WordWolf

If most people had said the problem was "foreign missions", I'd be more likely to believe them. In this case, however, I think there's strong evidence that he found the timing right to split from any formal organization, since he now had a marketable product and had already begun to market it. Before, he needed the financial support of the denomination. Now, he didnt, so he cut his ties pretty quickly. ==== In other news, he left for India 1955, and made his split after returning, in 1957. Looks to me like there's over a year of travelling there, as I thought...

"I could see that America was at a very low ebb spiritually. We had a lot of religion, but we sure lacked knowledge of the accuracy and integrity of God's Word, so that Christianity was just a name, a flag, a title." "I wrote a long study of my research and observations called <BR> the Dilemma of Foreign Missions. That caused some furor from the top echelons. But all that has passed. I just needed the freedom to work and teach to whoever was hungry. I didn't need the pressure, the man-made rules." "That's when I resigned in 1957 and we moved to that house on South Washington Street. I asked twelve people to stand with me for one year. But many of them were not in the church. I was still hung up on the denomination. I told others to stay with the church. I didn't want to disrupt anything, cause division or hardship. I didn't want to hurt anyone, so I told them to stay with the denomination." My, THAT attitude certainly changed...if this account was true, of course. He made it a hobby to attack denominations whenever he could.

Whatever, just so long as you post it in the appropriate forum. (Preferably in the appropriate THREAD, too.)

*thinks* Sounds familiar. *thinks* At first, I thought the "jar" was from "Would you Like to Swing on a Star", but now I'm thinking it's "Rosalita", by Bruce Springsteen (and the E Street Band). If so, Clarence Clemon's saxophone riff is the most recognizable part of the song-and I never thought I'd say the phrase "saxophone riff" ever.

This is what I wrote before on this... "BTW, if he travelled on the ERC's dime, and used their title to open doors for him (he ALWAYS used EVERY title he had-don't tell me he DIDN'T cite his group THERE), then they were completely within their rights to say he was not representing them. Nowadays, many groups have rules specifying who IS and is NOT allowed to represent themselves as a spokesperson as opposed to simply a member or whatnot." I'm figuring he waved his credentials whenever he arrived anyplace. To a degree, that's fairly normal. He raised it to a vocation, but that's a separate issue. When he just showed up places, people would naturally also asked what organization he was with, under whose auspice he was travelling. That's normal. It's also normal for them to say he's not their SPOKESPERSON, nor is he conducting an officially-authorized investigation or whatever. So, either this was a normal notice and he went out of his way to be offended by it, or this was a normal notice and he was ignorant of Standard Operating Procedure, or this was NOT a normal notice, which meant he was flashing his title inappropriately.

"We went as a family, Dotsie and I and the three oldest children. John Paul was two months old, so he stayed with his aunt, Dotsie's sister. It had never happened before that a man of God and his whole family went on a missionary tour. And I went unaffiliated, not under the flag of any denomination." [First of all, this trip separated a newborn from his family for OVER A YEAR if I read correctly. Is that even HUMANE? Second of all, John Paul seems to not be IN that family, since he just said J.P. was left home, and the "WHOLE FAMILY" went on this trip. Third of all, is there some basis for a claim that this was a never-before-done-trip: a minister goes on a "missionary tour" with his family. I know lots of MISSIONS have ministers with their families, and compared to LIVING THERE, a "TOUR" is a rather wussy thing to be bragging about. Fourth of all, he said he went "unaffiliated". Who PAID for this trip? vpw either was paid for this trip, or he wasn't. If he wasn't, he spent money for over a year there and arranged for rent paid for his residence back home, for over a YEAR. That's a sizeable chunk of money. Just travelling there and back would be a considerable sum, and even the cheapest food and lodging adds up over MONTHS. If he WAS paid for the trip, then who paid it? The obvious answer is that he was paid by his DENOMINATION. If he went, and they PAID HIM for a more-than-a-year trip, he HARDLY went "unaffiliated".] pg-216. "The non-Christians, they were fabulously responsive. I met with governors-of-states and other top men in the Central Government of India, as well as leading professionals and businessmen. I was the first minister invited to speak before the Jain convention. They responded because we brought with us only a teaching and research ministry of blessing to the people, irrespective of religious allegiance, with no acquisition of property and with no threat to the freedom of the nationals. The response of the denominations-my own included-was supremely non-loving, even vociferously opposed. The National Council of Churches in India informed me that I was not representing the Evangelical and Reformed Church, which I never claimed anyway. From then on I stopped all mission support except one dollar per year." [Do we have any documentation- other than vpw's word- that he was well-received by non-Christians? BTW, if he travelled on the ERC's dime, and used their title to open doors for him (he ALWAYS used EVERY title he had-don't tell me he DIDN'T cite his group THERE), then they were completely within their rights to say he was not representing them. Nowadays, many groups have rules specifying who IS and is NOT allowed to represent themselves as a spokesperson as opposed to simply a member or whatnot.]

