Mike

It fits. Try reading my posts above again, minus the hate for Dr. He did good for us.

I'm saying there's no difference FUNCTIONALLY. Natural man mind ruled in both cases.

No, I'm not saying "that precious few people in TWI had Spirit, thus the Way Tree was necessary." I'm saying that EVEN THOUGH we had spirit we were a lot like them. Remember, the gift token of pneuma hagion does NOT affect the mind. It was a miracle of God that we could operate ANY of the manifestations while still having a natural man mind that was enemies with God and that thought spiritual things were foolishness. Though we had token spirit, the HOPE of glory, we were functionally identical to spiritless Israel. *** And if you want to use the word "typical" I'd say it's typical to blame VPW here.

Howdy folks. I like to augment my memory on these matters of ministry history with the hard record, the tape and print record. I have a tape, a Corps tape, from 1972 where Dr describes the Way Tree revelation. He calls it that specifically, a revelation. It’s one of the 90 “Thus saith the Lord” statements I’ve found of his that so many people here insisted he never made. On this tape he says that God told him to apply a plan that, when you look at it, is generally a lot like the one Moses adopted from Jethro's suggestion. This Jethro plan was originally designed for an ancient people, where precious few had spirit upon them. My impression is that Dr had to have God tell him it had to go that way, and that otherwise Dr would NOT have gone that way. Dr’s original plan with PFAL was to have others teach it after hearing it from him. *** Oakspear, you wrote: “Early on the PFAL class was taught by people other than VPW. Putting it on film and controling it through approved twigs (rather than selling it) gave vpw a means of control and was a tool to centralize TWI also.” I disagree. I think you have it backwards. Dr’s original desire was to NOT have it centrally controlled. He was actively spreading out the responsibility of teaching the class in the pre-film class days AS A DEPARTURE FROM having central control all to himself. Why was it changed back to central control? The tape provided me with a clue, and so did the lady I worked with at HQ who was very active in the early 50’s. She told me that IT WAS THE PEOPLE who wanted Dr to teach it all the time. Dr wanted to go with a plan like the Israel had with prophets spiritually rising up whenever there was a need for governance, BUT THE PEOPLE wanted a king. (I think this is also why Craig was made king.) From what she said it was a lot like the difference between an audio cassette class and a full video class. We people on the field had a strong preference for the video classes and did all we could to wrangle them. Ditto for the early live PFAL classes. There was a lot of maneuvering involved in each class to get Dr to teach it himself. The people wanted the head honcho to visit them and teach, and if one of his assistants showed up they were disappointed. They were immature spiritually, and so were the assistant teachers Dr had at his disposal. It was the people’s immaturity that demanded a stronger teacher. *** Then johnj wrote: “The only people I ever saw that Wierwille admitted taught PFAL other than him was Mal George and Donnie Fugit.” Well, if my flimsy memory is right, Dave Anderson was also included, possibly Walter, although I think he was too young then, and I think there was a woman who did it too. Donnie Fugit MAY have taught a live class, but I tend to think not. He came in a little late in the process and he was very young then too. But, johnj, that’s an odd way to put it: “admitted”? Dr didn’t “admit” to it; it was common knowledge. To use the word “admit” is to imply wrong-doing where there was none. Dr wanted to see his students rise to be “...able to teach others also” as the scripture goes. Early on he implemented the plan, but the people were not yet ready for it. To use the word "admitted" looks like an to attempt to re-write history. This is why I constantly talk of mastering PFAL: because we didn’t and we STILL don’t know God and His Word enough to rise up above all this crap. We need to get sharper about what we were taught and about the actual historical context in which it happened... not the hysterical and “bad experience” distorted memories. In other words, the immaturity of the people was CONSTANTLY what slowed things down and eventually even bogged them down altogether, both then and now. The early plan Dr had was to have other ministers rise up and teach the class. It didn’t work, so he tried an new one: the Zero-ith Corps. That didn’t work, so he kept the film class in play and then started the First Corps with the goal of producing leaders who could run the kind of twigs that were self-sustaining and self-propagating and self-other-things... in other words, a NON-CENTRALLY controlled ministry. On this tape Dr fields a few questions from the Corps in the room. One asked about the centralized abundant sharing. Dr pointed (just like I did) to the immaturity of the people, and that as a temporary measure, the abs would all go to HQ. Shortly after that he started a ten year campaign to gradually wean people off the KJV and onto the far better written materials of the collaterals. As more was put into print the urging to master the collaterals increased. HOWEVER we all refused to do this the more time we had into the Word. The more facts we got under our belts, the less we went to the collaterals, and our immaturity lingered. So did the centralized money flow. I saw this financial immaturity first hand in 1972. My branch leader bought a great big flashy black Cadillac boat with the Branch abs and it severely embarrassed a lot of people. It was a problem. From what I heard things like that were happening all over. The centralized control was implemented to hold things together until we would finally get meek and return to the collaterals to get the message correct.

