WordWolf

waysurvivor, I hope you're seeing a mental health professional. If most of what you're saying is true, you need to be seeing one for the next decade, at least. If most of what you're saying is NOT true, you need to be seeing one for the next decade, at least. Unless you're deliberately lying, which is more than wrong, and does a disservice to all the REAL survivors here. So, in conclusion, if you're not getting professional help, get some.

Well, CES can remove logos and still have their material. If vpw removed all Leonard's stuff from pfal, the class would be less than 6 sessions long. Remove all of Leonard, Stiles and Bullinger, and it would be done in a short session. With songs.

You're referring to Revelation 12:4-9. In regards to the other 2/3 being loyal, I think it is not a big leap to say that saying 1/3 rebelled means 2/3 stayed loyal. If one were to complicate the subject (I've done that thinking on my own), one might imagine that the 1/3 that rebelled were not all entirely composed of the 1/3 originally under the dragon when he was in office. I would expect some of his subordinates to stay loyal to God, and some of them would be replaced by disloyal malcontents serving in the other 2/3. Either way, it is speculation and how I imagine it in my mind. I also think it's not a critical matter, or else it would have been outlined for us. Some stayed loyal, some rebelled. Period. The only place I've seen numbers on anybody was the garden of Gethsemane, when Jesus said at his arrest that he could call upon reinforcements of "over 12 legions of angels". If that can be taken literally, that means "72,001 or more angels". I do not believe Jesus was speaking of every single angel currently serving under God, but only some of them. (Since they outnumber devils 2:1, that means there's a minimum number of 36,000 angels on the planet, including the ones in prison who were disobedient at the time of the Flood in the Noah's Ark incident. I don't know how many of THOSE were imprisoned, either, but they're part of the original rebelling 1/3.)

AFAIK, The doctrine that there were exactly 3 angels in charge of all other angels comes from Revelation 12: 4 and 7. The doctrine that Michael is one of them comes from his mention in Revelation 12:7-8. Further, it's substantiated with references from Daniel, which refer to Michael as "one of the chief princes". Referring to Michael as "archangel" comes from his being called that when disputing over the body of Moses. =========== I don't know of documentation that settles that Michael runs 1/3 and Gabriel runs 1/3. Gabriel passed along the announcements of the coming Messiah in the Gospels, and he "stands in the presence of God". Generally, it's taken as assumptions that: -Michael is in charge of 1/3 the originals-the warriors -Gabriel is in charge of 1/3 the originals-the announcers -all spirit-beings under God are called "angel" ("messenger"), regardless of their function. -Archangel is the title given to exactly 3 angels in history -the 3 angels (Gabriel, Michael, Lucifer) mentioned in the Bible are the 3 ruling angels=Archangels. ======= I'd be THRILLED if anyone here can provide documentation disproving me about those last points being "assumed" and not DOCUMENTED.

I'd like to be awarded the title "Doctor". Since accreditation, apparently, is NOT critically important to some people, I've decided to save myself the expense and extra typing and research that normally goes into this process. After all, once you've achieved a certain level of Biblical understanding, it's as good as a Doctorate from most universities, as some people used to say (often). So, I turn to you. Normally, I would have to turn to a college or university, but since I don't need accreditation, I can skip that step. I submit as proof of my coursework, the entire body of my writings to date here at the GSC, including my digests, psychological and sociological analyses, commentary on religious movements, and general Bible knowledge. I further submit that my demonstrated abilities to date are at least comparable to those demonstrated by at least one person who was issued a Doctorate from Pike's Peak Seminary. Moreover, I've cited my sources when applicable, which, apparently, exceeds the standards of allowable conduct, per that same graduate of Pike's Peak Seminary. Now, none of you are registered with a legal accrediting agency, but, apparently, that's not very important. So, I ask you all... Who amongst you all would judge me to have warranted a Doctorate? Who amongst you all would award me a Doctorate? Those who would, please let me know on this thread or in a private message. Please also let me know the name of the field of study you are issuing me the unaccredited degree in. In case it's not obvious, I've no intention of using the title outside of the GSC. Most places outside the GSC make SUCH a big deal about accreditation.... Thank you all for your time.

