VPW and the Snowstorm - What do you believe?

[Oakspear]

I agree. Remember how vpw himself emphasized that his material was not at all so original?

Well bro', we agree for different reasons.

The Oldiesman quote was from, I believe, The Way Living in Love. We disagree on the significance of that statement too.

Frankly, I'm glad that you have found a solid relationship with your God, even if it is via PFAL

At least you've never told me I'm going to hell...or was possessed

[Mike]

I'm the kind of guy who wonders about stuff.

Like, for example, let's say a guy is blind and has been reliant on the audio version of PFAL as his authoritative source. Doesn't seem fair, really, that he's been confined to a defective version, now, does it?

Many of the books were put into audio cassette form and sold in the bookstore. The ones that weren't could easily be read by a loving sighted grad into a microphone and placed on tape.

Life is often not fair, but in THIS instance it is!

Frankly, I'm glad that you have found a solid relationship with your God, even if it is via PFAL

At least you've never told me I'm going to hell...or was possessed

Thanks Tom. I appreciate that. God (or Goddess?) bless you. ;)

[waysider]

Here's something else that puzzles me.

It's been said that 100,000 people sat through PFAL.

Personally, I believe that number to be grossly exaggerated but let's say, for the sake of argument, that 50,000 people took PFAL.

That would mean that 50,000 people were allowed to purchase a tainted product when the "pure" version was readily available. That doesn't seem very ethical, now does it? I wonder why a guy who had a personal connection to God Almighty didn't step up to the plate and correct the product flaws.

[waysider]

Many of the books were put into audio cassette form and sold in the bookstore. The ones that weren't could easily be read by a loving sighted grad into a microphone and placed on tape.

'Nother thing.

This one has me perplexed, too.

How's come visually impaired people would have to make special arrangements that weren't required of sighted folks? Maybe life isn't fair but I always thought that God was. (fair, that is)

[Jim]

It's been said that 100,000 people sat through PFAL. Personally, I believe that number to be grossly exaggerated...

I'm sure 100,000 people sat through the class. Just not 100,000 unique people. I must have sat through it 15 times.

[Mike]

'Nother thing.

This one has me perplexed, too.

How's come visually impaired people would have to make special arrangements that weren't required of sighted folks? Maybe life isn't fair but I always thought that God was. (fair, that is)

I think this should be a thread starter in the Doctrinal forum, don't you?

[waysider]

I think this should be a thread starter in the Doctrinal forum, don't you?

No.

It's not a doctrinal issue.

It's simply an observation of how ludicrous it is to exalt the written PFAL materials over the audio materials of PFAL.( as if either one of them had any real value to start with.)

[Mike]

Here's something else that puzzles me.

It's been said that 100,000 people sat through PFAL.

Personally, I believe that number to be grossly exaggerated but let's say, for the sake of argument, that 50,000 people took PFAL.

That would mean that 50,000 people were allowed to purchase a tainted product when the "pure" version was readily available. That doesn't seem very ethical, now does it? I wonder why a guy who had a personal connection to God Almighty didn't step up to the plate and correct the product flaws.

Not really.

It was NOT readily available in the earlier days, and for several reasons.

Look at it in these ways.

Example A - Many people bought a 1989 Toyota and got good use out of it. Now they can buy a 2009 Toyota and get around a little better, but no one would say they were ripped off in having to purchase the older model a couple decades ago. That's what was available then.

Example B - You send your daughter (if you have one) to a private kindergarten in 1989 and pay good money. Now you send her to college and pay through the nose. She learns advanced calculus at college, which is much better than the simple numbers she learned in kindergarten. But no one would cry foul here about being ripped off in kindergarten. She was not ready to learn calculus in kindergarten. If it were taught to her then she'd have not been able to absorb it.

That's how I see our recent opportunity to learn and benefit from the superior product of written PFAL, the end product of the 1942 incident, and thereby making the snowstorm more believable..... (had to get back on topic, donchya know?)

[GrouchoMarxJr]

I'm sure 100,000 people sat through the class. Just not 100,000 unique people. I must have sat through it 15 times.

You're probably right...they counted each person who attended instead of only new people...I must have sat through that sucker 20 or 25 times...after awhile, I started volunteering for children's fellowship just so that I could get out of the room!...anything was better than being bored to death. There really wasn't that much to the class to begin with...if you were half way intelligent and paid attention...you pretty much got it the first time round...everybody pretended that the more you sat through it, the "deeper" it got...

The only thing that got deeper were Vic's pockets.

[Mike]

No.

It's not a doctrinal issue.

It's simply an observation of how ludicrous it is to exalt the written PFAL materials over the audio materials of PFAL.( as if either one of them had any real value to start with.)

It's not at all ludicrous.

The written materials are more refined and more voluminous, for one thing.

