WordWolf

I vote for "none of the above". I say it was indicative of his mindset-it showed what he thought of David's SIN. It was what he and his sick mind did LATER with other comments and verses that REALLY did more damage. ANY document can be twisted if you distort it enough. You completely missed the point there. Outside of twi, NOBODY uses that verse as justification. IN twi, quite a few DID. Was that in SPITE of what vpw said and did, or BECAUSE of what he did? I'll quote vpw himself on this one. Back in the 1960s, vpw was chatting with someone and ASKED them to describe what orgies were like. (He OPENED the subject.) When they-reluctantly-described it, thankful to have been DELIVERED from it, vpw commented. vpw: "You know that's all available. God put it in I Corinthians 7:1 when He said 'It is good for a man not to touch a woman.' If it wasn't available to have sex outside the marriage, God would have said 'best' instead of 'good'." The reply: "I just thank God that He pulled our souls out of that pit of debauchery." The mind-frame of a man who would pervert Scripture and claim I Corinthians 7:1 permits orgies is the same one who would claim that "TECHNICALLY all the women in the kingdom belonged to the king." Later, people exposed to his teachings claimed that the only harm in guilt is the guilty feeling, and we can sin incredibly so long as we don't feel guilty. Did this have NOTHING to do with the mindset of their teacher? Did he really NEVER pass along to ANY of them this concept? We know he did not teach it to EVERYONE. We've heard he's been overheard passing similar things to lcm and others...

Well, the key was, as later groups saw more and more overtly, it's NOT the BIBLE, but the teachings of hq and leaders which supposedly REFLECT the Bible. The idea of you reading it yourself was-OFFICIALLY-encouraged, but in PRACTICE, DIScouraged. Rozilla has said that reading your BIBLE isn't necessary if you're reading their magazine and getting their tapes. Ever see a corps grad or BC or higher wince at the idea of people doing their OWN research and sharing it? I, myself, was told that had been a PROBLEM and was not seen as a good idea. (Which I translated as "don't let me know you're actually reading it/teaching it" since I was going to carry on regardless.) I was recommended instead to just go over the collaterals. So, when faced with a discrepancy between the Bible and the leadership, you were expected to follow leadership, which led to the claim that "God will cover"- follow leadership even off the Word, and everything will be fine ANYWAY.

Please cite the exact verse that entitled a king-under the Mosaic Law- to "all the women in the kingdom", including-since this was the SPECIFIC example being explained- women who were already married. If "technically" (as vpw said) this was true, then "technically" Nathan would have had NO grounds to confront David. As it was, he did-David violated some of the 10 Commandments here. "Thou shalt not commit adultery." "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife..." I can get the exact verses for that if you need them.

Congratulations! Best wishes on the next steps of your journey! Feel free to drop in and say hello at some point. Later, when you're up to it.

You cannot put new wine in old skins. I got that one from Jesus. The ORGANIZATION certainly CAN die. It's a bunch of names and slogans, some buildings, some books and programs. Christians managed just fine BEFORE them, and WITHOUT them. They'll survive long AFTER them, too.

Bingo. I didn't even get to my favourite quotes, either... :) Your turn.

Is that the Dreidel Song?

(new movie) "Those are for sinners. You should be smoking these. New Testament cigarettes."

The title is "Christmas Wrapping" (Or "Rapping"), by the Waitresses, but yeah, that's close enough. Your turn.

Oh, that's easy! They taught BOTH at DIFFERENT TIMES! That way, an innocent hears the SECOND one, and says "they never taught women were to prostitute themselves to the mog" and hardcore apologists could say "Those of you who heard this and still thought they taught the other thing are lying or mistaken. How COULD they teach ONE thing and the OPPOSITE?" Worked pretty effectively, too. Some people are a decade out or more and still saying it.

*sets up the aluminum pole* I think we should go to the Feats of Strength, since we specialize in the Airing of Greivances already....

" 'Bah, humbug!' No, that's too strong 'Cause it is my favourite holiday But all this year's been a busy blur Don't think I have the energy." "Now the calendar's just one page And, of course, I am excited Tonight's the night, but I've set my mind Not to do too much about it. Merry Christmas! Merry Christmas! But I think I'll miss this one this year."

"Sabrina". If memory serves, that was Harrison Ford and Greg Kinnear's characters sparring.

"Now the calendar's just one page And, of course, I am excited Tonight's the night, but I've set my mind Not to do too much about it."

That's "Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer". :) I heard they made a cartoon about that. That's just wrong....

I've heard she's doing quite well for herself, thank you. And appreciates the kind thoughts.

A lot of people don't know what's important about "The Integrity of your word". One answer is here: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/editorial/pl...m-wierwille.htm

I feel a discussion of plagiarism of pfal is incomplete without this thread.....

