He wasn't a Dr. in any sense of the word. A Dr. is someone who holds a legitimate doctorate or has had one honorably bestowed upon them. His *doctorate* was issued by a degree mill. He did not do the necessary work that is associated with receiving a doctorate, nor was an honorable doctorate bestowed upon him by an accredited establishment. This is not an opinion. It's a simple and provable fact. Rather, he was a rural preacher who intentionally plagiarized the writings of authors whose works were too obscure for his targeted market to recognize.
As to the divine nature of the contents of his works:
His materials, including the often vaunted orange book, are abounding with provably inaccurate declarations, cold hard factual material that is simply incorrect. Why would God waste his time giving someone divine revelation that is filled with error? Even worse, why would He then encourage the recipient to disseminate the information on a large scale basis, such as the Word Over The World program? That should make absolutely no sense to anyone who cares to approach the issue with an open mind and logical line of thought.
My conclusion is that recommending these books would be the result of resistance and failure to thinking logically, or, more generously, simply lacking an awareness of their true content.
I don't think this specific scenario is about someone's unfamiliarity with the content. That leaves only one other option.
I understand what you’re saying about vp’s ways of encouraging people to think – yeah but he tended to slip in some doubletalk here and there so as to gum up the works and actually thwarts any critical thinking. For example check out what he says in the chapter Are You Limiting God? pages 23 & 24 of The Bible Tells Me So:
“…We have been so schooled to revere the knowledge that comes to us through our five senses that we fail to recognize the knowledge that comes from the higher realm, the spiritual, where the Word of God, and not reason, has first place. Both realms or worlds are here: the natural world is factual; the spiritual world is true…The truths of the spiritual world are absolutely not dependent upon the senses, but rather on the spirit from God in man.”(end of excerpt)
Maybe I’m reading too much into it – but it seems to me vp is pitting the Word of God - spiritual knowledge - against reason…against the five senses.
Personally, I don't see it as doubletalk. Rather, it's a matter of trying to make a distinction between information received naturally, and that which is received spiritually. Which, from our "senses conditioned mind" tend to look and feel the same.
Greasespot Café broke the wierwille-propaganda machine.........and, it's beyond repair.
Yep. From Waydale to GSC the damage is done and the truth revealed. I lurked here for years before joining the community. GSC opened my eyes to so many issues the way international does not want revealed.
Personally, I don't see it as doubletalk. Rather, it's a matter of trying to make a distinction between information received naturally, and that which is received spiritually. Which, from our "senses conditioned mind" tend to look and feel the same.
It looks more like he's setting up an order of priority rather than making a distinction how the info is received; the word of god has priority over reason- logic and spiritual truth has priority over facts of the natural world.
Maybe that's where Chris G got his "look for the truth behind the facts" thing , I dunno
I do get what you're saying though - but I would like to tie that into what I said -
in II Cor. 5:7 we're told to walk by faith and not by sight; it doesn't say we're to walk by faith and not by reason. I'm of the opinion it's complementary - faith and reason, that is.
Also in Isa. 1:18 Is God's invitation to our minds - come now let us reason together
I know all the stuff about God's ways are higher than ours, blah blah blah - but still he chooses to come down to our level and engage us as the creatures of reason that we are.
And one more thing I'd like to address - what is the difference between truth and fact?
Philosophically truth is the aim of a belief system; but in a general sense what is true is also a fact; World War I began in 1914 - is that true? Yes - and it's also a fact.
One way of including the word “necessarily” in our analysis of PFAL p.83 is to write the phrase out both with and without this word, usually ignored by casual readers.
A - Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed…
B - Not all that Wierwille writes will be God-breathed…
Now try to describe what are the differences in what these phrases say?
My hunch is that most people here WANT it to say B, so ignoring the word “necessarily” is necessary.
Of course what most here want most things like this:
C - Not all that Wierwille writes can be God-breathed…
D - All that Wierwille writes will NOT be God-breathed…
E - None that Wierwille writes is God-breathed…
…and so on.
