he wouldn’t get away. My brother (and assistant Twig coordinator) - realizing we were exceedingly abundantly blessed beyond belief - began to harp on the greatness of selling stuff and directed him to the roomy couch, next to the end table that was decked out in magnificent PFAL sign-up accoutrements…Thank you God. (truly a work of fiction – but based on a real nightmare of a mindset )

It may have started when I referenced WordWolf’s post on Advanced Class thread within my above post: if link doesn't work now within quoting my post here is the link to Advanced Class post WordWolf's post on Advanced Class thread

GREAT post WordWolf !

Colene was hoping to finish the traffic line on highway 26 before it started raining

when his daughter said mowing the yard wasn't something girls should do dad was determined to prove her wrong

no one is above the law but some might be under it

The Living Book of Sleep Disorders

near-death experience: about to find out your blind date is into cosplay

an understudy for Athletes of the Spirit

coincidence or double entendre? Asleep at the wheel ~ ~ ~ ~ Asleep at the wheel

Did Mom say get a hundred and ten or ten hundred?

Grandma was the only one a little concerned about the new nanny fitting in

Your II Corinthians reference got me thinking…Since wierwille leaned so heavily on fundamentalism I wonder if that strict literal interpretation of scripture was one of the factors that handicapped him in having a much broader understanding of Jesus Christ’s various roles. Fundamentalism usually emphasizes authority and fixed creeds. Modernism usually emphasizes freedom and progress in religious thought. Here's the passage in another version: So, from now on we regard no one from a human point of view [according to worldly standards and values]. Though we have known Christ from a human point of view, now we no longer know Him in this way. II Corinthians 5:16 Amplified Before Paul’s conversion he evaluated people – even Jesus Christ, by human standards. We know from scripture, THE persecutor of the Church, Saul (later called Paul) regarded Jesus as a false messiah – whose followers needed to be “taken out” ( Acts 26 ). Paul said he now knows Jesus Christ in a spiritual – or transcendent way…I’m just thinking out loud here: perhaps wierwille was so hung up on wanting to see exact temporal and spatial designations in scripture because that’s all he could relate to from a strictly human point of view. If I am here now - then I’m not there…If Jesus Christ has ascended into heaven and is now seated at the right hand of God, then he’s not here. There’s no better example to show wierwille’s misconception of spiritual matters than his Great Principle “theorem” . God who is spirit teaches his creation in you – which is now your spirit – and your spirit teaches your mind. Then it becomes manifested in the senses realm as you act. After Grease Spotters have shot so many holes in it – I like to think of it as the Grate Cheese Principle. And it’s some stinky cheese at that! someone please activate the fart fan exhaust fan. ...Here’s a quick reference - WordWolf debunks the great principle - and folks can use Grease Spots search feature to find more. wierwille was a boldfaced bull$hit artist – if God who is spirit, can only speak to what he is – which is spirit, then how in the world did he talk to Adam and Eve after the fall? I don’t think wierwille knew squat about spiritual matters, how God works, what God can do, what Jesus Christ is doing…yeah, he’s the dumb-a$$ who said in PFAL God would have to change all the laws of the universe not to accommodate your believing. I’m not saying I know much about spiritual matters – but since I left TWI, I’m no longer THAT STUPID and ARROGANT to tell others what God Almighty can and cannot do. And right now, Jesus Christ probably has an immeasurable amount of stuff on his plate – at least lot more than what my pea-brain can conceive.

The online sale would end in 15 minutes The others were not around to consult He made an executive decision and placed an order At 35 percent off cat grass seed, he was sure the others would not complain

the unnamed creature slowly climbed out of the primordial whatever fixed its gaze straight ahead and asked "What's for breakfast? "

well...to give you the six-of-one-half-a-dozen-of-the-other explanation: one of the most notable features of wierwille's ideology is its lack of consistency, coherency, and clarity.