There are some things we know for a fact. We DO know that there were several people who took BG Leonard's CTC class the FIRST time when vpw took it the SECOND time. We know that THREE MONTHS LATER, vpw taught what he told the new students was "his" "pfal" class which was 100% composed of Leonard's CTC class. The people who attended the CTC class HAD to know it was EXACTLY the same class they had just attended, being taught now. They HAD to know it was wrong for him to tell them it was "his" class. They HAD to know it was wrong for him to omit ALL references to Leonard and the REAL class. They didn't stop him. ===== That much, we KNOW. WHY did they not stop him? Was it fear? Greed? Pride? We can only speculate. If I were to speculate, I would say it was MISPLACED LOYALTY. They felt that, somehow, he was EXEMPT from the rules of Christian conduct, exempt from the laws of the US. They felt that he was ABOVE the law, that he was too important for the law to apply to him, that the stakes were high enough to justify criminal actions if he said so. ======== Further speculation- WHY would they have such misplaced loyalty to him? I would speculate that he used the SAME techniques THEN that he used LATER on a larger scale. vpw pretended that all the content of pfal, version 1.0 was his, when it was entirely Leonard's. Before THIS, vpw had encountered JE Stiles, who spent a few HOURS with him, preparing vpw to speak in tongues, and directing him through it. Stiles did a GREAT job. vpw's description, 20 years LATER, was very detailed and contained all the same elements vpw used later in sessions 10-12 of pfal. Stiles taught this no-strings-attached, then left. vpw's style was to attach this to pfal, thus charging money for it AND connecting pfal with it, and thus himself, whom HE called THE Teacher. Between the taped class and the CTC class, people gave him loyalty. Based on his techniques, and based on what we know of his character, and-based on the fact that he could recite the details of the Stiles incident in GREAT detail later- I'd say that he went thru this with each of THEM, and told EACH of them that this was from HIM, and not a transliteration of what he was told by STILES. I don't have PROOF-neither eyewitnesses nor a confession. However, it is a theory that does fit the facts AND his established behaviour. That's the best I can do short of one or the other.

Well, this was hardly a public, "official" statement. vpw carefully chose who he said this to. A number of the top people heard him, a smaller number was complicit in some degree, even fewer did it. Of course that "few people" was FAR too many. Rozilla herself was one of the people "complicit" in that she helped vpw get ahold of the women. How vpw acted on this HIMSELF was varied. The most basic way he did this was on-grounds. He had a home, he had an office, and he had a camper "office" set up for sleeping. He had arranged a place for sleeping when his house was RIGHT THERE. (AND he could have driven one of the golf carts around if he thought it was too far, and he considered one of the carts "MY STUFF.") vpw had all corps applicants submit an autobiographical (life-story) report called "from birth to the corps." Many people NOW think that he read these reports and singled out reports of women who had suffered sexual abuse in the past. They think this because it is known that previous sexual victims are often easier for other sexual predators to victimize later. They also think this because the results WERE that the women who reported this in their reports WERE consistently primary targets for his sexual predation. So, women were told they were on-grounds to be their best for God, and this man had a special connection to God (God spoke to him and gave him imaginary snow-twice and so on), and thus was a trustworthy Christian and NOT a sexual predator. Then, a number of "odd coincidences" would happen. A woman would be singled out coincidentally, and be called into vpw's camper. One of a number of things would happen then, but the ultimate goal was for vpw to rape them. A number showed reluctance or ran out. So, he refined his technique. He started serving drugged drinks to women, and they started passing out alone with him in the room, and waking up with that disgusting man doing disgusting things. There were other scenarios, but that was the MOST COMMON. When he was on the road, it was different. ======== Now then, he also had "cleanup crews." Some people existed on staff- or as Region or Limb leaders or their wives- who would look out for his victims, and stop them from talking. Those who seemed ready to talk despite that were kicked out of twi IMMEDIATELY-including off-grounds if they were ON grounds- and IMMEDIATELY her reputation was savaged. Everyone was told they were "possessed" and no one was to ever contact her or communicate with her in any way. That having been said, despite victims having come forth, and some people having witnessed the "cleanup crew" in operation in progress, there are STILL some people who will claim it's all a lie. Of course, this, in and of itself, does not affect his doctrine. HOWEVER, given his record of self-serving doctrine-- like "all the women in the kingdom belong to the king", "no condemnation", teaching AGAINST the tithe when he was in a denomination but teaching FOR the tithe when the money was coming to him, it DOES mean that each doctrine SHOULD be examined for self-interest. Further, the premeditated nature of what he did (he had to plan a lot to arrange it) indicates he lacks the proper character to serve in ANY capacity among Christians OR of trust of any kind. THAT doesn't affect his doctrine- but I don't respect conmen and rapists, and I don't heed their doctrine. I can't trust him when he opens his mouth. Sometimes he MIGHT speak truth, but I'd rather get truth from a RELIABLE source.