But alas, what is printed is:
A - Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed…
That word “necessarily” is a bugger to many.
*******
Also on page 83 is the context. This actually is where the word “necessarily” becomes most crucial.
The context is the untrustworthiness of man’s words versus how trustworthy God’s Word is.He gives a list of normally impressive names that some may think are trustworthy, but declares them as not trustworthy.
Then he includes his own name to FURTHER emphasize how untrustworthy are man’s words.
Even though VPW had been given the commission by God to bring forth God’s trusted Word, his own words (vpw’s) are ALSO in the untrustworthy pile.
If only Wierwille worshipers had see this in the 70s !!!
I did see this passage in the early 70s and it helped me keep a balance in what kind of respect I afforded him.I remember running video classes as the AV man, and elbowing or catching the knowing eyes of the instructor when these words would come up.It was often a highlight in the class for me.I knew what he was saying.
When I called my good old best friend J.Fred Wilson about this passage he immediately remembered it as a high point of Dr’s claiming divine inspiration for SOME of his writings.J.Fred agreed with me that PFAL p.83 is a huge “Thus saith the Lord statement” in direct contrast to the context. Not contradicting the context, but complementing it.
J.Fred totally agreed with me on the grammar and context analysis. He and Karen were the editors of the PFAL book. I also talked to D. Craley, Dr’s magazine editor,about this same passage and he agreed with me.Both were less enthusiastic than I in believing the content of the passage, but both agreed with me on the grammar and context of what it says.
***
The gist of the two words “not all” is “some.”The gist of the whole phrase, INCLUDING the word “necessarily,” is:
Some of what Wierwille writes will not be God-breathed, so that is untrustworthy like all the rest in this context. However, some other writings of Wierwille will OF NECESSITY be God-breathed, because God gave him that job.
Here’s another of my amplified versions of the passage on page 83:
Even some of Wierwille’s writings must be deemed unworthy, and he was given the commission of bringing forth God’s written Word for modern times.YET, despite this commission,his own words are just as untrustworthy as everyone else’s.
One way of including the word “necessarily” in our analysis of PFAL p.83 is to write the phrase out both with and without this word, usually ignored by casual readers.
A - Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed…
B - Not all that Wierwille writes will be God-breathed…
Now try to describe what are the differences in what these phrases say?
My hunch is that most people here WANT it to say B, so ignoring the word “necessarily” is necessary.
Of course what most here want most things like this:
C - Not all that Wierwille writes can be God-breathed…
D - All that Wierwille writes will NOT be God-breathed…
E - None that Wierwille writes is God-breathed…
…and so on.
.....
And................the wheels on the cult go 'round and 'round.
Okay, Mike.........against my better judgment to indulge your wierwille-sycophancy......
The wierwille-shtick was devoid of "receiving revelation" ........the man was a fraud and huckster. In all my cult-years around wierwille, I NEVER ONCE saw the guy receive OR operate revelation......ie word of knowledge, word of wisdom or discerning of spirits. NOT ONE TIME.
Wierwille claimed an 8th corps guy was possessed in the BRC.......wierwille stomped and stammered and did nothing!
The night at corps week when it was pouring rain and the big top tent was dangerously pooling water above.....wierwille blamed the corps.
Wierwille looked me straight in the eyes after my deprogramming experience and said that my parents would be DEAD IN FIVE YEARS for having put me thru that captivity and experience. My Dad lived 27 years longer, my Mom lived 34 years longer........than wierwille's fraudulent "prophecy."
I could give plenty more examples, Mike.........but I don't care to.
After 24 years around Vic, Howard, Don, Dotsie, Emogene, Wanda, and the cult-clan........I saw everything I needed to see. But go ahead and live off the delusions of this scam if you like..........where "the rubber meets the road" it just wasn't there. I don't care how many times you add "references" or "written research" from wierwille.......the scriptures POINTEDLY SAY that we shall know them by their fruit.
And one more thing.......I spent time delving into all that backstory of wierwille's India trip and claims........a nothing burger. Wierwille plagiarized whole swaths of that "foreign missions pamphlet" from others before him. But I seriously doubt that any of this will have any sway over your wierwille-discipleship.
