VPW and the Snowstorm - What do you believe?

[dmiller]

Speaking of dyslexia ----

It could be that docvic was a charter member of DAMM.

Drunks Against Mad Mothers.

Just my IMO. :unsure:

[Mark Clarke]

You see Mark, many people are very intent on trashing Dr. Wierwille's name. Then ergo, what he wrote is no good.

That's exactly backwards. We "trash" his name because what he wrote (and did) is no good. There may be a few things he got right, but for the most part it has been proven wrong by the very keys that VP taught.

The trashing of Dr. Wierwille's name does a huge disservice to God's people and the ministry of reconciliation of Jesus Christ. It's not much unlike the day Jesus went to his home town and declared the Word to his own hometown folks. They just weren't having any. This is the apistia type of unbelief that we learned about. They thought they knew him but they really didn't. They wouldn't sit still long enough for the Lord to teach them.

Jesus said a prophet is not without honor except in his home town. VPW dishonored himself, and proved he was no prophet. "By their fruit you shall know them."

That's one of the reasons the Word Over the World Ambassadors were so successful on the field. How did they know what they were taught and were teaching was true? We just saw it in God's Word, believed it and walked out on it. It worked.

It's a little bit like ice skating. You just lace up the skates and get out on the ice. At first you look like a jerk and fall down a lot. But you're determined and you stay with it. Pretty soon you're gliding around the rink with greatest of ease. You're feeling pretty good and it's fun.

Just some food for thought.

Anything that "worked" was because of what God did for them, not what VPW or TWI did. In fact in some cases God did mighty works in people's lives in spite of what TWI said and did.

They ain't duped. They're jerks. They're liars. They're self-centered. They ain't duped.

Could it be you're confusing the followers with the leaders?

The leaders were/are jerks, liars, self-centered, etc., but the followers, such as many of us used to be, were duped into thinking it was God's Way.

Edited January 22, 2009 by Mark Clarke

[potato]

Anything that "worked" was because of what God did for them, not what VPW or TWI did. In fact in some cases God did mighty works in people's lives in spite of what TWI said and did.

how successful was the WOW program, really? I think I feel another spin-off coming on...

[Bolshevik]

. . .

Could it be you're confusing the followers with the leaders?

The leaders were/are jerks, liars, self-centered, etc., but the followers, such as many of us used to be, were duped into thinking it was God's Way.

The followers give the leaders their power. I find the distinction between the two to be rather trivial anyway.

[skyrider]

how successful was the WOW program, really? I think I feel another spin-off coming on...

Yes, potato......I had the same thought when the WOW program's success was mentioned.

I went WOW twice in the mid-70s. Although I experienced some personal learning both years, there really wasn't anything of significance that I couldn't have learned had I remained in college.

On the contrary, I found myself in a position of 1) four strangers learning/squabbling to live together, 2) the awkwardness of two males/ two females adjusting to a plethora of differences, 3) daily discussions and weekly meetings to hammer out bathroom schedules, food shopping, meal preparation, cleaning responsibilities, etc. etc. 4) finances ---- rent money, food money, family fund money ---- ALWAYS MONEY, and 5) witnessing, accountability, followup, classes, etc.

IMO......the overwhelming result to most WOWs' experiences would fall under the aspices of basic, low-level living. There was very, VERY, little WOW Department support and encouragement.....in fact, it really didn't seem like I was involved in any program except for the obvious rules and regs.

To be fair, I did witness 4 or 5 instantaneous healings and saw the power of God move on a personal level. But, overall..... the "program" was not successful....imo. Through the years, I've talked with many WOW vets who've shared their disgust and disappointments of their WOW year(s).

And, my two WOW "sisters" from my first WOW year.....found their husbands on the WOW field.........both marriages ended in divorce, years later. Other stuff, too.......but I don't care to elaborate.

In hindsight, I think housing young males and females together was completely irresponsible. And further, some of those WOWs were sent to po-dunk towns in 1980-84 where ill-prepared WOWs dealt with townies who didn't want the way cult trying to indoctrinate their kids. Several groups had a hell-year.....or had to move.