Yes, pawtucket, you're right. It was between the two of us and I let it slip out. I apologize.

Yes, because WHEN I SPEAK UP it rattles so many shallow thinkers' cages that they flood management with complaints. They usually can't address the content of what I say, so they simply cry "foul!" When I speak up, and say that the posting majority here has no clothes, many shallow thinkers revolt. They want free speech for themselves, but not for anyone who DARES to point out the abject nudity of some here. Many of you guys (and gals) here are STARK NAKED, and all the while you complement each others' fine apparel. The very human and inefficient practice of closing eyes to the "emperor's" nakedness is an on-going phenomenon, and not something of the past. By "emperor" here I mean the majority held theory of what went wrong in TWI. I have a different theory, WITH FACTS to back it up, and I speak it up. Call it an infomercial if you have no ammunition to shoot it down. We were sloppy on doctrine back then and it still goes on today.

Rascal, Well, there it is, ALREADY, the charge of derailing. You wrote: “That isn`t even isn`t the same ball park with what polar bear is talking about....” Wanna bet? Polar bear, like so many others here, often decry activities and procedures that took place back then as wrong... and often with the implication that TWI was inhumanly unique in the implementation of these wrong procedures. I am pointing out (by questioning the integrity of polar’s challenge) that these were merely HUMAN foibles, and that the EXACT SAME thing happens here, because there are humans here. I am pointing out that polar’s complaint lacks integrity or wholeness because it’s selfish, and polar (along with many others) seems to be poised to NOT address the same problem here. That it lacks depth, is my criticism. *** You wrote (with my highlighting): “I personally think that you are given quite a bit of leeway and freedom to promote your personal agenda her at greasespot...and think that it is mighty silly, not to mention thankless for you to whine about persecution simply because your attempts are not well recieved...” Yes, I agree IT WOULD BE silly and thankless of me. I direct my thanks to pawtucket for tolerating all the complaints against me, and striking up an agreement that limits my posting, but DOES ALLOW IT! To pawtucket I am thankful, but to you and your kind, rascal, I am not. *** NOR is it a matter of “simply because [my] attempts are not well received...” that I am speaking up now about this human phenomenon. I grieve for you and other grads who so easily blackwash SO MUCH of what they were taught that was good. *** NOR is it the case that I simply (as you put it) “promote your personal agenda here at greasespot...” What I have to offer is not my personal impressions, but the actual record: book, magazine, and tape. It’s not simply my personal agenda, but a SPEAKING UP that we need to look at the actual history, the facts of what we were taught, and not trust our HUMAN memories so much. *** You wrote: “I don`t know what you expect when you are attempting to promote a doctrine that placed so many of us into the darkest of spiritual bondage Mike.” I expect to be able to discuss it with those who believe in free speech, and want to discuss ideas and not personalities. I expect people with integrity. And, jut to set the record straight, I am NOT promoting a doctrine like the one that placed you in spiritual bondage. I have fought against the TVTs (Twi Verbal Doctrines) here bigtime. It was the TVTs that brought the darkness, not the written doctrines. *** So, I speak up, that we need to see that the same human errors in emotional thinking are taking place here in some, just like before. I speak up, that we did not get it right. We failed to absorb much of the written teaching, forgot another huge portion, and added in a lot of garbage, resulting in the TVT bondage that you and others STILL seem to be overly sensitive to. Get a grip. The books are pure.

I was hoping my whole life would change when I hit 5000 posts, but I accidentally placed that post HERE in this thread, instead of MAKING IT COUNT! Oh well, at least there's a little like-mindedness here.

The same human phenomenon happens to me here, when I speak up. When I speak up about the lack of clothing (accurate memory of the written teaching) that some strut around in here, then I'm subject to the SAME KIND of attacks. I question the integrity of your complaint, polar bear, because I don't see you huffing and puffing when I'm attacked thusly. It's not just you, though. There are some who decry the lack of speaking up BACK THEN, and then turn right around and try to silence me here. I'm thought of as a problem that needs to be limited. I see blindness in many posters here, as they repeat the same human errors here as they did back then, like ganging up on the unpopular idea people, and totally ignoring their input.