Hey, Mike...................how about the simple grammar in my post above?
Care to explain why wierwille couldn't practice what he preached?
Well, according to some good ole' waybrained logic, we should overlook all the evil he did while pretending to be the MOGFODAT. Since God commissioned him we should overlook all the obvious wrongs he comitted, you know, like....plagiarism, sexual predator, etc. Overlook or rationalize or ignore or blah.
In agreement with some of your observations, it may be that on days and hours when he was out of fellowship, Dr himself would also contribute to this kind of anti-intellectualism that often invades ranks of leaders in all churches.
As unreliable as vp's intellect was - whether he was in fellowship or out of fellowship I know not - I'd feel more confident recommending the Magic 8 Ball to someone who is looking for answers:
Hey, Mike...................how about the simple grammar in my post above?
Care to explain why wierwille couldn't practice what he preached?
Romans 7 Oh wretched man that I am. I too have trouble practicing what I preach.
When a human is in a position of great power, their sin hurts others more. I know when Saul, David, and Solomon were out of fellowship, it could be very hurtful to others. When a powerless man sins, it's often very private and easy to smooth over, and press on when fellowship is restored.
Well, according to some good ole' waybrained logic, we should overlook all the evil he did while pretending to be the MOGFODAT. Since God commissioned him we should overlook all the obvious wrongs he comitted, you know, like....plagiarism, sexual predator, etc. Overlook or rationalize or ignore or blah.
No. What we should do, and should have done long ago, is line up actions with what it written. I find it necessary to purge lots of what I heard from lots of great teachers from the Way. It's only the written works that I want to preserve. All the crap of the TVTs is not easy to purge, but it is necessary.
It's a stylistic difference, Mike. The sentence carries the same meaning either way., much in the same way that the two words "throughly" and "thoroughly" mean the exact same thing, despite Wierwille's insistence they had different meanings.
Even some of Wierwille’s writings must be deemed unworthy, and he was given the commission of bringing forth God’s written Word for modern times.YET, despite this commission,his own words are just as untrustworthy as everyone else’s.
Romans 7 Oh wretched man that I am. I too have trouble practicing what I preach.
When a human is in a position of great power, their sin hurts others more. I know when Saul, David, and Solomon were out of fellowship, it could be very hurtful to others. When a powerless man sins, it's often very private and easy to smooth over, and press on when fellowship is restored.
Please stop comparing VPW to Biblical icons. He was not a Biblical figure, he was a small town preacher who stumbled on a scheme to vaunt himself above reality.
Please stop comparing VPW to Biblical icons. He was not a Biblical figure, he was a small town preacher who stumbled on a scheme to vaunt himself above reality.
My take on all this is that we are supposed to compare ourselves with Biblical icons and dare to think we can do even better.
That’s what I see having Christ in us means: we got more than most of those Biblical icons.It is an extreme position to take.I know that, and I see Christ in us as extreme too.
When you ask me to please not compare like that, that’s pretty difficult for me to comply with, seeing my decision to come back to the PFAL writings and work then again fresh.My sorting out of my TWI experiences ends up being thankful for some things, and rejecting some things.
I think the reason so many of us did have positive experiences was due to our exposure to these writings. As we grew in ministry responsibilities most of us drifted from the simple writings and headlong into TVTs. That’s the stuff I am most suspicious of and reject often. YES, vpw drifted from them too, and admitted so in several ways over a span of decades. I’ve collected them, and posted them here.
When I compare any modern person to Biblical icons it’s for good reason, not simple, shallow hero worship. Did you notice I also compared vpw to King Saul?Did you know that Saul must have been a great guy who did lots of good things? In time he drifted and drifted real bad.
I see it as Simpleton City to harbor an image of a pure bad guy.
With it you lose credibility in being able to explain what happened to us in the Way. We got incredibly blessed. You have to include that. Many grads are still very thankful to God for what they learned and we need Biblical models to explain how a man can bless so well with one hand and curse so well with the other. Biblical characters can explain how that happened to us. Your pure bad guy thesis is totally lacking credibility.
