The Ubiquitously Hidden Teaching of VPW

[Steve Lortz]

lovematters - Bishop Sheen! Yes... I remember our family watching his show when I was a child, and we weren't even Catholic. I'm going to have to go watch a few of his shows presently in syndication, to check out for myself how closely Wierwille imitated Bishop Fulton Sheen.

Love,

Steve

[Steve Lortz]

Oh... just one more thing... I'm placing my "OLG Extraordinaire's Warning" in the public domain. Please feel free to copy and paste it in any thread you please, as many times as you think is appropriate.

All I ask is that you don't mess with the wording. After all... it is the true, reliable, untattered message of THE OLG Extraordinaire. We wouldn't want anything to slip past us, leak out, or any other stuff to be allowed in, would we?

If you are inspired to compose warnings of your own, please do so. I think this could be highly enjoyable, and spiritually profitable at the same time.

Love,

S. Lortz, OLG Extraordinaire by Popular Acclaim

[Mike]

Steve,

Do you mean an "official" theologian or grammarian?

Like youself for instance?

[Mike]

lovematters,

I was in an antique store a few years ago looking in the old books they had for sale for copies of PFAL series books. Every so often I find one this way. Used bookstores and thrift shops are also good places. In this antique store I spotted a large box, monopoly game size. It was something I instantly recognized from my childhood in the 50?s. It was a ?John Gnagy ? Learn To Draw? set. John Gnagy was an artist who did a ?How To? national TV show on drawing and sketching. I ALWAYS wanted one of these sets, which included pastels, and charcoal, and sketch pads, and several instruction books.

You?ll never guess what I saw inside the main instruction manual! Right in the middle of art lessons was an amazing paragraph. and what I saw astounded me. It was words, or VERY similar words, that I recognized instantly as words I heard from Dr in some class. I just quickly looked through the art set for the exact words and couldn?t find this paragraph, but if anyone wants to know them I?ll search again.

This blessed me to see how far and wide Dr combed the culture for information that would bless us.

It never ceases to amaze me how desperate disgruntled grads are to find dirt on Dr and the plagarism charge is the MOST desperate of them all.

If Dr had not TOLD us many times and in many ways that God had guided him in selecting material from others teachers, then these charges may carry a little weight, but he did tell us and often. He even had the bookstore carry some of them, including the supposed grand daddy of the supposed rip offs, Bullinger?s ?How To Enjoy the Bible.?

But because he DID tell us, those who now charge that this violates their sense of justice have NOT one iota of veracity in their charges. Those of you with head-up-butt over this are admitting that you?ve were either totally asleep when Dr told us of his data gathering techniques, or you?re really good at forgetting. Either way, your sudden shock at plagiarism is unimpressive at best. Actually the plagiarism moaners and groaners very efficiently identify themselves as non-thinking band wagon hangers on. Now their bandwagon is moaning and groaning about Dr, and 25 years ago it was probably extolling the virtues of the class.

So where were all you when Dr told us he didn?t originate the material, but got it from others or God directly?

If you missed that then, how many other things did you miss?

Plagiarism moaners and groaners seem to be unaware that there is no such thing as originality, and that all truly new ideas come spiritually to a person, it?s not generated from within with no help. Truly new ideas come spiritually. (Steve that was your cue) All artists borrow and blend, and if their honest and alert to this they?ll admit it.

You people who insist on strict APPEARANCES of originality are fooling yourselves.

Those of you with ruffled feathers and outrage over Dr's data collection and representation seem to have grown this taste fairly recently. Those of you who worship "originality" had your chance to speak up years ago whan Dr TOLD us that he did not originate much of the material. WHY didn't you think it was bad then? Because it wasn't. THAT'S why. You only THINK it's bad now out of desparation over trouncing Dr in your minds. What's the matter, sex scandals aren't enough? Worried those charges wont bury PFAL?