Thud's First Law is "IF you push something hard enough, it will fall over."

(....Hmmm. I had to think to myself... what cool games could I play now!?...)

But powerful gasoline, a clean windshield, and a shoe shine are all I need to say: Let's get down to business! Name TWO Firesign apocalyptic titles, one secular, and one Biblical. Hint: think rarities

It was the Firesign Theatre that first led me into speaking in puns, years before PFAL.

George, You're also not trying to address the spiritual issues, so you turn to the subject of me. Bore me with something other than me, ok?

It wouldn't have surprised me one bit at all to see Dr, on occasions, lower his fluency from the high level I did hear to a lower level. But I AM surprised none of you Sherlock Holmes wannabes out there could not come up with this notion on your own. (Or was it deliberately suppressed?) I have noticed that if I'm tired or distracted, then my fluency could go down. Just like fear limits SIT, fatigue and distraction can place limitations on our willingness to accommodate God in speaking forth unusual sounds. Just how inexperienced with tongues and fluency WERE you people? I'm constantly running into criticism of what Dr taught from people who DIDN'T LEARN what Dr taught! Or at least not very deep nor very detailed. *** Speaking of “willingness to accommodate,” that reminds me of another method I’d use in my Excellors’ Sessions. We’d go up and down the alphabet and “force” only sentences that began with a particular letter. Or we’d “fill” a segment of SIT with an abundance of that particular letter’s sound. It seems that God was VERY willing to accommodate us in this alphabet exercise!

Watered Garden, How dare I? I think you are too predisposed to judge me in the wrong. Please try reading it again without prejudice. I was not comparing the men’s characters, but the historical circumstances that had some similarities. Note I said “some.” Those similar circumstances stand in the midst of PLENTY of great dissimilarities. If you re-read what I wrote, keeping “the many” dissimilarities OUT of mind, you’ll note that I was making a point with “the few” similarities quite far removed from besmirching or lauding Reagan’s and Hitler’s respective characters. It would appear that you missed that point by focusing on something emotionally negative and far removed from my point. Or then again (and I’m not saying that YOU are into this but some others here are) MAYBE you (OR others in other instances) had no intention of reading, understanding, or responding to my point there. Maybe (and I’ll believe you if you say it isn’t so but still some others will think this way) you were just looking for a way to paint me in a negative light with your post, couldn’t quite find a legitimate one, so went with the illogical one, hoping it would influence others who don’t really want too much logic anyway. Being the gentleman that I am, why don’t I offer you (or/and those others) a second chance to do this, paint me in a negative light? How’s this? In my third paragraph above, you (or/and those others) could quote my kernel sentence and then comment thusly: Mike, you wrote: “I was making a point with 'the few' similarities quite far removed from besmirching or lauding Reagan’s and Hitler’s respective characters.” Mike, I can't believe anyone in his right mind would use the word "respective" in the same sentence next to Adolf Hitler. Anyway, you asked "how dare" I, and THAT’S how I dare. ******* WordWolf, You wrote: “He's entitled to his own opinions. Me, I say his conclusions were all SPECULATION and are UNSUPPORTED.” I want to thank and challenge these two adjacent sentences of yours regarding me, respectively. Now, didn’t you actually mean to say in the second sentence: “Me, I opine...” ? Ok, I know it’s too late for you to edit that second sentence now, but maybe next time you’ll remember.

Hi Abigail, I can live with that. I'm thankful for one such round of friendly debate.

