WordWolf

Steve Lortz: "Before proceeding, let's review the written material and its 5-senses meaning. On page 83 of PFAL, this is exactly what Wierwille wrote, "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." The 5-senses meaning of this passage, according to all the laws of grammar, is as follows: Wierwille's words fall into the same catagory as the words of Shakespeare, Kant, Plato, Aristotle, Calvin, Luther, Wesley, Graham, Roberts and denominational writings; the words in this catagory are different from the words in the catagory called "Scripture" because ALL the words of Scripture are God-breathed, while NOT ALL the words of the other catagory will necessarily be God-breathed. Let's start with the context and work inward. Chapter 6 of PFAL (pp 81-92), titled "That Man May Be Perfect", is about the function of God's Word. The chapter begins with a citation of II Timothy 3:16, and ends with a citation of II Timothy 3:16&17. The over-arching context of the paragraph on page 83 is "All scripture is given by inspiration of God [God-breathed], and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." The first part of the paragraph on page 83 reads, "The Bible was written so that you as a believer need not be blown about by every wind of doctrine or theory or ideology. This Word of God does not change. Men change, ideologies change, opinions change; but this Word of God lives and abides forever. It endures, it stands. Let's see this from John 5:39. "Search the scriptures..." The first sentence of the paragraph contrasts the written Bible ("All scripture" according to the over-arching context, II Timothy 3:16) with "every wind of doctrine or theory or theology." The second, third and forth sentences contrast "This Word of God" (the written Bible, "All scripture") with men, ideologies and opinions. Men, ideologies and opinions change, according to Wierwille, while "this Word of God" (the written Bible, "All scripture") does not. So the context within the first part of the paragraph sets up a series of contrasts between the written Word of God ("All scripture") and the products of men; winds of doctrine, theories, theologies, men, ideologies, opinions. With the fifth and sixth sentences, Wierwille introduces a new citation, "Let's see this from John 5:39. 'Search the scriptures...'". So the "this" of the fifth sentence refers to the contrast between the written Word and the writings of men. Wierwille is introducing John 5:39 to point up that contrast. As we have seen above, in the rest of the paragraph under consideration, Wierwille continues the series of contrasts: the writings of the Scriptures with the writings of Shakespeare, Kant, Plato, Aristotle, Wierwille and denominations; the writings of the Scriptures with the writings of Wierwille, Calvin, Luther, Wesley, Graham, and Roberts. The "Not all" that begins the last sentence of the paragraph is a contrasting allusion to the "All" that begins II Timothy 3:16, "All scripture is God-breathed..." ALL scripture is God-breathed, but NOT ALL that men write is God-breathed. [u[In the whole paragraph, Wierwille places his own writings squarely in among the writings of the other men."

In the 50's, vpw was a cipher, except in the little community where he worked. It's hard for YOU to imagine nobody hearing of both vpw and Kenyon and being aware of the contents of Kenyon's books and having contact information for Kenyon-but that wasn't the internet age. Leonard was the only one known to have found out- and he made it clear he was offended by the theft that is plagiarism-he made that clear in writing. He was legally and morally in the right. vpw WANTED to be a household name-but had to play a careful game. If "his" materials got too wide a dispersal, his rampant plagiarism might have been caught. So, he kept the tapes and collaterals under his grip.

