Mike

I am considering that TWI could have mishandled the collaterals under LCM's rule in the years prior to the release of the year 2000 editions to the collateral books.

Actually, I was saving a rigorous reading and response to all the posts on this thread for the Christmas lull in my business that starts tomorrow. Is your Blue Book link on this thread? If so I will eventually find it. My purpose it to check up on TWI's editing integrity. I don't trust them there at all yet. I am happy for their baby steps toward PFAL, but think they still have a ways to go to meet the standards of VPW's final instructions to us. Their handling of the collaterals these 20 years is something I want to see first hand. That is very labor intensive, comparing all the collaterals, old and new. If I had one example of what I perceived you have advertised, that would save me MUCH time in holding their feet to the fire on proper handling of the collaterals.

That is not what I am doing. The supposed errors pointed out here are a totally separate matter. I am looking for what I would consider TWI errors in making changes. You are reading my intentions incorrectly

I am trying to mine your memory for labor savings. SURELY you can remember ONE change in the books! SURELY your x can remember one.

No, that's not what I mean. I mean a change in the collaterals. There is no place where the 1942 promise is mentioned in the collaterals... I dont think it is even hinted at.... I want to do a before and after comparison in the collaterals they sell now in the TWI Bookstore. THAT's what I thought you were saying. You mentioned your wife working on changes for years.

No. I really do care! I care enough to plan to do the arduous work of comparing, but you could save me MUCH of that work. Also, I'd want to call you on putting your money where your mouth is. If there really were a MULTITUDE of changes, surely you can remember ONE, and it would be no effort to tell me. You have told me this tale THREE TIMES now so surely you have a simple single solitary piece of evidence to back you up. Actually, I would like to see the whole multitude of changes. Is there any way you can pass on this desire to your x-wife? Is she still in TWI? If so, that would be a BIG bonus. I want to see the evidence that TWI changed a multitude of things in the collaterals to white wash their plagiarism guilt.

These were private phone calls. No publicity value to his group. I did not get the impression he was trying to recruit me to join his group. That DID happen with a private phone call with another great researcher. He tried to shmooze me to joining his research team when he realized he could not talk me out of highly respecting the collaterals. He overtly tried to recruit me as adding balance to his team. I declined.

Can you please give me me one or two examples of this "multitude" of errors TWI have whitewashed? I have my original set of collaterals to compare the newer collaterals with. I intended to do this with the new editions that came out in 2000 and that I got with the new PFAL-T. My intent is to see if TWI made any errors in their changing things.

Do you mean more thinkers who are skillful? Or do you mean thinkers who are more skillful? I try to acquaint myself with both, but I would not mind another name for consideration.

LONG after. Around 2006.

My short response is "You got me wrong." I wish he was the man he knew to be. The collaterals are different. They help me and others to read the Bible. */*/*/* I really want to get to your long, more challenging post, but am putting it off to when I have more time. All of my immediate family is 3,000 miles away, so tomorrow and Christmas day I will have lots of time. I banged out a response for today's post as I was getting ready for work. */*/*/* You wrote a description of someone idolizing VPW . That which you wrote, if adjusted for accurate application to me, would not idolizing VPW. /*/*/*/*/* When you want to beat to the plagiarism bush, then all the content in the collaterals originates elsewhere, and not from VPW. Beating the plagiarism bush means exposing VPW’s sin of stealing the good teachings of others. Those poor hard working ministers of light were robbed by the evil VPW. That is the sentiment pumped. And this promotes the idea that he is untrustworthy. The greater the plagiarism sin (on top of others) can be portrayed to be, the greater “evil personified” he is. THEN, change the scene. When you want to discredit ME by labeling me a VPW idolator, I protest and say my focus is the collaterals. All of sudden those poor unfortunate writers of all the collaterals’ contents contents are forgotten, and they are besmirched, because the “evil personified” guy’s NAME IS ON THEM. The name of VPW on all those otherwise good writings seeps into them and makes them evil. I don’t buy it. The contents of the collaterals are good. (or at least debatable in a few places) One of the most skillful thinkers I know, predisposed to find dangerous, damaging error in the collaterals, could find NONE. He said TWICE that if I disciplined my life to the collaterals and nothing else (except the Bible they point to), then I would do well in life. This was a modern Gamaliel who said this; your chief Whistle-Blower who said this.

