WordWolf

Jason Alexander Shallow Hal Gwyneth Paltrow

*wild swing* "Rogue One"????

That book is on Project Gutenberg. You can get a copy in e-pub, Kindle or plaintext. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/44932

It's "slice-of-life" on the farm for the farmer and his animals-whom he thinks are pretty stupid (except for the sheepdog.) When he's not looking, they lead more interesting lives. Even the humans don't get dialogue (they can grunt and get irritated, make happy sounds, etc. The animals all make their expected sounds, with occasional sighs and laughs and so on. The show is really funny, and kids get the visuals but miss a lot of the jokes. It spun off of "Wallace and Grommitt", and little Timmy spun off into "Timmy Time", where he begins preschool as a toddler (older than in StS.) There was a "Shaun the Sheep" full length movie. It had a little text and no dialogue whatsoever. And you really should watch some of the cartoons. Many are on YT right now, and you can understand a version in any language since the opening is the only thing that gets translated.

That's it.

I'd agree with your logic so far. Well, there was one movie already released, based on it. Another's in the works, allegedly. So, the movie wasn't that long ago. (I was able to follow the RUSSIAN version of the movie almost entirely. You won't have a problem watching the show in Hungarian. No, those languages are not any kind of clue. The originals are all in English.)

Mike's alternate take on history is in effect here. He was challenged, many, many, MANY times- to pick, at his choice, even ONE of the items on the Actual Errors list, and, using his supposed techniques, resolve it. He has completely refused to do so for the entire time. WE (independent of Mike) discussed ONE item on the list, and whether or not it should be included. Mike, having demonstrated NOTHING in the process, announced afterward that he'd succeeded and knew all along it was going to come off the list. That's transparent to most adults, and the most blatant of techniques that cold readers(charlatans) use. So, Mike will continue to PRETEND he addressed the list, and, perhaps in his altered memories, he really remembers it that way.

January 3, 2003, Raf: What does Wierwille mean by "the Word of God?" Well, in the passage above, he's clearly equating the Word of God with "the scriptures." We also know from PFAL Chapter One verse One that "The Bible is the revealed Word and Will of God." Thus, by checking in the verse and in previous usage, and knowing that things equal to the same thing are equal to each other, we can state with certainty the following: The Bible = The Word of God = The Scriptures. We will also note that Wierwille specifically differentiates his own writings from the Word of God. He lumps his work in the same category as the work of other ministers, past and present, in comparison with the Word of God, which he holds up on a pedestal. So, according to Wierwille, his writings are NOT to be taken as "God-breathed" by comparison to the Bible. So what of his statement "not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed?" Does that mean, as some meek masters have said, that SOME of what Wierwille writes will be God-breathed? Let's see how Wierwille defines it: PFAL, p. 89 So, we know that God's Word is the Bible. The accuracy of the Bible is another way of saying a proper understanding of the Bible. When you speak with a proper understanding of the Bible, what you speak is just as though God Himself were speaking it. On this we can all agree. So, taking the two passages together, we may reasonably conclude that Wierwille felt his writings, when they agreed with the Bible, were as valuable as the Bible (to which I say, no duh). Logic dictates that when Wierwille's writings disagreed with the Bible, they would NOT be as valuable as the Bible. Weirwille himself left this possibility open by noting that NOT EVERYTHING HE WRITES is God-breathed. On the contrary, according to Wierwille, ALL of the Bible is God-breathed. One may reasonably conclude, therefore, that PFAL is God-breathed ONLY insofar as it agrees with the Bible, ALL of which is God-breathed. If and when PFAL disagrees with the Bible, the Bible is always given pre-eminence (how can it be otherwise)? The Bible is pre-eminent. Wierwille's writings are no more authoritative than the works of Luther, Aristotle, Kant, Billy Graham or Oral Roberts. WIERWILLE HIMSELF SAID SO. Mike, you have perverted the words of Wierwille, and dismissed the Word of God. You measure the Bible against the standard of PFAL, when you should be measuring PFAL against the standard of the Bible. That Wierwille did not see his book as "The Word of God," or as the equivalent of "God-breathed scripture" is evidenced by the fact YOU brought up, which is that PFAL went through several printings and that changes were made. Wierwille taught that if you change one word of the Word of God, then you no longer have God's Word. You accuse him of tampering with God's Word by fiddling with PFAL. I know this won't change your mind, as you have already stated, quite plainly, that no amount of evidence will persuade you to pull your head out of the sand. That's your choice, but don't expect a bunch of us to stick our heads in the sand with you and call it light.