"These 3 types of common activity are the bookselling market, the academic community, and a small family of 2 parents and 4 children. NOW, does anyone here remember this argument of mine? I would not want to place the same requirements on that small family regarding intellectual ownership and how knowledge gets distributed. Would you? Parents have to put footnotes on what they teach their children? Not reasonable." [It's ethically and morally responsible for the parents to cite their sources, even if it's not in an academic fashion. I do so when dealing with 1 child, and it's VERY reasonable.The kids get a sense of things having sources, and that they can learn from them also. It's NOT difficult nor cumbersome.] "How about a much larger family of 4 sets of sibling parents and their 16 children? Would it be plagiarism to print out teachings and instructions to a large family like that? I’d still say no." [If they were taking from the work of others, yes, it would be plagiarism. Most people wouldn't insist on legal measures at that level, but legally, it's plagiarism. Sorry your lack of understanding of plagiarism results in your misunderstanding of this.] "When things started out with Dr's ministry they were just a small church in a small town. Should the collateral books been cluttered up with footnotes in that setting?" [Trick question. When it was a small church in a small town, there WERE no collateral books because there was no CLASS for which to have collateral books. Later, when vpw ripped off Leonard's class and began teaching Leonard's class and saying it was his own, he never MENTIONED Leonard to the students. However, the early classes had NO collateral books. The collateral books began once 3 things happened: 1) vpw encountered Stiles' book and plagiarized that entirely, in essence retyping "Gift of the Holy Spirit" into "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today" (which was what he originally called Leonard's "Gifts of the Spirit" class. (The first White Book.) 2) Others transcribed parts of the class from audiotape to print, resulting in the first Orange Book once vpw added the introduction. 3) Others transcribed sermons on specific subjects touched on, resulting in pamphlets like "Studies in Human Suffering." When those were done, there should have been footnotes or endnotes, and credit where it was due. The names "Leonard" and "Stiles" don't appear ANYWHERE there. There's also this delusion you have that books with proper references are :"cluttered." Dig out your old copy of "Babylon Mystery Religion." The book "The Two Babylons" was in the public domain. So long as the sources are cited, it can be used in its entirety. Woodrow took that book and produced BMR. It's heavily, heavily end-noted. You might not even NOTICE that while you're reading, since it doesn't distract from the contents. I've mentioned this before, and you're still ignorant of this. Old news.] "Dr showed his students Bullinger and Kenyon. There were no secrets about his sources." [He kept the names "Leonard" and "Stiles" SECRET. He kept his most important sources SECRET. He mentioned Kenyon and Bullinger SOME of the time, but not others. He said HE worked all the occurrences of the word "spirit" in the New Testament. He said nothing about it being a book Bullinger wrote that the twi bookstore didn't carry. There were other instances with both writers. And he never mentioned that "Are the Dead Alive Now?" was basically 2 books of Bullinger's with some cosmetic differences. Their names don't appear in ADAN at all. His sources were USUALLY secret. And DWBH's mentioned a secret cache of books vpw kept around, from which he directly ripped off work. vpw showed him privately and didn't mention it to twi at large or even on-grounds.] "But then the ministry started growing explosively around 1970, and as it started expanding out of its tiny family-size arena it started growing into the two similar arenas of the book market and the academy. Before 1972 Dr had Elena Whiteside record and quote him saying that he was NOT the originator of most of what he taught, but that mostly he had only “put it all together.” " [Buried in a books most twi'ers neither owned nor read, over 100 pages in, was an off-hand comment about what he did not being original. A few people, determined to whitewash vpw's crimes, pretend that's an attempt to cite sources. All his books left sources out- then one obscure book mentioned something vague in passing, and we're supposed to believe that satisfies any reasonable standard for citing sources or giving credit where it was due.] "Also, as the ministry continued to grow in the 70s and into the 80s FOOTNOTES and accreditation were added to the new publications. A strong example is the credit given to Dr. Martin from Pasadena, the one who cracked the code to the star of Bethlehem. In Volume 5 is another memorable citation where Dr quoted a page or two from Kenyon with proper academic credits. Again, these developments are never included in the plagiarism discussions. " [Your ignorance is showing again. I MYSELF have discussed them- IN plagiarism discussions. (The Martin one, at least.) The interesting thing about this is how this worked out. The actual citations were the results of the actual writers. twi researchers actually did all the work, and cited their sources. That was the case in the scholarly works that didn't resemble the early books at all. This culminated in JCOPS and JCOP. Who were those writers? Hard to tell-their names don't appear in those books. The books read "By Victor Paul Wierwille." Not "edited by". vpw takes all the credit for THEIR work. vpw seemed unable to fully give credit one way or another. It resembles a pathology.] "Oh, and surprise,surprise! "The Act of Creation" was written by someone we all know! He is Arthur Koestler of "The Thirteenth Tribe" fame. Actually he's much more famous for his many other books, than for these two. Thirteenth Tribe is way too political and Act of Creation is way too intellectual to be very popular. " Oh, yes. "the Thirteenth Tribe's premise has been completely disproven.. Genetic tests showed his assertion that the Khazars REPLACED the Semitic Jews was incorrect. Jews share genetic markers with other Semetic peoples, and not with the Khazars. The book is still popular with various anti-Jew or pro-Nazi sympathizers, and people who whitewash vpw's reputation. Interesting grouping there.]