Intellectual ownership is a crock just as much as property ownership, when viewed from within God's family. We steward things (and ideas) but we NEVER own them. God does.

I?m GLAD Dr followed orders and collected all that material for me. He deserves a lot of credit for collecting it, sorting it, adjusting and fine tuning it, and then GETTING IT TO ME! If you plagiarism moaners and groaners ever wake up from your mob mentality, you?ll be thankful and give Dr credit for a wonderful job done.

Plagiarism and copyrights have meaning ONLY in academia and the marketplace, NEVER in God?s family.

We share everything in God?s family, EVERYTHING!

[This message was edited by Mike on June 21, 2003 at 12:14.]

[Mike]

WordWolf,

You wrote:

I'm doing my best to get a clear, unambiguous

summary of your position, or positions. On some

subjects, you keep moving your position, so

it is very difficult to get a single, clear

view. So, when possible, I'm trying to get one.

When possible, I also state my positions as

plainly as possible.

I do to, but I think you want more than plain. My position is "Read PFAL" plain and simple.

Why do you want to get a microscopic view of my position?

Why do you NOT want to get a microscopic view of PFAL?

Why make me the subject all the time?

I think, unless you convince me otherwise, that you are going after the softer target. You want to get information about me so that you can take pokes at me, while PFAL is much harder to poke at.

I?m tired of endlessly catering to you focus on me. I?m tired of figuring out how to twist the context you bring up BACK to the thread topic.

Get your clear unambiguous pictures from God in PFAL.

************************

You wrote:

B) If thinking (having my senses exercised to

discern good and evil) is a 5-senses approach

to spiritual problems, then so is READING

(taking in information by sight and thinking

about it), no matter the subject matter. Either

both are eeee-villl, or both are acceptable.

If all we have cooking is the 5-senses method then it?s better than nothing.

It?s GOD?S responsibility to see to it that a 5-senses seeker, especially one working the tattered remnants of the Bible, FINDS Him. God sees to it that the 5-sense reader will get holy spirit fairly easily, even from inaccurate translations and versions. But to dechomai holy spirit does not affect the mind, so more is needed. God also lays out a curriculum (as much as available) for this 5-senses seeker to gain spiritual insights in the soul/mind category that will lead him to a spiritual understanding, needed to surpass the temporary benefits the 5-senses approach can provide under the adversary?s interference in his realm.

This curriculum got a 2000 year boost in the 1942-82 period.

Advanced Class key #4 is ?Study (5-senses reading) the Word much. What you can know by your 5-senses God expects you to know.?

See how much you forgot?

If you have been applying photographic memory and memorization to my posts, their limitations are apparent, because I?ve posted this key #4 about 3 times before. Memorization doesn?t mean it?s put together. Memorization is good, but it?s a few steps away from sunesis.

***************

You wrote:

I still haven't seen you present any

"evidence" that vpw's writings were of

surpassing quality, let alone of divine origin.

Since you seem to be saying you've been

providing data along those lines, please label

it when you're doing so, so we know when you

claim to be providing evidence vpw's work wasn't

one man's work supplementing an agglomeration

of the work of a handful of others.

I?m not trying to present the personal things that convinced me. If you want the evidence of this you must obey Dr and master the material. If you can?t dredge up the motivation to obey him because he taught you so much of God?s Word, then you?re lost! Hey, maybe God will let you into the Bride of Christ if you don?t want to function in the Body of Christ.

[This message was edited by Mike on June 21, 2003 at 12:43.]

[lovematters]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike:

If you want the evidence of this you must obey Dr and master the material. If you can?t dredge up the motivation to obey him because he taught you so much of God?s Word, then you?re lost! Hey, maybe God will let you into the Bride of Christ if you don?t want to function in the Body of Christ.

---

That's some scary freaky stuff dude.

Are you sure you know what you're doing?

Does the phrase "We ought to obey God rather than men" ring a bell?

