WordWolf

Ok, this is a handy time to invoke this link.... Pike's Peak Seminary had no resident instruction, no published list of faculty, no accreditation, no agency of government supervised it. Its degree programs involved mailing of book reviews and papers by mail. About Dr H. Ellis Lininger being "head of the Dept of Education for the state of Colorado"... The Colorado Dept of Education said he never did head this dept. ========== BTW, thanks for the kind words, Belle. As you can see, however, the group effort on this is more effective than just me posting quotes. Others catch things I miss and post relevant links and quotes. I also got a few quotes from the GSC archives. My favourite quote hasn't even come up yet. It will make the most shocking stuff from earlier in the thread look tame.

Here comes another list of names, from page 188. vpw has said he and 39 others passed the hat around and paid for Christian speakers to come visit them. Anyone know anything definite about the "Spiritual 40 Club"?BTW, Glenn Clark's camps were called "Camps Farthest Out." I'm sure I saw something about that somewhere... That and the ashram thing... Who's John Gaynor Banks???? Here's Otto Lininger. pg-189. page 190, vpw repeats one of his statements, and hopes you'll connect the dots when he does. That was one of the places he suggested-again-that God taught him directly. page 192, vpw exceeds "everyone"'s expectations again, thru his friendship with an anonymous woman who supposedly taught him about Church history.

Yes, USING THOSE TERMS is a minor point at best. The doctrines were ripped off from other people. Slapping a new name on the doctrine didn't make the doctrines "original". Only the NAMES were "original". FWIW, I think "manifestation" (singular) is the best way I've heard the term in I Corinthians 12:6 mentioned. This, of course, means I'm curious who taught him this. I'm fairly confident SOMEONE did, but I haven't found out WHO yet. The TERM "administration" was his usage. The concept was straight out of Bullinger, who called them "dispensations". vpw said it was better translated "administration" or "stewardship", then called it "administration" from then on. Me, I used the term "stewardship" because I thought it more accurately represented the concept, with less ambiguity. Further, Bullinger numbered 7 dispensations. vpw numbered 7 administrations. They weren't QUITE the same 7. I agree with Bullinger's 7 rather than vpw's 7. Bullinger numbers the Law as #3, then Grace as #4, followed by the Revealing (#5) and the MILLENIAL REIGN (#6). vpw does not count the Millenial Reign. vpw counts the Christ administration, or Gospel administration, as #4, making Grace #5. The only advantage to this is allowing Grace to be #5. I find that Scripture supports Jesus' earthly ministry as that which CLOSED OUT the Law rather than just superceding it "just because". Bullinger wrote the book (literally) on Number in Scripture, but he wasnt so obsessed with it that he rewrote things to fit his theology. There, I expect his own personal spin produced the renumbering, but I suspect he didn't understand things as well as he thought he did.

I'm not sure, but that little issue MIGHT be solved if you scroll up and follow my advice. Even if it's not the solution to this PARTICULAR problem, it's all good for your machine anyway and may remove and prevent OTHER problems. Of course, you can always just ignore my advice. It IS your computer, after all.

On page 187, vpw shows how to give a compliment and take it away at the same time, when he's asked whatever happened to Rosalind R. I guess that addressed the earlier question.She "brought him back" to the Bible. He had been brought up with it, and people used it, but they couldnt teach him. Since he was a hellion, I expect the reason they could not is because he could not learn. "When the student is ready, the teacher appears." He actually forgot them in seminary. This was the "start" of him on that track. In other words, if he didn't need to for his sermons, he would never have gone to The Word, it "made" him study.

Hm. Interesting. This warrants further study. Frankly, I'd rather discuss this on a different thread, and will probably open one later for this, since I think it deserves a thread all by itself. However, at a quick read, it provides some ideas that sound familiar. Lamsa downgraded sin to "error" (which is similar to downgrading it to "broken fellowship" in that both of those are PART of sin and not ALL of sin). Lamsa put forth that he was the man of God for this day and time. (That ties up another loose end.) Lamsa's idiosyncratic position on Christ has been used by different people and the writer's suggesting it's the main reason vpw dropped the Trinity. It also gives a lot more info on Lamsa's psychic connections and so on.

I'd look into what info there is about a connection between Lamsa and the Unity school of Christianity that Thomas mentioned above. Those with Leonard's books have quoted him and it appears that Leonard didn't teach the Trinity in the classical sense, nor Jesus' pre-existence in a discrete identity as Trinitarians do. However, he also didn't pick fights about it. The only things we haven't seen were the usages of the terms "administrations" and "manifestations". They're incredibly minor points, but everything ELSE seems to have been traced elsewhere.

I think Raf was looking for his old avatar, the guy with the white hat.... I hate to be a noodge, but when all the vital stuff has been addressed, can someone recalibrate the dingus that adds the little blue boxes under a name? Apparently, they indicate # of posts. Excathedra's posts now distort and are hard to read- she's got so many boxes that it shoves her posts into a corner.