For what it’s worth some online commentaries of John 14:12 that suggest the greater works is the spreading of the Gospel…the following are a few excerpts from Bible Hub’s commentaries: And greater works than these shall he do.—Comp. Notes on John 5:20, and on Matthew 21:21-22. The explanation of these greater works is not to be sought in the individual instances of miraculous power exercised by the apostles, but in the whole work of the Church. The Day of Pentecost witnessed the first fulfilment of this prophecy; but it has been fulfilled also in every great moral and spiritual victory. Every revival of a truly religious spirit has been an instance of it; every mission-field has been a witness to it. In every child of man brought to see the Father, and know the Father’s love as revealed in Jesus Christ, has been a work such as He did. In the world-wide extent of Christianity there is a work greater even than any which He Himself did in the flesh. He left His kingdom as one of the smallest of the influences on the earth; but it has grown up as a mighty power over all the kingdoms of the world, and all that is purest and best in civilisation and culture has found shelter in its branches. Because I go unto my Father.—The better reading is, because I go unto the Father. The words are to be connected not with one clause only, but with all the earlier parts of the verse. They are the reason why the believer shall do the works that Christ does, as well as the reason why he shall do greater works. The earthly work of Christ will have ceased, and He will have gone to the Father. The believers will be then His representatives on earth, as He will be their representative in heaven. Therefore will they do His works, and the works shall be greater because He will be at the Father’s right hand, and will do whatsoever they shall ask in His name. Ellicott's Commentary ~ ~ ~ ~ …notice the remarkable connection of the words with which we are dealing. ‘He that believeth on Me, the works that I do shall he do,’ and the ground of that is ‘because I go to My Father,’ and whatsoever the believer ‘shall ask, I will do.’… Here, then, there is clearly stated this great thought, that Christ’s removal from the world is not the end of His activity in the world and on material things, but that, absent, He still is a present power, and having passed through death, and been removed from sense, He can still operate upon the things round us, and move these according to His will. We are not to water down such words as these into any such thought as that the continuous influence of the memory and history of His past will be a present power in all ages… …‘The works that I do shall He do also’; because ‘whatsoever ye shall ask I will do it.’ We have not to think only of a Lord whose activity for us, beneficent and marvellous as it is, was finished in the misty past upon the Cross, nor have we only to think of a Lord whose activity for us, mighty and comforting as it is to all the solitary and struggling, is wrought as from the heights of the heavens, but we have to think of One who is beside us and in us… …‘I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me… …And it is in regard to the application of the finished work of Christ to the actual accomplishment of its contemplated consequences, that the comparison is drawn between the limited sphere and the small results of Christ’s work upon earth, and the worldwide sweep and majestic magnitude of the results of the application of that work by His servants’ witnessing work. The wider and more complete spiritual results achieved by the ministration of the servants than by the ministration of the Lord is the point of comparison here. And I need only remind you that the poorest Christian who can go to a brother soul, and by word or life can draw that soul to a Christ whom it apprehends as dying for its sins and raised for its glorifying, does a mightier thing than it was possible for the Master to do by life or lip whilst He was here upon earth. For the Redemption had to be completed in act before it could be proclaimed in word; and Christ had no such weapon in His hands with which to draw men’s souls, and cast down the high places of evil, as we have when we can say, ‘We testify unto you that the Son of God hath died for our sins, and is raised again according to the Scriptures.’ … MacLaren's Expositions ~ ~ ~ ~ John 14:12. ἀμὴν … ποιήσει. The first encouragement is the assurance that through Christ’s absence the disciples would be enabled to do greater works than Jesus Himself had done. These “greater” works were the spiritual effects accomplished by the disciples, especially the great novel fact of conversion. See this developed in Parker’s The Paraclete. Such works were to be possible ὅτι … πορεύομαι. It was by founding a spiritual religion and altering men’s views of the spiritual world Christ enabled His followers to do these greater works. Here this is explained on the plane of the disciples’ thoughts and in this form: “I go to my Father, the source of all power, and whatever you ask in my name I will do it”. Expositor's Greek Testament ~ ~ ~ ~ and greater works than these There is no reference to healing by means of S. Peter’s shadow (Acts 5:15) or of handkerchiefs that had touched S. Paul (Acts 19:12). Even from a human point of view no miracle wrought by an Apostle is greater than the raising of Lazarus. But from a spiritual point of view no such comparisons are admissible; to Omnipotence all works are alike. These ‘greater works’ refer rather to the results of Pentecost; the victory over Judaism and Paganism, two powers which for the moment were victorious over Christ (Luke 22:53). Christ’s work was confined to Palestine and had but small success; the Apostles went everywhere and converted thousands. Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges End of excerpts from: Bible Hub commentaries: John 14:12 ~ ~ ~ ~ Common to these above commentaries is the general idea of Jesus Christ being present with the church to spread the Gospel. And there are some similarities and differences when I compare what I remember of PFAL and at other times when the “greater works” came up: Similarities to above commentary excerpts: In PFAL wierwille did emphasize it was Christ in each believer and that during his earthly ministry he was limited in scope. With the Lord present and at work in each believer, Christ is no longer limited in time or place. Believers are representatives of Jesus Christ. ~ ~ ~ ~ Differences to above commentary excerpts: I also recall wierwille made some variations from pretty good, to bad, to worse: like the greater works was leading someone into the new birth…another variant was leading someone into speaking in tongues…and at its worse…well…to address the elephant in the room – the TOP PRIORITY of TWI-followers was always to promote the PFAL class – and not really about spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ. Sure, you can say Jesus Christ is in PFAL – but he is more like window dressing in the earlier sessions of the class – kind of a bait-and-switch thing. A new student is presented with a marketing campaign that promises material abundance and the ability to alter reality through wierwille’s pseudo-Christianity. The “ministry” of wierwille had nothing to do with adding souls to the invisible church. It was about adding devoted followers of the Lord ….the retention of loyal paying customers who bought into his special brand of bull$hit.