For another, the written record shows changes in the revelation.

For another, the written is more accessible for study. Finding thins is easier, and you can look at a whole page (or two) at one time. Can't do that with audio.

Plus, the brain is set up with about 4 times more gray matter devoted to sight than to sound. When we read we use all that sight circuitry PLUS (because sub-vocalization is employed in reading) the sound circuitry. That adds up to five times more brain power being involved.

[waysider]

Yeah, I see your point.

The whole thing was an exercise in kindergarten logic from day one.

Snow storm my foot!---More like a snow JOB!

[GrouchoMarxJr]

It's not at all ludicrous.

The written materials are more refined and more voluminous, for one thing.

Sorta like the Harvard Classics?... ...Not hardly...Wierwille's writing skills were sophmoric at best...equal perhaps to his grasp of "spiritual matters"...To this day, I still have all the written materials by Wierwille (waiting for the price to inflate on ebay)...and I cannot believe that an intelligent person would give any credence to this collection of...what shall we call it?...garbage sounds good...

Isn't life short enough without wasting time chasing after the god peddlers?

...by the way, for those interested...Wierwille's books are valued at between $20 and 45 bucks a piece...hardbound in good condition can get ya $50!...I have a copy of the "blue book" and several others in hardbound...I'll sell the blue book for a hundred bucks right now...any takers?

Edited January 8, 2009 by GrouchoMarxJr

[Mike]

---More like a snow JOB!

I wish I had a nickel for every time I had to hear that joke here.

But I know what you're up to, you waysider!

You're trying to stump me so you can have the last word.

And by having the last word you advance ONE MORE STEP in passing me by in numbers of posts.

Five stumps and you pull ahead of me!

Is that your game, you swy waskel waysider?

Edited January 8, 2009 by Mike

[lindyhopper]

I guess we'll just have to take Mike's word for it.

I for one know that I've heard the story on video from VPW's mouth. My memory is still quite young: )

I think it must have either been from a taped live PFAL class or a tape of Living Victoriously. Did HRA do a cameo as a carpenter with a balanced hammer in Living Victoriously? You around for Living Vic, Mike?

I am in the club of those that think ol Vic made the tale up or "borrowed" it from else where. I think WW did a good job of summing up why.

[Mike]

I guess we'll just have to take Mike's word for it.

That's RIGHT!

And by Golly, no fair checking them things out. I want an EXCLUSIVE franchise on expertise.

Maybe I'll set up my own church, and charge only 9.95% tithes to the first 100 suckers.

I can be a MOGMIKE... as long as no one opens up them books!

Edited January 8, 2009 by Mike

[Thomas Loy Bumgarner]

Never ask a leper to lend you a hand.

Raf trying out for the comedy club circuit

[doojable]

And now for something completely different....

[Twinky]

I suspect (based on many similar, deeper observations of other grads) that you have only a partial knowledge of some of the materials (note the double incompleteness), AND that it's partially forgotten, unknowingly distorted, and hopelessly mixed with other teachers' comments and writings.

If I'm wrong I'll be delighted to encounter a full-bodied PFAL mind.

But I strongly suspect you DEDUCE from anecdotal memories and others' stories (rather than DIRECTLY OBSERVE) that the contents of the writings are not valuable to you.

Everywhere I go for the past ten years I encounter vast unawareness of the contents of the writings. Those few who do study one or two books do so with a huge chip on their shoulder, and encounter many corresponding distortions. Inaccurate knowledge of the writings seems to be the rule, and the many grads who reject the writings seem to do so based on emotional reactions to all the stories and other peoples reports on the writings.

Like I say, I'll be delighted to encounter any grads who honestly know the materials that so many reject unknowing.

Do you think you are one, and that you knowingly reject the contents of the writings?

Mike, remind us which Corps you were in. And what TWI positions you held after graduation, and for how long.

Many of the people posting here are actually Corps grads. You know how many times we had to study the PFAL material? Teach things from it? Field Corps often ran classes; how many times do you think they heard the material? Had to answer questions on it. Others, Corps and non-Corps alike, ran twigs at which collaterals were made available - and would have to answer questions from new twiggies on TWI material. Some of these people may have done this for many years, especially field Corps.

Obviously you know it better, so I'm just asking for your creds.

Also, perhaps you would tell us what non-TWI sources you have studied. There are on-line study guides, commentaries, etc (see, eg, Crosswalk) - some of which are valuable and some of which are less so. Some of them are pushing a point of view with some obviousness; others don't seem to be. Are you saying that VPW didn't push his point of view? Are you really saying that? Just like other reputable sources don't see things from their point of view?

Anyway, Mike, why shouldn't it be "mixed with other teachers' comments and writings"? Who says it's "hopelessly mixed" (other than you)? I don't think even VPW said he had a monopoly on the truth. His claim was in the presentation of the truth.