Ok. Please allow me to fill in that part of the story: The short version is it only LOOKS like I idolize VPW. But using the phrase “idolize VPW” is not the best way to describe those looks. First of all, VPW is not the target of my message. I target the written collaterals, and by everyone’s admission here, the sources of that text are varied and large in number. My target is built from all their contributions. I believe God gave massive revelations to them all, and VPW was a minor contributor, but the major “funnel” by which they delivered to me. This is a perspective I have hammered out for myself very carefully, fairly recently, not in my youth. I did it with a lot of awareness of my many disagreements and disappointments with VPW that cropped up over the years. I have recently been posting a number of details, in this regard. If what I do is idolatry, then it certainly is NOT simple VPW idolatry. If I were to paste here all my recent digs against him, you would be in agreement that I must be rabidly idolizing something else. What I focus at is pretty subtle, and many points were never understood by any frequent posters here now. …yet. Most are totally stuck believing I am idolizing VPW. In order to facilitate communication, please alter your Score Card to say that I am a “written collateral idolizer.” That would be a more accurate base from which we might debate the word “idolize.” But if you stay locked onto “Mike idolizes VPW” then we will NEVER communicate. You will misunderstand all that I say, if we can’t agree on WHAT it is that I “idolize.” You will be criticizing my position position without having adequate knowledge of my position. Summary of my plea: come half way in my direction. Say Mike idolizes the collaterals. */*/*/* Fifteen years ago, a key element in what I focus on was finally understood by two posters, Abigail and Oakspear. They did NOT agree with me, but they were the ONLY ones who understood me, on that one key point. There were approximately 70 posters poised to try and debate me out of what NONE of them, but two, understood. On that one point, Oakspear and Abigail were the only ones I could talk to, and disagree with. It was pointless to reason with those who completely misunderstood my position there. */*/*/* If all that doesn’t convince you, would it convince you if I collected together all my “startling admissions” of VPW falling short of my expectations? I would bet WW has a folder of them, just in case they come in handy. Mike idolizes the books. Meet me half way, please? */*/*/*/* You wrote: Or now that the anti idol schtick did not fly you’re going to try a different tactic, the “snapped” to love and hate idea. No, I am trying to change gears totally here starting today. I’ll keep on trying that new approach here with you. With the anti-idol schtick, I thought I’d try and describe what I mean there without the dramatics. But not this minute. I started that different tone in my opening of this thread, and explaining the snap thing in a non-adversarial way. I see it as an explanatory tool. I’ll explain more as I deal with the specifics of Twinky’s post. */*/*/*/* You wrote: I can see tactically how that lines up with painting Karl Kahlers book negatively. So “The Cult That Snapped” historical account written by a Way Corps member now instead of it being a cult that snapped instead it was the author. I honestly forgot all about his book, and never read it. If he wrote it after 2002, then I have proof that I came up with the snap idea before him, I just didn’t use the word snap back then. My opening post on this thread explains how I was observing “snappers” in the 1979s who were doing it appropriately, and I wished I could imitate them. I have no idea what Karl said in his book. I was not attracted to it. I was attracted to GreaseSpot for Grad News, which was difficult to come by in 2001. I wanted grad news of all sorts. Friend Tracker was also a major draw for me here. Karl Kahler was just a blip in all that for me, in the year that I was read-only lurker. I never had any intention of posting here. It was too negative for me, so I skimmed lots of things. But I appreciated that GSC was a NETWORKING HUB for PFAL grads. That was special to me. I had gone through the GreaseSpot LIVE version in 1987, and I probably associated Karl’s book with that event. I had enough of whistles blown to last a lifetime at that time. That book never interested me. I don’t remember any reason why, other than time budgets. The term “snap” I got from (but only vaguely remember) an old TWI weekly tape, SNT #965 “The Man Who ‘Snapped.’” It was about Paul’s conversion, I think. Maybe it just started with that and went on to something else. I can get much more info on this if anyone is interested. Like a transcript.