This is a follow-up piece on Gnosticism… by way of my philosophical amateurism wierwille’s Gnostic-ishness is somewhat related to intellectualism . – which is synonymous with rationalism - knowledge derived from reason. In the context of social interactions, intellectualism may carry a negative connotation about someone who focuses more on thinking than practicality. A unique distinction of wierwille ideology is that the a priori assumption is “The Word” - or rather wierwille’s theories based on his own interpretation of the Bible. If you consider fundamentalism as open-pit mining of ideas close to the surface of the Scriptures, then perhaps wierwille’s Gnostic-ish intellectualism is underground mining to produce convoluted, bizarre, and grandiose notions from an unorthodox vein of thought – and more often than not a nonexistent vein of thought. If you recall a key phrase from PFAL you might see the correlation with Gnosticism – the exaltation of knowledge…especially the superiority of a certain kind of knowledge…a secret knowledge revealed to wierwille (remember his claim of God teaching him “The Word” like it hasn’t been known since the 1st century): The greatest secret in the world today is that the Bible is the revealed word and will of God…and further along in the class wierwille presents one of his many tantalizing concepts of absolute cognizance as a byproduct of his teaching on the holy spirit – after which he says you will know, that you know, that you know…In my opinion his repetitiveness of “know” as a means to cinch the absolute certainty of his beliefs rings hollow because it’s based on his shoddy methods by which he came to those beliefs (I believe a big chunk of wierwille’s Modus operandi was a lot of plagiarism…after all he was an unabashed glory hound with delusions of grandeur). Take note of what Wikipedia says about Gnosticism : Gnostics considered the principal element of salvation to be direct knowledge of the supreme divinity in the form of mystical or esoteric insight. Many Gnostic texts deal not in concepts of sin and repentance, but with illusion and enlightenment. When I think of intelligent debates, I think there’s usually some standards of logic, ways of identifying and calling out biases that may obscure the issues and, in that regard, most honest folks strive for some sort of clarity and accuracy to get their point across. But when I think of my TWI-mindset that revolved around wierwille, it’s not so much about arguing from a certain perspective as it is imposing wierwille’s point of view on some unsuspecting soul.

Raf, I always appreciate your posts… Now and then I too feel an urge to explore some facet of what I once believed. I find your posts inspirational in that regard…I used to feel uncomfortable engaging atheists, agnostics, and folks with other non-TWI viewpoints until I realized the analytical benefit was that I could get down to the nuts and bolts of a certain topic. That methodical process helped me let go of rigid fundamentalism while at the same time embrace some basic aspect of my faith. Does that make sense? I’m not into labels – but if that puts some folks at ease – I’m some sort of a Christian agnostic…or maybe I’m in the category of Liberal Christianity…Liberal Theology…Christian Modernism…whatever...how about just call me T-Bone though when it comes to superhero movies, I still have an old-fashioned preference for the 1978 Superman starring Christopher Reeve. (it’s more about the romance of Kal-El and Lois than special effects) ~ ~ ~ ~ My main concern with religion is that government stays out of its way and that it stays out of government's way …I’m with you on that ! And by the way – if you would have told me in 1985 that in 37 years, I would be a Grease Spot sharing about the woes of being in a harmful and controlling cult like The Way International, I would have said “get behind me Satan.” While I was in TWI, anytime the thought of leaving, tripping out, or copping out crossed my mind – I would nip it in the bud as being inconceivable.

If anyone knows about goals and the appropriate action plans to achieve them – I assume it would be God: When Joseph’s brothers saw that their father was dead, they said, “What if Joseph holds a grudge against us and pays us back for all the wrongs we did to him?” So they sent word to Joseph, saying, “Your father left these instructions before he died: ‘This is what you are to say to Joseph: I ask you to forgive your brothers the sins and the wrongs they committed in treating you so badly.’ Now please forgive the sins of the servants of the God of your father.” When their message came to him, Joseph wept. His brothers then came and threw themselves down before him. “We are your slaves,” they said. But Joseph said to them, “Don’t be afraid. Am I in the place of God? You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives. So then, don’t be afraid. I will provide for you and your children.” And he reassured them and spoke kindly to them. Genesis 50:15-21 ~ ~ ~ ~ And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified. Romans 8:28-30

I'm pretty sure it goes "a sailor went to sea, sea, sea...to dig a ditch to bury the bi tch " - no wait you'd dig a ditch on land...ah shoot... I'm gonna have to Google the lyrics

Let's cosplay like it's 1966

The Canopics were one of the first Egyptian Wrap groups