VPW and the Snowstorm - What do you believe?

[Twinky]

This also solves another long standing mystery. In Session 1 we were taught that "the Bible" is the REVEALED Word of God, but that was prophesy. At that time there was no "the Bible" that was revealed in existance, only tattered remnants of an ancient one. As the PFAL reveltions got put into written form "the Bible" came into existance. That the PFAL writings are "the Bible" is the greatest secret in the world. Not many people, only a few hundred that I've contacted over the past ten years and readers of GreasSpot have ever heard it, and far fewer believe it.

This truly IS the greatest secret in the world today that PFAL (book and magazine form) is THE Bible and is the Word of God in written form.

There was a time when I might have believed this, or something like. Just like all of you, I subscribed to The Way Magazine, and read it eagerly. It was letters and articles. The NT is all letters, not bound together in a book. Letters. People still write letters. Christian leaders still write letters. Christian leaders still write articles.

I believed in The Way Ministry, that it was a good and wholesome place to be, teaching me The Word in a practical way; how to apply it. So why wouldn't I see the letters and articles in The Way Mag as God's word to his people today? The Ephesians, Corinthians and all the others in the Pauline epistles had the choice to make: the words of Paul - or the words of God as given to Paul?

But after some years of reading the same old same old stuff in The Way Mag, hearing the same stuff on SNS, it was just boring. I realized it wasn't freeing but constricting.

Truth to tell, I liked GMIR best.

Now I see the wide disparity between the way these articles were seeking me to behave; and the behavior as practised by TWI leadership. I felt the difference between the words preaching love, and the practice of "love" as espoused by TWI - keeping people in the dark, excluding people from their own lives, compulsion, bullying and intimidation.

And I can see if I tucked those letters into my Bible after John 1, 2 and 3 as Vic 1, 2 and 3 (or whatever) (LOL) there certainly wouldn't be a fit like a hand in a glove. More like a wolf's paw in a glove.

***

One rule for faith and practice: well, here's mine.

God is love and in him is no darkness at all. Because he loves us, God will never leave us nor forsake us.

Scripture references can be found if desired. I will leave that to established sleuths, those that like to mine treasures in written words. Not sure if they actually appear in PFAL so another Book may be required.

If it's not a good rule, no doubt there will be those ready to "correct" me.

I don't seek signs, miracles, wonders or snowstorms to be able to follow this rule. It's quite simple to operate, really.

[Mike]

The following is NOT my logic:

#1 The snowstorm was and the revalation to Wierwille was real...

#2 Therefore the PFAL class was the fullfillment of that promise...

#3 Therefore the PFAL class is the Word of God...

***

Here IS my logic:

#1 From ten years of focused study of written PFAL and from 27 preceding years of casual study of written PFAL, I have come to feel VERY comfortable with the God I have met in those pages and have totally committed my life to Him.

#2 From many references within those pages where Dr claims to have gotten the PFAL material under God’s supervision, either from direct or indirect revelation as I defined it earlier on this thread, and from #1 above, I conclude that God did talk to him audibly as Dr claimed.

#3 From #1 and #2 above, I conclude that the snowstorm is factual, that it did happen as reported.

I feel no need and I will not try to derive #1 with logic.

It came from simple obedience to an instruction that was Dr's very last teaching and that was largely ignored and/or disobeyed by ALL top leadership and as far as I can see all lower leadership too. I felt like doing what I saw no one else (hardly) did. It was an unturned stone no one seemed to look under.

[Mike]

There was a time when I might have believed this, or something like. Just like all of you, I subscribed to The Way Magazine, and read it eagerly. It was letters and articles. The NT is all letters, not bound together in a book. Letters. People still write letters. Christian leaders still write letters. Christian leaders still write articles.

I believed in The Way Ministry, that it was a good and wholesome place to be, teaching me The Word in a practical way; how to apply it. So why wouldn't I see the letters and articles in The Way Mag as God's word to his people today? The Ephesians, Corinthians and all the others in the Pauline epistles had the choice to make: the words of Paul - or the words of God as given to Paul?

Very well put! Excellent thing to say.

But after some years of reading the same old same old stuff in The Way Mag, hearing the same stuff on SNS, it was just boring. I realized it wasn't freeing but constricting.

