Mike

Moving right along... But seriously folks... I too am an Oliver Sacks fan. He wrote a book titled "Awakenings" that later became a movie, where Robin Williams played the role of Dr. Sacks. In that book (and I think the movie too) a certain reflex act of impulsively catching thrown objects is discovered and discussed. I myself have experienced this phenomenon. No kidding. It was uncanny how much more accurate it was than when I've consciously played baseball. Sacks has a lot of fans.

This reverse speech thing has to do with the corruption of language over time. Long ago reverse speech said exactly the same thing as forward. Here's proof, an earliest of quotes where the uncials are all strung together: "MADAMIMADAM.' Hey, I didn't write the book!

But as you can see, what God taught him, and he put into written form, is not going away. It thrives even in the most antagonistic of environments.

Setting aside all the details, Raf, I think I can speak for THOUSANDS of grads and say that no matter what you all say, WE WERE BLESSED by the sum and substance of VPW’s ministry, WE CONTINUE TO BE BLESSED by it, and none of you CAN’T talk us out of it!

I can imagine VERY SIMILAR gut wrenching debate and hair pulling arguments among the relatives and friends of Uriah, among the relatives and friends of Solomon's victim's, and among the relatives and friends of Saul of Tarsus' victims. It gives God glory to proclaim that He can do many might things with and for terrible sinners like us. We ALL have failed to love God first MANY times in our lives, we all are guilty of breaking the greatest commandment. Praise GOD for His goodness to us all!

Here's one answer: to get rid of all the theologians... at least for a little while.

I'd say this is a emotionally wild extrapolation, not at all based on having experience working with the man, and totally ignoring the good he did for me and thousands of others. ****************************************************** Jim, I can’t overemphasize what a huge HOME RUN you’ve hit with this post. This perturbed me long ago, way in the back of my mind. One time in the 80’s the twig I was in did a word study together. It was maddening how may of us came to differing conclusions. It brought my deep hunch to the surface, but it wasn’t respolved until the events in 1998 happened that I’ve described here. Information theory is the elegant mathematical way of proving what you just said: “I know that once information is lost, it's lost. And no amount of fiddling will bring it back.” No amount of biblical research, using all the methods we were taught, will ever put Humpty Dumpty back together again. It’s the same as making an .mp3 file from a full .wav file. Information is lost and it’s lost forever. *** I’m convinced that THIS same perturbance is what VPW was so frustrated over when he was ready to throw in the towel in 1942. There’s something interesting just before the well know phrase from Elena Whiteside’s book: “He said He would teach me the Word as it had not been known since the first century if I would teach it to others.” In addition to that set of words, in the early 70’s there was another set that we often repeated, but that later fell from use and became less and less known. WordWolf documented this on Post #51 of this thread: “I was praying. And I told Father outright that He could have the whole thing, unless there were real genuine answers that I wouldn't ever have to back up on.” The perturbance that brought VPW to the point of being ready to quit the ministry was that he couldn’t get “real genuine answers” and everything he researched he’d later “have to back up on.” I’m convinced that, like you, Jim, the original understanding of the ancient manuscripts was utterly lost and catastrophically irrecoverable. Then God showed him His solution, revelation. Not just pure revelation, but revelation WHILE HE WORKED THE PRINCIPLES. This point of senses research working ALONG WITH revelation is emphasized well in the “Light Began to Dawn” we all earlier looked at here: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?showtopic=1871 In that transcript VPW documents often that there was work involved. He had to do the research using the principles and tools, and then God would lend His hand where it was needed. This is something he often taught elsewhere. I’m convinced that there are 4 reasons VPW taught us those research principles and tools, and it was NOT so that we could “get back” to the originals on our own 5 senses steam. That information, as Jim well put was “lost. And no amount of fiddling will bring it back.” No amount of 5 senses fiddling, that is. The Author could assist, though, and then it’s possible. Here are the 4 reasons VPW taught us those research principles and tools: 1. To document the way scholars work to arrive at the multiplicity of answers they come up with, and then later have to “back up on.” 2. To document how he and God worked on getting back to the originals, that is, what part VPW had to do in the process. God had to guide him. 3. To give us a way we could REtrace or REsearch his work. Remember how he used to emphasize that Research was not to come up with something new, but to “see again” what god showd him? 4. To give us a method whereby we could work on fully absorbing the PFAL texts, where there wasn’t the catastrophic problem of loss of the originals, just befuddled heads that need clearing. Using the research principles and tools on PFAL is new and novel, and it’s by this means I have seen more in the writings than I ever saw before, or anyone else has ever seen without using these research principles and tools. This is what I meant in Post #135 to Twinky when I said: “Like I said, I did study before similar to or more than the Corps, yet I was stunned when I returned to try it again. My credentials are that I have engaged in deeper the study and can hold my own quite well with anyone who posts here, as well as in many e-mails and phone conversations I’ve had with many of the research luminaries of the ministry past. I simply employ advanced techniques others have only used on the ancient scriptures." *** I’ve said all these things before, multiple times, and in different ways. Last night I really thought we’d finished seeing this thread’s lifetime. I thought I’d be all well (cough, cough) today and back to work and no more reminiscing the Mike Wars. So how DO we end this? Call a cease fire, or someone put forth the definitive argument?