I think the ones getting blessed were the new people. When I was new it was pretty much all blessings.
As we older grads "graduated" into ministry responsibilities and into the TVTs, things went pretty sour in some places at some times. I was lucky to have dodged most of the crap until 1983.
You lose credibility in being able to explain what happened to us in the Way. We got incredibly blessed. You have to include that. Many grads are still very thankful to God for what they learned and we need Biblical models to explain how a man can bless so well with one hand and curse so well with the other. Biblical characters can explain how that happened to us. Your pure bad guy thesis is totally lacking credibility.
Sure good things happened, Gods Word doesn't return void. A lot of good people were involved that protected others from what wad happening behind the scenes.
Howeve, many people were abused, ABS spent on personal use by the trustee household, some thrown out in midfle of the night - defamed and slandered with outright lies, some threatened, etc. But lets not forget the cherry on the cake. VPW was a sexual predator who twisted God's Word to fulfill his own lusts. A creepy old guy preying on very young women and married women. VPW taught Martindale the same tricks and made him three times the child of hell, figuratively speaking.
There are clear qualifications for a minister, qualifications that VPW included in his books and totally ignored in his own walk. The guy was corrupt. These arent unfounded accusations. His own grandchildren have told me a lot more than i post here. Many of the abused post here. GSC tells the other side of the story, the side twi wants covered up.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
110
64
43
37
Popular Days
Jun 4
69
Jun 1
51
Jun 5
33
Jun 8
32
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 110 posts
T-Bone 64 posts
waysider 43 posts
OldSkool 37 posts
Popular Days
Jun 4 2017
69 posts
Jun 1 2017
51 posts
Jun 5 2017
33 posts
Jun 8 2017
32 posts
Popular Posts
Steve Lortz
Greetings, ImLikeSoConfused! I would have responded to this thread sooner, but I had a heart attack on February 9th which landed me at the hospital DOA. The docs resuscitated me and I've spent th
Longhunter
I don't agree with a single word if this. Such a wild claim requires a big burden of proof. His theological claims are unsubstantiated, his Greek was lousy at best, and his Biblical studies were fra
WordWolf
He sounds a great deal like the last child of one that passed through here, the one that later claimed to be his own Dad posting here to support his own posts, sockpuppet style. The "making up stuff"
Posted Images
waysider
He wasn't a Dr. in any sense of the word. A Dr. is someone who holds a legitimate doctorate or has had one honorably bestowed upon them. His *doctorate* was issued by a degree mill. He did not do the necessary work that is associated with receiving a doctorate, nor was an honorable doctorate bestowed upon him by an accredited establishment. This is not an opinion. It's a simple and provable fact. Rather, he was a rural preacher who intentionally plagiarized the writings of authors whose works were too obscure for his targeted market to recognize.
As to the divine nature of the contents of his works:
His materials, including the often vaunted orange book, are abounding with provably inaccurate declarations, cold hard factual material that is simply incorrect. Why would God waste his time giving someone divine revelation that is filled with error? Even worse, why would He then encourage the recipient to disseminate the information on a large scale basis, such as the Word Over The World program? That should make absolutely no sense to anyone who cares to approach the issue with an open mind and logical line of thought.
My conclusion is that recommending these books would be the result of resistance and failure to thinking logically, or, more generously, simply lacking an awareness of their true content.
I don't think this specific scenario is about someone's unfamiliarity with the content. That leaves only one other option.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
Personally, I don't see it as doubletalk. Rather, it's a matter of trying to make a distinction between information received naturally, and that which is received spiritually. Which, from our "senses conditioned mind" tend to look and feel the same.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Greasespot Café broke the wierwille-propaganda machine.........and, it's beyond repair.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Wierwille's Orange Book sat on the wall.
Wierwile's Orange Book had a great fall.
Something, something, something...
