Mike

The brrrr thread? I actually learned to like beer at almost room temperature in the wintertime. *** The quote in Elena's book and the transcript are not my spin but Dr's words. I'd say what DWBH posted is HIS spin on what he REMEMBERS to have witnessed. I too was there (in admittedly lesser capacity by comparison to DWBH) and I too remember what I witnessed. Sure I have my spin, AND I also have quite a bit of hard evidence to back it up. It looks to me that this very same hard evidence is what DWBH is leaving out.

DWBH, I think you're leaving out a few things. At that time in the early 70's Dr was very open about not being original in his writing, and he was even quoted in Elena's book as having said so. We've seen that written quote posted here on this thread as well as a similar one in the posted transcript of the 1965 tape (later) titled "Light Began to Dawn." I myself heard him disclaim originality several times back then. He did claim, and in rather clear terms, that his guidance from God was mostly in what to accept and what to reject from his teachers. He did not hide his teachers' work from us at all, like your "secret compartment" paragraph might to some uninformed readers seem to be alluding to. I will add here that THE ORDER in which he gave us these materials was also guided by God. He put it together in a certain order that was best for us. All this was above board and common knowledge in the early 70's. It was later lost in the verbal traditions that grew up in TWI that I call the TVTs. It was in the TVTs (Twi Verbal Traditions) that Dr supposedly got "divine dictation" as to what to write. Those later grads who grew up in these traditions (or older grads who had forgotten the earlier originality disclaimers) were dismayed at hearing that Dr's teachers had similar material. Dr not only credited his early teachers, he also labeled their insights as revelations for God. If that is true, then GOD is the true owner of those earlier texts of supposed plagiarism. If Dr got permission from the real Author, and instructions as to what to edit and what order to present it to us, THEN WE SHOULD BE VERY THANKFUL.

The films were transferred to video in the 70's.

Have you ever heard of figurative speech? If not, look at my response to Raf's criticism of the same seaspray post.

Ok, I'll try reading with a fresh attitude. I could be wrong and just stuck in an old mode.

Todd, I think, and this is respectfully put, as a friend, it's because you're too poetic and flowery the way you psot and too intellectual in what you post. I find it a lot of work reading them, and then very challenging to match both your style and the heady things you bring up. If you downgraded them to street style I could handle them better. That's just my opinion.

It wasn't a try on my part, nor on seaspray's. I think you tried to close your eyes to it. Jesus Christ is the central figure in all the teaching we received. You just wanted to see ONE SPECIFIC label. You're too tied to that one label. It's not even Hebrew, it's Greek. Why didn't you ctrl F his Hebrew label? And another thing, I think you're confusing The Way International with The Way Ministry. The ministry was initially named after Jesus Christ, who is THE Way and had the legal title The Way Ministry, signifying the work or ministering of Jesus Christ. It was from this organized effort that I came to call him, Jesus of Nazareth, my Lord. Around 1972 the legal title was changed to TWI. This notion of label quota and name counting goes back years. Whenever I see Jesus quotas brought up I suspect there's a dirth of even wrong argumentation. It's pathetic. I should dig up the previous Jesus quota accusations I've seen. Actually, there was one just last week, but I let it slide.

Raf, Gee, maybe you need glasses, or a more expanded vocabulary. I see Christ all through this post. Maybe if you were better instructed you'd be able to see better.

Well if the SNL Church Lady said that to me I’d say “LIGHTEN UP, Church Lady!” Attorney General Ashcroft had the bare breasted statues in the Justice Department shrouded in the name of decency. E-gads! How stupid people can act about sex is all about us. A lot of the message I got from the CF&S class is that we ought not to be so up tight about sex. Yes, and this is the duty of a Biblical research ministry, otherwise how should we deal with “pornographic” images such as these: Proverbs 5:18,19 Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth. Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love. Songs 1:13 A bundle of myrrh is my wellbeloved unto me; he shall lie all night betwixt my breasts. From “Jesus Christ Our Promised Seed” we can read written Biblical teaching on this subject of sex. JCPS page187 Matthew 1:20 and 21: But while [after] he [Joseph] thought [had pondered] on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream [vision], saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived [begotten] in her is of the Holy Ghost [Holy Spirit]. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou [Joseph] shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people [israel] from their sins. This vision appeared to Joseph, according to verse 18, “before they came together,” referring to sexual intercourse; but now he is specifically instructed “take unto thee Mary thy wife,” which means to have sexual intercourse with her. Couple that with what we have printed in JCPS pages 192,193: When studied in context, Matthew 1 makes it clear that Joseph had sexual intercourse with Mary before Jesus was born, but not before Jesus was conceived. This should have been very evident to us long ago. However, because tradition has taught that Mary was a perpetual virgin, our minds were led away from the simple accuracy of God’s Word. Many people have considered the subject of sex as unclean, and so do not properly understand passages like this one which specifically deals with sex. God’s Word covers all facets of life, from man’s deepest physical and emotional desires to the great spiritual realities of man’s redemption. God’s Word never degrades such aspects of living, but elevates them, dealing with them honestly and openly. Well now, isn’t that SPAYSHELL!