vpw was expounding on his trip to India. He said Bishop K.C. Pillai invited them to India in 1955. "Bishop Pillai was a converted Hindu who opened up for us the Eastern customs behind many scriptures. He had taken the class and had been teaching Orientalisms to us here. He said that Hindus would believe and would want to hear the Word of God. We went as a family, Dotsie and I and the three oldest children. John Paul was two months old, so he stayed with his aunt, Dotsie's sister. It had never happened before that a man of God and his whole family went on a missionary tour. And I went unaffiliated, not under the flag of any denomination." [First one in history???? How about that.] pg-216. "The non-Christians, they were fabulously responsive. I met with governors-of-states and other top men in the Central Government of India, as well as leading professionals and businessmen. I was the first minister invited to speak before the Jain convention. They responded because we brought with us only a teaching and research ministry of blessing to the people, irrespective of religious allegiance, with no acquisition of property and with no threat to the freedom of the nationals. The response of the denominations-my own included-was supremely non-loving, even vociferously opposed. The National Council of Churches in India informed me that I was not representing the Evangelical and Reformed Church, which I never claimed anyway. From then on I stopped all mission support except one dollar per year."

Or, if true, it may just have delayed the Syria trip. I find the premise of the "secret and hidden messages" to be one of the siller Gnostic iterations to come down the pike this century.

Where'd you get the idea that was a list of Will Rogers? There's curses on that list and he was strictly a G-rated entertainer. Further, I'm not even sure they were using electric fences in his day.

It would help if I could compare the year Dr H "rid him of his hang-ups" and the year vpw got in trouble with his denomination for the affair with his.... *blink* *blink* *lightbulb* You don't suppose.... is it even possible.... that the secretary he got in trouble for improper relations with wasn't his secretary IN the church, but the one he retained for the "Chimes Hour Youth Caravan", could it? If so, she was hired in 1947. So, it COULD have been her, since she had been an employee for several years by then, and she's since said she didn't think much of vpw as a Christian... ======= And yes, Mr "I-Love-the-Spotlight" makes the announcement that, YEARS AGO, 3 different assassination attempts on his life had been made, but at the time he said NOTHING? This would not be typical of him. What IS typical of him is, years after something when it's "untraceable", to suddenly add all sorts of outrageous claims. He was even CAUGHT doing this sort of thing with the Tulsa blizzard. (And confronted-which is when he started saying angels lied to him.)

Cynic said:

'Mike': "For those who WANT to know, start with PFAL page 11, and PM me." ====== So, this is SECRET evidence..... Which starts on page 11 of the Orange Book. *looks* Oh, the 5 things we NEED to know to "receive anything from God." This is the stuff that has NOTHING to do with Mike's thesis, but, so long as he hides his 'evidence' from us and never subjects his ideas to any kind of objective analysis (meaning, never allows anyone to actually THINK about his stuff-instead only allowing the swallowing whole of it- "Here, eat this. No, you can't know what it is. Eat." but NEVER allowing someone to see if his ideas have anything to do with what's written- he can pretend what he teaches is actually TRUE. ======= Or, to put it briefly, he STILL didn't post the nebulous "evidence" and doesn't plan to. Next from the Emperor's Fall Fashion line, we have this lovely ensemble by Betsey Johnson....