Heck, some WOW families lost one or two people.....and spent the rest of the year scrambling to pay rent.

The WOW program was a slip-shod operation..........exploiting the youth.

[potato]

I started a thread on it, because I find it interesting how the official spin on the WOW program was so different than what actually went on.

http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?showtopic=19220

[now I see]

Don'tWorry, I hope you're still lurking, I have a few questions regarding your post on pg #16....I just read it today, as I haven't been following this thread...you said:

..she (donna randall) would transcribe whatever teachings, taped meetings or research team discussions vic wanted to "write" a book from, and then she would actually edit them and put them in a written form for him........even vic's account of how he locked himself in a hotel room for a week in order to "put together" the holy spirit book is a lie!!........all he did was lay out j.e.stiles' book and had rhoda (his church secretary at the time), type it up with some minor changes which he DICTATED to her and then put it in the old printing press........that's why there were so many subsequent editions of that book......because when he had donna's expertise available to him, he quickly dumped rhoda for the new and vastly improved model."

Does this mean Rhoda and Donna were complicit in assisting vpee with the plagerism, were they both in on it?  I don't know if its ever been discussed here, but how much did either of them know what was really going on behind the scenes, wasn't Rhoda married to uncle Harry?  Were others aware of the plagerism or did they just think vpee was continueing the work? 

...this mental "laziness" dates back all the way to the chimes hour youth caravan radio broadcasts.

This is so ironic considering vpee would have a cow when he spoke of how the young people were lazy in this way or that way, and how he bragged he could out shovel any young person because he knew how to work, man, he always had to be on top.

.we all just presumed he was speaking by word of knowledge or word of wisdom, because that's the only way he could know it!!!!!......for instance......i remember vividly,......one night we were hangin' at his house and i asked him..."dr.........have you ever been "caught away" to the third heaven and earth?".....(received the revelation in the book of revelation like the apostles john and paul had).........his answer........."well son, you see, there are just some things i'm not at liberty to discuss with you."......now of course, me being the faithful "corps kid" that i was......i knew this meant the answer was "yes", but that god was not allowing vp to tell me outright for whatever super secret spiritual reason...........do you see how that worked????.......he was basically telling me that, yes, god has shown me the revelation but has not allowed me to share it with you yet!!!!!!...

I even heard this story out on the field!

Thanks DWBH!

As I said, Jeffrey Dahmer only ate a FEW of the people he met. Miniscule compared to the number of people he didn't eat. That makes him a non-murderer and non-cannibal FAR more times than he was a murderer and cannibal.

Raf, that has to be the absolute best, most logical line I've ever read in regards to vpee being a MOG!

[Mark Clarke]

I had a couple questions too, that seem to have gotten buried.

Don't Worry Be Happy,

Thanks so much for your input! I have a couple of questions.

First, you mentioned Lamsa's "so-called" peshi tta text. I don't know much about what went into that. Why do you call it "so-called"?

And secondly, in your opinion, do you think VPW knew he was being dishonest if not fraudulent, or do you think he was so deluded that he actually believed his own BS?

[skyrider]

.......wasn't Rhoda married to uncle Harry?  

No.....Rhoda married Ruben Wierwille.

[WordWolf]

Mark,

I think the "so-called" refers to the meaning of the term.

From the Wikipedia entry on the same word,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedangta

"The name 'Pedangta' is derived from the Syriac mappaqtâ pšîṭtâ (ܡܦܩܬܐ ܦܫܝܛܬܐ), literally meaning 'simple version'. However, it is also possible to translate pšîṭtâ as 'common' (that is, for all people), or 'straight', as well as the usual translation as 'simple'. Syriac is a dialect, or group of dialects, of Eastern Aramaic."

"The name 'Pedangta' was first applied to the standard, common Syriac Bible in the ninth century, when it is called such by Moshe bar Kepha. However, it is clear that the Pedangta had a long and complex history before receiving its name. In fact the Pedangta Old Testament and New Testament are two completely separate works of translation."