[Mike]

lovematters,

I can assure you that the trepidations you feel are the fear of the unknown.

You may have missed this, but the same topic of obedience came up earlier on this page.

Goey post something to this effect:

*************************************************************

Mike,

You have posted many times about obeying Wierwille. Here are just a few:

"I'm sure that if we all had spiritually heard Dr's final instructions immediately after his death, and had REALLY obeyed them, then the ministry wouldn't have died."

"The most often cited flimsy excuse for NOT literally obeying Dr's final mastery instructions is..."

"But this was not the case. Dr's final instructions were not obeyed by leadership, and these final instructions were not properly presented to the rest of us."

"...then I can only reasonably appeal to those OLGs to risk all and get their spiritual assurance from God to start obeying Dr and come back to this Word in PFAL addressed to us."

Mike, obedience to Wierwille is a theme that runs throughout your posts. You equate obedience to Wierwille with obedience to God - as if it were the same thing. He was a man Mike - not God.

Goey

*************************************************************

He had thought the quotes above were in contradiction to this earlier quote of mine:

?I'm talking about obedience to GOD and His SON by obeying His Word, this Word He gave to Dr by revelation.?

So, here?s what I posted:

*************************************************************

Goey,

Come ON! This isn't hard.

A command from Jesus Christ is as good as a command from God, right? Jesus got his words by revelation form God, so he doesn't have to BE God to have his words worthy of obedience. Right?

When Peter spoke before Cornielius' household he spoke with all the authority of God Almighty.

If and when Dr spoke by revelation, then obeying Dr is obeying God. Disobeying Dr on one of these points is disobeying God.

It all hinges on whether God got His revelation through and THAT is what was spoken.

Can you see that your found "idolizations" of mine melt away IF Dr spoke by revelation?

*************************************************************

THEN, a little later, Oakspear chimed in with:

?IF Wierwille was given PFAL by revelation, then it is not idolatry to follow everything that was in PFAL. IF Wierwille was speaking by revelation when he told us to "master PFAL" then it would behoove us to master it. BUT...?

So, lovematters, I suggest you be a little more thorough in your research before criticizing me on things that are very well explained here already. If you don?t, you leave yourself open to the charge of just going along with the crowd and not thinking things through thoroughly.

I suggest that when you jump on on a thread you at LEAST read the whole page.

[lovematters]

Steve - I remember watching the Bishop back when too. I just remembered there is a skeleton in his closet that recently fell out. (He was a local lad who made good, so folks around here keep up with his story.) It turns out that he claimed to have two doctorates but only had one. At least he had one real one.

[WordWolf]

Mike,

A) The reason you keep coming up is that the

issue here is your private interpretation of

PFAL-secret messages only you've found, hidden

meanings only you've seen, special revelation

only you believe. When we addressed PFAL,

you said you won't be sidetracked. Hours and

hours of discussion of the less-than-perfection

of the object of your adoration came up. You

have recently admitted that you claim to

be refused to be sidetracked, you refuse to

entertain what disproves your claims, etc, etc.

That was on this thread. Let me know if you need

the citations.

Since the PFAL materials have flopped on their

own, we look to find where your private

interpretations come from. They're not from the

plain reading of PFAL, since, as, has already

been shown on thread after thread, PFAL's own

methods, applied to PFAL, demonstrate it does

NOT hold up to PFAL's standard of Scripture.

Since, to date, ONLY MIKE seems to think that's

what it meant, this does not cause anyone else

stress.

MIKE has announced that VPW repeatedly said that

his material was the results of VPW and God and

various other people. This claim was already

addressed on many threads. VPW very prominently

proclaimed in PFAL it was just HIM and GOD.

Since he never repudiates that claim IN PFAL,

that claim remains in PFAL.

Another question on this subject.....

..Mike has claimed that VPW claims that some of

what VPW said (wrote) is of God directly, and

some is of VPW. Supposedly, now, some was also

of other people, yet also of VPW AND some of

other people AND GOD. That's a tangled mess.