I don't recall hearing any comment as to whether he could read or write German. He DID share anecdotes where he claimed to understand spoken German. He claimed that he was a guest of some VIP at a restaurant. When someone brought a bottle of wine to the table, the VIP snapped "Don't try to serve me that stuff-I'm with a guest!" in German. vpw claimed he understood him because he spoke German. So, he at least claimed he could speak German. He grew up in an area with a significant number of German immigrants who were farmers. He later made comments about how his family knew how to work and got their work ethic from being Germans. That's independent of all the other things he claimed made his earthly family special.

I sometimes wonder if he ever had an original thought, or if he just plagiarized it all. If he didn't plagiarize ALL of it, he certainly gave it a good try. Ever hear that Billy Graham overcame shyness in preaching by going to the woods and preaching to the trees? It's a famous anecdote of Graham's childhood. In TW:LiL, Harry claimed that vpw did it. vpw used to shirk his chores, and go off into the woods for hours at a time. Harry, who did not see him during those trips, said that he knew vpw was "preaching to the trees" when he vanished. So, he didn't vanish to shirk his chores, he went to practice preaching. News to everyone else. His own Dad thought he'd make a poor preacher (as recorded in TW:LiL.) His neighbors were skeptical when he went to divinity school. That's not the response you get to someone who PLANNED to be a minister, who practiced for it through his childhood. Small surprise he told the Corps at least once that he considered 3 fields, including ministry and music. Small surprise that TW:LiL records him as being ready to quit TWICE in his early career as a minister. And that it was a year AFTER HE BEGAN PREACHING that he first heard of the Bible as the Word of God and believing it, also recorded in TW:LiL. He made up for his lack of dedication, his laziness, by cutting corners. He outsourced his sermons. He relied on the work, the dedication, of real Christians who cared and did their best. And slapped his name on it. And to this day, there's still some people buying into that.

For the curious, I'm raising the question. I'm not personally aware of incidents of leadership physically hitting or beating "followers" or staffers. I AM aware that children of in-residence Corps- unless children of the inner cadre- were subject to being beaten without warning by any adult on grounds- and that's why adults on campuses with kids were expected to carry around a wooden spoon to be used to deliver the beatings. One of the inner cadre was seen hitting a 2-year old repeatedly for not doing something they were told to do- until there was a visible injury (I seem to remember the account mentioning blood). I'm well aware that plenty of threats of physical violence were delivered-I was on the receiving end of one from a resident and I wasn't even in residence when it happened. I also know that one unstable individual who had no business being accepted into a leadership program was in the Corps, a military veteran, who heard vpw make a comment about someone who should be killed, then went off to prepare an assassination but was stopped by another Corps member. None of that actually addresses what I'm asking (unless it refers to the kids being beaten- which was attested to by both Corps and kids who were beaten). Did anyone see anything like that or became aware of anything like that?

After seeing some of this, I think that idle curiosity should be satisfied. One possible result of someone reading over vpw's books is thinking they replace the Bible and form God Almighty's revelation to us, thinking vpw was some superhuman, and seeing Jesus "many times" teaching from the Orange Book with it in his hand.