Hi railroader II, I don’t mean to bury your thoughtful post with my long one, but I had spent the last half hour composing the following response to Abigail. Responding to your post, though, I think Dr was human and sinful, just like us all. Sure it must have been very unpleasant for him, as well as all Germans living through those times. I talked a lot with Jimmy Doop a few years ago, and during the 90’s. He said that Dr had said that Hitler hat some very right ideas early on, but that he later went insane. From Jimmy’s mouth I heard that Dr knew and believed and admitted that Hitler was insane, but still possessing some impressive skills. Kinda reminds me of Craig. It’s no small fact that Hitler was very successful in pulling Germany up from and out of a huge financial and psychological depression. He was loved like Ronald Regan who did a similar thing (not as intense, though) in pulling us up from a much milder financial and psychological depression. Remember 17% inflation under Carter, and the Vietnam malaise? I think Germany’s inflation rate was in the thousands, or at least far above 100%, and they were heavily oppressed by the Treaty of Versailles ending WWI. I don’t think Dr had any problem with the sad affairs of WWII Germany by the time he taught us the class. Dr did admit having psychological problems with blacks, because his brother was killed by one, but he also reported that he eventually overcame this, as HCW has verified here. My co-worker on staff went to high school with Dr. She told me of some of his early problems and how he overcame them. ******* Hi Abigail, Long time no talk. It's good to see you. No, I'm not God, AND I am (believe it or not) not in the least bit looking down on anyone. I picked up what I posted there from Romans and a few other sources, including first hand experience. I know firsthand how phony I can be and have been. I know firsthand how phony religious people can sometimes be, but have a good outward show. Didn’t you see any of that in TWI? Of course you did. It’s the norm for humans. I am convinced that ALL human beings (not just Jews, to your "Hmmm" comment) of body and soul are incapable of pleasing God and are in fact, enemies with God, the True God. Much is needed to overcome this, but chanting prayers out loud is useless. Humans show off their religiosity for each other all the time and it means nothing to God. He said this in the OT many times... in vain do they worship me, He says. Jesus said it too. Sorry, I'm just the messenger of a sad reality, that humans are mere animals that THINK they are spiritual and that they know God when the opposite is the case, they (as children of Adam) are owned lock, stock, and barrel by the devil. It takes much to overcome this, like lots of desire on the human’s part and lots of power on God’s part and few even try beyond what they think they must do. God is their fire-escape from hell at best, and it’s definitely not a love (agape) thing. *** As for my arrogance, that’s only true if what I serve is not the truth of God’s Word like it has not been known since the first century. It’s PFAL is false, then I must plead guilty to arrogance, but at least I’d be arrogant with a willingness to serve what I THINK is the truth. I could be worse, like arrogant WITHOUT a willingness to serve. But if PFAL is from God, THEN I’m not arrogant, just accurate, and willing to serve the accuracy of God’s wonderful matchless Word. Babe Ruth said (and many agree) that if a man says he can jump over a barn, and he can actually do it, THEN it’s not bragging. I like that usage of the word “brag.” I think it works for arrogance too. I think you too, if you look at what you do well for others, would feel the same basic thing I just expressed. Have you ever looked at the 4 Gospels with the same anti-arrogance stance as you just looked at my post? What do you think of Jesus saying that he was the ONLY way to God? What do you think of Jesus’ claim that anyone who tries to enter heaven bypassing him were like thieves and would fail, that he was the bread of life, the resurrection, etc., etc. He was NOT arrogant because he was accurate and he had a willingness to serve with his God-granted superiority. I happen to be a little taller than many other people. That’s accurate, not arrogant, if I use my tallness to serve others, reaching things on high shelves for them. If I expect others to worship me for each inch I have over them, then I have a problem. The same thing hold for brains, beauty, and bucks. Having a lot of either can make someone arrogant with no willingness to serve others with their God-granted gifts, OR they can thank God for their bounty and serve others with it. *** How do you know Jesus didn’t take PFAL? I’ve heard that one before, but usually it’s Paul that people point out could not have taken PFAL. Paul went on his time travel trip to the future to see why he was busting his arss so bad. God showed and taught him by revelation (It was not physics type relativistic time travel.) God showed him how His will finally prevails. Jesus too had something shown to him, and I don’t believe it was a one time short flick on the cross. It says he endured the cross for the joy that was set before him. In a late (hence missed by most) Way Magazine article “The Capacity to Endure,” Jan/Feb 85, Dr writes this by revelation: “ What could that joy that was set before Jesus Christ have been? He saw that someday people would rise up to believe, and that the works he had done they would do. He saw that they would do even greater works after he went to his Father in heaven. He saw all that and more.” Do I believe Paul and Jesus actually sat through the 36 hours for three weeks, four nights a week? No. They’d have to have learned English for that and it hadn’t been invented yet. Did you think that I would say they both had signed green cards? I simply believe God taught them in their own tongue (like us) the same general gist and principles that are set forth in PFAL. Dr had 17 different ways of teaching the class (Walter told me this) when he was doing it live. There are always lots of ways to teach the same basic material. This is a lot like the argument I presented just today to anotherdan in excathedra’s thread on “did anyone hear Dr SIT,” where I pointed out three different formats God has used to present the same basic message: the stars, ancient writings, and modern PFAL. Different formats; same Word. This shouldn’t be hard to see. The same is the case with interpretation of tongues: it’s the GIST, not a word for word translation. Paul and Jesus were taught the same things by God that God taught to Dr and then Dr taught us in PFAL.