First century believers ALSO had to deal with this. They ended up wandering from Paul, and Peter warned them it was error in his dying last words in II Peter.

Truth to tell, I liked GMIR best.

Now I see the wide disparity between the way these articles were seeking me to behave; and the behavior as practised by TWI leadership. I felt the difference between the words preaching love, and the practice of "love" as espoused by TWI - keeping people in the dark, excluding people from their own lives, compulsion, bullying and intimidation.

Believers in David's and Solomon's day had the same difficult things to ponder regarding revelation given to these sometimes not so moral kings.

And I can see if I tucked those letters into my Bible after John 1, 2 and 3 as Vic 1, 2 and 3 (or whatever) (LOL) there certainly wouldn't be a fit like a hand in a glove. More like a wolf's paw in a glove.

***

One rule for faith and practice: well, here's mine.

God is love and in him is no darkness at all. Because he loves us, God will never leave us nor forsake us.

This rule will take you pretty far, but not as far as God would like you to go. That's why he gave more revelation than this. But this is a very good start.

Scripture references can be found if desired. I will leave that to established sleuths, those that like to mine treasures in written words. Not sure if they actually appear in PFAL so another Book may be required.

If it's not a good rule, no doubt there will be those ready to "correct" me.

I don't seek signs, miracles, wonders or snowstorms to be able to follow this rule. It's quite simple to operate, really.

There may be someone you are ministering to someday who WILL want to see something miraculous from you, and that's the farther distance the Father would have us grow into.

God bless you greatly.

[waysider]

The following is NOT my logic:

#1 The snowstorm was and the revalation to Wierwille was real...

#2 Therefore the PFAL class was the fullfillment of that promise...

#3 Therefore the PFAL class is the Word of God...

***

Here IS my logic:

#1 From ten years of focused study of written PFAL and from 27 preceding years of casual study of written PFAL, I have come to feel VERY comfortable with the God I have met in those pages and have totally committed my life to Him.

Sounds more to me like you've dedicated your life to promoting PFAL.

#2 From many references within those pages where Dr claims to have gotten the PFAL material under God’s supervision, either from direct or indirect revelation as I defined it earlier on this thread, and from #1 above, I conclude that God did talk to him audibly as Dr claimed.

#3 From #1 and #2 above, I conclude that the snowstorm is factual, that it did happen as reported.

I feel no need and I will not try to derive #1 with logic.

It came from simple obedience to an instruction that was Dr's very last teaching and that was largely ignored and/or disobeyed by ALL top leadership and as far as I can see all lower leadership too. I felt like doing what I saw no one else (hardly) did. It was an unturned stone no one seemed to look under.

Of the tens of thousands of people who are grads of PFAL, how can you be so certain no one else seems to have looked under this "stone"?

[Mike]

waysuider,

You wrote: "Of the tens of thousands of people who are grads of PFAL, how can you be so certain no one else seems to have looked under this "stone"?"

I've been searching for ten years for them. In the non-Corps 99% of some 300 grads I've talked to never even knew of Dr's last teaching. In the Corps population it was like 40% had not heard of his last teaching and the call to master the writings.

If you know of any, please tell me who. I found about 10% of the clergy I talked to knew not of the teaching. There were even two clergy in the Research Department who had not heard of the teaching until I told them a few years ago.

Even when I informed them of this lost teaching, most went on to blow it off and refused to obey it.

Some study (or studied) PFAL a little (and a lot earlier when they were less mature) but no one has had any systematic way of mastering it. No one, just NO ONE, had looked closely at the differences between supposedly identical chapters and magazine articles. No one, just NO ONE, had ever done any kind of a word study within the PFAL writings.

I'd love to be wrong on this, but essentially no grads outside a small fellowship here and a few GreaseSpotters scattered around the country that I'm in touch with take mastering the collaterals seriously.

If you know any, please connect us.

Edited January 15, 2009 by Mike

[GarthP2000]

WordWolf,

What does all that have to do with the topic?

((Passing my hand over my head, and making an airplane-flying-overhead sound))

"Not many people, only a few hundred that I've contacted over the past ten years and readers of GreasSpot have ever heard it, and far fewer believe it."