"The origin of the Pedangta New Testament is complicated by the existence of two other Syriac gospel traditions: the Diatessaron and the Old Syriac. The earliest New Testament translation into Syriac was probably Tatian's Diatessaron ('one through four'). The no longer extant Diatessaron, was a continuous harmony of the four gospels into a single narrative. It, rather than the four separate gospels, became the official Syriac Gospel for a time, and received a beautiful prose commentary by Ephrem the Syrian, which remains the chief witness to its content. However, the Syriac-speaking church was urged to follow the practice of other churches and use the four separate gospels. Theodoret, bishop of Cyrrhus on the Euphrates in upper Syria in 423, sought out and found more than two hundred copies of the Diatessaron, which he 'collected and put away, and introduced instead of them the Gospels of the four evangelists'."

"The early Syriac versions of both Old and New Testament with the four gospels, excluding the Diatessaron, is called the Old Syriac (Vetus Syra) version. There are two fifth-century manuscripts of the Old Syriac separate gospels (the Sinaitic Palimpsest and Curetonian Gospels). These are a comparatively free translation of the Greek text, the so-called 'Western' recension of it, and apparently making use of the Diatessaron text for phrasing. The Old Syriac Gospels were probably produced in the third century (although some date it to the early fourth century). The Old Syriac uses the Pedangta Old Testament for Old Testament quotes (and thus is the earliest witness to its existence) in the gospels, even in places where the quote is quite different in the Greek. There is also evidence that translations of the Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline epistles also existed in the Old Syriac version, though according to Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History 4.29.5, Tatian himself rejected them.

The Pedangta is a reworking of Old Syriac material to form a unified version of the scriptures for the Syriac-speaking churches. "

The Wikipedia entry on Lamsa:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_M._Lamsa

"A native Aramaic speaker, he translated the Aramaic Pedangta (literally "straight, simple") Old and New Testaments into English."

"Lamsa was a member of the Assyrian Church of the East. He was a strong advocate of one of that Church's beliefs: Pedangta primacy (a form of Aramaic primacy). His hypothesis was that for the New Testament, the Pedangta was the original text, and the Greek version was translated from it. In support of this, he noted that Aramaic was the language of Jesus and the earliest Christians,[1] because of the historical fact that, according to Lamsa, "Aramaic was the colloquial and literary language of Palestine, Syria, Asia Minor and Mesopotamia, from the fourth century B. C. to the ninth century A. D." [2]

Lamsa further claimed that while most of the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, the original was lost and the present Hebrew version, the Masoretic text, was re-translated from the Pedangta."

[DontWorryBeHappy]

hi greasespotters!

now I see...........hi!.........long time since we've crossed posts, eh?..............."Does this mean Rhoda and Donna were complicit in assisting vpee with the plagerism, were they both in on it? I don't know if its ever been discussed here, but how much did either of them know what was really going on behind the scenes, wasn't Rhoda married to uncle Harry? Were others aware of the plagerism or did they just think vpee was continueing the work? "

the simple answer to your first question is "yes"!..........rhoda becker, (who, btw, as skyrider points out above, was married to vic's brother reuben, not harry), was, imho, perhaps less aware of the abject plagiarism vic employed in the "writing" of vic's books than was donna r..........donna also had "research skills" in that she was knowledgeable of how to utilize the various greek concordant and lexical aids available to students of the bible, in addition to her acutely honed secretarial skills. she was well aware of the numerous sections from authors like bullinger, kenyon, stiles, leonard, etc., which were used almost verbatim by der victoid in the earliest publications of his "written works".