Bringing this back since we're discussing it...

pg-210, 211, he speaks about Dr E.E. Higgins. She's the one who would call him up every night, asking what God taught him that day. ====== "God told me to teach the Word of God to others, but He never told me to how many people. She used to come to Van Wert on weekends. She'd stay at the "Y". She'd say it was like coming home. She gave me my first copy of Bullinger's<BR>How to Enjoy the Bible. She said, when she first heard me teach, that I taught like he wrote, and I'd never met the man or even read his stuff." "She taught me the great respect and love I have for the human body-the tenderness of it. She loved the body, like I love the Word of God. She just stood in awe of how magnificently it was put together. She rid me of my hang-ups, that false stuff, and taught me the beauty of the human body. We used to talk about the human body-where the life was located." ======== [How many people see that little comment as a dire warning, given 20/20 hindsight?] WordWolf:

Ok, let's translate this into plain truthful English... ========== pg-209, vpw on the genesis of the White Book. "'Somewhere in there I wrote the first holy spirit book. I can't remember exactly what year.'" [...by cutting-and-pasting Stiles' book and Bullinger's book on the subject.] "'I'd been working those 385 scriptures and they began to all fall into place.'" [ I 'worked' them as they appeared in Stiles' and Bullinger's books, and they were already 'in place' as a result. But that didn't stop me from adding my name to their work.] "'We're having the sixth edition printed now of that book: Receiving the Holy Spirit Today. It's a great piece of research." [ It's a pretty good combination of the contents of 2 other books, neither of which are ever mentioned IN that book.] "Lots of the stuff I teach is not original." [ 99% of the stuff I teach is not original-but taken ENTIRELY from other people's books and classes, teaching style and method of speech.] "Putting it all together so that it fit-that was the original work." [ Well, it all "fit" since it was of God, but reassembling their books into my book, and adding Bullinger and Stiles into Leonard to make the Foundational class, I consider that "original" since no one ever put them alongside each other. Of course, I'll never mention their names because I don't want to have my paper-trail followed.] "I learned wherever I could," [ No arguments there.] "and then I worked that with the Scriptures. What was right on with the Scriptures, I kept; but what wasn't, I dropped." [When Christians said something I thought was correct, I copied over their work. When non-Christians said something I thought was correct, I copied over their work. And I added tithing to the mix because the 10% was coming to ME now. Actually comparing things to Scriptures was incidental in many cases. That's how the "Law" of Believing became a Session I mainstay.] "Vale from Florida was the one who taught us about interpretation and prophecy. But he didn't understand the other manifestations. It took BG Leonard and others to teach us healing and believing." [This is vpw giving credit. This is not a bad thing. It is NOT a substitute for the legal requirements of citation, nor the moral requirement of being honest. ] "But in the holy spirit field, our piece of research is the most thorough and original coverage of the subject. And believe me, I've seen about everything in that field. No one really goes into it.'" [ It's the most thorough because it combines the thorough works of more than one good writer. It is not even SLIGHTLY original. ] "Do you know that three times in those early years people tried to kill me?" he remarks suddenly, facing me squarely. I wait, hoping for details, but Doctor relaxes his shoulders in a barely noticeable gesture, and then launches into a new theme." [ This is changing the subject, and inflating one's own self-importance. He's supposedly important enough to warrant murder attempts. Then again, those might have been fathers of young women who had received the 'special blessing' of the mog. ]

Probably, but please confine personal attacks in this thread to people from the book. You didn't have any comments on the last set of quotes, there?

Here, templelady... http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/quz_ipolicar.htm I also clicked up an old thread about this. (Okay old wayers 1978).

Someone asked about this old topic....

In pfal, (vpw's class), it was "Believing EQUALS Receiving" that was on the chart in the syllabus and shoved down our throats. You haven't really experienced pfal until you've read it in the original Klingon. ========= Can anyone explain what "Go until you hear glass" was SUPPOSED to mean when lcm would start rambling? I know he took it from football, but I can't find the meaning there, either.

