The Wierwille Legacy: Who Will Write The Book?

[Mike]

10 hours ago, waysider said:

Refresh my memory.

From the film class video and the PFAL book:

Proofreaders' oversights and printers' errors

Plus we were taught that with the IMMENSELY flawed fragments ancient  scriptures there were all kinds of research techniques that can be use to restore portions of accuracy. With the relatively FEW minor errors that creep into the publishing process, we who were trained on dealing with the flaws in the much more difficult Biblical texts should have an easy time sorting through tiny errors that crept into PFAL printing processes.

There are other minor flaws in there. No big deal.

[OldSkool]

I think this link sums it up. In tbe same manner the martindale preliminary hearing transcripts opened my eyes, and the fact that twi settled out of court to prevent the truth and gory details of a corrupt organization from seeing the light of day, Dr. Jeudes research into Wierwille helped open my eyes to the truth that Wierwille was a fraud.

I do not believe that Wierwilles sins negate the scriptures. God's Word accomplishes what God intends, and nothing can stop that.

Mike, please take the time to read all the links on the page that folows:

 

http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/tw_founder.htm

Edited December 25, 2017 by OldSkool

[So_crates]

6 hours ago, Mike said:

From the film class video and the PFAL book:

Proofreaders' oversights and printers' errors

Plus we were taught that with the IMMENSELY flawed fragments ancient  scriptures there were all kinds of research techniques that can be use to restore portions of accuracy. With the relatively FEW minor errors that creep into the publishing process, we who were trained on dealing with the flaws in the much more difficult Biblical texts should have an easy time sorting through tiny errors that crept into PFAL printing processes.

There are other minor flaws in there. No big deal.

As you also remember, we were taught that the whole purpose of research was to get back to when "holy men of God spoke moved by the Holy Ghost."

In other words, the originials, in theory, were perfect and that's what we were working back toward.

You also know most of the PLAF collaterals were transcribed, right?

Which means they're the originals.

Which means with the PLAF collaterals, if they are God-breathe, were are at the "holy men of god spoke moved by the Holy Ghost" phase.

Therefore, they should be perfect, which they're not, as you admitted above.

Edited December 25, 2017 by So_crates

[So_crates]

18 hours ago, Mike said:

Why was it that a man could go through four years of college and about five years of seminary, at that time; have a bachelors of arts, a bachelor of divinity, a masters of theology and all of my work finished for a PHD with the exception of about seven credits--being out there in the ministry and not being able to get the job done? 

There's a legal axiom that says if one statement is  a lie, the whole thing may be a lie. 

He never did work on a PhD, he went to a diploma mill to get his degree.

Now, if he'll lie about this, why should I believe anything else in this passage?

Edited December 26, 2017 by So_crates

[waysider]

6 hours ago, Mike said:

 

There are other minor flaws in there. No big deal.

It is a big deal. You said it was God Breathed. This is not a printing error, as you claim. It's evidence the writing is not divinely inspired.

[Mike]

Summing up several responses into one here.

I believe God worked with VPW in collecting and sorting through data that He wanted taught to us. They both, with lots of help, moved the original revelation (where the perfection is) to verbal form and recorded, and then to written form.

Just like God's guidance on the collecting and sorting, when the proofreading stage is reached, God continues to guide the process.

Have you ever done any massive proofreading? It's not easy. Human error can overlook things at ANY point, especially when exhaustion comes into play. How do you know when you're done?

I believe that at some point in the proofreading process God says "Ship it!" because the print product is CLOSE ENOUGH in God's assessment to get the job done.  I've worked some in technical electronic factories, in the area of quality control, and reaching the stage where of an appropriate official "Ship it!" is a big deal. I've had to make that decision at times. I know God can guide.

I believe that the printed books and magazine articles that VPW said (by guidance) "Ship it!" are CLOSE ENOUGH to get the intended jobs done in my heart and in others' hearts.

Perfection for perfection's sake is pointless. I want to get the job done, and accurately. When I get one of the collaterals in my hand I have God-breathed data that came from God, via a very complex process, and made simple enough for anyone to understand it.