anyone who was around during the summer school sessions at new knoxville during the summers of 1970, 71, 72, and 1973, and who took the "how to enjoy the bible" class, run by vic, cummins, and donna r., was definitely aware of the many occurrences in the foundational class itself, as well as in the "newly" released pfal book, (the orange one), and the new "edition" of RTHST which was published in the first days of the '70,s!...........bullinger's book, "how to enjoy the bible" was the main "text" of those summer school classes of the same name. the first time i read "how to enjoy the bible", in 1971, i was "shocked" at how much of the first six sessions of pfal were contained in virtually the same order, in bullinger's book!..........then, when i was actually in-rez corps, beginninig in the summer of 1973, vic granted me access to his "personal research library", hidden behind a false mantle by the fireplace in the office in his house..........here were kept vic's personal copies of numerous, if not all of, bullinger's works on the bible, stiles' book on the gift of holy spirit, the sylabus and other materials provided by b.g.leonard for his gifts of the spirit class which vic took first in 1953, books by charles welch such as "the just and the justifier", which vic used as his primary "text" for "his" teachings on the book of romans to the in-rez corps, along with bullinger's book, "the church epistles".

welch,, considered by some to be bullinger's "greatest disciple", carried on his own work, authoring numerous "bullinger-like" works on the bible, as well as a number of volumes of his "research journal", "the berean expositor", similar in design and scope to bullinger's british trinitarian bible society journal publication, "of things to come". vic had quite a collection of both "of things to come" and "the berean exp[ositor" in his "personal library", which provided many "unknown" sources for lots of vic's "writings", and lots of biblical "research" which vic conveniently claimed as his own as he was "putting it all together so it fit with 'the word'". as a matter of fact, when teaching the various epistles and the book of acts to the in-rez corps, vic lifted his "literary structure" of each book of the bible he taught to the corps directly from bullinger's "church epistles" and welch's structures as laid out in his books (e.g. "the just and the justifier")............welch made several trips to the USA during the late 1950's and early 1960's..........a fellow named oscar ---------, hosted welch on several of these US intineraries. grace bliss chauffeured vic as he followed welch on a couple of these itineraries through the midwest..........oscar was the founder and manager of a little bookstore in warsaw indiana called "truth for today". from his little "warehouse" in warsaw, oscar was the one who sold twi it's copies of "how to enjoy the bible", "the companion bible", and numerous other works written by bullinger and welch, which twi resold (with a healthy mark-up added) through its bookstore.

i visited "truth for today" in warsaw, indiana 4 times during ther mid and late 1970's, and spoke with oscar at length several times.i bought every book (almost) that truth for today had in its inventory, by bullinger and welch, along with some backcopies of the berean expositor............it was here that i first saw and bought bullinger's "the giver and his gifts", the other half of vic's RTHST, which, when combined with stiles' book, provides almost the entire "original text" of vic's "holy spirit book"!!...........when you lay out these two books alongside vic's RTHST, you see the incredible extent to which vic indeed plagiarized stiles and bullinger verbatim, especially in the earlier "editions" of RTHST!..........in doing so, you will "relive" rhoda's experience in that van wert hotel room when she typed up vic's first RTHST "manuscript"............later, with donna r.'s added editing and research expertise, the succeeding editions of RHTST removed as much of bullinger's and stiles' styled verbiage as necessary in order to make vic's "work" appear more "original" than just plain copied!........the final edition i had was the seventh edition, a spayshull leatherbound edition of RTHST produced for sale during living victoriously, in 1982, the 40th anniversary year during which vic retired and passed off twi to the doofus from okie!........i gave all my "research books", and every book i bought from truth for today to a little bible study group in massachusetts, in 1987...........my twi books and paraphenalia were taken to the landfill in douglas, ma that same year..........and some were "donated" to twi innies in massachusetts at that time.

so, imho, anyone who was aware of the materials i mentioned above, and who had read them, had to be painfully aware, as i was, that vic liberally plagiarized many christian authors and writers.........but, it was a subject never openly discussed at that time. why???..........because, at that time, those of us with access to those sources believed unabashedly and unswervingly, that vic was indeed, the mog..........and that whatever the "ethical dilemmas" surrounding vic's biblical research methodology and "writing" style, they existed "by revelation from god" and were less important to know about than having "the greatness of god's rightly-divided word as it had not been known since the first century" available to us so "freely"!!...............sic!