*wild guess* "Presumed Innocent"?

pg-209, vpw on the genesis of the White Book. "'Somewhere in there I wrote the first holy spirit book. I can't remember exactly what year.'" "'I'd been working those 385 scriptures and they began to all fall into place.'" "'We're having the sixth edition printed now of that book: Receiving the Holy Spirit Today. It's a great piece of research. Lots of the stuff I teach is not original. Putting it all together so that it fit-that was the original work. I learned wherever I could, and then I worked that with the Scriptures. What was right on with the Scriptures, I kept; but what wasn't, I dropped. Vale from Florida was the one who taught us about interpretation and prophecy. But he didn't understand the other manifestations. It took BG Leonard and others to teach us healing and believing. But in the holy spirit field, our piece of research is the most thorough and original coverage of the subject. And believe me, I've seen about everything in that field. No one really goes into it.'" "Do you know that three times in those early years people tried to kill me?" he remarks suddenly, facing me squarely. I wait, hoping for details, but Doctor relaxes his shoulders in a barely noticeable gesture, and then launches into a new theme."

No, but I'm waiting for a song I recognize- which usually means rock & roll, and otherwise means pop from the 80s onward.

=================== "The summer of 1953, our whole ministry went up-Dotsie and Donnie and some of the others from Van Wert. We took his whole trip- really learned a lot about the other manifestations of the holy spirit. But he worked from personal experiences. I worked what he taught from the accuracy of the Scriptures. When I came home, I made up my mind that I was going to tie the whole thing together from Genesis to Revelation. So I did, and in October, I had the very first 'Power for Abundant Living' Class. At that time, the Foundational Class and the Advanced Class were together-then whole thing in two weeks. But the syllabus today is basically the same. The basic principles from the Word are the same. The class has filled out. But I knew the greatness of our age-the age of holy spirit and that every truth must fit in the framework of the manifestations. I just had to teach it to somebody." "I taught without a syllabus, but the class was the same. You could throw the syllabus away now and I could still teach it. It's a burning reality in my soul." ============ Ok, here's the timetable. vpw takes Leonard's entire class (not an interrupted one) in the summer of 1953. Let's say it was the beginning of summer to allow for maximum time. 6/21 is the FIRST day of summer. So, figure he takes Leonard's "whole trip"- at least 2 weeks of concentrated material. Let's say three weeks and say he took EVERYTHING. That takes him thru the end of May and into the middle of June. vpw claims he then took Leonard's classes and "tied the whole thing together from Genesis to Revelation", and added Scripture to Leonard's class. If vpw is being truthful, that means he would need to completely deconstruct Leonard's class, then completely rebuild it. He'd need to find the Scriptures to match EVERYTHING Leonard taught. Do you know how LONG that would take? When CG attempted to take the Advanced class (1/3 the material) and improve on it, he worked on it sporadically over YEARS. It would have been at least 6 months of concentrated work- and that was TWEAKING and IMPROVING-not completely taking it apart and building a NEW CLASS. That would have taken one person over a year if working completely alone. So vpw takes Leonard's class, and a few months later, runs his first PFAL class. He has NOT had enough time to build an entirely new class. He had time to make a few cosmetic changes. He had time to memorize blocks of Leonard's class. So, realistically, this could NOT be that different a class. Further, if he rebuilt it, he would have a definite outline for doing so, between DEconstruction and REconstruction. It should have been relatively simple to take the most basic outline, add a paragraph on each session's contents, then hand it off to a secretary for typing and photocopying. That would have been a rough syllabus. Ok, so either vpw told the truth or he did not. He did not have sufficient TIME to have done this in the manner he stated. Further, the 1.0 version of anything is rather different, say, than the 4.5 version. That's because there's years of refinement and improvements over years, and the makers find better ways of doing things. vpw claims the 1.0 version of pfal is largely the same as the FINAL result. Something like saying that decades more work didn't advance it past a 1.9 version. The only reason that would be, is if the INITIAL DRAFT was a FINAL VERSION. Supposedly, he made this in a few months of complete reconstruction. This is impossible. If he was just copying a final version from LEONARD, however, it's possible it was ALREADY nearly as good as it COULD get, thus not requiring major overhauls to improve it. So, on paper, it makes sense that vpw lied and just copied over Leonard's completed class as his own "completed class". That still leaves reality. Those people who have taken both Leonard's class and vpw's class have said that Leonard's class DOES have all the Bible in it, and all of the supposed "original" material of pfal was straight out of Leonard's class. The most ridiculous example of this is that the imaginary examples-Maggie Muggins, Johnny Jumpup and Henry Belocco were ALL from Leonard and just transliterated over. (Snowball Pete may not have been mentioned. However, he only appears once in 12 episodes of pfal, so that's not significant.) In short, there is no reason to believe vpw is telling anything resembling the truth here. He took Leonard's class. He claimed to make improvements on it, then a few months later (too soon to overhaul it), he taught Leonard's class with a new name. There was no syllabus or textbook initially. Over time-and time spent with books on the Holy Spirit field- textbooks "were written" that were Bullinger and Stiles' books with a new name and cover. According to some people, God wanted him to teach "his" class. However, "his" class was LEONARD's class. The only difference for several years was the name of the class and the name of its "originator." It would have been easier to make arrangements to arrange for LEONARD's class than to spend months slapping his name on a transliteration. The only gain for that time was vpw's name added to it. So, then, that would mean God wanted Leonard's class to be taught, but vpw's name attached to it and Leonard's name removed. If you want to believe that makes sense, go ahead.