I thought the new people might want to see this thread...

On page 187, vpw shows how to give a compliment and take it away at the same time, when he's asked whatever happened to Rosalind R. Here comes another list of names, from page 188. vpw has said he and 39 others passed the hat around and paid for Christian speakers to come visit them. Anyone know anything definite about the "Spiritual 40 Club"?page 190, vpw repeats one of his statements, and hopes you'll connect the dots when he does.

Here's where he says "God taught me himself because no one else COULD teach me. Therefore there was no one else who DID teach me. I'm special because I learned it directly from God." This, apparently, is NOT one of the places where he supposedly credits Leonard, Bullinger, Stiles, etc for what he learned from each. Looks like he's saying teachers that taught him DID NOT EXIST. "If there's no one around to teach it, God has to teach it Himself." Those looking closely will also note that he never comes right out and says "God taught me, period." He prevaricates and implies, and leaves direct statements absent or ambiguous. That way he can say he literally didn't lie, yet still cause others to believe what isn't true. This is the same principle that he uses when defining "apostle" so it looks like it describes him, then leaves out actually saying he's one.

There's my approach, and there's Dogbert's approach from Dilbert. When I encounter them, I sniff once then walk off. I don't even waste my time with people like that if at all possible. Dogbert's approach is to wave his paw at them and say "Bah!"

My first question on this would be: was there a "real" snowstorm producing an instant whiteout? As has previously been discussed here, no whiteout was recorded for the area. Period. Ok, the next question becomes: was there a vision of this? Well, that now goes to confirmation based on the second half. Let's ignore the "if God wants you to tell other people, he'll tell you to tell them" stuff that got Joseph in trouble with his brothers. If someone claims to have a vision from God, and this vision does not come to pass, then they are a false prophet. This supposed prophecy had several components: A) God would teach vpw God's Word B) God would teach vpw God's Word like it hadn't been known since the First Century C) vpw would need to teach it to others. One necessary assumption there is that the phrase "God's Word like it hadn't been known since the First Century" actually had meaning. In the first century AD, there were no printing presses. What was known was the spoken Word, a handful of copies of New Testament books here and there, and the Old Testament/Torah. So, this entire saying is a neat catchphrase, but conveys a false impression. If this came from a god, it came from a foolish god. It's a cute concept that is a convenient FICTION. In practice, there was no unified vision of things. There was considerable division. Christians were on the run. They made sure other Christians were not in financial straits, and spent time together where they could find it, eating together and so on. Where they found a haven, they stayed and taught. They were hardly an "organized" bunch, but most especially, they were not CENTRALIZED. If they saw a need in another city's Christians, someone passed the hat around, and they sent money. Now, compare that to twi. Everything centrally organized. Everything centrally controlled. Everything STANDARDIZED. All the money goes ONE WAY> Permanent locations. What the top leader says, goes-no questions. Organized meetings. Extensive study of Greek, but NO time for charity. The first century Christian church would never RECOGNIZE twi. Any resemblance between vpw's work and the first century Christian church is faint at best, and probably coincidental. So, that part of this supposed prophecy FAILED- NOTHING resembled the first century Christian church. Moreover, everything vpw taught was ALREADY being taught at the time he "learned" it. God could not teach him things that "hadn't been known since" because all of it was KNOWN. That part of this supposed prophecy FAILED-NONE of it was unknown. Evidence is pretty clear vpw got EVERYTHING from the books and class of others, not from God. If there was a vision, it was NOT from the true God who knows better. If it was from another source (the only remaining option if there WAS a vision), then vpw was an incompetent who couldnt tell when he got a message from God versus the false god. vpw then claimed (in the Orange and White Books) that he learned their contents from God and only God. The entire claim fails under scrutiny. It's sole purpose was to put forth that himself was some great one.

But he never mentioned he took one of Bullingers' books and dropped its contents into RTHST, and that 2 of Bullinger's books became ADAN, which was a book he sometimes claimed was the most important book "he wrote"....

Actually Wordwolf, I was beginning to have some sort of fixation on your concept of plagiarism (or your understanding of it) as you purport that most, or the vast majority of VP's writings were plagiarized, because he STOLE all his ideas from others. Actually, it seems that almost every one of "his" teachings, stylings, naming conventions, etc. came from someone else-usually someone he never credited with actually being the source of it. Ever hear about tea and chocolate chip cookies? Leonard said it first... Frankly, if he'd taught ALL the same material, but gave all the credit where it was all due. I suspect I teach MORE original stuff than him, but I provide my sources. No, that's not it. Amazing you could read even SOME of the discussions and STILL not get it. Then Raf (and Oakspear) comes along and puts a fly in your ointment. Actually, we AGREE. You missed that. That's not exactly what they said. And not exactly what I said, either. This black-white thinking is not healthy. It also makes False Dilemmas. False Dilemma. A radio can be stolen or not. Intellectual property, that can be trickier to prove. We've discussed this. That is how you've SEEN it, and it's incorrect. I don't wonder. It's very simple. vpw claimed in his books that the material in them was a collaboration between him and God. Virtually all their contents were a rearrangement of material from a handful of other writers. All of them are uncredited in the books. That's illegal, and immoral, and lying. I claim he's unoriginal, and a deceiver for it. Often, he's a criminal as well, JUST for that. I consider SOME of it plagiarism, and most of it presented deceptively. You claim NONE of it's criminal or plagiaristic, regardless. That's simple enough.