vic was "mentally lazy"............he was quite good at physical farmwork and finding plenty of menial "busy-work" for his massive in-rez free labor force.........but, for the centerpiece of his "ministry", "biblical research", he sorely lacked, imho, the intellectual capacity and discipline necessary to produce anything of significance or importance to legitimately vetted biblical scholarship. that's why, imo, he was so comfortable with the blatant plagiarism which was such an integral component of his "biblical research" and his "written works". he did not possess the intellectual or writing ability necessary to produce any writings which expressed the "depth and accuracy" of the work folks like bullinger or welch produced. he was a homiletics major, and used transcriptions of taped teachings to try to say in his own way, what genuine scholars like bullinger, welch, e.stanley jones, et al said in their's! as his following grew, and people with the requisite intellect, education, and writing ability came on board, more effort was made at "cleaning up" the sloppiness and shoddiness of vic's research and "writing" as it appeared in twi materials. hence, the various edits and re-printing of the various works bearing his name and his stamp of approval, which some here refer to as his "later written works" as they appear in their final forms before his death.

i hope this answers your questions now I see..............if not, just ask some more!...........and, mark clarke.............sorry about missing your earlier quesations about the pedangta text and lamsa's aramaic work..........i will submit another post here to try to answer your questions..............although, i must say, that our fellow greasespotter, Penworks, who worked under bernita jess at hq for years, will probably have a lot more information regarding the aramaic arm of twi's research department and its operations than i do...........maybe you might want to pm her (penworks) if my attempts at answering your questions is not sufficient............i gotta go do some errands and stuff, so i'll get back to you a little later............sorry for missing your questions, and the delay in replying to them...................................peace.

Edited January 25, 2009 by Don'tWorryBeHappy

[Mike]

DWBH,

I think you're leaving out a few things. At that time in the early 70's Dr was very open about not being original in his writing, and he was even quoted in Elena's book as having said so. We've seen that written quote posted here on this thread as well as a similar one in the posted transcript of the 1965 tape (later) titled "Light Began to Dawn." I myself heard him disclaim originality several times back then.

He did claim, and in rather clear terms, that his guidance from God was mostly in what to accept and what to reject from his teachers. He did not hide his teachers' work from us at all, like your "secret compartment" paragraph might to some uninformed readers seem to be alluding to.

I will add here that THE ORDER in which he gave us these materials was also guided by God. He put it together in a certain order that was best for us.

All this was above board and common knowledge in the early 70's. It was later lost in the verbal traditions that grew up in TWI that I call the TVTs. It was in the TVTs (Twi Verbal Traditions) that Dr supposedly got "divine dictation" as to what to write. Those later grads who grew up in these traditions (or older grads who had forgotten the earlier originality disclaimers) were dismayed at hearing that Dr's teachers had similar material.

Dr not only credited his early teachers, he also labeled their insights as revelations for God. If that is true, then GOD is the true owner of those earlier texts of supposed plagiarism. If Dr got permission from the real Author, and instructions as to what to edit and what order to present it to us, THEN WE SHOULD BE VERY THANKFUL.

Edited January 25, 2009 by Mike

[Oakspear]

DWBH,

I think you're leaving out a few things.

I think what he's leaving out is your spin on things that he actually witnessed. :P

hey, why don't you join us on the beer thread in the Open Forum?

(edited to correct spelling)

[Mike]

I think what he's leaving out is your spin on things that he actually witnessed. :P

hey, why don't you join us on the berr thread in the Open Forum?

The brrrr thread?

I actually learned to like beer at almost room temperature in the wintertime.

***

The quote in Elena's book and the transcript are not my spin but Dr's words.

I'd say what DWBH posted is HIS spin on what he REMEMBERS to have witnessed.

I too was there (in admittedly lesser capacity by comparison to DWBH) and I too remember what I witnessed.

Sure I have my spin, AND I also have quite a bit of hard evidence to back it up.

It looks to me that this very same hard evidence is what DWBH is leaving out.

Edited January 25, 2009 by Mike

[skyrider]

I will add here that THE ORDER in which he gave us these materials was also guided by God. He put it together in a certain order that was best for us.