If one must claim that PFAL was DIVINE, it

swiftly becomes a scrambled mess concerning

who wrote what.

B) On the charge of plagiarism,

if you've kept up on the GSC, you'd see that

quotes from MANY sources over MANY years

indicate that VPW did everything he could to

"soft-peddle" the connection to BG Leonard's

material and JE Stiles' material-that which the

supposed "meat" of PFAL seems to match precisely

and MIKE claims was not plagiarized. VPW NEVER

indicated that RTHST would NEVER have happened

without JE Stiles' book, which appears to

precisely parallel VPW's book. VPW NEVER

indicated that the PFAL class would NEVER have

happened without BG Leonard's class, which

seems to precisely parallel VPW's class,

complete with the imaginary examples of

Maggie Muggins and Johnny Jumpup and so on.

It can clearly be shown VPW had taken BG

Leonard's class before starting work on PFAL.

It can be clearly shown that VPW had read JE

Stiles' book before starting work on his own.

Despite huge sections of both appearing to be

photocopied to form VPW's work, he never said-

not once! -THIS is the class I owe so much to,

THIS is the book I owe so much to. Rather,

both names seem almost nonexistent in VPW

history.

C) I was reading my orange book.

Page 105 says the following, in a chapter making

the SAME point:

"I learned my unbelief in the schools I

attended which taught that the Bible is full

of errors, that the Word of God is full of

myths, that it has a lot of forgeries in it.

If a miniwster does not believe that the Bible

is God's Word and if he thinks that it is full

of myths and forgeries, what would be the man's

actions if he followed what he believes? He

would get out of the pulpit if he were honest

with himself.

I have very little respect for those who stand

in the pulpits or stand behind podiums and

declare, "This verse is all right, but that one

is an interpolation, and that other one is a

myth." "

Now, Mike, you've claimed the Bible is full of

"tattered remnants" and "unreliable fragements."

VPW declared in PFAL (chapter 8 entire) is NOT.

Mike, you've got a convoluted method of

substitution that invalidates that entire

chapter-that when VPW talks about the Bible,

he is referring to HIS writings, OR he's

referring to the one we all know, OR he's

referring to the originals. Now, plain

distinctions between the originals and moderns

we understand-but they're connected, not truly

different books. You wonder why we can't take

your view seriously...

D) Honesty and integrity COUNT to us. You can

claim the ends justified the means, but that's

not selling here-as you should have seen by

now.

E) I didn't say that studying was WRONG.

YOU said that, Mike. You claimed that using

the intellect to discern good and evil-thinking

about whether Mike's thesis is legit or not-

is wrong. I've been SAYING that THINKING is

important all along, by implication AND direct

statement. Don't pretend I said otherwise.

Your claim was that thinking was a 5-senses

approach and wrong. That means, by YOUR claim,

Advanced class Key 4 is wrong.

Is that part of the Advanced class that you

don't consider canonical-like the "cancer is

a devil spirit" part?

E) You said you're not trying to present

evidence.

Goey already pointed out that's inconsistent

with your posts.

Also, you keep saying that blindly accepting

your instructions will get us the results.

Outside of religious cults, that kind of claim

never works.

"I refuse to prove I have anything to offer,

but if you do things my way, you'll see it."

F) Your latest appeal is one of loyalty.

I'm supposed to obey VPW "because he taught you

so much of God's Word." So, then, if I teach

people a lot, they're supposed to do whatever

I say? I've been in the wrong business all

these years! I should have been teaching the

Bible yesterday so I could invoke blind

loyalty today!

*runs off to start his own ministry*

[lovematters]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike:

So, lovematters, I suggest you be a little more thorough in your research before criticizing me on things that are very well explained here already. If you don?t, you leave yourself open to the charge of just going along with the crowd and not thinking things through thoroughly.

I suggest that when you jump on on a thread you at LEAST read the whole page.