... Ohhhh, ... namely yourself. And ONLY yourself.

Edited January 15, 2009 by GarthP2000

[oldiesman]

Those unwritten things tainted any "truth" he taught.

I believe differently. Whether or not it is tainted is a subjective conclusion based upon feelings and emotions; not logic and truth. If sin taints truth, I suppose there'd be no bible, no teaching, no preaching as well because all have sinned.

[waysider]

If sin taints truth, I suppose there'd be no bible, no teaching, no preaching as well because all have sinned.

If sin didn't taint Truth, there would be no reason for the admonition to be "beyond reproach".

[Tzaia]

I believe differently. Whether or not it is tainted is a subjective conclusion based upon feelings and emotions; not logic and truth. If sin taints truth, I suppose there'd be no bible, no teaching, no preaching as well because all have sinned.

I didn't say sin taints truth. I said the unwritten things taint truth. Now if I knew that all these people involved in writing the Bible were actually living a lie and held themselves to a different standard, I would take anything written by them with a grain of salt. Do I believe they were sinless? No. I do believe that motive must always be considered.

He wasn't honest. He isn't the only resource available. There are far better role models to emulate.

[oldiesman]

Now then,

Do the sins of the teacher "negate" the truths in a teaching?

NO.

IF there are truths in a teaching, a teacher's sins don't "NEGATE" them.

However, one's BEGGING THE QUESTION in this in the first place- by presupposing that the teaching

had truths, AND one is misrepresenting what others say by using the word "NEGATE" (the Strawman.)

Thus, it's a loaded-and dishonest- reply to legitimate discussion.

Whatever descriptive word one uses to trash VPW's teachings because of his alleged conduct (pick a word: negate, taint, poison, cancel out, etc.) the thought is pretty clear that the idea is conveyed that the teachings are "**********" because of his sins. This is no strawman because it is at the heart of some folks' belief and feelings.

But truth is truth. If VPW said "Jesus is the Son of God" and Mother Theresa said "Jesus is the Son of God" the message that Jesus is the Son of God is not tainted because VPW said it.

If one feels differently, one is entitled to ones feelings; but the truth is not "tainted."

[WhiteDove]

No, I posted above what he taught. It's not "the Bible" but "The Word" that he took as his only rule. That was in 1967, when hardly any of PFAL was in written form. In those days all WE had was our KJV and the spoken class to fix some of it. We went with what we had, which was better than nothing.

Hey Mike

I am confused as to why you think that in 1967 hardly any of PFAL was in written form. There were pamphlets that accompanied the class they just were not combined into the one book format. but they were done by 1953 the monographs or Youth Caravan Pamphlets as they are referred to sometimes. By 1955 the second edition of Receiving the Holy Spirit Today was out. From 62 - 66 Studies in abundant living series were printed covering a good portion of the class.

[Oakspear]

WordWolf,

What does all that have to do with the topic?

What do your posts have to do with the snowstorm? (the topic of this thread)

WordWolf was addressing a line of thought that is present in this thread. It's germane for Oldiesman to bring it up (although I disagree with his conclusion) and appropriate for WordWolf to offer a rebuttal. No less so than your "presentation" of your illogical thesis as having anything to do with whether we believe the story of the snowstorm

[Oakspear]

I've asked this question before, but if anyone here really believes that something that is true somehow becomes not true due to sins of a person who speaks that which is true, please so indicate by saying "yo".

[RumRunner]

Poor spin attempt OM. No one can possibly refute your postulate below about whether vic or Mother Theresa said "Jesus is the Son of God." However, that is an overly simplistic comparison to the discussions that have been posted. I believe that the major questions are not over fundamentals but the more "complex" teachings of vic. A lot of his "teachings" were fraught with contradiction and it is likely that his self-indulgences led to at least some level of doctrinal corruption on more complex issues (eg sex outside the marriage).

Hence on a simplistic level you are correct. But on a more complex level I think it is fair to say that since he was messed up in certain areas then his teachings in those areas also stood a high(er) probability of also being messed up.

Whatever descriptive word one uses to trash VPW's teachings because of his alleged conduct (pick a word: negate, taint, poison, cancel out, etc.) the thought is pretty clear that the idea is conveyed that the teachings are "**********" because of his sins. This is no strawman because it is at the heart of some folks' belief and feelings.