George, what you are yearning for is the original setup, The Garden and/or the final return to same. The reason things are so convoluted right now is because there's a cosmic war to blame. But relax, it's only temporary.

WOW! I agree COMPLETELY with this, and have said so many times here. The latest is above where I mentioned guessing: "...if it's not by revelation then that's all there is, guesses, educated guesses at best, but then you have to guess which "educated" guess is the best educated and therefore correct." The reason the loss of the originals is catastrophic is because they're UNRECOVERABLE! Here's another way I've said it: If the devil scrambled up the original message, there's no way sense knowledge scholars can compete with that and restore it.... ...UNLESS GOD ALMIGHTY, THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR, INTERVENES.......

My comments are in blue, below. WordWolf's are in black.

Well folks, this has been fun. However, I think we’ve nearly exhaused the subject of this thread, and I’ve recovered from my cold and ready to get back to work. I’ve tried to answer some in the recent round of posts below en masse. *********************************** From your last sentence might I conclude that you are Corps? If so, I am thankful for your service in the Corps. I know I benefitted from Dr’s ministry, as well many thousands did, and I know for some considerable time and in some powerful ways The Way Corps was a very effective extension of his ministry. But we all know there were times, especially into the 80’s, where the Corps was far from an honorable institution due to the behavior and attitudes of many within it. One of my credentials is that I was not sucked into that mess, but was able to perform my service outside Corps, twice as a twig leader, once as a WOW, a few years on HQ staff, and many years in helps and governments. I also was AV man for many classes, which meant I had to sit in the class for more continuous hours than the class instructors. I also researched “off the books” on a number of projects. I can compare my research files and the wide margin of my Cambridge with most Corps and come out with more “credentials” in those departments. Do you know how much a twig leader had to study the materials? It was a lot, and then I put in a lot more. IN SPITE of my extremely high and diligent study (often exceeding Corps) I was TOTALLY surprised at how much I had missed when I returned to the writings in 1998. There were many reasons that in my recent ten year study I saw much that had eluded me in my early days. One such reason was I was a different person. Another was I had adopted a new tool to use: utter and total respect. In my early days I had medium to low respect for the integrity of what was on the pages. Changing respect levels changes what I was able to see. Plus I had some guidance from another experienced grad as far as looking for deeper hidden spiritual truths. In my early days my study was primarily focused on checking up of vpw for accuracy, correcting my KJV in it’s wide margin, witnessing, and teaching my twig(s). In my post 1998 study I focused on the Return of Christ and my relationship to the Father. Having the guidance I just mentioned was crucial. I try to pass on some of the tips I received from this experienced grad here in my posting for those who want to see deeper. Back to your question: yes, I know some grads and Corps did considerable study in the writings, but that doesn’t mean they were successful, or that they saw all that was in there. Hardly anyone has showed up here to impress me with their extensive and deep knowledge of the writings. Exactly the opposite HAS occurred frequently. I welcome exceptions. I still assert (sans Corps credentials) that there are many great and wonderful surprises for those meek grads who return to the writings with meekness and willingness to accept some minimal guidance. Like I said, I did study before similar to or more than the Corps, yet I was stunned when I returned to try it again. My credentials are that I have engaged in deeper the study and can hold my own quite well with anyone who posts here, as well as in many e-mails and phone conversations I’ve had with many of the research luminaries of the ministry past. I simply employ advanced techniques others have only used on the ancient scriptures. It’s only in my post 1998 study that I’ve limited my study to PFAL. Before that (and I’ve posted much on this) I went to many other sources, including other churches. I especially studied the trinity and One God matters back then. Prior to that I went into Eastern religions and Philosophy quite a bit. I also have spent a lot of time in science, especially Physics, Math, and Neuroscience. I know VPW pushed his point of view, but the point of this thread is whether or not he had (from the snow storm story) an upper hand from God and thus had a special point of view. If God did not intervene in 1942 on the catastrophic loss of the scriptures then vpw’s point of view is just another man. He claimed to NOT be a scholar, but just someone who got a special boost with a willingness to pass it on. If the snow story is factual and God intervened in 1942, then we should regard those revelations as superior to men’s opinions and sense knowledge research. If the 1942 intervention happened, then, YES, God’s monopoly on truth should be the only source we respect. Yes, we should look to him, the author and finisher of faith, NOT via our own non-special hunches and feelings and senses research, though. We should look to him and to the men he (the author and finisher of faith) appoionted as his spokesman. Two thousand years ago he appointed Paul, who had the most negative of credentials, and recently he appointed Victor Paul. That God and His Son can and will to work with sinners should give you great joy! If the snow story is factual, then this should make reasonable sense. If not, then not. *********************************** I once took a Modern Theology class personally taught by Thomas Altizer, the famous "God is dead" theologian who scored a Time Magazine cover. He had us read a bunch of other theologians. This was a little after I took the class in the early 70's at Stony Brook University. I didn't like the class, but I did the reading. *********************************** Oh, ok :unsure: now I see, :wacko: I think? :huh: *********************************** Actually, although I could use the kudos here, and do appreciate the jovial "title," it's also important to point out that I'm simply engaged in the process of mastering it. Like I said I have a teacher who has guided me in my study of the collaterals. I would think that there are many here who could surpass my "mastery" by adopting my techniques and getting meek about it.