Shouldn't we be looking at the author and finisher of faith, the head of the Church, rather than at another disciple?

[Mark Clarke]

I for one have not limited my understanding of VPW's teachings to just my memory of the class. I read and worked the books, and taught them at Twig for years. I was sold out to the notion that God had spoken to VP and taught him how to put all that stuff together so he could teach it to us. But in more recent years I have learned how to study the Bible without those blinders and discovered how much of VP's interpretation was just plain error. And that was before I even heard about most of the sordid details of his personal life and questionable moral character. Just from a scholar's standpoint he missed the whole point of Jesus Christ's preaching and ministry.

Many scholars and even simple laymen have read the Bible without preconceived ideas and seen that the whole crux of what Jesus taught was about the coming Kingdom of God on earth, and his disciples taught the same thing throughout Acts. But VP taught that the Kingdom of God was overall while the Kingdom of Heaven involved the personal presence of the Lord from heaven. Yet anyone who can read can see that "Kingdom of God" and "Kingdom of Heaven" are synonymous in the Gospels. This is just one of the many obvious errors that I missed for years. It was like the video above, where we're so busy counting how many passes the white team makes that we miss the moonwalking bear!

Many of his explanations that were supposedly based on Greek cannot even be substantiated in Bullinger's Lexicon, let alone reference works by more mainstream theologians. How many works by other theologians have you read, Mike? Can you explain the errors in their logic or do you just declare they are wrong because they contradict Wierwille's writings? As you say, this is not the place to get into all this, not being the Doctrinal Forum, but you claimed that most former Way followers don't accurately remember his teachings. I just wanted to point out that there are plenty who have weighed them in the balances and found they came up lacking.

[Tzaia]

Why don't you just crack the books, again, and see what a more mature reading/study in a far different atmosphere than the hectic "move the Word" lifestyle we were in can produce? (Are you listening Tzaia? This is the answer to your protest.)

Mike, I got rather early on that in TWI, "moving the Word" was actually getting people to sign up for the class. Having seen what I had gotten myself into, I really wanted to know exactly what was being taught before I blindsided anyone I knew with the boring and repetitious class. That's why I went through the books very carefully many times and my opinion, at the time, was that the books should be offered without the class because there were so many contradictions and if you took the class you might not read the books. It was clear to me that people had not read the books and I think that was by design.

Since stepping further away and reading them even more critically, I can't recommend anything beyond perhaps JCOP, and even then I am hesitant because of his attempt to reconcile the two passion accounts when they are clearly different narratives and disagree about whether Jesus was crucified on the day of the Passover preparation or before. The narratives in the Bible simply do not agree and I (now) disagree with the idea they must agree.

I cannot recommend any of his books for several reasons:

1. He does not cite sources in his writing.
   
2. He is divisive towards the body as a whole - clearly this stance conflicts with the message of Christ.
   
3. He contradicts himself leading to confusion when he claims he's trying to clear up confusion.
   
4. He preached 3 conflicting messages - one to the inner circle, one to the non-inner group, and still another to the unwashed masses.
   

Any book presented as non-fiction, including the Bible, should be read critically - and he did that - but his main point was that his understanding was correct and everyone else's was wrong. He proof-texted with the best of them to support his beliefs, and ignored clear teachings by relegating them to "for our learning" to support his own agenda, while retaining others to support his agenda.

I used to think that it was unnecessary to throw out the baby with the bath, but in the ensuing 15 years after I left TWI, no one was able to clearly define what the baby was. Based upon what I've seen in the splinters, the main "baby" that has been held onto is this need to be in possession of "the" truth, continue to deride the parts of the body that don't hold the same opinions (like-mindedness) (I don't agree with either side doing that, but it's far more out there with TWI and the splinters than in a standard denominational setting), and the need to separate from the body over issues of doctrine (rightly-dividing). I think those are not the right things to hold onto, and there's not much else besides that. My reality is that I can't find anything from the organizations worth holding onto, so I don't.

It is clear to me that it was very important to VPW to be "credible" and in his mind that credibility included being a part of "signs, miracles, and wonders." He had to have a sign from God, and in true Bible fashion, he saw something that can't be independently confirmed.

At one time there was no reason not to believe him because most of us didn't know about his secret life. Now that the secret is out, there's no reason to believe him. He turned out to be an non-credible witness for signs, miracles, and wonders because of his failed walk with God. It's as simple as that.

[Ham]

but he's like the pope! Or at least Santa Claus..

The R.C.'s still regard the "distillation" of "truth" from their leader's lips above and beyond question, do they not?