The following was posted by Goey, June 1, 2003, 2:12pm Eastern. ======= -------------------------- From PFAL- p83 "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..." 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. -------------------- In think WIerwille put "necessarily" in there because he believed or wanted others to believe that it was "possible" for him to write from inspiration. Just as possible for him as it was for the others he mentioned, like Luther, Wesley, etc. I have no problem with that. It is certainly possible that God could inspire any one of us to write. In the last sentence, Wierwille uses a semicolon after "Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed." Then he lists these other folks but omits the word 'necessarily'. This, according to Bullinger, is the figure of speech-ellipsis or omission. We could add the word 'necessarily' before 'what Calvin said'-and not change the sense of the sentence. It would then read: "Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed, not [necessarily] what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures- they are God-breathed." In fact, you could rearrange the names in any order and not change the sense of what Wierwille was saying here. After he lists these men he then says 'but'. BUT! BUT! BUT!...IN CONTRAST to what all these men have written- it is the Scriptures that are God-breathed and it is the Scriptures that are to be searched (and mastered.) The thrust and point of WIerwille's message here is that the works of men- including Luther, Wesley, Calvin, etc-and Wierwille himself; even though they 'could' be God-breathed (inspired)- are not scripture. They are not in the Bible and are not a part of the canon of scripture. And, rather than rely on the works of men, (Wierwille includes himself), we are to search the Bible (scriptures)- "so that you as a believer need not be blown about by every wind of doctrine or theory or ideology." Mike, it seems that because of your seeking for "hidden messages" and because of your presumptions necessary to support your theories, that you have missed the actual message that Wierwlle was really attempting to make. You got it exactly reversed from what Wierwille was trying to teach here in PFAL. ==================

This is a show that wasn't too hard to sell to international markets. It's got a broad appeal- partly because it's slice-of-life (believe it or not) and partly because the actual episodes require NO TRANSLATION WHATSOEVER (the opening and title might need them, however.) It started as a spin-off of a series of shorts, and itself spun off a children's show. This show, technically, IS a children's show, but has broad appeal to the adults that understand it better than the children. It's got voice actors, which is a little surreal for the actors sometimes since there are no spoken words during the episodes. It proved popular enough to be the basis of a theatrical movie- with a sequel supposedly being worked on right now.

We may never know (unless someone knew him right when he arrived on-grounds or before) if lcm was into that before he lived on-grounds. We DO know that he adapted everything vpw said as descending from God Almighty-which resulted eventually in his ousting, court case, and de facto breakdown. Anyone who takes vpw's words as some sort of godly utterance is setting himself up for a sad life.

A) Back then was not as it was later. If she gave him the divorce he deserved, the social climate and support systems were completely different or absent. She might have thought she truly had no choice if she wanted to spare her kids. B) Staying with vpw guaranteed her a rather comfortable living, with mandatory gifts given to her. lcm confirmed that vpw got upset when he was offered a gift but Mrs W was not, in his "VP and Me" book.

Hey- keep chasing off the top layer of talent, and eventually you scrape the bottom of the barrel. As we can see, when this continues, we find out what's left when you lift the barrel..

I'm no expert on his reactions. However, judging from how he tended to view women as inferior (and treated them so when the cameras were off), I think he'd be more offended that the top spot in twi was held by a woman, ahd have been offended that lcm let women completely run his life and all his actions when he was President. Anything else might offend him a lot less. Women running the thing, hunting and fishing less popular, no hunting dogs around-I'm sure he'd think it was all just to get rid of all the things he enjoyed. The whole "now you can't just rape the women" thing would be a part of that, since other people to him were just things to get him what he wanted.

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.