WordWolf

I don't think I've done this song before. "Her royal blood didn't mean a thing, even though our first-born might be a king."

Cadillac Man Robin Williams Good Morning Vietnam

The annoying part is that I know that the last 2 actresses were in the same movie, but I can't remember what movie I was reading about when I read that.

Are we talking "The Santa Clause"???

Oh, and since, sometimes, there's people who fog an issue by misplacing where the burden of proof lies in a discussion, there's a thread on Burden of Proof- https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/24437-burden-of-proof/

In the Skepticism was "Questioning SIT". https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/23944-questioning-sit/ Also in Doctrinal was "I Cot. 12-14". https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/23207-i-cor-12-14/ In "About the Way" was "SIT, TIP, Prophecy and Confusion" https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/23184-sit-tip-prophecy-and-confession/ as well as "SIT, Interpretation Prophecy and Confession, Reboot" https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/24198-sit-interpretation-prophecy-and-confession-reboot/ All discussed here, by people familiar with twi and its terms and jargon.

This thread, "Speaking in Tongues", preceded the long discussions. https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/17459-speaking-in-tongues/

Ok, Doctrinal.... In "Another Discussion on SIT and the Bible", there's links to a bunch of the other discussions. https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/24434-another-discussion-on-sit-and-the-bible/ https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/23213-sit-online-reading-room/ The SIT Online Reading Room had links to offsite references. https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/23940-yet-another-thread-on-speaking-in-tongues/ "Yet another thread on speaking in tongues" came after all the other threads were done.

BTW, I'll dig out the links to the discussions. The discussions in "Open" didn't address Doctrine (beliefs) nor About the Way (what does twi teach), and those threads are here: https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/24206-what-is-language/ https://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/23550-free-vocalization/

I know we had several discussions on the subject here- which is to say, several threads here on the subjects, from different angles. By the end of the discussions, I'd reversed my position. I wasn't the first person to do so, but I'm not sure anyone else did during the actual discussions.

The main page on twi is this: http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/cultsthe.htm I'm not sure what, specifically, you're looking for, but it should be there somewhere.

One thing he may have gotten from Starr Daily is the tendency to cheapen Greek study. No language is solely the construction of each word, each word can have meanings completely unrelated to their construction, especially over time. "Manufacturing" now means assembly lines and robots. The word originally meant "hand-made", so that's almost the opposite of what it meant once. But as someone who was neither skilled nor motivated to study language, vpw found the lazy method quite useful, certainly in practice.

The "from birth to the corps" papers were initially all to help vpw figure out who he could most successfully rape. It was only later that other uses, like possible blackmail, may have come up. Personally, I think I would have submitted a paper that was carefully written and 100% lies. After all, if they really need to know, I can't fool God- they'd get revelation on what I wrote. (And that was my thinking BEFORE all this! Aren't they glad I never signed up?)

Starr Daily had a goal, and, as such, he partly described sin correctly, and partly did not. Starr Daily was more about turning your life around- but he light-pedaled REPENTING. A genuine knowledge that you did wrong, regret you did, and asking for forgiveness, as well as an attempt to do better. If the wrong person reads what he wrote (like vpw), then it becomes a matter of "change your thinking and sin becomes grace". Also, when one sins, one does "miss the mark", but that's not ALL there is to sin. By reducing it to that, vpw made it easier to dismiss. Then, when vpw soften sin further to "BROKEN FELLOWSHIP" - a CONSEQUENCE of sin but not the sin itself- then it became easy to MECHANICALLY remove sin from one's THINKING. One need not dwell CONTINUOUSLY on the problem of sin and of sinning, but the opposite is at least as bad- being unaware one is even sinning. It's easy put one's conscience to sleep this way- and vpw sure did.

Take it, George.

That's a shame, because he had so many roles, some in television, some in movies. In television, I also remember him as a kid on an episode of the Odd Couple (Randy Grainger was in the Big Brother project), and his roles in the Austin Powers movies should be remembered if ONLY for their names (Peter, Johnson...) and the scenes in which they occur (Johnson, in particular, is named to gales of laughter.)