That's RIGHT! And by Golly, no fair checking them things out. I want an EXCLUSIVE franchise on expertise. Maybe I'll set up my own church, and charge only 9.95% tithes to the first 100 suckers. I can be a MOGMIKE... as long as no one opens up them books!

I wish I had a nickel for every time I had to hear that joke here. But I know what you're up to, you waysider! You're trying to stump me so you can have the last word. And by having the last word you advance ONE MORE STEP in passing me by in numbers of posts. Five stumps and you pull ahead of me! Is that your game, you swy waskel waysider?

It's not at all ludicrous. The written materials are more refined and more voluminous, for one thing. For another, the written record shows changes in the revelation. For another, the written is more accessible for study. Finding thins is easier, and you can look at a whole page (or two) at one time. Can't do that with audio. Plus, the brain is set up with about 4 times more gray matter devoted to sight than to sound. When we read we use all that sight circuitry PLUS (because sub-vocalization is employed in reading) the sound circuitry. That adds up to five times more brain power being involved.

Not really. It was NOT readily available in the earlier days, and for several reasons. Look at it in these ways. Example A - Many people bought a 1989 Toyota and got good use out of it. Now they can buy a 2009 Toyota and get around a little better, but no one would say they were ripped off in having to purchase the older model a couple decades ago. That's what was available then. Example B - You send your daughter (if you have one) to a private kindergarten in 1989 and pay good money. Now you send her to college and pay through the nose. She learns advanced calculus at college, which is much better than the simple numbers she learned in kindergarten. But no one would cry foul here about being ripped off in kindergarten. She was not ready to learn calculus in kindergarten. If it were taught to her then she'd have not been able to absorb it. That's how I see our recent opportunity to learn and benefit from the superior product of written PFAL, the end product of the 1942 incident, and thereby making the snowstorm more believable..... (had to get back on topic, donchya know?)

I think this should be a thread starter in the Doctrinal forum, don't you?