Since some have been pointed out before, and Mike didn't see them, I suspect the answer is "No". He hasn't even thanked me for helping him with the chapter from one of the collaterals featuring "the Amazing Morphin' Man"...

[WordWolf in boldface again.] Just what did VPW do? That's the all important question everybody wants answered, isn't it? Despite his human frailties and weaknesses, VPW did his best to help people with the Word of God he knew. [Actually, a strong case has been made that he did NOT do that. In order to make things look original, vpw made some changes here and there, accidentally diluting the product. This was an acceptable result for him, since he was more concerned about presenting it as HIS best and GOD's best at the same time, and NOT with making sure the people got GOD's best in truth no matter WHO wrote the books. So, I say he did NOT do his best, certainly not of what it can be proved he KNEW. ] That is what he did. [ That is what you say he did. ] What I fail to see is how Mike is minimizing, downplaying, misrepresenting and mischaracterizing that aspect of VPW's life, and he's got the tape and written records to prove it, or so he says. [ Well, your failure to see something is no guarantee of its nonexistence. Ever seen Death Valley? Antarctica? The Dark Side of the Moon? Not with your own eyes you haven't. ] Well big deal, I say. All that that has ever done is spawned some of the longest threads here in the history of GS Cafe. The only people excusing their idolatrous ends are the antagonists. [ Your entitled to your opinion, even if it is contrary to the facts presented here. ] Since VPW can't live up to some "god-like image of Jesus Christ" it is that fact which justifies their all important, self-righteous (and spiritually erroneous) criticism of him. [ No, it is vpw's failure to refrain from drugging and raping members of the congregation, squandering money for the ministry on luxuries for himself, and lying and misrepresentation (among other things) that we object to. We expect a human who masters his lusts as a CHRISTIAN leader, not one who makes occasion for the flesh, to fulfill the lusts thereof. Most other ministries and churches get to have those-why shouldn't we have gotten one? ] Just the possibility that they may have to share a spot in heaven someday with the likes of VPW - man oh man, that alone must completely terrify them to no end! But what of the scriptures which say, "Therefore let no man glory in men" and also the scripture: "But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgement; yea, I judge not mine own self." Well you should just forget those scriptures, huh? After all, they want you to believe it is _MY_ job to bring to light the hidden things of darkness and make known all these evil's in the heart of VPW. But this is not what my bible says. My bible says this is the Lords job, not any of yours! "Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God." 1 Corinthians 4:5 That's all I'm going to say about this subject - which is the Word of God itself. Bye. [ Of course, taking your twisting of those verses out of their context, and following them to their logical conclusions, we should release all murderers and rapists from prison, since it was unjust to "judge" them. In fact, the criteria given in Timothy-and TAUGHT BY WIERWILLE HIMSELF AS CRITERIA FOR JUDGING MINISTERS- would be null and void. Hear that? That's the sound of "your whole Bible falling to pieces", since you said part of it doesn't work.... BTW, Joel Steinberg's out of prison now, the guy who beat that child to death? Interested in offering him a job, or have you decided to "judge" him? He's having trouble finding work and a place to stay....]

UH, you missed something. If Mike thought that the Pauline Epistles were of equal authority as the Orange Book, that would work. Mike thinks the Orange Book is of superior authority to the Pauline Epistles. Mike claims the original Epistles have somehow lost some ineffable quality-despite 2000 years of documentation. He also refuses to believe in 2000 years of documentation, but DOES believe vpw's claim of the snow on the pumps.