"Matrix" or "Matrix:Reloaded"?

(page-178, since "Nothing cataclysmic...") Watch this next quote from pg-179. pg-180. pg-181. Folks?

Dag, this sounds familiar...but not from anything I've seen in the past few years.

Dunno about the occult bookstores. Lamsa's stuff has been carried in "Christian Publications", Manhattan's uberstore for Christian stuff. (Now if they'd only stay open LATE just ONCE....) It's also carried in Barnes & Noble, where it's among the CHRISTIAN stuff, not the OCCULT stuff. If it's carried in occult bookstores (Shaz said it is), that's news to me.

If you pause at the right moment, you can get a nice clear shot of all the Christians patting lcm on the back. It's in the second half, after he has the jacket, and it's while the narration is saying it's so fantastic to be a minister.

It was Bullinger. It's in the thread "the Way:Living in Wonderland" thread in the direct quotes from vpw. It's directly quoted in the first 2 pages, we haven't discussed it in detail yet.

But you cried at the scene when people first got born again. That scene was specifically designed for it. I've stopped feeling emotional about it since the time when twi people at the ROA '89 Mainstage Keynote teachings said that they were staying faithful and to avoid all emotional appeals- and then IMMEDIATELY showed THAT CLIP-and ONLY THAT CLIP-deliberately to appeal to emotion. It was such a naked, blatant display of hypocrisy that it's forever connected with that scene to me.

That line is bad enough, but the exact line was "..so that you will stand firm and erect before the bema." I mean, any teenager would have giggled at the phrase "..so that you will stand firm before the bema." This was a LOT worse. It would not surprise me if someone 'fesses up that they added it specifically to make people giggle because this whole thing was nucking futz. I'm reasonably certain Mu**** became fairly embarassed about the stupid things she did in twi-just as I'm fairly embarassed about the stupid things I did in twi, which had fewer witnesses. I'm pretty confident because she was already out of twi as of ROA 1989 and fellowshipping with the Geerite faction.

Here's what we know, or is blatantly obvious from vpw's own words. Rosalind Rinker was a decisive woman (she made decisions at an instant and carried them out), with a forceful personality (all this "pinning" and "backing"). She dismisses meeting with his congregation COMPLETELY, and focuses all her attention on him. She says she wants to meet with him. vpw, speaking about this time, says she "winds him around her finger" "pinned him down" "pinned him down" "backed him up against the wall" "night after night, day after day" (not "day after day, night after night"). After everyone else had gone to bed, they went alone to the pulpit. There they spoke, and she told him that he was very special ("she told me that God was showing her that He had something very special for me to do..."). (interlude??) Before they leave, vpw prays for forgiveness. ======== So, then, my questions..... What did Rosalind Rinker HERSELF have in mind here? Was there an interlude? And, my most interesting question of all..... Did the hunter become the prey? We know that before this, EARLIER, that he was prideful, arrogant, boastful, liked attention. We know that, EARLIER, he viewed the clergy as a PROFESSION and not a holy calling. We know that, EARLIER, he preferred books to manual labour. We know a woman arrives, focuses a lot of attention on him, has a forceful personality, and says he's special. They go off in private. vpw prays for forgiveness. We know that he was a control freak on his congregation LATER. (I refuse to believe a congregation with elders will have a man ARRIVE, immediately terrorize his congregation, and just say "ok" without replacing this wet-behind-the-ears young pup with less than a year outside of school. They'd have him replaced within the month. Having his seat VACANT is better than having a screw-up botching up the job. Let elders rotate duties until even a lukewarm replacement can be found.) We know that LATER he engages in some activities with a church secretary. vpw insists that they never fired him-he quit. We know that LATER he focuses attention on young, impressionable women, and sometimes resorts to alcohol to lower their inhibitions, and sometimes resorts to drug to knock them out. Was there an incident between EARLIER and LATER that channeled his self-centered, egotistical behaviour into sexual directions? ========= BTW, kudos for Ala for catching that peculiar phrase, which started my little side-investigation.

OK.....I have only ONE question...Why in the he!! did VP take so much from this WOMAN? Up until now...VP has no respect for woman. Suddenly, this lady is lacing into him...and she's the best thing since sliced bread. hmmmmmmmmmm???? --> The forgiveness word REALLY caught my eye. Here is a man that is sure of his beliefs...he's taking a stand ... he's telling the religious leaders where to go and setting them straight. Now he wants forgiveness??? For what? Someone feels guilty? What about?