Elitism in itself is self worship. Being an elite servant, in my supplied context, means getting a real big job done for God. It is love. Someone's got to be the best at agape, why not us? Groucho, Lots of people claim to be Christians. Some have something to serve. Grads have the most. That's not something to bust buttons over. In fact, busting buttons is NOT doing th serving. Busting open the books is where the best service can come from. Let's be the best at serving. So long for now, folks. It's been fun.

Hi Dan, I’m going to have to leave for fellowship soon, but here goes a partial response. I do thank you for discussing these things with me, even though you strongly disagree. I know that you know I’m not nuts, or otherwise you wouldn’t talk to me in PMs. I do KNOW that my ideas are not easy to take... at first... because they are so different from what’s out there in the world that we breathe every day. One of the greatest revelations to me is that God is light and in Him is no darkness, NO!, none at all! I think that’s the proper translation if the I John verse. God can not be darkness. God does not have the ability (anthropopatia - sp?) to be darkness or to contain darkness. God can not lie. That is an OT verse somewhere. I find it delicious to know these things and not be burdened with the common shroud of belief that God can and does everything. Sin and sickness are against His will. They are in defiance of His will...CURRENTLY. The whole idea of “free will” means free of external determining causes, even God. God limited Himself here. When we “allow” God to work within us things can be different, but an unbeliever does not have that advantage. Allowing God to do something is equivalent to submitting to His will. It’s a figure of speech almost (maybe IS one) where a VERY rare usage is brought out for great emphasis. Allowing God to work with me and in me has more linguistic punch to it than the simple statement of submission to His will. I see absolutely no disrespect in saying “allowing God” as long as it rightfully sits in a context of us taking something God gave us and giving it back to Him. *** Trying to avoid the usual charges of derailing, I’ll minimize my response on God-breathed PFAL issue. 1. - We no longer have the authoritative originals, not even close. 2. - We have no authoritative translating agency even if we DID have the originals. These two points present us with a problem. Your solution (I’m guessing) is that you believe God for revelation on both ancient language problem of fragmentary copies and mis-copies from the originals, and for the problem of translating. On this second problem most grads now defer to some other scholar to do that work and then the grad gets revelation as to WHICH translating scholar to trust and WHERE to trust them. My fundamental thesis here is that Dr and God addressed these two problems on a grand level, finishing the job for all. You (probably) believe to get revelation to smooth over these two problems. However, so do many others, and they don’t all agree with each other. I fact, they quite often DISagree. So whose solution to these problems is best? Yours? Knowing you I’ll be you do not trust your own current solution for all verses, but you are constantly fine-tuning it. If you think your fine tuning in one area is only sense-knowledge, they you know it’s not sure and somewhat a guess. If you think an area is illuminated by revelation then you are more sure. My main theses here is that God contacted Dr in 1942 to THE grand solution to these problems. That’s not so nuts! My main thesis here is that God gave Dr revelation on the best ancient texts when necessary and revelation on the best translations when necessary. When there weren’t any good texts or translations available for any one area, then God had to give him the revelation from scratch. That’s not in any way fundamentally different than your (and/or others’) approach except that I believe Dr’s set of revelations (from scratch and from others’ revelations chosen by revelation) is best, the best since the first century. We all know that what we ancient scriptures have on paper needs work and is only approximate. We all know we need to go beyond the traditional text and translations. God solved these two thorny problems with PFAL so that we could really obtain The Word and not merely a hand-me-down approximation of His Word. God changed the format of His written Word long ago, from the stars to paper. Does that bother you? The star reading understanding and skills of people had corrupted and so eventually God reformatted the whole thing on paper, instead of constantly correcting sincere, seeking, believers as they would try to read His Word in the stars. Those people who had become inordinately attached to the tradition of the star method probably thought that the paper readers of Moses’ time and after were NUTS! Those grads who are inordinately attached to the KJV canon and all that tradition think it’s nuts to junk it. I think many of them simply want it to be THEY THEMSELVES who are the grand fixers of the two problems outlined above. God gave Dr revelation. God had Dr write it down for us, so FOR US it’s much better than the old traditional format and procedures. That’s not so nuts, just superficially threatening if it is the case that God really DID give that revelation. I constantly point out here how much we either forgot or never registered of Dr’s teaching, so we are not in a good position to judge the truth of whether the revelation really was given to him. We CAN however finish listening to Dr’s teaching and then ask God. I master PFAL because Dr told us to and I found out how VERY FAR from mastering it we did. I gotta go now, and if you want to respond further on this, Dan, I suggest you start a new thread in Doctrinal on it.