Haven't checked it out ...One thing that hasn't been said here that perhaps pertains to the discussion is the fact that twi is/was one of many many Christian denominations that spreads the Word about Jesus Christ. I know mainly of my experiences with it, but it can help today as well for someone who needs to hear all about Jesus Christ and God's plan for salvation. Yeah, you don't need twi, there's always another church around the corner and on television. But on the other hand, let's not limit God to how we think He should work. Twi just might reach out and help someone, even today, and that's not too shabby. We don't always know how God works in peoples lives. :)--> Even if we decided to limit God in that fashion, it would in no way require God Almighty to conform to our feeble intellects. God can utilize the most unlikely people, the most unlikely places, the most unlikely things. That having been said, I think we can all agree that, if we want to be a part of God's plan and execution of same, we should strive to be the best we can, as defined by God. Just because God can work with an idolatrous wifebeating hatemonger doesn't mean that we should all become idolatrous wifebeating (or husbandbeating) hatemongers.

Mike, you said (8/26/04, 6:57pm) "God is the ONLY one who knows how well Dr did in temptation, yet you and many others act as if YOU know, too. You don't! You should ask God how many times Dr DID say no to temptation, but as long as you are out of fellowship with Him and focusing on other men's sins instead of Him and His Word and Son I doubt you could hear Him answer." First of all, I'd like to remind everyone that when you say "His Word" you mean pfal. Second of all, Nathan, Jeremiah and all the prophets of old must have been terribly out of fellowship, since they spent a lot of time confronting "other men's sins". Paul must have been awful when he confronted Peter to his face, "since he was to be blamed." Third of all, the thrust of this quote.... We don't care how often vpw succeeded in overcoming temptation. We care about the times he failed. This is to be expected. By your standard, Jeffrey Dahmer was pretty good. He overcame the temptation to be a bad person over 99% of the time. Less than 1% of the time, he killed and ate people. Nobody CARES what a noble effort Dahmer put up 99% of the time. If he WANTED to stop himself, there were ways. He could have put himself in therapy. He could have made sure he was always surrounded by witnesses. Heck, if he walked down the street and had an urge to kill someone, he could have strolled right into the local police station, explained the situation, and requested to be placed in preventive detention. They would have made sure he couldn't kill anyone, and prevent a crime from occurring. Then they would have made sure he had counselling and followups, and see he was attended to. Jeffrey Dahmer could have chosen to separate himself from his sins. He chose not to, and lives were destroyed. The courts didn't care if he was kind to small animals. Likewise, vpw KNEW rape was wrong. This is the SAME man who taught in CF & S that it was wrong for a man to "help himself" to a woman, then went out and "helped himself" to women. Could he have resisted the temptation? Ask Billy Graham, who had a bigger following and NEVER succumbed to temptation. There were things he could have done to insure he did not ask improperly. The simplest was to make sure he always had 2 men with him at all times unless he was alone with his wife, or in his office (and keep them outside the office.) Instead, he planned and orchestrated rapes. It was wrong for him to WANT to rape Maggie Muggins. That was bad enough...but he didn't stop there... It was wrong for him to PLAN to rape Maggie Muggins. It was wrong for him to build a PLACE to rape Maggie Muggins. It was wrong for him to TAKE Maggie Muggins to the place to rape her. It was wrong for him to TRY to rape Maggie Muggins. It was wrong for him to rape Maggie Muggins. That took planning and carpentry. It was not a momentary impulse. === Mike, you have chosen an idol who was a more persuasive speaker and salesman. You have chosen an idol who was of WEAKER moral fibre than YOURSELF. He was a man who chose to surrender to his weaknesses. An expression of regret at the end of his life- regret that he'd ruined lives because he wanted to- does NOT excuse him for his actions. I hear Dahmer regretted what he did after the fact also, but he still had to serve his time in prison.