SPLAT!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Yep. From Waydale to GSC the damage is done and the truth revealed. I lurked here for years before joining the community. GSC opened my eyes to so many issues the way international does not want revealed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
And from the ashes arose PLAF The Wonder Class.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
It looks more like he's setting up an order of priority rather than making a distinction how the info is received; the word of god has priority over reason- logic and spiritual truth has priority over facts of the natural world.
Maybe that's where Chris G got his "look for the truth behind the facts" thing , I dunno
I do get what you're saying though - but I would like to tie that into what I said -
in II Cor. 5:7 we're told to walk by faith and not by sight; it doesn't say we're to walk by faith and not by reason. I'm of the opinion it's complementary - faith and reason, that is.
Also in Isa. 1:18 Is God's invitation to our minds - come now let us reason together
I know all the stuff about God's ways are higher than ours, blah blah blah - but still he chooses to come down to our level and engage us as the creatures of reason that we are.
And one more thing I'd like to address - what is the difference between truth and fact?
Philosophically truth is the aim of a belief system; but in a general sense what is true is also a fact; World War I began in 1914 - is that true? Yes - and it's also a fact.
Edited by T-BoneClarity
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
One way of including the word “necessarily” in our analysis of PFAL p.83 is to write the phrase out both with and without this word, usually ignored by casual readers.
A - Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed…
B - Not all that Wierwille writes will be God-breathed…
Now try to describe what are the differences in what these phrases say?
My hunch is that most people here WANT it to say B, so ignoring the word “necessarily” is necessary.
Of course what most here want most things like this:
C - Not all that Wierwille writes can be God-breathed…
D - All that Wierwille writes will NOT be God-breathed…
E - None that Wierwille writes is God-breathed…
…and so on.
But alas, what is printed is:
A - Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed…
That word “necessarily” is a bugger to many.
*******
Also on page 83 is the context. This actually is where the word “necessarily” becomes most crucial.
The context is the untrustworthiness of man’s words versus how trustworthy God’s Word is. He gives a list of normally impressive names that some may think are trustworthy, but declares them as not trustworthy.
Then he includes his own name to FURTHER emphasize how untrustworthy are man’s words.
Even though VPW had been given the commission by God to bring forth God’s trusted Word, his own words (vpw’s) are ALSO in the untrustworthy pile.
If only Wierwille worshipers had see this in the 70s !!!
I did see this passage in the early 70s and it helped me keep a balance in what kind of respect I afforded him. I remember running video classes as the AV man, and elbowing or catching the knowing eyes of the instructor when these words would come up. It was often a highlight in the class for me. I knew what he was saying.
When I called my good old best friend J.Fred Wilson about this passage he immediately remembered it as ahigh point
J.Fred totally agreed with me on the grammar and context analysis. He and Karen were the editors of the PFAL book. I also talked to D. Craley, Dr’s magazine editor, about this same passage and he agreed with me. Both were less enthusiastic than I in believing the content of the passage, but both agreed with me on the grammar and context of what it says.
***
The gist of the two words “not all” is “some.” The gist of the whole phrase, INCLUDING the word “necessarily,” is:
Some of what Wierwille writes will not be God-breathed, so that is untrustworthy like all the rest in this context. However, some other writings of Wierwille will OF NECESSITY be God-breathed, because God gave him that job.
Here’s another of my amplified versions of the passage on page 83:
Even some of Wierwille’s writings must be deemed unworthy, and he was given the commission of bringing forth God’s written Word for modern times. YET, despite this commission, his own words are just as untrustworthy as everyone else’s.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
sorry
Edited by Mikedouble post
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
And................the wheels on the cult go 'round and 'round.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
This is just simple grammar. It's complicated by the emotional mindset of some.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Hey, Mike...................how about the simple grammar in my post above?
Care to explain why wierwille couldn't practice what he preached?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Well, according to some good ole' waybrained logic, we should overlook all the evil he did while pretending to be the MOGFODAT. Since God commissioned him we should overlook all the obvious wrongs he comitted, you know, like....plagiarism, sexual predator, etc. Overlook or rationalize or ignore or blah.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
As unreliable as vp's intellect was - whether he was in fellowship or out of fellowship I know not - I'd feel more confident recommending the Magic 8 Ball to someone who is looking for answers:
Magic 8 Ball, should I take that job in New York?