"After that trip to Tulsa lots of things fell into place. God just keeps giving it to you as you can take it. Someone in Tulsa gave me the name of B.G. Leonard, or sent my name to him, I can't remember which. Anyway, after Tulsa I began to get his monthly newsletter from Calgary, Alberta, Canada. I never read that thing. It was so badly printed, you could hardly make out a word. I never read it for two years. And then a couple of years after Tulsa, I had been working the Word about laying on of hands. I'd worked every scripture and seen how they worked together perfectly. That particular day, just after I'd worked it through, I'd gotten B.G. Leonard's newssheet. Well, I just crumpled it up and threw it in the wastebasket as usual. I did some other things, and later that day I took the wastebasket out to burn the rubbish. As I shook it out, this thing, which was on the bottom, fell out on top of the heap in the incinerator--opened. There staring me in the face was an article about laying on of hands. I read the first two lines fast, and they are perfectly accurate. So I pulled the whole thing out of the fire before it burned and read it through. The whole article was exactly what I had come up with in my months of research. So I went in and called B.G. Leonard on the telephone. He told me he loved me, but I couldn't come up to see him because he was in the middle of a class. So I took the next plane to Calgary. His place was called the Christian Training Centre." ========================== "I never read that thing. It was so badly printed, you could hardly make out a word. I never read it for two years." So, he claimed he never read it. And, he claimed it was ILLEGIBLE- "you could hardly make out a word." "I just crumpled it up and threw it in the wastebasket as usual." In the rubbish, the paper, which was CRUMPLED- OPENED. Unless he had a less-efficient manner of crumpling, he balled up the paper without looking- then it was UNBALLED. Must have been a "miraculous unballing." The article stared him in the face. He read the first 2 sentences, and they were accurate. Ok, start with a barely-legible sheet of paper. Then CRUMPLE the paper. Then uncrumple it and try to READ it. It is now LESS than barely-legible. How did he read it? He said nothing about a miraculous reading or anything. Ok, let's suppose all of that happened-somehow-exactly as reported. vpw works on something, and Leonard worked on something, and they came up with the same results. (I've had that happen before, myself.) vpw's response? He has to go from Ohio up into Canada NOW and see Leonard. Face-to-face. Why? Was it because Leonard could have saved him "months of research", or was there an entirely different reason?