Thanks for the shorty post, so I can do a shorty PRE-response to your longer one. In the spirit of the Provisional Peace Treaty just penned with OldSchool (careful, the ink's still wet!) I'll chose Door Number "E." Yes, in the middle of food fights, and a parade of jeering jesters, I often lose track of my Empathy Engine's throttle. I'm trying to, but begging for a little empathy for me also, think of my position a little. We all know that belittling me can be a sport here at times. It is difficult to turn off my defenses, but I can try. It's a busy time of year, so I need to be brief. I will have time soon to fully read your long post, and work on this. */*/*/*/* Point to consider: with Penworks, my reading is just to her finishing the class and a little tiny beyond, a little into chapter 13. Losing my Dad recently I totally empathized with the part about losing her mother, and her mourning lacking closure. But that is tangential to her story-line, so I did not write about it here, nor do I plan to. Should I have? I've not tried to be thorough in my few comments so far about my reading. I'll do that after I finish. Maybe I should have kept quiet and not posted my early impressions. I do plan to crank up the empathy with her when the Research Dept thing comes up, because I already went through a couple of years with that confusion myself. I think I know pretty much what bothered her there. We will see. Over the vacation, I'll surely have time to finish it. I have no idea what else happens in that book. I'll tell you where I have been totally empathetic toward Penwork, and that is is in my not going to her thread to post my text.

Thanks for bringing that up. I should have used scare quotes. How's this look? “The Bereans took it in for deep pondering, worked the scriptures day after day, talked with each other a lot during this scripture party. They probably had only one “Bible” to work with, which was a bulky set of scrolls in a heavy protective box, called a “bookhouse.” They compared impressions with each there, in this careful public study. And then they gradually arrived at the point where they were ready to fully believe Paul.” I added a few words, bold fonted. They made a slow, deliberate, community decision to believe. Nobody jumped on the decision. It was not emotion based or emotion pumped up. With light switches, the old-fashioned type was real snappy. But just the opposite, some new ones are gradual, and called dimmer switches. I don’t like thinking of my self being jealous of the snappier commitment people in the 1970s, and I dislike even more using the name “dimmer switchers” to apply to me, even though it partially applies. It was often fear that slowed me down in committing, and had I been brighter I’d have figured it out sooner. Just thinking out loud, trying to come up with a better sounding term than AMS for the opposite of snapping. Analog vs. digital? */*/*/*/*/* You also wrote: “In the synagogues was where the scrolls were kept and they weren Gideon Bibles you would find in motel6. It was common practice to ask question of the scribes, pharisees, Drs of the Law and to actually argue with them. They employed true critical thinking skills. If you would actually like to discuss scripture in a meaningful way Im game...if you would like to keep imagining your own reality then were just gonna keep going round and round." I most certainly would like to do that! The conditional clause might need some negotiation, though If “…to keep imagining your own reality…” means that I throw away the set of assumptions I have decided to base my life on for the past 24 years, effectively change my "religion-horse" midstream, and be a proselyte for some religion that meets your approval, then …. then ... I might want to sleep on it a little. If “…to keep imagining your own reality…” means that I focus my posting on the scripture discussion, setting aside my overt and covert calls to “come back to the collaterals”… then yes, I could SNAP onto that kind of a truce. I had 20 years to post that message. It is time to move on to the next steps. I've been thinking about this for a while, now. */*/*/*/* Might we sweeten the deal with an agreement to set aside the gotcha game? That might be more complicated to negotiate, largely because you can’t speak for the others. What the gotcha game does, besides waste everyone’s time, is it cause me to be over-cautious in what I say. In addition to paying attention to the discussion and offering some honest, serious text to contribute, I have to look at every word and phrase not only to convey meaning, but also to not blow up in my face in a gotcha game, by being misconstrued innocently or deliberately mis-characterized. So even if you and I agree to drop gotcha, I still have to walk on the gotcha eggshells with everything I say to you, until this idea of discussing meatier subjects catches on. Anyway, there’s no rush to this. I just thought that after 20 years, gotcha is getting boring to everyone, including the folks at home, the “read-only” folks.