But truth is truth. If VPW said "Jesus is the Son of God" and Mother Theresa said "Jesus is the Son of God" the message that Jesus is the Son of God is not tainted because VPW said it.

If one feels differently, one is entitled to ones feelings; but the truth is not "tainted."

[potato]

If sin didn't taint Truth, there would be no reason for the admonition to be "beyond reproach".

I disagree that it taints the truth. I think what it does is make truth and lie so difficult to distinguish, that it might as well taint the truth. that's why leaders are to be above reproach, so that the truth the speak can't be hidden behind the sin of their lives, which speaks so much more loudly to witnesses.

I've asked this question before, but if anyone here really believes that something that is true somehow becomes not true due to sins of a person who speaks that which is true, please so indicate by saying "yo".

if it's true, then it doesn't matter who said it's true. but remember that even speaking in tongues is just noise if there's no love.

[waysider]

Tainted----To contaminate morally.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tainted

QUOTE (oldiesman @ Jan 15 2009, 02:17 PM) *

If sin taints truth, I suppose there'd be no bible, no teaching, no preaching as well because all have sinned.

waysider replied:

If sin didn't taint Truth, there would be no reason for the admonition to be "beyond reproach".

Used in a sentence:

Wierwille's reprobate lifestyle tainted (morally contaminated) the validity of his snowstorm claim.

Reproach---To be a cause of blame or discredit to.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/reproach

I Timothy3:

If a man desires the office of a bishop------------------he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

Used in a sentence:

Wierwille's reprobate lifestyle has brought reproach (is cause to discredit) to the validity of the snowstorm claim.

Edited January 15, 2009 by waysider

[JeffSjo]

I really intended to stay out of this thread but as Mike responded to my post in such a direct fashion I feel obliged to give Mike some feedback. I find the conversation between you all very interesting..... well... here goes.

The following is NOT my logic:

#1 The snowstorm was and the revalation to Wierwille was real...

#2 Therefore the PFAL class was the fullfillment of that promise...

#3 Therefore the PFAL class is the Word of God...

***

Here IS my logic:

#1 From ten years of focused study of written PFAL and from 27 preceding years of casual study of written PFAL, I have come to feel VERY comfortable with the God I have met in those pages and have totally committed my life to Him.

YOUR #1 ONE POINT CORRESPONDS VERY NICELY WITH HOW MY POINT #3 WOULD LOOK FROM YOUR POINT OF VIEW.

#2 From many references within those pages where Dr claims to have gotten the PFAL material under God’s supervision, either from direct or indirect revelation as I defined it earlier on this thread, and from #1 above, I conclude that God did talk to him audibly as Dr claimed.

YOUR #2 POINT CORRESPONDS VERY NICELY WITH MY POINT #2

#3 From #1 and #2 above, I conclude that the snowstorm is factual, that it did happen as reported.

YOU ACTUALLY DO BELIEVE THAT THE SNOWSTORM STORY IS REAL AS MY #1 POINT STATES.

I feel no need and I will not try to derive #1 with logic.

It came from simple obedience to an instruction that was Dr's very last teaching and that was largely ignored and/or disobeyed by ALL top leadership and as far as I can see all lower leadership too. I felt like doing what I saw no one else (hardly) did. It was an unturned stone no one seemed to look under.

So even though you say that my list does not represent your logic you seem to be saying that you actually agree with my list if you approach the list from #3 to #1?!

IMO you do not just agree with my list, you are actually living it.

(edited for grammar and clarity)

Edited January 15, 2009 by JeffSjo

[leafytwiglet]

Well for me it comes down to several things .

1. I do not for one second believe that God gave VPW revelation. (This is my opinion.)

I know I believed it when I was involved in TWI and until I learned some of the stuff I have learned here. (I am not going to re enumerate them)

I have been checking a little bit and as far as I can see, God never ever gave revelation to some one whose life was out of alignment with his word. Did these men of God sin; Yes, we have all fallen short in that area. But when they sinned they were shown their sin and repented and brought their life back in alignment with God's word.