Bingo. Bonus points for "why you think anyone here thinks you have something to offer on a topic of substance." After years of nothing but smoke and allusions alternating with correctable/corrected errors, and elevation of the pfal books beyond anything vpw said about them, in between worship of vpw, we're skeptical you've anything of substance to bring to the table NOW. And if anyone's wondering what I meant by worship of vpw, I meant comments that he was "born with an overabundance of brains and brawn", that he was "overgifted" and that "where he walked, the earth shook." At that level, it is NOT hyperbole to call that "worship", at least "hero worship".

Since there's no actual reason to think Uriah's family had any reason to suspect anything improper happened, it is logical to think that Uriah's relatives mourned his death in combat, and then thought that it was good that his widow was taken care of- whether out of genuine concern for her, or out of relief that they didn't have to see to it, depending on how nice his family was. BTW, elevating vpw to the same status as David in discussions is, well.....

DWBH has a medical background. DWBH has both study and experience in medicine, at some level. vpw didn't- and still spoke at length on cancer. It was common for vpw to speak at length on topics on which he was factually ignorant.

Furthermore, Mike's tendency to re-imagine events or invent them wholesale is evident here. When we discussed TW:LiL, and the apologists were claiming that one offhand comment in one book was equal to the legal citing of sources in all the books in which this comment wasn't even mentioned, there were 3 posters who said that. If Mike posted on it at all, he was an incredibly minor voice, although he's now remembering himself as the main proponent who scored imaginary victories then also. (Yes, we've had a consistent pattern of that, too.) Based on how he's consistently misrepresented his discussions here over the decades, I'd be truly shocked if his discussion with JS even RESEMBLED what he's said. As if any of us here care what JS said in between managing his splinter group.

Those are people who feel NOTHING for other people. They only feel for themselves. It's not a guarantee they're a bad person, but it's a common enough ingredient. One Psychologist discovered he had the absence of empathy, but his good upbringing made him a better person. vpw, on the other hand, had an abusive dad, and vpw learned early on to run off and shirk his chores, and to use a gift of gab and the threat of violence to get what he wanted. That was his rep as a teenager.

Probably not. Discussions about Psychology point to vpw having Antisocial Personality Disorder. His "concern" for people was shown to all be STAGED-which is why he could sit and chat with you, turn his head, SCREAM at someone, and turn back to you and resume the conversation, all without batting an eye. None of it touched him.

A lot of the old cartoons are still eminently watchable, from the 60s and 70s, to say nothing of the Batman and Green Hornet shows.

BINGO. Besides, we're still waiting on discussion on a few matters raised in 2003, matters highly relevant to your position- and which completely refute it. (BTW, it was 6 months ALMOST to the day, not to the exact day. (I checked.) )

When Mike wrote a post whose sole content was the phrase "When Christ returns, he'll be holding a PFAL book in his hand and teaching you from it." , I immediately concluded he was joking. However, someone asked him outright if he was actually serious when he made that claim. Mike replied he was "Very serious. I've seen him that way many times myself." Mike has decided to stake his entire life on the assertion that the PFAL books were of divine origin and superior to any and all modern English Bibles, let alone the texts remaining from Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew. He's said the closest we have to the originals is "unreliable fragments" and "tattered remnants." He also is rather creative in how he interprets both current and past posts. (He's been thoroughly refuted, gone away for 6 months, then returned and said that the previous time, nobody'd been able to hold a candle to him. So, if you're looking for a LOGICAL answer, don't be shocked if you don't get one. To date, Mike's dangled questions and insinuations, and gone out of his way far afield to ever avoid answering questions simply, directly, and unambiguously. He's also shown some elementary errors in understanding the Bible the few times he's mentioned something in it. He did this once, I refuted him and pointed out specifics, and announced then and there that he'd probably be back in 6 months, claiming he was correct and unrefuted. 6 months to the day, guess what happened? ;) BTW, Mike, I'm doing well by objective standards. I'm seeing a much brighter future for my day-to-day life, in fact.