Well I just posted some specific details. Let's see yours.

I took the class several times, both the early 70's video in B&W and the final one in color. I was constantly looking for information that would be useful to me and people with little experience. I was constantly finding that I could not relate to it. It was obviously addressed to people who were "doing it" and feeling either guilty or bored or sinful about it. I had none of those needs, having no partner, and I was constantly disappointed in that class. Here's an example: the vocabulary rundowns. It was for ministers, who presumably were married, and less experienced people in their flock would be looking to them for sex counseling. Dr specifically said this in the class. I'll paraphrase with double-double quotes because I've never felt a need to seek out the video and look it up: ""If someone comes to you for counseling and uses some street vocabulary for an anatomical body part or some sexual action, and you blanch with embarrassment, that person will never be able to trust you in another counseling session, so I'm giving you all this vocabulary to get you accustomed to hearing it."" As street hippies, we'd burst out with laughter at all this, because we were totally used to most of the language. When he brought a word on those vocabulary lists we had not heard it was double funny. But for older straight laced establishment adults, they would turn beet red at many things in the class because they were raised to think it was all dirty and/or ultra private. Another example was the teaching in that class about how sex could be made more interesting. Having hardly ever had ANY of it, I could not relate at all to this. It ALL seemed interesting to me. It took me a lot of time hearing things like this to realize that just like ice cream and candy, if you get it a lot, sex could get a little boring for some people unless they got "creative" about it. That class was even more than 99% addressed to couples who were having trouble with sex. This is indisputable to me.

Maybe you should have read a few lines down before asking me that.

For those who are guided by recent emotions and dimmed memories that class was 99% aimed at married couples who were not having much sex. I saw that class encourage one middle age couple, parents of two girls in their late teens, to have two more boys. *** As a single person taking that class I felt left out and uninstructed in finding a mate, the area I felt a need. It seemed to be addressed to people past that stage, and even married, but who either had some hang-ups about sex being dirty or for whom it had become boring. *** I see people here at times condemning the kind of talk and attitudes that occurred in that class, only to then see them post and converse and schmooze with posters here where identical, IDENTICAL talk and attitudes occur. This exceeds double standards and lands into the schizophrenic zones IMO, and I am flabbergasted to see that no one else observes it. This kind of common, religious, human behavior seems to me to be the kind of real life phenomena that Dana Carvey crafted his SNL Church Lady on, minus the laughs.

Well hello again DWBH, Your manners and style have always appreciated by me (and many others) going back to 1971. I'm beat and I suspect the others are tired too. If anyone wants more info on this there's always the PM system. I had no intention of getting into another round of the Mike Wars, it just sort of happened.

I'd say, DWBH, that it's the other way around, you corroborated what I had posted MANY times, and that VPW had openly admitted many times, that it was NOT by divine dictation that he received the revelation for PFAL, but by a sharing process back and forth. Here's one such early post of mine on this: I’ve toyed with the idea that the PFAL revelations were first discussed and hashed about, much like Dr says in the Thessalonians Univ. of Life tapes that Paul and Timothy and Silas hashed out Paul’s revelations before they were put into written form. This is NOT the dictation model of written revelation. I’ve discussed this here before, how in Psalms it says (with suitable corrections) that every Word of God is pure, words-of-earth tried in an oven seven times. That sounds like hashing it out, discussing it, editing and revising it until it’s good for consumption. Maybe those booklets were part of that process. The fact that they were discontinued in 1971 should tell us something. This message has been edited. Last edited by: Mike, May 03, 2004 14:57 ****** I can live with that, but I know no one is going to let this thread end with my name stamped on the end and showing up in the forums that way. So whoever wants to have that "last post by" honor I wont try a come back. Thanks DWBH for a gracious ending.