2. Were some of VPW's teachings truth. Of course they were. He took valid teachings from other people and used them to teach so some of them were true and some were not. By not showing what was from whom or making a valid attempt to share this with all of the people who took the class, I believe he was crippling us the believers and his own self.

Did he represent that what he was teaching was all his own no, But he never ever admitted that almost all of it was stolen from other sources. This is provable and has been done by several people.

3. Did VPW's sins affect his teachings... Of course they did. Everyone here is aware of this. Even VPW was probably aware of this at least on some level. Did it negate the parts that are true OF course not

4. Was VPW a man of God..... I do not believe he was. When he was confronted with the error of his ways he never repented. If you look in the bible And it does not matter which version you use you will see that every Man of God in there who sinned repented, when they were showed the error of their ways.

5. Is the Bible the God breathed word. I believe it is . And my bible is not the PFAL class. It never was and it never will be. Did VPW think it was? Not for a second. He may have been a sinner (who among us isn't) But he knew in his own self what that class represented and PFAL was not God breathed.

Some of the things that make me the most angry is that he would hurt any of God's children. In any way shape or form. THat he would misrepresent the class as his own teaching and yes he did by not documenting where he got it form . HE stole it whole sale and passed it off as his own, He Told all of us how to follow the word and then he went and broke many of the rules of GOD, and then told some people that it was okay for them to sin. He taught this to them and they went out and taught it to those people in their twigs.

HE told us that we as leaders were responsible for the words we spoke to the people in our twigs and who we witnessed to. Then he hurtt many of the very people who he was sending out to share God's word.

The whole section that was shared about how he researched the bible, was for me proof positive that he he was a liar.... he went directly against the principles of research he taught us. Telling us that we needed to line up our thoughts and what we taught with the bible and how you worked the word of God but then he got to change it because it didn't fit how he thought it ought to be, in his head. This is the direct opposite of what he taught.

HE was no Man of God Not ever. A man of God would have seen the error when it was shown to him and repented. For all these reasons I know he never received any revelation from God. So no snow storm for VP.

HE was no Man of God.

Edited January 16, 2009 by leafytwiglet

[GrouchoMarxJr]

HE was no Man of God.

That's right...he was a con man, a liar, a drunk, an abuser of women, a plagiarizer, a liar and a hedonistic pig.

...he should have been thrown in jail.

[Mark Clarke]

Mike,

You keep saying, "which version?" every time I mention the Bible. VP himself said his standard is "not the King James Version, but THE Word of God which was given when holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy spirit." I consider that to be my standard as well. And how did VP get to that "original" Word of God? By utilizing the keys by which the Bible interprets itself, which he taught and expected his followers to use. They are a system of checks and balances within the Scriptures themselves which enable us to know when we have the "God-breathed Word" on a given subject. Far from "tuning this out," many of us did use them, and by doing so have seen the errors in his doctrines. You have yet to deal with this; you just keep harping about "which version."

You want a single printed version of THE TRUTH that is unchangeable and never varies. Guess what, that's never going to happen. You know why? Because language changes, people change, cultures change, idiomatic expressions change, and the way the same ideas are communicated in one culture at one point in history is not the same way they'd be communicated in other languages and at other points in history. Witness your difficulty with Bullinger's writing, and that wasn't even a century before PFAL.

God knew that language changes, and that His truth would be communicated with different words over the centuries. In fact when the Bible itself uses the term "the Word" it is referring not to the written Scriptures, but to the message which is COMMUNICATED by the written Scriptures. That's why He made sure there were MANY MULTIPLE manuscripts which could be diligently compared, so that people could discover what the correct understanding would be, and thus learn His message. If you think that's "loosey-goosey" you obviously know nothing about how textual criticism, and languages in general, work.

Wierwille NEVER made any claim that "PFAL (book and magazine form) is THE Bible and is the Word of God in written form." In contrast, Paul made the clear statement, more than once, that he was writing by direct, divine revelation. If PFAL is the "New Bible" why did VP never come out and say so? Plus, Paul offered PROOF that he was writing by revelation, because his words fit with the other Scriptures that existed before (i.e., the Old Testament), and because his life was characterized by the fruit of the spirit as well as OBSERVED miracles. He didn't base his credibility on some "sign" that nobody saw!