I'm completely caught up on Flash and BBT, and obviously LoT and Powerless. I'll catch up on Gotham and Supergirl this week (1-2 episodes behind on each.) I haven't sat down to finish Agent Carter, and seriously behind on Agents of SHIELD. I saw the first episode of Iron Fist. Not making him Asian made sense if it was Iron Fist. If they wanted an Asian, they should have picked Shang-Chi (Master of Kung Fu.) George asked about if it's faithful to the series. Well, all the names are correct-Daniel Rand and family, Meachum, Colleen Wing, Lei Kung the Thunderer, Shao Lao the Undying (whether shown or mentioned.) As for a faithful depiction of the guy who later joined with Luke Cage to start Heroes For Hire, I see no resemblance. I can't even prove DR actually has "the Iron Fist." And with that in question, he certainly isn't like "the Immortal Iron Fist" of the more recent series. My main problem is their inability to decide if they wanted to be faithful to the source material (all the names) or go in a completely new direction (almost everything about the first episode.) Raf was wise to keep expectations low for the series. I kept mine low but not quite low enough.

One of those Hong Kong stars was Jackie Chan, in his US appearance. He had comedy martial arts films under his belt. The discrepancy of the "Japanese" team being Chinese actors ticked off Jackie Chan when he found out. But it explains why the host of the talk show looks befuddled- he speaks Japanese, not Cantonese. I don't know why the labelled Subaru is confused for a Mitsubishi in the credits. Fenderbaum was written for Don Rickles. He refused, and Sammy Davis Jr got the role-and did a better job. BTW, Sinatra was actually disappointed they never considered him for a part after Dean and Sammy got roles-but they fixed that in the sequel when he played "Frank." John Fiedler was the hotel desk clerk-seen when someone was knocked out; he asks the "paramedics" to help. George Furth plays Arthur J Foyt, who tries to stop the race. Peter Fonda led the biker gang in the big fight. Valerie Perrine was the lady highway patroller. Bianca Jagger played the Sheik's sister. Steve Mc Queen was considered-so this obviously involved fast cars. Recasting Burt Reynolds meant the directional change to a comedy. Burt Reynolds admitted his motives were financial, and thought he didn't do the movie for a good reason. (Hey, Christopher Lee did some bad movies, also, for the money.) Rick Aviles played Mad Dog. He crashed his truck into the lobby, his truck jumped the freight train empty bed, and in the big fight, showed how one survives in a NYC subway. Pamela Glover was named "Beauty" by JJ after he's unable to guess her name-and that becomes how everyone refers to her. The ambulance drivers know the Ferrari drivers, but fail to identify the priests in the car despite that. (It causes a problem, after all....) The Dodge Tradesman was the ambulance, "Roger Moore" drove the Aston Martin, the chicks drove the Lambo, the "priests" drove the Ferrari, and the Sheik drove the Rolls Royce Silver Shadow.

That's it.

Did the experience ever really make a great book?

-This 80s film includes 2 actors who were well-known in Hong Kong at the time, both with experience in comedies (and action-comedies, each of a sort.) -The production company for this US film was a HONG KONG company- Golden Harvest. That explains some of the cast but causes another wrinkle in the casting at the same time. -One role was written specifically with DON RICKLES in mind, but he refused the role, and we got a better movie for it once it was recast (with the same name.) -George Furth and John Fiedler both appear in this movie. (I used to confuse the 2 actors because of this.) -Peter Fonda appears in it as well. And Valerie Perrine. And Bianca Jagger. -Steve McQueen was cast, but died before they prepared to begin filming, so that part was re-cast and the mood of the movie was changed radically. -In one scene, a Cantonese-speaking character is interviewed by a Japanese television presenter. Neither the presenter nor the audience understand what he's saying, but the other Cantonese-speaker in the movie and he chat several times, in Cantonese. They use a Subaru-incorrectly identified as a Mitsubishi. -One actor spoke about having done the movie, later. "I did that film for all the wrong reasons. I never liked it. I did it to help out a friend of mine, Hal Needham. And I also felt it was immoral to turn down that kind of money. I suppose I sold out so I couldn't really object to what people wrote about me." -This was the first movie the late Rick Aviles appeared in (you may remember him as Willie Lopez in "Ghost.") -Nobody remembers the name of the character Pamela Glover-she ends up with a nickname early on, and that "becomes" her name for the rest of the movie. -Continuity error: the "Hawaiian Tropic" car changes from a Laguna to a Monte Carlo after a quick paint job. -Continuity error: Jamie Black and Fenderbaum know JJ Mc Clure and Victor Prinzim early on. However, in the middle of the movie, Mc Clure and Prinzim completely fail to recognize them. -Other vehicles appearing include a Dodge Tradesman, an Aston Martin, a Lamborghini Countach, a Ferrari 308 GTS, a Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, -Bianca Jagger plays the sister of Abdul ben Falafel. (In the sequel, their father is played by Ricardo Montalban.)