Yeah.........not only is THE CONTENT "guided by God".....but THE ORDER of the content was also "guided by God" to give us a certain order that was best for us.

There is no end to wierwille's mogshipness, is there?

Too bad wierwille never ordered HIS STEPS in god's word.

[Mike]

Too bad wierwille never ordered HIS STEPS in god's word.

I prefer to leave judgments like that to SNL Church Ladies.

[waysider]

Sure I have my spin, AND I also have quite a bit of hard evidence to back it up.

Such as?

[Mike]

Read what I wrote at the beginning of Post #587.

I cited two quotes that have been posted here.

Edited January 25, 2009 by Mike

[waysider]

Mike said:

I think you're leaving out a few things. At that time in the early 70's Dr was very open about not being original in his writing, and he was even quoted in Elena's book as having said so. We've seen that written quote posted here on this thread as well as a similar one in the posted transcript of the 1965 tape (later) titled "Light Began to Dawn." I myself heard him disclaim originality several times back then.

He did claim, and in rather clear terms, that his guidance from God was mostly in what to accept and what to reject from his teachers. He did not hide his teachers' work from us at all, like your "secret compartment" paragraph might to some uninformed readers seem to be alluding to.

I will add here that THE ORDER in which he gave us these materials was also guided by God. He put it together in a certain order that was best for us.

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

I hope you're joking if you consider that "hard evidence".

[Mike]

Why are you having such a difficult time with this?

The hard evidence is the book "The Way Living in Love" published in 1972, and the SNS tape #214 from October 17, 1965.

In this hard evidence we see Dr claiming that he was not original in his writing.

I had posted to DWBH: "I think you're leaving out a few things. At that time in the early 70's Dr was very open about not being original in his writing..."

I went on to add: "I myself heard him (Dr) disclaim originality several times back then. ...He did claim, and in rather clear terms, that his guidance from God was mostly in what to accept and what to reject from his teachers. He did not hide his teachers' work from us at all, like your "secret compartment" paragraph might to some uninformed readers seem to be alluding to."

My hard evidence OF THESE EARLY DISCLAIMERS is found in the two quotes.

[potato]

Why are you having such a difficult time with this?

The hard evidence is the book "The Way Living in Love" published in 1972, and the SNS tape #214 from October 17, 1965.

In this hard evidence we see Dr claiming that he was not original in his writing.

I had posted to DWBH: "I think you're leaving out a few things. At that time in the early 70's Dr was very open about not being original in his writing..."

I went on to add: "I myself heard him (Dr) disclaim originality several times back then. ...He did claim, and in rather clear terms, that his guidance from God was mostly in what to accept and what to reject from his teachers. He did not hide his teachers' work from us at all, like your "secret compartment" paragraph might to some uninformed readers seem to be alluding to."

My hard evidence OF THESE EARLY DISCLAIMERS is found in the two quotes.

why are YOU having such a hard time with this, Mike? the things you're talking about are different.

not original in IDEAS. that was implicit in vpw's statements... that he learned from other people and the way he put it together was what was original.

but wait, there's more:

not original in WRITTEN TEXT. that's what DWBH was talking about. plagiarism. wholesale copying of published work. vpw didn't reveal the extent of how unoriginal he was, and it was very deceptive.

[waysider]

Mike

These aren't disclaimers.

These are obviations to the skepticism he knew would be inevitable if and when people discovered his plagiarism.

Guess where I learned this clever trick?

Yeah, in The Way Ministry. Witnessing and Undershepharding if I remember correctly.

The way it works is you bring up an anticipated objection and then address it before the other party has an opportunity to bring it up themselves.

Obviate

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

edited

On second thought, maybe we were taught that in Fellow Laborers. Maybe one of the other FLO remember that. It probably would have been the year that Howie Y. was there.

Edited January 25, 2009 by waysider

[Mike]

In 1965 the ministry was so small there was no need to obviate. Part of the hard evidence is from that early date.

Just to remind you of the details in these two quotes of hard evidence I’ll reproduce them.