Yes, thanks for the confirmation. I wanted to make sure it was not directed at her, but at the phenomenon, which I believe is built into all of our DNA. It can include her, but I see it applying to all of us. When the emotion is there, I know for sure I can be a snapper. Penwork is very clear in her book that the continuing emotional tragedy was part of her snapping. Who hasn't done that ?? We all do it.

Jumping to Concussions in a Rush to Judgement This is kind of phenomenon I saw often in TWI-1, and in MY OPINION it is part of how inappropriate idolization of VPW happened with some. A common phenomenon in human cognition is the ability to quickly crystalize a whole new perspective or paradigm, and massively jumping to concussions, in a rush to judgement. Using that word “concussions” was deliberate and not a typo or spellcheck. It was an attempt to lighten up a little on a pretty serious subject, and it is descriptive of what can go wrong when this kind of mental jumping happens inappropriately. I imagine that in many situations this ability to quickly crystalize a large impression is a useful skill. That is why it is a common phenomenon: it is built into our DNA. A mechanical analog of this phenomenon is a light switch with a snap to it. This kind of mental snapping could have all sorts of survival values in the wild. But snapping can be dangerous when applied to the wrong situation, especially in modern civilization. In our lives some situations require long ponderous thought, and not-so-fast action. Let’s come up with a name for this near opposite of snapping, why don’t we? How about we find one with the terminology of Acts 17:10-11, where the Bereans did not jump to concussions. How about AMS for “anti mental snapping.” The Bereans took it in for deep pondering, worked the scriptures day after day, talked with each other a lot during this scripture party. They probably had only one Bible to work with. They compared impressions with each there. And then they gradually arrived at the point where they were ready to fully believe Paul. “And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.” Compare this Berean AMS to the day of Pentecost, when 5,000 people heard the S.I.T. miracle (?and maybe saw the tongues like as of fire?) and they all believed that same day, real quick. And how many Bibles did they have with them to search the scriptures? It looks like the snapping there was good and godly. This same human dynamic can be hijacked by the devil, and then the snapping is very dangerous. It may be that snapping was involved with Paul’s conversion on the road to Damascus. */*/*/*/* I have been thinking about this phenomenon ever since my first twig fellowship in 1971 where it happened almost regularly with teenagers. Just two days into my posting here, 20 years ago, I brought it up. A blast from the past: Posted December 27, 2002 11:06 pst (slightly edited) I'm amazed at how impatient everyone is to get all this in a thumbnail. It reminds me of early 1987, when there was almost no info flowing and everything was hush-hush, yet within months everyone had made up their mind which splinter (or not) to be a part of. With relatively no information to lean on, decisions were made back then that have never been reexamined, only built on, or piled on. I'm glad I was taught to take it slower. It’s sad how much information was lost or never considered by those who crystallized their stand on emotion and/or whichever leader happened to tickled their fancy. In those early days, after the 1986 meltdown, I would always shop around for info because I wanted to decide more carefully. I noticed that no one else here in SD did that except for one other person. When JL from CES would blow into town once every year, me and that one other person would always attend. We two “ringers” would always be the only people from the other major SD camp at the time, the GeerSplinters, as we mostly attended those fellowships at that time. No CES people would talk to GeerSplinters, and no GeerSplinters would talk to CESers. We two ringers straddled that line for 10 years. Everyone huddled into a group that was quickly decided upon, and once there, the leaders would tell [or inspire] them to M&A all other grad groups. The same applied to the Craigites here, but they were in much smaller numbers. The majority here went with Geer, and only one small twig went with LCM. The same applies to most GreaseSpotters in my opinion. Lots of digging into their positions, little knowledge of what the others are doing. I urge patience and info gathering. */*/*/* I have posted on this since several times using terminology like rush to judgement, quick crystallization, and jumping to concussions. Only just recently have I seen that this topic of snapping applies to several posters’ life stories, and to Charlene in particular. My hunch is that snapping to hyper-love towards all that is TWI long ago, is very similar to snapping to hyper-hate towards all that is TWI in later years. I see both AMS and snapping as good skills that can go wrong. Some people are more prone to AMS and some are more prone to snapping. I distinctly remember being jealous of snappers in my early years. My slowness to commit ended up later helping me, but back then it was sometimes a liability. I missed out on a lot, by being too careful. I felt I was a very slow learner, and I wanted to be able to jump in all the way. After a lifetime of pondering all this I see that I was excessive in backing off from full commitment. It was fear. I consider it a character trait, a flaw of mine, that needs working on. Similar introspection may be useful for those who may be the more impulsive types.