The Facebook page is here:https://www.facebook.com/pages/St-Louis-Bible-Fellowship/118451138168054?_fb_noscript=1 It's got all the familiar buzzwords, guaranteed to trigger PTSD. It has a link to a separate website- which is to an expired domain someone's cybersquatting on. Nobody has updated their Facebook page to reflect their current URL. The current URL off Facebook is http://www.stlouistheologicalseminary.org/index.php It's well-phrased, and should NOT trigger PTSD. Furthermore, it's got notices that their school won't tolerate plagiarism, and gives some examples of 2 categories of plagiarism. I think someone's learned something, at any rate. If we take this site as 100% truthful, it's come a longer way than the people posting to their Facebook page-who sound like they just came out of a twi class.

...and waited until now to get new information, for which I appreciate your reply.[ The internet age sure makes it easy to learn all sorts of things, doesn't it?/b]

-The production company for this US film was a HONG KONG company- Golden Harvest. That explains some of the cast but causes another wrinkle in the casting at the same time. -One role was written specifically with DON RICKLES in mind, but he refused the role, and we got a better movie for it once it was recast (with the same name.) -George Furth and John Fiedler both appear in this movie. (I used to confuse the 2 actors because of this.) -Peter Fonda appears in it as well. And Valerie Perrine. And Bianca Jagger. -Steve McQueen was cast, but died before they prepared to begin filming, so that part was re-cast and the mood of the movie was changed radically. -In one scene, a Cantonese-speaking character is interviewed by a Japanese television presenter. Neither the presenter nor the audience understand what he's saying, but the other Cantonese-speaker in the movie and he chat several times, in Cantonese. -One actor spoke about having done the movie, later. "I did that film for all the wrong reasons. I never liked it. I did it to help out a friend of mine, Hal Needham. And I also felt it was immoral to turn down that kind of money. I suppose I sold out so I couldn't really object to what people wrote about me." -This was the first movie the late Rick Aviles appeared in (you may remember him as Willie Lopez in "Ghost.") -Nobody remembers the name of the character Pamela Glover-she ends up with a nickname early on, and that "becomes" her name for the rest of the movie. -Continuity error: the "Hawaiian Tropic" car changes from a Laguna to a Monte Carlo after a quick paint job. -Continuity error: Jamie Black and Fenderbaum know Mc Clure and Prinzim early on. However, in the middle of the movie, Mc Clure and Prinzim completely fail to recognize them.

Yes, they all played Dr Who in one form or another. (Mrs Wolf figured it out without cheating, but she doesn't want to play logging in.) John Hurt played "the War Doctor", the Doctor who refused to call himself "the Doctor" because of his behavior when at war. William Hartnell played the First Doctor, but when he passed away, the First Doctor was played by Richard Hurndall (in The Five Doctors). Michael Jayston and Geoffrey Hughes played aspects of the Doctor's dark side. Toby Jones did something similar. Peter Cushing played him on film in 1965 & 1966. No fooling. Paul Mc Gann, Sylvester Mc Coy, Peter Davison and Colin Baker all played Doctors in the television series (Fifth thru Eighth.) Jim Broadbent, Rowan Atkinson, Hugh Grant, Richard E. Grant, and Joanna Lumley were all in the Comic Relief UK spoof, "the Curse of Fatal Death." (You can see it on YouTube.) Go ahead, George.