Magic 8 Ball's answer: Ask again later
All praise and glory be to Magic 8 Ball !
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Romans 7 Oh wretched man that I am. I too have trouble practicing what I preach.
When a human is in a position of great power, their sin hurts others more. I know when Saul, David, and Solomon were out of fellowship, it could be very hurtful to others. When a powerless man sins, it's often very private and easy to smooth over, and press on when fellowship is restored.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
No. What we should do, and should have done long ago, is line up actions with what it written. I find it necessary to purge lots of what I heard from lots of great teachers from the Way. It's only the written works that I want to preserve. All the crap of the TVTs is not easy to purge, but it is necessary.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
It's a stylistic difference, Mike. The sentence carries the same meaning either way., much in the same way that the two words "throughly" and "thoroughly" mean the exact same thing, despite Wierwille's insistence they had different meanings.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
This is worth repeating:
My amplified version of the passage on page 83:
Even some of Wierwille’s writings must be deemed unworthy, and he was given the commission of bringing forth God’s written Word for modern times. YET, despite this commission, his own words are just as untrustworthy as everyone else’s.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Please stop comparing VPW to Biblical icons. He was not a Biblical figure, he was a small town preacher who stumbled on a scheme to vaunt himself above reality.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
My take on all this is that we are supposed to compare ourselves with Biblical icons and dare to think we can do even better.
That’s what I see having Christ in us means: we got more than most of those Biblical icons. It is an extreme position to take. I know that, and I see Christ in us as extreme too.
When you ask me to please not compare like that, that’s pretty difficult for me to comply with, seeing my decision to come back to the PFAL writings and work then again fresh. My sorting out of my TWI experiences ends up being thankful for some things, and rejecting some things.
I think the reason so many of us did have positive experiences was due to our exposure to these writings. As we grew in ministry responsibilities most of us drifted from the simple writings and headlong into TVTs. That’s the stuff I am most suspicious of and reject often. YES, vpw drifted from them too, and admitted so in several ways over a span of decades. I’ve collected them, and posted them here.
When I compare any modern person to Biblical icons it’s for good reason, not simple, shallow hero worship. Did you notice I also compared vpw to King Saul? Did you know that Saul must have been a great guy who did lots of good things? In time he drifted and drifted real bad.
I see it asSimpleton City
With it you lose credibility in being able to explain what happened to us in the Way. We got incredibly blessed. You have to include that. Many grads are still very thankful to God for what they learned and we need Biblical models to explain how a man can bless so well with one hand and curse so well with the other. Biblical characters can explain how that happened to us. Your pure bad guy thesis is totally lacking credibility.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
"Your Honor, you need to understand something . . . thing is . . . we were having a really good time getting blessed"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
sorry. misread post. eyes bleary
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I think the ones getting blessed were the new people. When I was new it was pretty much all blessings.
As we older grads "graduated" into ministry responsibilities and into the TVTs, things went pretty sour in some places at some times. I was lucky to have dodged most of the crap until 1983.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Sure good things happened, Gods Word doesn't return void. A lot of good people were involved that protected others from what wad happening behind the scenes.
Howeve, many people were abused, ABS spent on personal use by the trustee household, some thrown out in midfle of the night - defamed and slandered with outright lies, some threatened, etc. But lets not forget the cherry on the cake. VPW was a sexual predator who twisted God's Word to fulfill his own lusts. A creepy old guy preying on very young women and married women. VPW taught Martindale the same tricks and made him three times the child of hell, figuratively speaking.
There are clear qualifications for a minister, qualifications that VPW included in his books and totally ignored in his own walk. The guy was corrupt. These arent unfounded accusations. His own grandchildren have told me a lot more than i post here. Many of the abused post here. GSC tells the other side of the story, the side twi wants covered up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.