It's this very complex PROCESS, many details of which I've posted on recently, that gets label "God-breathed."  

Suppose you have a physically perfect page of God-breathed words. Not a single flaw. It blesses your life. Now, imagine a fly lands on one sentence line and makes a deposit that looks just like a comma. Is the page NOT God-breathed now?  Technically, no. Practically, yes.

When I say the collaterals are God-breathed I mean  their origin is God, not man, and we need to absorb them.

If I lived in the first century and I had a copy of a copy of Ephesians, I would regard that as CLOSE ENOUGH, even though there may be minor proofreading errors and scribe errors.

***

P.S. - At one HQ staff meeting VPW was hot and angry about a few typos creeping into the latest Way Magazine. In that meeting he said much the same that I wrote above about the factories and industry. He eventually calmed down and said something to the effect that if the Way International waited until every product was absolutely perfect then we probably would never get ANY product out the door.

I'm glad he said "Ship it!" and I got the product that God says is CLOSE ENOUGH.

 

Edited December 25, 2017 by Mike

[Mike]

2 hours ago, So_crates said:

There's a legal axiom that says if one statement is  a lie, the whole thing may be a lie. 

He never did work on a PhD, he went to a diploma mill to get his degree.

Now, if he'll lie about this, why should I believe anything else in thiss passage?

So_crates have you read here the post done by Research Geek around 12 years ago on Pikes Peak? He actually went there to research it out a little. His post bears repeating. I should look for it. Your objections to Pikes Peak are not appropriate dud to incomplete data. If you or anyone here knows how to do the advanced search stuff, please find that.

Ragging on Pikes Peak is common here and repeated often. Research Geek's post giving the whole story, should be repeated often, just like Oldiesman's post on plagiarism.

[So_crates]

9 minutes ago, Mike said:

Summing up several responses into one here.

I believe God worked with VPW in collecting and sorting through data that He wanted taught to us. They both, with lots of help, moved the original revelation (where the perfection is) to verbal form and recorded, and then to written form.

Just like God's guidance on the collecting and sorting, when the proofreading stage is reached, God continues to guide the process.

Have you ever done any massive proofreading? It's not easy. Human error can overlook things at ANY point, especially when exhaustion comes into play. How do you know when you're done?

I believe that at some point in the proofreading process God says "Ship it!" because the print product is CLOSE ENOUGH in God's assessment to get the job done.  I've worked some in technical electronic factories, in the area of quality control, and reaching the stage where of an appropriate official "Ship it!" is a big deal. I've had to make that decision at times. I know God can guide.

I believe that the printed books and magazine articles that VPW said (by guidance) "Ship it!" are CLOSE ENOUGH to get the intended jobs done in my heart and in others' hearts.

Perfection for perfection's sake is pointless. I want to get the job done, and accurately. When I get one of the collaterals in my hand I have God-breathed data that came from God, via a very complex process, and made simple enough for anyone to understand it.

It's this very complex PROCESS, many details of which I've posted on recently, that gets label "God-breathed."  

Suppose you have a physically perfect page of God-breathed words. Not a single flaw. It blesses your life. Now, imagine a fly lands on one sentence line and makes a deposit that looks just like a comma. Is the page NOT God-breathed now?  Technically, no. Practically, yes.

When I say the collaterals are God-breathed I mean  their origin is God, not man, and we need to absorb them.

If I lived in the first century and I had a copy of a copy of Ephesians, I would regard that as CLOSE ENOUGH, even though there may be minor proofreading errors and scribe errors.

Your error here is that, if we follow the ministry's model, God did not say "Ship it!" to Paul when Paul wrote Ephesians. The ministry model would claim that Paul's copy of Ephesians was perfect, as God is perfect, and that was the goal the ministry was attempting to arrive at (or as close as possible to that original version, again "when holy men of God spoke moved by the Holy Ghost."

Remember the part in the class where Saint Vic said Moses didn't sit down and write, In the beginning, yah that sounds good? According to Saint Vic, God's spirit moved Moses spirit which guided Moses Hand.