In Post #252 on this thread I resurrected an old dialog between Oldiesman and dmiller, that may have suffered in the pruning process that had to take place years ago due to the old GreaseSpot server costs and limitations.

Here is hard evidence EXHIBIT A

First dmiller wrote:

Docvic (plain and simple) took from other's works,

and passed it off as his own.

Then oldiesman wrote:

dmiller,

sorry but I am going to have to disagree in part with you,

and I base my belief on the following:

“Lots of the stuff I teach is not original. Putting it

all together so that it fit -- that was the original work. I learned wherever

I could, and then I worked that with the Scriptures. What was right on

with the Scriptures, I kept; but what wasn't, I dropped.”

Victor Paul Wierwille,

1972 The Way Living In Love

Elena Whiteside page 209

The previous statement by VP disproves that he “passed it off as his own.”

In 1972 he said it wasn't original; ... if you don't believe he said that,

there it is, right before your eyes.

He deserves credit for not passing it off as his own,

but rather saying “lots of the stuff I teach is not original.”

If he was trying to hide something, and pass off all of this as his own,

he would not have made the previous statement, nor have other authors' books,

from whence he learned, selling in the Way Bookstore for all to read.

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

And here is hard evidence EXHIBIT B

I refer to an old Greasespot thread titled “transcript of a 1972 VPW Sunday night service” found at http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...c=1871&st=0

The title of that thread contains an error. The date should have been posted as 1965. The first post of that thread is a transcript of a middle section of SNS Tape #214 October 17, 1965 titled “Selling Plurality - Acts 4:34.”

That middle section was in later decades cut out from that tape and distributed on a cassette tape titled “Light Began to Dawn.”

All of the SNS tapes are available in mp3 form on CDs from a distributor on the Internet. The voice behind this posted transcript can be heard by anyone to check the accuracy of the transcript.

In that transcript we read Dr saying (with my bold fonts):

“And so I'd read the Word, I'd read it, I'd read it. Then I'd work, start looking start working, and as we began working this Word of God, is when light began to dawn. And wonderful things that God did for us, He brought men and women across our paths who came just at the right time to help us in our light; men who had gone so far, but no further. But God brought these men so that we could go further because these men brought light. Men like Rufus Mosely; men like E. Stanley Jones; men like Albert Cliff; men like Star Daley, God brought all of these men and others, many of them, across our pathways, just at the right time to add to this revelation and enable us to walk on the Word and understand it.”

Later in the transcript we read:

“But there was a hunger in my heart and God said He'd teach me the Word if I'd teach it but I had to study. I had to work. And revelation begins(this is why I know this so well) revelation begins where the senses cease. What you can know by your senses, God expects you to know. He expects you to study the Word that has already been worked out. Men like Bulinger; men like Stevie Ginsberg; God expected me to work those men and others. But He taught me how to get the error out when there was any. And out of that process He taught me then what was truth. And when there was no way of knowing it and I'd researched to my fullest ability, tried to find out. Then if there is no other way, He showed it to me by direct revelation.”

********

I think this proves my assertion that

1. Dr claimed that he was not original in his writing. that Dr was very open about not being original in his writing.

2. He did claim, and in rather clear terms, that his guidance from God was mostly in what to accept and what to reject from his teachers.

3. He did not hide his teachers' work from us at all.

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

DWBH also forgot to include that Dr claimed on many occasions that he was NOT a scholar. He also OFTEN said that his ministry was by grace, God’s unmerited favor.

One such place where Dr put these kinds of things in writing was in the May/June 1979 issue of The Way Magazine. In the Our Times article titled “How the Word Works” he wrote:

“... the years of Biblical research I have spent come back to my mind, and joy wells up inside me as I think of what is available to you today through The Way Ministry in book and magazine form, setting forth the accuracy of God’s Word.”

You see he’s claiming that the “book and magazine form” setting forth of God’s Word is better than the KJV’s setting forth, as well as any other setting forth of same. This is because God promised to teach him how to do this as posted above.