I think I got the basis of the heart of it. If I hadn't, I would have been a LOT more cynical. I DO plan on rereading it later. I do that with posts that I think warrant rereads for any of a number of reasons. *reads the next post* I also thought you meant me in the "cruel" reference. Glad we cleared that little detail. On another note, I think several of the past few posters have made points you would do well to reread as well (Rascal, Raf, myself.)

A) I never said your post was a mistake. B) If you thought my reply was ruthless or vicious, you haven't compared it to some C) I think you missed my conclusion. I made an unsolicited comparison, in which you came out favourably.

You missed my point completely. Did we need to be subject to the twi framework, error and abuses in order to reap the benefits of Christian doctrine? From what I've seen, ounce for ounce, we would have benefited FAR more from an expansion of BG Leonard's work into the United States, rather than have someone waste the time to repackage it and the man-hours to add an elaborate organizational framework to it. Heck, rather than just say "denominations are wrong!", we might have motivated the denominations to change from within. A LOT more work could have gotten done if a lot of the frippery had not been demanded. Even then, from what I've seen, vpw choked a lot of legitimate Christian growth on both coasts by demanding Heefner and Doop step down so he could run things.

Posted by Mike. [WordWolf in italics for once for variety's sake.] [Ahh, the payoff. I speak of hurts to the heart and compassion, so now come "master" pfal. ] [ BTW, I think we can now see some of the reasons why it's no big deal vpw abused his power. Supposedly, any man would have abused power....at least, I would have abused it....at least, I THINK I would have abused it.....it would have been nice to HAVE some power....] [ In brutal honesty, Mike, despite everything you've said before this, I am doubtful you would have raped your way thru the ranks if offered the SAME chance vpw made for himself. In that respect, I think you proceeded from a core of moral fiber that was superior to vpw's. ]

Originally posted by Oldiesman. [WordWolf's comments in boldface as usual.] Here's some:+ Folks getting born again, understanding that impact and being certain, to know that you know that you know you're heaven bound, no power from hell can stop you from going [uh, this is a common doctrine among Christians. Are you claiming vpw was unique in this?] + Folks knowing that Jesus Christ's death and suffering was the complete payment for man's sins [This is a common teaching among Christians. Are you saying vpw was unique in this?] + Folks understanding more about the bible, believing it's accuracy and integrity [ This is not uncommon among Christians-many do Bible teachings and studies.] + Folks understanding the difference between salvation by grace, and salvation by works [ Turned on a television sometime? This is a common doctrine among Christians. ] + Folks understanding from scripture what their rights (5 sonship rights) and responsibilities (preaching the Word), are in Christ [ First, you can't show "5 sonship rights" from the Bible that you just claimed was a big deal. Second, having rights in Christ-and corresponding responsibilities- again, are not uncommon among Christians.] + Folks understanding from scripture what it means to manifest holy spirit [ Not something taught in EVERY church, but taught in many places, as seen by BG Leonard, JE Stiles, et al. ] + Folks understanding from scripture that the dead are not alive now [ Taught in some places. Admittedly, not told in most. ] + Folks understanding from scripture the differences between "son of God" and "God the Son", and the various implications of both [ That evil Trinity again, cause of all the world's ills.] + Folks understanding about Jesus Christ our Passover, Jesus Christ our Promised Seed [ Understanding WHAT about him? That he paid the full price? That he fulfilled the promises? Those, again, are common. Some of the details vary. ] + Folks understanding, respecting and appreciating various other very good bible teachers, such as B.G. Leonard, Stiles, Bullinger, Kenyon, Jones, etc. etc. ... [ Let's see... other than Bullinger, you actually heard vpw teach we should read these other writers? He BURIED the names of Leonard, Stiles, and Jones, and pretended not to lift entire paragraphs from Kenyon and others. ] :)--> Ok, so what's the tradeoff? No Trinity, dead are not alive, in exchange for everything ELSE that came along with vpw.... Me, if I had to choose, I'd rather teach both doctrines, but not have to worry about lies, deception and rape by leadership, than face the fabled "good old days" when leadership wasn't caught plagiarizing and raping.