 

9 minutes ago, Mike said:

***

P.S. - At one HQ staff meeting VPW was hot and angry about a few typos creeping into the latest Way Magazine. In that meeting he said much the same that I wrote above about the factories and industry. He eventually calmed down and said something to the effect that if the Way International waited until every product was absolutely perfect then we probably would never get ANY product out the door.

I'm glad he said "Ship it!" and I got the product that God says is CLOSE ENOUGH.

 

Now, how did people so obsessed with stringing chairs and making sure every object at HQ was cleaned within an inch of its life allow errors to creep in?

Typos, okay. But, again, the collaterals were transcribed. How many mistakes do you think court reporters make in their transcriptions?

And if Saint Vic is that bad at recieving revelation why should we trust any of his revelations?

 

[Mike]

3 hours ago, OldSkool said:

I think this link sums it up. In tbe same manner the martindale preliminary hearing transcripts opened my eyes, and the fact that twi settled out of court to prevent the truth and gory details of a corrupt organization from seeing the light of day, Dr. Jeudes research into Wierwille helped open my eyes to the truth that Wierwille was a fraud.

I do not believe that Wierwilles sins negate the scriptures. God's Word accomplishes what God intends, and nothing can stop that.

Mike, please take the time to read all the links on the page that folows:

 

http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/tw_founder.htm

I have taken the time to read many things like that. It's just a re-peat of everything that appears here. I started reading massive amounts of data along these lines in 1987. It was Ralph's visit to San Diego in July of that year that got my attention. Prior to that I had dismissed the Passing of the Patriarch as mere Corps blather. I continued in this for almost 10 years. In 2002, on Christmas Day, I started posting here and read more large batches of what people were saying happened in the ministry.

If that was done by John Jeudes I don't need it at all. He is very much rooted in churchianity and did not receive the material when he first took the class. Religious people like that make zero impression on me.

[So_crates]

21 minutes ago, Mike said:

So_crates have you read here the post done by Research Geek around 12 years ago on Pikes Peak? He actually went there to research it out a little. His post bears repeating. I should look for it. Your objections to Pikes Peak are not appropriate dud to incomplete data. If you or anyone here knows how to do the advanced search stuff, please find that.

Ragging on Pikes Peak is common here and repeated often. Research Geek's post giving the whole story, should be repeated often, just like Oldiesman's post on plagiarism.

A search of the forum ("pikes peak" and "research geek") turned up only your reference.

Unlike Saint Vic, I got my B.A. the hard way, by taking five years out of my life. 

And not at a diploma mill, at Purdue University

Edited December 25, 2017 by So_crates

[Mike]

16 hours ago, T-Bone said:

Hey Mike,

Don’t bother looking at my drivel…I’m so sorry for giving you such grief all the time…I have some issues obviously – I guess I don’t know when to throttle it back… and by nature I’m an a$$hole anyway…not making excuses – just giving you reasons.... I’ll work on being a nicer person – I promise. Merry Christmas and happy new year!

Merry Christmas to you too, T-Bone.

I’m a little shocked (but in a good way) to read this.

Is this is a sudden change of heart, or has it been developing over time? If the later, I’m sorry I didn’t sense it coming.

Just to mitigate a little, I had not noticed any unusual ignoble intentions as you describe above. Sure I notice the opposition, but I had not seen an evil heart going at me.

Maybe I’m a little jaded. Fifteen years ago, when I first came here, all hell broke out and massive evil intentions were directed at me. It got very bad a few times, and once Pawtucket felt a need to contact me personally about possible stalkers.

T-Bone, please be assured that you didn’t come close to the kind of roughness that went on back then.

These are VERY heavy issues we are dealing with here. I do sleep well at night unless I know that any posting I did that day was the absolute best accurate agape love I could muster up.

I wish you well with the issues you must deal with.

 

Edited December 25, 2017 by Mike

[Mike]

2 hours ago, So_crates said:

A search of the forum ("pikes peak" and "research geek") turned up only your reference.