In that same article he continues (with my bold fonts):

“This research took me years to work out, and now you can see the depth of it in just a few short hours of reading. Any person who works this material will have a fantastic opportunity to see how the Word works.”

Notice he says “work out” and not "originate" or “conjure up from scratch.” He worked it out from the available working that had gone on before him, as he admitted above in my posting here.

He continues:

“I have had the opportunity over the years to see much of how God’s Word works. When I speak of research among our believers, I do not mean, primarily, discovering something new in the Bible. I mean establishing in your heart the wonderful truths of God’s Word--to the end that these truths are your own; you can understand them, you have mastered them.”

He often told us this, that research was not to be so original as it was to be establishing, a REesearching as he defined if for us. Those of us who forgot this were later dismayed. This same idea of REesearching was repeated in his very last Way Magazine article in 1985, and probably missed or forgotten by most grads.

He continues:

“Someone who has been exposed to the Word for only a short while (such as a new grad of the foundational class on Power for Abundant Living) perhaps could not do as much with it as I could, but this is simply because of time. Any individual can work the Word of God and understand it.”

That is the Word of God as set forth in “book and magazine form.”

He continues (with my bold fonts):

“I have never said that I am a Bible scholar; all I know is that I love God, I love His Word and I want to help people. I do know something about God’s Word, because I’ve been in that field for quite a few years, but I always feel humbled when I come to the Word, because I know its magnified greatness.”

In this very same article, a little later he brings up some more pertinent items:

“The best way for me to do this type of work is privately. I need to be alone in my office away from interruptions and people’s questions where I can get into the depth of it. This is the way I worked God’s Word when I discovered the truth that Jesus Christ was crucified on a Wednesday and raised on Saturday. Finding truths like this made me ‘stand out like a sore thumb’ in so-called Christendom.

“For almost fifteen years, no one thanked me for what I taught. People did not accept much of my heart and life. When I shared with them what I had found in God’s Word, they would shout, “Heresy!” But Dr. E. E. Higgins told me one night after I taught at the LaSalle Hotel in Chicago that I taught like Bullinger wrote. Then she took me up to her office in the hotel and gave me her copy of How to Enjoy the Bible. Back in the early 1900’s, Bullinger had found and seen many of the things in the Word that I was finding. Reading his book was like getting a drink of cool water from a desert oasis. I still have a great respect and love for the work of E. W. Bullinger, which will stand as a monument until the return of Christ.”

Edited January 25, 2009 by Mike

[waysider]

You can tap dance around it all you want, Mike.

I have heard that tape several times.

He carries on and on about himself and his vision to build the business.

It's like a sales pitch to invest in an ISO. (Initial Stock Offering)

"Get in on the bottom floor, folks, this venture is going to be big."

If I recall correctly, I don't think he even cited or quoted one scripture that night.

What kind of "sermon" is that?

It was plain and simple preemptive obviation.

It's a text book example of how we were taught to do it at Public Explanation meetings.

He patronized the audience, backed up the hearse so they could smell the roses, and obviated what he anticipated to be possible objections.

Whether it was in front of 10 people or a thousand is irrelevant.

He stated these things in front of an audience and preserved them for posterity by having them recorded.

That indicates to me that he viewed his presentation to be more than a fleeting one-time sermon.

What is extremely relevant is that, at the time he made those statements, he was fully aware that he had already committed plagiarism. (past tense)

Preemptive damage control.

[Mike]

It's like a sales pitch to invest in an ISO. (Initial Stock Offering)

"Get in on the bottom floor, folks, this venture is going to be big."

And BIG it became! And big it still is. So big it thrives to this day as I said before. So big that some devote much time to try and bring it down.

If I recall correctly, I don't think he even cited or quoted one scripture that night.

What kind of "sermon" is that?

Actually, that tape is a cutout from the larger SNS teaching, which did include Acts verses. I mentioned this, but you seemed to miss it.

What is extremely relevant is that, at the time he made those statements, he was fully aware that he had already committed plagiarism. (past tense)

But of course, if he had permission from the Author, then it would be a lot different. Right?

Edited January 26, 2009 by Mike