By the way, VP kept talking about THE WORD as the overall message of God, as given by the original writers. If he is the new interpreter and communicator of that message, how did he get it so wrong? He didn't even get it right about what Jesus' primary message was, which anyone who reads the Bible (in ANY version!) can see is the Gospel of the Kingdom of God. But VP didn't even get that right.

Not only did he not get the overall message right, but he made HUGE glaring errors about some things that are obvious to anyone who can read. Just one, related to the overall message, and which I mentioned before, is that he claimed that the Kingdom of God meant God's reign over all, but the Kingdom of Heaven refers to the reign of the King from Heaven. If VP's writings are the new God-breathed Word, how do you explain such a glaring blunder? Anybody that can read can see that the phrases Kingdom of God and Kingdom of Heaven are synonymous and interchangeable. How do you explain such an obvious error in the "God-breathed" writings of Wierwille? (Not to mention the many other errors in his writings.)

Edited January 16, 2009 by Mark Clarke

[dmiller]

Mike,

You keep saying, "which version?" every time I mention the Bible. VP himself said his standard is "not the King James Version, but THE Word of God which was given when holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy spirit." I consider that to be my standard as well. And how did VP get to that "original" Word of God? By utilizing the keys by which the Bible interprets itself, which he taught and expected his followers to use. They are a system of checks and balances within the Scriptures themselves which enable us to know when we have the "God-breathed Word" on a given subject. Far from "tuning this out," many of us did use them, and by doing so have seen the errors in his doctrines. You have yet to deal with this; you just keep harping about "which version."

Mark --- this may be , but you need to realize that Mike ONLY looks at the written work of docvic.

That means the written books of docvic and the Way mag articles. The Bible doesn't count.

It doesn't fit on Mike's "Table of Challenge". In case you didn't know it -- this is a heads up for you.

It's futile to try and talk *Bible* with Mike. OK -- back to topic. Snowstorm -- or something like that???

[Mark Clarke]

Mark --- this may be , but you need to realize that Mike ONLY looks at the written work of docvic.

That means the written books of docvic and the Way mag articles. The Bible doesn't count.

It doesn't fit on Mike's "Table of Challenge". In case you didn't know it -- this is a heads up for you.

It's futile to try and talk *Bible* with Mike. OK -- back to topic. Snowstorm -- or something like that???

Yeah, I gather that. I'm just hoping some kind of logic might at least show up the inconsistency, since VP never claimed his writings should take the place of the Bible. I don't really expect Mike to change his mind, but maybe someone reading these things will benefit. I was also curious to see how he would actually answer my points. I'm learning how to go from incredulity at his responses to calmly and rationally pointing out the faults in his logic. It's a good exercise for me. Thanks for the heads up.

[Twinky]

One rule for faith and practice: well, here's mine.

God is love and in him is no darkness at all. Because he loves us, God will never leave us nor forsake us.

This rule will take you pretty far, but not as far as God would like you to go. That's why he gave more revelation than this. But this is a very good start.

Why, that's very kind of you, Mike, to think it's a "very good start." Most kind of you.

Would you prefer this?

VPW was love and in him was no darkness at all. Because he loved us, VPW stole PFAL so that his actions will never leave us nor forsake us.

Nah, think I'll stick with what I said before.

[Twinky]

And I can see if I tucked those letters [letters and articles in The Way Magazine] into my Bible after John 1, 2 and 3 as Vic 1, 2 and 3 (or whatever) (LOL) there certainly wouldn't be a fit like a hand in a glove. More like a wolf's paw in a glove.

Mike, I note you didn't respond to this comment in your post no 403.

[Mike]

Mike, I note you didn't respond to this comment in your post no 403.

For what reason do you want me to respond to that?

I'm behind in responding to many posts. Some get lost in the shuffle, even though I do try to keep track of the ones I think would be most instructive for me to work on. I also have to try and ignore some because if I get too involved a not so useful situation usually develops where the story becomes too much about me. It's also the case that if I respond to too many of the emotionally charged posts that tempers start to flare and etiquette plummets. You may have not witnessed how easily this has happened in the past, but it did.

So what do you think will be the benefit to others (that's why we DO all this... right?) if I were to respond to that passage, bumping it ahead of the others in line on my growing list?