I read where they went as far as to say that they were sent "wicked popes" when they were "off the ball.." the people musta been BAD people ya know..

and they held that the pope's "authority" was still god-given, and MUST be obeyed.. he could trace his lineage to peter and all..

same for the english and french royalty.. I've seen where some of them try to trace their lineage back to abraham and david..

http://www.ccg.org/english/s/P067.html

now we have the modern, however FAR LESS well known wienerwillian version. Son of a farmer.. descendent of Hugenauts.. "destined" to be da KING, ahem, I mean mog.. he couldn't trace his lineage to David, however, or Solomon.. though some here have TRIED, by comparison.. so the next best thing? We need a miraculous sign to confirm the "divine" appointment..

it's really the same religion.. we have a class which "rules".. edicts and doctrines cannot be questioned or challenged.

[Oakspear]

I agree with Mike that many of us in TWI didn't always remember exactly what we heard and when. I remember being very surprised, for example, when I couldn't find the whole "It's Christ in you!...what power we have if we only knew it" was not in the book. There were so many classes, commentaries and teachings based on the classes, advances, books, articles, tapes, etc, it's a wonder we could keep any of it straight. That's just the way human memory works, I don't care who you are. However does that mean that Mike is recalling them correctly? <_<

Now, if Mike has a copy of the video or audio class (one & the same) or an dependable transcript, I would tend to believe him, but would feel better if an additional witness could verify what he's saying. I've not found Mike to be a liar, but he does tend to quote what backs up his position while ignoring the rest.

What I don't agree with is that anyone who doesn't come to the same conclusions about PFAL as Mike did hasn't "mastered" the material. His stance that a different viewpoint is prima facie evidence of non-mastery is a circular argument.

[Raf]

Did he say it during the class or is it in the books?

Did he say it in 1965 or 1973?

Did he say it to Mrs. Wierwille or did he keep it from her?

Do his contradictions actually complement each other?

Is there a way to harmonize the written record in a way that makes apparent contradictions "melt away"?

Are you relying on your knowledge of the written work or your memory of the audio or video class?

Did Wierwille say it, or was it merely spoken by someone Wierwille trained?

How many passes does the team in white make?

[oldiesman]

Mike, I got rather early on that in TWI, "moving the Word" was actually getting people to sign up for the class. Having seen what I had gotten myself into, I really wanted to know exactly what was being taught before I blindsided anyone I knew with the boring and repetitious class. That's why I went through the books very carefully many times and my opinion, at the time, was that the books should be offered without the class because there were so many contradictions and if you took the class you might not read the books. It was clear to me that people had not read the books and I think that was by design.

Since stepping further away and reading them even more critically, I can't recommend anything beyond perhaps JCOP, and even then I am hesitant because of his attempt to reconcile the two passion accounts when they are clearly different narratives and disagree about whether Jesus was crucified on the day of the Passover preparation or before. The narratives in the Bible simply do not agree and I (now) disagree with the idea they must agree.

I cannot recommend any of his books for several reasons:

1. He does not cite sources in his writing.
   
2. He is divisive towards the body as a whole - clearly this stance conflicts with the message of Christ.
   
3. He contradicts himself leading to confusion when he claims he's trying to clear up confusion.
   
4. He preached 3 conflicting messages - one to the inner circle, one to the non-inner group, and still another to the unwashed masses.
   

Any book presented as non-fiction, including the Bible, should be read critically - and he did that - but his main point was that his understanding was correct and everyone else's was wrong. He proof-texted with the best of them to support his beliefs, and ignored clear teachings by relegating them to "for our learning" to support his own agenda, while retaining others to support his agenda.

I used to think that it was unnecessary to throw out the baby with the bath, but in the ensuing 15 years after I left TWI, no one was able to clearly define what the baby was. Based upon what I've seen in the splinters, the main "baby" that has been held onto is this need to be in possession of "the" truth, continue to deride the parts of the body that don't hold the same opinions (like-mindedness) (I don't agree with either side doing that, but it's far more out there with TWI and the splinters than in a standard denominational setting), and the need to separate from the body over issues of doctrine (rightly-dividing). I think those are not the right things to hold onto, and there's not much else besides that. My reality is that I can't find anything from the organizations worth holding onto, so I don't.

It is clear to me that it was very important to VPW to be "credible" and in his mind that credibility included being a part of "signs, miracles, and wonders." He had to have a sign from God, and in true Bible fashion, he saw something that can't be independently confirmed.

At one time there was no reason not to believe him because most of us didn't know about his secret life. Now that the secret is out, there's no reason to believe him. He turned out to be an non-credible witness for signs, miracles, and wonders because of his failed walk with God. It's as simple as that.

The sins of the teacher do not negate the truths in the teaching.

Happy New Year!

[Raf]

Maybe, but you won't catch me scouring the works of L. Ron Hubbard for a "what's right with it, what's wrong with it" review.