---

Hey there Mr. Big,

Where do you get off telling me how to post?

Stuff your suggestions in the box.

[lovematters]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike:

lovematters,

I can assure you that the trepidations you feel are the fear of the unknown.

---

Sounds like a line from a B movie.

THE SORT OF INSIDIOUS DOCTOR MIKE

INT GREASESPOT CAFE - a greasy spoon NIGHT

DR MIKE

lovematters, I can assure you that the

trepidations you feel are the fear of

the unknown.

LOVEMATTERS

Fools go where angels fear to tread

Dr. Mike.

[pause]

Fools go where angels fear to tread.

[Mike]

DR MIKE

But lovematters, you have nothing to fear,

because when you?re in love with an angel nothing matters.

LOVEMATTERS

Kiss me you fool! That?s all that matters!

DR MIKE

But I don?t even know if your a man or woman.

You Public Profile doesn?t want to come clean.

[Oakspear]

Mike has used a portion of one of my quotes to back up his position. I just want to make it clear that I DO NOT agree with Mike. Here is my original quote:

quote:

---

IF Wierwille was given PFAL by revelation, then it is not idolatry to follow everything that was in PFAL.

IF Wierwille was speaking by revelation when he told us to "master PFAL" then it would behoove us to master it.

BUT...

The evidence that Wierwille was doing God's will, and that PFAL is the "Word of God" for our times is slim at best; but there is compelling evidence that PFAL was largely plagarized, often without an understanding of what was plagarized, nor how parts taken from different sources contradicted each other.

Basing one's belief that Wierwille's writings are "God's Word" simply because Wierwille said so is circular reasoning. Basing that belief on so-called hidden meanings in passages where Wierwille clearly says that his writings are not equivalent to God's Word is fanatasy.

---

The part that he leaves out follows the BUT

Anyone who has read even a few of my posts knows already that I don't agree with Mikey; I haven't yet accused him of being insane or under the influence of spirits, but IMHO, he's WRONG!!!

Oakspear

"We...know how cruel the truth often is, and we wonder whether delusion is not more consoling"

Henri Poincare

[Goey]

Mike,

quote:

---

Come ON! This isn't hard.

A command from Jesus Christ is as good as a command from God, right? Jesus got his words by revelation form God, so he doesn't have to BE God to have his words worthy of obedience. Right?

---

Of course it is not hard. I got this stuff long ago as did most others here. With this I agree.

quote:

---

If and when Dr spoke by revelation, then obeying Dr is obeying God. Disobeying Dr on one of these points is disobeying God.

It all hinges on whether God got His revelation through and THAT is what was spoken.

---

Not really. It hinges on whether or not "revelation" was given to Wierwille in the first place - beginning in 1942 and beyond. It hinges upon whether Wierwille had the authority to ask/demand the kind of obedience you are demanding - to master PFAL, and even beyond that, to obey hidden messages that Wierwille allegedly wrote and spoke (by revelation) that only you can see.

It is not so cut and dry as: Obeying Wierwille is obeying God - Disobeying Wierewille is disobeying God. .

You want to convict folks of disobeying God becasue they reject Wierwille's last call to master PFAL - but not just master PFAL, but master it as the Word of God. And not only that, your form of mastery would necessitate one seeing the same unbiquitously hidden messages and meanings that you see.

The inferrence is clear; that if folks don't do what you do ("mastery" of PFAL) then they are disobeying God. And it looks like you are the only one in the entire world that is doing it. Mike, that should tell you something.

Goey

"Most of my fondest memories in TWI never really happened"

[seaspray]

Goey,

Chalk me up in the "Mike" column. Call me nuts all you want. I believe Mike is absolutely correct in declaring Power for Abundant Living "theopneustos". We have the Christ in us, now is the time to learn how to truly be in Christ. Mastering PFAL is the single route.