potato, That could have been the case. If you read that “Light Began to Dawn” transcript that’s been cited several times on this thread you see that the way Dr learned from God USUALLY involved him reading some human author (Corps papers can be included here) and God showing him that such and such at passage was important and noteworthy, and maybe even worth if inclusion in a teaching, book chapter, or mag article. **************************** waysider, I think going that route in GMWD p. 14 will be a de-railment of this thread. It would fill many pages. I once had a two whole threads on it the subject of hidden spiritual truths that p. 14 talks about. One of those threads is still on the board titled “The Ubiquitously Hidden Teaching of VPW” found here: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...=1005&st=40 On that thread Posts #50,61, and 65 start the ball rolling on this. Let me know what you think of it in a PM. It’s been years since I read it. Please excuse my aborted attempt to retroactively place a table of contents in there at the beginning. You can see this by the time stamps. It was in the days when unlimited editing was permitted here, not limited to a few hours like it is now. Before I was finished with the table of contents project that policy was changed and I couldn’t finish it, plus all the links are obsolete and the pages are shifted. The reason there’s a D added to GMW is because long ago they invented four letter codes for all the books in the scripture index booklets. I think it was the way computers were less flexible in the 70’s but I’m not sure. I’ve just stuck with those old codes. ******************** waysider and Twinky, You both recently mentioned "the scriptures." I have a number of problems with that idea. It starts with the loss of the original scriptures. Then comes the existing ancient scriptures which are fragmentary and which differ from each other quite a bit. Then much later, like 1000 years later come the critical Greek texts, which were scholars attempts to fix the above problems, but THEY TOO differ with each other. Then comes the problems with translating to English, where there are hundreds of opinions as to how things should be rendered for many, many verses. Then comes the problem of reading English versions with a Western mind and Western mental images as to how things are “in the scriptures” even thought they were originally written for an Eastern reader. Then comes the problem of figurative verses literal interpretations of many passages in English versions. Then comes all the religious images of God and spirit that we all grew up with that are superimposed onto our reading of English versions. After all that, I find that figuring out what “the scriptures” say a mammoth task, one that is very subjective and fraught with multiple opinions. Everyone has a different thing in mind when they say “according to the scriptures.” I don’t want to live in that world. That world if multiple points of view is too confusing for me. I asked God to give me His answer, His point of view. I found out that this is the same problem VPW had in 1942 and that he too was ready to quit, but God gave him something to pass on to people like me. I have closely looked at what was passed on to me, not been at all interested in all the tales of abuse that seem to fascinate many, and liked what I saw. I find that most people who constantly want to bring up stories of abuse are not very familiar with the contents of what was passed on to me, so I try to help make the contents more familiar. I’m not trying to hurt anyone nor insult anyone. Please allow me to help if you want to see what you missed in PFAL. If not I’ll understand and try to not bother you. Please give me this mutual respect.

waysider, I apologize if I'm getting crabby. Can you put yourself in my shoes, though? Can you see how I'm trying to discuss one thing and people come in with distractions and insults to me?

Two days before the snow VPW was ready to quit his ministry because he noticed in his research that he had to "go back" on many issues. He'd be led one way by one author, and then the opposite way by another author. He prayed that God would give him something he'd never have to go back on, something fixed and unchanging, a rule. The next day God audibly promised to give him such a rule if he would pass it on. The next day God confirmed His promise with a snow storm in response to VPW's request. By getting down the idea of what a rule is in VPW's vocabulary, we can then see most of us have not yet settled on such a rule for our lives (I have) and that that the written PFAL teaching is what Dr claimed is the rule GO taught him.

First you insult me, then demand I not insult you, then you insult me again. I mention Jesus Christ in many more ways than you are familiar. The biggest is when I mention written PFAL. If you absorb and master the material in there you will have put on the mind of Christ. In JCNG Dr mentions that Jesus Christ made him his spokesman. I think Jesus Christ is not focused on sin but on where people are trying to walk with him. Now let's get back to the topic. OK?

Please excuse the repetition. I was writing the following before you just posted. GMWD, which for those familiar with the collaterals we were told to master, stands for "God's Magnified Word" Volume IV published in 1977. In this chapter 2 titled "The Benefits of God" every verse of Psalm 103 is covered. Here is the opening paragraph to that chapter: Psalms 103 is a tremendous example of knowledge and praise. Just the reading of it thrills the heart of anyone who loves God. The beauty with which this is set just from a human point of view, without even thinking of its spiritual impact, should set at peace the soul of any man or woman. For us as born-again believers there are tremendous spiritual truths hidden in this psalm that will elevate and enrich our lives as we learn them. I brought this up in regards to fine points in PFAL as opposed to mere KJV corrections. In this paragraph are not KJV verses, yet one strong fine point is there for those who are familiar with the class material, the collateral writings. In the earlier teaching, the bulk of what was published in 1971, we were taught to not look for hidden spiritual meanings. Here in this 1977 paragraph the hint is dropped that there ARE hidden spiritual meanings to be seen. Why the change? For those who track with these kinds of things, as opposed to tracking with gossip of misbehavior, there are many other changes to the revelation God was giving Dr and he was giving to us. In the AC we were taught in the 16 Keys that revelation, given once (not twice) can change when the circumstances change. There are many other fine points such as this that can be seen in the publications after 1971, which was the point I was making when you asked your questions.

Give me an example from (your life) of the results you get from your guidelines for living. First give me some kind of idea what your sole rule (or multiple rules) for faith and practice is. What do YOU believe in? Then give me one honest to God, tangible RESULT you get from applying your rule, or floppy procedure of the moment. Have you been reading this thread?

I already have, but they were ignored. I wish you had been eager to follow up on them when I first posted them. Let's see if you ignore them a second time. One was page 14 of GMWD. Another was the change in revelation between book chapters and magazine articles. Another was the Return of Christ.