Unlike Saint Vic, I got my B.A. the hard way, by taking five years out of my life. 

And not at a diploma mill, at Purdue University

Ok. I'll try to locate it in my archive. There was a time when many threads (not just mine) were removed to save on bandwidth (or HD space).

Edited December 25, 2017 by Mike

[waysider]

Simple question ( not Bible related):

 Where was Nicaea?

[Mike]

41 minutes ago, waysider said:

Simple question ( not Bible related):

 Where was Nicaea?

I think I knew twice in my life, but forgot both of them. It's not been useful for my work, so it faded.

[waysider]

3 minutes ago, Mike said:

I think I knew twice in my life, but forgot both of them. It's not been useful for my work, so it faded.

I'm not sure why you quoted me, as your response has nothing to do with answering my question.

[Mike]

It was a fancy way of saying "I don't know"

[Mike]

Did you know that the word "manifestations" is misspelled 3 or 4 times towards the end of the PFAL book? It's spelled "manifestions" so I can see how proofreader fatigue set in. Same exact thing happened once in the Way Mag.

I am well aware, maybe more than most here, of the tiny flaws that have crept into the mass production print versions.

[waysider]

Are you telling me you don't know Nicaea was in what is now modern day Turkey?

[Mike]

1 minute ago, waysider said:

Are you telling me you don't know Nicaea was in what is now modern day Turkey?

My recollection is that I posted "Turkey" yesterday here in my joke. Did you miss it? Maybe you'll laugh.

What I am saying now is that I'm not at all sure of it.

 

[waysider]

Maybe THIS will help.

[Bolshevik]

10 minutes ago, Mike said:

Did you know that the word "manifestations" is misspelled 3 or 4 times towards the end of the PFAL book? It's spelled "manifestions" so I can see how proofreader fatigue set in. Same exact thing happened once in the Way Mag.

I am well aware, maybe more than most here, of the tiny flaws that have crept into the mass production print versions.

Was it a flaw?  Or was it God's intent?  How do you know?

[Mike]

22 minutes ago, Bolshevik said:

Was it a flaw?  Or was it God's intent?  How do you know?

EXCELLENT POINT!

For brevity, when I said that word was misspelled, I left out that possibility you just mentioned.

When I actually encountered years ago those renderings of "manifestion" what I did was place in the margin the symbols "?typo?" to alert myself that it LOOKS LIKE it might be a typo, but it COULD be intentional.

Your comment is encoded in my two questions marks. If i hadn't been trying to be brief, I'd have typed "The word 'manifestation' is ?misspelled? in 3 or places." And then I would hav e explained the double question mark part.

Edited December 25, 2017 by Mike

[Mike]

When I run into ?typos? in PFAL they are documented in a file, so I can forget about them temporarily as I work on the parts that are clear and free of tiny error.

I don’t obsess about this folder of apparent errors. I can relatively forget about its contents, due to the massive amount of good material.  I could care less about its contents, UNLESS a solution to one of the items therein pops up. That happens every now and then.

 

BTY, one such solution did pop up. I mentioned yesterday to someone that I would be willing to work item #8, all without distinction, in the “Actual Errors in PFAL” thread. Any takers yet?

 

Edited December 25, 2017 by Mike

[Bolshevik]

7 minutes ago, Mike said:

EXCELLENT POINT!

For brevity, when I said that word was misspelled, I left out that possibility. When I actually encountered those renderings of "manifestion" what I did was place in the margin the symbols "?typo?" to alert myself that it LOOKS LIKE it might be a typo, but it COULD be intentional.

Your comment is encoded in my two questions marks. If i hadn't been trying to be brief, I'd have typed "The word "manifestation" is ?misspelled? in 3 or places." And then I would hav e explained the double question mark part.

Ah good.

Details are important.  I'm glad you saw that.  There's so much possibility in those details.  Innumerable, right?  That's why you have the shorthand?

[Mike]

I'm not fully getting the meaning of:  " That's why you have the shorthand? "