wrdsandwrks, The bottom line is that we did not ever have a problem with our Jewish friends AND we did bring a lot of them to twig. There was no following VPW into anti-Semitism because there was no leading into anti-Semitism. It's all being manufactured now in threads like this. *** George, In response to your last question, have you never heard of outward expressions POSSIBLY being phony in any way? God looks on the heart. *** Exy, I think you get creeped out too easily. If you could deal with such a simple non-threatening idea of a "grad" better, then you could move on to dealing with lots of other things that bother you. We are graduates of PFAL. That is our fundamental commonality. If you were not a grad I could see it a little, and I can see it a little (how you feel) when it comes to how we treat non-grads, but even there I think you need to relax. Elitism in itself is creepy, but when an elite crew actually get a very difficult job done, then THAT kind of elitism is honorable. As grads we are to become elite servants. This is still possible to do.

Being an ardent do-wop fan, I tend to agree with you here, shi-bop bop boom. However I must remind you and everyone else, that God does not always get His way. Many resist His will. Eventually He will reign supreme, but right now, in this world, He looks like a minority player at best. Also remember He has foreknowledge and can either prepare twig members' fluency to greet newbies, or come up with some other means if no one overcomes their fluency fears. God wants ALL to be saved, but are all? I don't believe God has given Himself access to our minds in that He would twiddle them to be impressed at something non-impressive. He could teach and prepare such a willing mind, and He can prepare a conducive environment, but I don't see Him forcing the impression or all would be saved by now.

George, You wrote: “But if you buy the notion that there IS an Almighty God that once had a pact with the Israelites, why couldn't the U.N. have been used as a tool to reestablish that nation? Is there some sort of Biblical prohibition against the U.N.?” I mentioned it earlier. A country that fundamentally rejects God’s Messiah rejects God. *** You wrote: “...what IS the difference between the "Israel" of old and that of today? I mean, other than theological tenets of you and them?” Why the qualifier “other than theological tenets of you and them” ? That IS the fundamental difference. In the OT, when Israel would reject God, then He would reject them. When they believed, God would accept them. When NON-Israel humans would believe He would accept them. This is Biblically addressed in the figure of Abraham’s two offspring, one of believing God and one of believing the flesh.

Lies? So, George, are you arguing that Dr and Keostler were so wrong about this that God DID use the UN to set up a country in the 1940's for His people? Are you saying that identifying modern Israel as fundamentally different from Biblical Israel was a lie?

Nottawafer, Why do you say “It's either the spirit of God or it's not.” God is involved AND people are involved in TIP. God has His part; we had our part. God’s part is spiritual, our part was natural. We were the final arbiter, though, in that we could always STOP. We were in total control of the on/off switch (natural); God supplied the electricity (spiritual). In God’s portion of the deal “it's either the spirit of God or it's not,” and it IS the spirit of God there in that part. In our portion of the deal “it's either the spirit of God or it's not,” and it is NOT the spirit of God there in that part. *** You wrote: “Who cares what it sounds like. We didn't know what we were saying. Only God was supposed to right?” No! Not right! This thread is beginning to look a lot like one of those many Excellors’ Session I ran years ago. You have either forgotten what you were taught, or some of it never registered. This happened to absolutely all of us. Please think it though a little more with me here. We cared what it sounded like because it was supposed to be SIGN to unbelieving believers, which WE OURSELVES were in many categories. Better SIT fluency meant better sign to those hearing it AND to those speaking it. If I had heard “boop boop boop boop beep beep beep beep” at my early fellowships I’d have not been impressed. When I first developed my own fluency my believing shot up in many ways. Another reason to develop fluency is to allow a better interpretation to be manifested. Sure these things declined as the 80’s came on, but that’s because by then we earlier grads were drifting from the “book and magazine form” of Dr’s teaching to memory and verbal traditions that were springing up. The complexity of the English message also declined because we were not heeding what we were hearing.