Hello, powerfilled and marypoppins. Since someone brought it up (and you missed it), here's a direct link to a thread that the staff felt was important enough to make into a "sticky"/"pinned" topic. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?showtopic=7913 As you may know, when first encountering internet messageboards, it is a very good idea to read the "sticky"/"pinned" topics before ever making your first post. Those are marked as important enough to read FIRST.

Let me say it again slower. The brochure you showed said "A lifetime of CHRISTIAN SERVICE." skyrider said they never wrote "A lifetime of TWI SERVICE." You said the brochure saying a lifetime of "CHRISTIAN SERVICE" was proof they had printed brochures of a lifetime of "TWI SERVICE". They both have the words" "A lifetime of" and "service" in common. They differ critically in one word. The brochures said they serve GOD. The announcement skyrider got- which was on NONE of the written and legally-binding agreements- was for a "lifetime of TWI service." See, one says "God", one says "TWI", see? I pointed out any Christian can make a committment to serve GOD. Corps seemed to be trying to learn things from twi with the intention of serving GOD for a lifetime. One of them objected, months LATER, to hearing that he'd signed on to serve "TWI" for a LIFETIME. Not "serve God while IN twi", "SERVE TWI." See, that's a small, but critical difference. People have been killed over less critical differences. So, 100 brochures saying "a lifetime of Christian service" show a laudable goal to ALL Christians. "A lifetime of TWI service" does-and should- raise an eyebrow like a brochure saying "A lifetime of Roman Catholic service" would, or "A lifetime of CES service" or "A lifetime of CFF service" would. The phrase "TWI service" is not legally the same as "Christian service". If someone (as you seem to have done) CONFUSES one for the other, that STILL does not make them legally the same. I love you as my brother in Christ, but those 2 terms are not synonymous. twi wanted people to THINK they are synonymous, but twi, as you know, was wrong in many, many, many things.

(Responding to my note that the phrase "corps vet" coexisted with "wow vet" but was phased out.) I can tell you that Igotout and Simonzelotes are posters here who bought official "corps vet" t-shirts once they completed their tours of duty in the way corps. You'll have to ask THEM for specifics. Please ask them to POST about it, since I expect someone to later claim there WERE no such shirts.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. Act I, Scene I. "How strange! You-Know-Who's dead body was found right next to little Harry Potter!" ============== Or Act I, Scene I. "What's all the celebrating about?" "Have you heard? You-Know-Who's dead! James Potter and Sirius Black caught him in a crossfire! The Ministry's still examining his body." ============== Not as short. "Fellowship of the Ring", at the Council in Rivendell of all the races on Middle-Earth. "What will we do with the ring?" "Gandalf will hitch a ride on Gwahir, the Wind Lord (that big bird.) He'll carry the thing in a sack, and release the sack once they're over Mount Doom!" "All right then! If all goes well, we can defeat Sauron before dinnertime!"

WhiteDove showed a brochure with a title about "A Lifetime of Christian Service." Seems someone needs to explain this again, and I'm in the mood. ================ "ONCE a Marine, ALWAYS a Marine." "Semper fidelis" ("Always Faithful.") Does that mean that a Marine spends the rest of his life being assigned battlefields by the US government? Of course NOT. He follows orders for his TOUR OF DUTY (or tourS of duty.) Then he is discharged and returns to civilian life. Is he still a Marine? Yes. But he's "retired" from "active duty". He is a VETERAN. He takes the training and experiences he learned in the Marines, and applies some of it to daily life, and he generally upholds their principles for much or all of his life. That's what "ONCE a Marine, ALWAYS a Marine" means. ===== Now, people entering the Way Corps were entering for a period of training, after which they would choose to accept assignents for a time, or not accept them. Their commitment to serving God would remain, and their training would remain. They would apply that in their everyday lives. That's why, for a time, the expression "corps vet" coexisted with "wow vet." A wow made a commitment to travel and speak for ONE year, and then he went home. He didn't move EVERY year. Corps entered the program with the intention and stated goal of learning things they would apply the rest of their lives. They never agreed-in writing or any other way-to lifelong servitude to twi. However, once they were in for several months, they were told that was what they had signed up for. (Skyrider mentioned that.) ====== In short, "a lifetime of Christian service" is one thing. ANY Christian can make such a commitment to God, ANYTIME. "A lifetime commitment to serve twi" is something else entirely...