I have never expected to receive the Word taught from a sinless person. I would be waiting until Christ returned. Has anyon else ever waited for this? I think the REAL issues are the lies and deceit that followed veepee's life. VeePee presented himself as a man of God, allowed himself to be called the MOG, and made us think that he was tapped in to God like nobody else on earth had been since Jesus Christ himself. VeePee's words didn't line up with his pseudo life-style. That is why I disregard him and his teachings. I don't give him undue credit. After leaving twi, I learned that a minister has a responsibility to NOT present himself without flaws. They are human, and they are not superior to those who come to hear them teach. The church leaders need to be aware of their own weaknesses and need to grow and be open about their hurt, pain, failings, and humanity. Instead of "having it all together" and being insulated from confrontation and change, they are in a process of healing and opening up to their own safe people for support and accountability. TWI has a terrible problem with leadership trying to appear flawless and never making mistakes or admitting them. It doesn't allow them to be human. It started with VeePee's ego. It didn't end there. VeePee didn't spearhead the truth like he wanted us to believe. Truth comes from other sources also. The churches are not the evil places VeePee made them to be. They were just his competition. Even IF vpw spoke correctly in all his doctrine, (including how all the women in the kingdom belonged to the king), it would be sensible to examine and review all his doctrine from a healthy distance. If it was all CORRECT, an objective examination would only underscore its accuracy. If any of it is ERROR, an objective examination allows it to be revealed to the seeker.

So, "sex by the rules" is "a form of Mary worship". That's the "no fooling around" stuff that most religious-and moral nonreligious people- teach. According to Mike, it's a form of Mary worship. Never mind that it's in accordance with the Mosaic Law AND the New Testament. Also, "a few unwanted advances" is what most of us call "serial rape and molestations, premeditated and orchestrated." "Phony sex-purity religion"= "telling people not to engage in sex outside of marriage". So, translating the above sentence, Mike said "If I had to choose between my sisters (or future daughter) suffering thru an orchestrated, premeditated rape by the group leader, or getting caught up in a doctrine of abstaining from sex outside of marriage, I'd choose her being raped as less damaging. I've seen more damage from moral rules than from discarding rules. Do YOU have daughters? Do you indoctrinate them to abstain from sex outside of marriage?" Reread it carefully. That's what his substitutions said.

I was told about Jesus Christ all the time. I was told "The Word takes the place of the ABSENT Christ." Period. I was not to look to Jesus, author and finisher of the faith, but to leadership.

Aaah, the old bait-and-switch! Mike, you compared vpw with the people on this board. I said you hadn't dealt with them on anything resembling a fair footing. You then said the comparison was between vpw and the famous twig leaders you dismissed previously. Further, you decided- again, sight unseen-that anything I ever offered was insufficient. Wonder why nobody's eager to accept your word on hidden messages when your word on overt messages is so dishonest?

Ah, no one on this board ever got 1/2 the carte blanche to teach you as vpw. Level the playing field a little, standardize the rules a bit, and we might surprise the heck out of you.

Hm. You're right-I left that out. I'll have to do some tweaking...

Well, I hope the teens THERE learn something the teens in twi never learn.....

Well, I think it's SAD, anyway.

TSRTS, I hope you don't mind me ripping you off for today's signature.... :)-->

TheSongRemainsTheSame offered the following rewrite of the "but he taught me The Word" slogan.... "I do not care if he was a womanizer, a plagiarist, and whether he was a DR or TEACHER or operated the other 4 gift ministries. I do not care he hurt people and told lies and lived a tax-free live off the abs of those who actually believed his words and all the allegations of sexual abuse, and, and, and... Besides the aforementioned and all those who have come forward a testimony the OBVIOUS, Victor the Trickster and womanizer, a plagiarist, and installed LCM, HE TAUGHT ME THE WORD OF GOD and that's good enough for me."