figuratively, yes

I completely agree with what I bold fonted above. There most certainly ARE other records of how Jesus walked. We can look to the walking OT examples from whom young Jesus learned to walk. We can learn from Paul's walk, where he was right-on. John has lots of teaching on the Jesus-like walk in his Epistles surrounding the one sentence you cited. You are misinformed if you think I have not made a regular habit of learning from Jesus past ministry and his walk among people, personally. I continually learn from scriptures not directly addressed to me.

Your problem is hyper-abbreviation here. You are leaving out stuff. Yes, God is absent in this sense of the word, but it is PHYSICAL absence only. That is the reason it was so important the the Word was made flesh, in Jesus. Jesus is only temporarily absent, and will once again be present in the flesh. Right now, the reason Jesus became absent was to UPGRADE his ministry from physical to spiritual. His absence from the world but presence within us now is an upgrade. Jesus is now absent from the world, but present in us. God is now absent from the world, but preset in us. Both God and Jesus are present spiritually, and totally aware of all that goes on. They are capable of intervening in the physical, while awaiting his Return.

No. Just the opposite. The 4 Gospels teach us about the PAST ministry of Jesus, here on earth, addressed to the children of Israel. The 7 Church Epistles teach us about the PRESENT ministry of Jesus, seated at the right hand of God, and addressed to us. */*/*/*/*/*/* Those who point new Christian babes to the 4 Gospels first to are misdirecting them AWAY from the ONLY mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

You might have skipped this stage yourself, but the instructions at the end of the class were to spend all our reading time in the Epistles of Paul for the next 3 months. I see Charlene got that part wrong in her book; twice possibly. She has him directing us to read the collaterals only for 3 months after the class. I remember a few months fixing this error, in that her book seems to have RE-PROGRAMMED the memories of what we were to study those first 3 months.

I was very diligent to search out what went wrong with the ministry and what went right. Many long distance phone calls were very expensive for the first 10 years of my inquiring around.

Do you know the year he left? I am always trying to get my grasp of the history right. I have seen many times (both ministry and secular) the phenomenon of two differing views on employment terminations. "I quit on my own" versus "No, we're firing you." The sad emotions his family felt can match both scenarios. But I think the "present truth" came later by a few years. How is your memory on that?

You were almost onto something with your button bet. On the Determinism thread was this loose end: The answer is I keep bringing things back to PFAL and what we were all very slow learners of, and some want deeply to keep their understanding of PFAL at its current low (less than mastery) levels. People here think they understand what they are devoted to criticizing, but I am often showing them what they missed. For those here with an advanced case of anti-idolatry cooking resent it the most. I'm reminded of silversmith in Acts who was having his idol business ruined by the Christians. Lot of buttons get pushed when a person's idol is fallen. Meanwhile, people here think they can pull an "vpw-idol" away from from me. I admit there were vpw-idolators in TWI, but I had been prepped to avoid idols like that by being burned slightly by a couple of hippie idols in the years prior to me meeting VPW. I went slow with him, and didn't fully accept the collaterals until 1998. By comparison, I took about 26 years to get fully committed to the written final product of VPW, where it looks like it took Charlene a couple of months to commit her life to the man, VPW. Why the difference? I was protecting my buttons and not letting anybody push them. I have to do that all the time here. I listen intellectually here, but I don't let my emotional buttons get exposed easily.

I think it went down different. The "present truth" thing came (I surmise) a few years after Gluckin left voluntarily. Gluckin and Geer were friends at Rye, and he went with Geer. From my phone conversations with him long afterwards, they did not want him to leave TWI. Similarly with Walter, only there I have no first-hand info.