Remember the old song, "There are many roads to Chicago but if you want to get to Heaven?"? By the way, did Ted write that or cover it?

Nothing personal here Goey, I'm sure you and all the other "Mike baiters" are terrific folks. I'm looking forward to seeing how terrific we all are when we get the "In Christ" right.

[Tom]

Seaspray,

The thing that I don't get, seaspray, is how you & Mike can reconcile touting PFAL & contradicting it in the same breath.

quote:

---

Mastering PFAL is the single route.

Remember the old song, "There are many roads to Chicago but if you want to get to Heaven?"?

---

VP was talking about salvation with the Chicago allusion, getting Christ in, NOT getting in Christ. That remark was never intended to refer to PFAL as the only way to get in Christ. It wasn't talking about either "in Christ" or PFAL. Isn't there something in PFAL about all scripture (not that PFAL is scripture - that is YOUR contention) must be interpreted in its context?

I keep bringing things like this up to Mike also, but they never get answered. I thought PFAL answered the "tough" questions. Too tough? Hmmph! Seems pretty basic to me. Maybe that's why I've been relegated to the 1/2 of the questions posed that Mike is never going to get to.

Yeah, I'm still on break - my more than abundant life hanging in the balance, waiting for PFAL to provide salvation on a practical level (practical level - gosh, I'm glad I know the difference between learning how walk in Christ and going to hell without all heaven being able to help me.

I'm sorry, that was really arrogant of me. Please, I most humbly beg you, Mike. Let me be among the 1/2 whose questions you answer - sometime. No, I'm very sorry - I know you're busy. Isn't there anyone else that I can pray to besides you?

[Goey]

Seaspray,

Ok, make that two people in the entire world that believe that mastering PFAL is the "single route." - Two people in all of humanity that believe that God has instututed a convenant whereby the only way for mankind to learn how to be 'in Christ' is through mastery of PFAL. Two people in the whole world that believe that God has so narrowed the path to truth that it can only be known through 'mastery' of selected writings of Wierwille.

Seaspray, Is this a case of 'Mike said it, I believe it' - or have you come to your conclusions independant of Mike?

Goey

"Most of my fondest memories in TWI never really happened"

[excathedra]

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha goey, is that enough for a believers meeting ? i forget

ooooh boy sorry mike and seaspray, time for comic relief, for me anyhow

[Tom]

quote:

---

is that enough for a believers meeting ? i forget

---

Takes three, ex. It's a conundrum.

[vickles]

Thomas, I was told in the late 70's that if there were not three and no one around living near you then it could be two. But if two did it and other believers lived around your area then it wasn't from God

Ok!! I will not try to be a nice person...ok? I will not!!

[vickles]

Goey,

If mike and seaspray are two separate people.

Ok!! I will not try to be a nice person...ok? I will not!!

[Tom]

quote:

---

Originally posted by vickles:

Thomas, I was told in the late 70's that if there were not three and no one around living near you then it could be two. But if two did it and other believers lived around your area then it wasn't from God

---

Vickles, I don't care what you were told. What does PFAL say? Opinions come and go, but PFAL liveth and abideth...uh, as long as Mike does.

[vickles]

thomas, I really don't even believe in it anymore so it doesn't matter to me, just repeating what was told to me. Yes opinions come and go and so has mine, about most that I've been taught. I don't believe most of what pfal was taught and I believe that interpretation and prophecy are a lot different than what we were taught in twi. I believe that you can see God work and prayer works without all that. And mike can believe what he wants but it doesn't mean to much when it comes to what the Word says. Thanks for sharing with me though.

Ok!! I will not try to be a nice person...ok? I will not!!

[alfakat]

Vickles--thomas was goofin witcha...toungue-in-cheek, as per Mike...

..

weren't ya, TH???

[vickles]

Well, alfakat, you know I'm blonde.....duh I mean really...kewl....and all that...lol

Ok!! I will not try to be a nice person...ok? I will not!!