Wild swing here- "Jake and the Fatman"?????

Well, didn't the Beatles base "Yellow Submarine" on it, or something?

vpw often claimed to hear special revelation from God- then recite some NONSENSE he got from some weird fringe group like the John Birch Society. vpw was believed because he had conned people into thinking he heard from God Almighty. All of that was based on integrity which he didn't have, skill which he plagiarized, and lies that he'd heard from God Almighty in 1942. If not for all of those, the foolish cabal drivel would not have been given a second thought, let alone taken seriously. The lies and the plagiarism MATTER. The broken integrity and the lack of character MATTER. The counterfeited authority MATTERED.

As Raf said so long ago, a truth from the pen of a plagiarist is still true. HOWEVER, plagiarism matters. Plagiarism goes to the character of the plagiarist. Every time vpw said something without directly supporting it- and that was most of the things he said- it rests on HIS "authority" - which is based on his INTEGRITY and his substance. A plagiarist has LITTLE TO NO INTEGRITY. vpw told people all kinds of things, which they took as coming from God Almighty because vpw said so or because he insinuated it- all of which rested on his nonexistent integrity. So, all of "his work" should be approached with a LOT more skepticism because it's clear it was all the compilation of a plagiarist serving HIMSELF, not someone special serving God Almighty. Once that scrutiny is actually applied, the wheels start coming off and all the errors, mistakes, and so on become clearer. With one ASSUMING vpw was correct because one was taught he heard from God Almighty, none of that is going to be examined, which means error will remain hidden.

Coming back to this post..... Ok, so, agreed the snow story was made-up, a lie, and devoid of authority. "His stuff wasn't original, so I believe his main job was compiling, organizing in one package." Where do you get the idea that he had that as any kind of "job"? Oh, right, because he said so. But he's a proven LIAR. Any CLAIMS of his are VOID because he's a proven liar. He's an unreliable source. So, any such CLAIMS would have to be supported some other way other than "that liar insisted that was his job." There's another assumption here- that he was "receiving revelation and taking action on it." The only reason to think he was doing THAT was to do his ALLEGED "JOB", and the only reason to think that was his "job" was that a proven liar SAID IT WAS. So, going back to "he would have had to be in fellowship with the Father at those times he was doing the word"...... All of this is BACKWARDS. it is ASSUMED he got a job from God- which was disproven. It is ASSUMED that this (disproven) job meant he had to compile and organize into a package. It is ASSUMED that to do this (disproven) job meant he had to receive revelation and act on it. It is ASSUMED that to do this (disproven) job meant he "was in fellowship with God" part of the time. All of those assumptions, and all of them based on a disproven point- a disproven claim that he was given a task from God, which he outlined. When your initial assumption is garbage, EVERYTHING proceeding from it is useless. It is error. It may be error that feels comfortable, but that makes it OLD error, not any less an actual ERROR.

There was ONE BOOK. It SUPPOSEDLY was about training a dog by punishing him heavily when he disobeyed and rewarding him a little if he obeyed. vpw said that same book was good for raising dogs, and for raising children. vpw knew nothing about doing either. He'd done little of either, and was bad at both. Nobody would have taken him seriously, except the lies that claimed he had a God-given authority had deceived people.

But.... vpw NEVER RAISED HIS DOGS! He farmed out all the work with the dogs to someone else on grounds. He also farmed out all the work on his kids. And people still take him seriously on the subject of training or raising EITHER.

The book was "HUNT CLOSE." I've heard it says to reward a dog who does the right thing, and punish him heavily for every wrong thing. it's been disavowed by RESPECTED dog trainers because that results in a dog that behaves AS LONG AS THE TRAINER IS WATCHING. The idea of using that to raise a kid when it's inappropriate to even use on a DOG is disquieting, to say the least.