Many of the books were put into audio cassette form and sold in the bookstore. The ones that weren't could easily be read by a loving sighted grad into a microphone and placed on tape. Life is often not fair, but in THIS instance it is! Thanks Tom. I appreciate that. God (or Goddess?) bless you. ;)

Look more closely at what I wrote. "The writings may well contradict some of the mis-impressions that many of us got from limiting ourselves to the verbal teachings. " By having the partial, hearing-mode understanding only, many of us developed mis-impressions of what was being taught. By absorbing the whole picture presented in the writings those individualistic contraqdictions melt away. *** In the past I've posted many specifics regarding differences between the verbal and written teachings. One was that the "Red Drapes" story was removed, and not in the writings at all. Another was "needs and wants parallel" was augmented with "needs and wants balanced." Another example of augmentation in the writings was in the "third heaven and earth" teaching. In the class it's about three sentences. In the writings it's an entire, robust chapter. Another vital book addition, in 1977, was the admonition that we shouldn't follow leadership's idiosyncrasies or when they are off the Word. Many missed this and hurt resulted. Another change between the verbal and the written is in finding spiritual meanings, hidden in God's Word. In our early teachings, like the film class (1967), we were urged to NOT look for hidden meanings, just to "read what's written." After we matured a little, in Volume IV (1977) we were told that Psalm 103 had "hidden truths" that wen beyond what a senses reading could discern. I could go on and on, but this is not the proper place to do so. Why don't you just crack the books, again, and see what a more mature reading/study in a far different atmosphere than the hectic "move the Word" lifestyle we were in can produce? (Are you listening Tzaia? This is the answer to your protest.)

Well, for starters, I don't think they contradict, but they do add to the verbal teachings. The writings may well contradict some of the mis-impressions that many of us got from limiting ourselves to the verbal teachings. It's even the case that some of the written teachings changed over time. This was not error correction, but changes in the revelation due to changes in the circumstances. More was being made available by God as we were growing and better able to receive it. It's like how things are explained to a college student in ways that differ from how they are explained in middle school. As for specific examples, that would take some time and some bandwidth. I think I may well wear out my welcome if I start citing page references and long quotes. If you'd like to discuss this in private I'm open.

Please look at what Oakspear accentuated above in Post #85. Even on the physical level, the writings are far more than one man's words, but if you include the spiritual, GOD was working with all the people on that extended team. *** If you look at the history of Israel they didn't do all that well at times. I think written scriptures are a VAST improvement, and God thinks so too, otherwise he wouldn't have had them put into written form. Verbal contracts only work when the stakes are low. When there's a lot at stake, everyone knows getting it in writing is important. Wasn't it Job who praised God for committing Himself to a book? Remember that teaching? It's the adversary who likes to play it loosey goosey and not be pinned down to written commitments. God is good and is not afraid to chisel His will in stone.

One of the great discoveries I've made in the last ten years, and this applies to me as well as to anyone else, is that what we HEARD in the film/tape class was NOT AT ALL the same as the contents of the writings. I'm assuming by your saying "sat through it" you mean you HEARD what was spoken. That is FAR from the FINAL END PRODUCT I've been talking about here. The books have more far material and it's more refined. What we "sat through" was done in late 1967, and was not at all the finished product. Over the next 18 years that material was refined and several more books were added along with scores of magazine articles. Many of us, and this is again is my great discovery which applies equally to me, substituted the hearing of the class and the SNS tapes for mastery of the written material. The verbal teaching got us only so far and they stranded us. It was the written material, especially the LATER writings that would have made the difference for us (and still can). Time and time again I have discovered that what I thought I knew from the hearing is VASTLY superseded by what I found within the writings in these past ten years. Hearing the class and the SNS teachings is NOT the same as reading the whole set of writings. This is a crucial point that many have missed. I did too.

I agree. Remember how vpw himself emphasized that his material was not at all so original? I think Oldiesman found that quote a few years ago. Hey! Where IS Oldiesman lately? I miss a lot of the old crowd. It's been fun, staying home with the sniffles and going over these things with all you folks. My hat is tipped to Paw and the moderators and how we can discuss these things with civility and respect. There was a time six years ago where this discussion would have resembled something out of the Wild West.

The bottom line to my position on the question of this thread I've already stated pretty clearly: that I'm very happy with the final end product (the writings) of the 1942 snowstorm story. That makes the story quite acceptable to me. Lifted Up's report of rogue snowstorms added weight that such things happen once in a while without breaking any of the laws of Physics, so the snow wasn't so much a part of the phenomenon, just a useful coincidence for vpw's encouragement.