Whenever my posting causes a great amount of attention being focused on me,
then I know my posting is hitting a nerve.
Yah, you've hit our nerves. . That's why we're pointing out your message is "I have an ego the size of Betelguese" and everything else is being overshadowed by that fact.
Quote
When the message gets too difficult to deal with,
attack the messenger.
And what makes you think this message is hard to deal with. It's just Saint Vic elevated to demigod status. We dealt with The Way, I'm pretty sure we can deal with this. You, however,....
Quote
It's the standard ploy.
I prefer to focus on my message and not me.
Then why all the "I"s? I'd think if your message was so important, you would have been prepared to deliver it. Which your not. However, you are prepared to tell us YOUR theories and refer us to YOUR writings
And what makes you think this message is hard to deal with. It's just Saint Vic elevated to demigod status.
That elevation is what you WANT my message to be.
If it's merely simple hero worship on my part, then it can be dealt with and suitably trashed.
But as I post details that show it is NOT worship of a man, but is actually worship of the God Who gave all those ideas to VPW’s teachers and to their teachers for centuries, then that plan is thwarted.
***
Here are two reasons my message is hard to deal with:
This stepping aside of mine from the hero worship charge exposes the schitzo nature of the Pure Evil model of VPW that has become the central element of Greasespot Correctness.
With the plagiarism charge, everything in PFAL is described as coming from good, holy, respected teachers. But then I bring out some of the PFAL material here and those same ideas suddenly become tainted by the Pure Evil model.
THAT’s one of the reasons my message is so hard to deal with. Good ideas from Bullinger, Kenyon, Styles, Leonard suddenly become bad ideas when they’re in PFAL. That’s a schitzo problem.
***
Another reason, I’m thinking, it’s like the situation surrounding that way Jesus was received by the Pharisees and the way it’s handled in JCNG.
If Jesus said he was God, then that would CLEARLY be insane and there’s no reason for management to feel threatened by him. But for Jesus to claim that he was the SON of God was TERRIFYINGLY POSSIBLE for them and NOT at all insane. It would be highly unusual, and a very big claim, but not an insane one because the scriptures had the idea in there already for many centuries.
It is scriptural that GOD is forgiving and flexible enough to overstep all of our criteria for who should be trusted as a teacher. That God can and does forgive great sinners is very well documented. That God can and does work with the unworkable is very well documented.
So, the more lucid I make my case for the possibility of God working with a sinner to greatly bless us, the more my message MUST be eliminated, in order to pay homage to the Pure Evil model.
When the message is made more and more clear, and more and more misunderstandings eliminated, then the messenger, the bearer of the message, must be portrayed as evil, self absorbed, or insane.
So every systematic attack on me BROADCASTS to every reader here, that my message is being shoved under the rug, because it is coming out as too lucid.
If it's merely simple hero worship on my part, then it can be dealt with and suitably trashed.
Which it is, as you refuse to entertain any idea other than your worship of Saint Vic
Quote
But as I post details that show it is NOT worship of a man, but is actually worship of the God Who gave all those ideas to VPW’s teachers and to their teachers for centuries, then that plan is thwarted.
***
Here are two reasons my message is hard to deal with:
This stepping aside of mine from the hero worship charge exposes the schitzo nature of the Pure Evil model of VPW that has become the central element of Greasespot Correctness.
With the plagiarism charge, everything in PFAL is described as coming from good, holy, respected teachers. But then I bring out some of the PFAL material here and those same ideas suddenly become tainted by the Pure Evil model.
As I recall I showed you were in the bible Saint Vic was out of fellowship and could not recieve revelation. I further asked you "where the signs, miracles and wonders that follow the man of god like a tail follows a dog" were. You threw a hissy fit and refused to even consider it. You also refered me to a paper YOU wrote. Please show me "line by line and word by word" where it says in the bible someone out of fellowship can recieve revelation.
Further, I cannot judge the person, however I can judge their behavior, which I have done repeatedly. You too have judge peoples behavior, accusing them of throwing stones and pouncing on you and attacking the messanger. So, if I say Saint Vic would not inherit the Kingdom of God, and therefore not recieve revelation, its his behavior I'm judging and stating what the bible says about the behavior.
Quote
It is scriptural that GOD is forgiving and flexible enough to overstep all of our criteria for who should be trusted as a teacher. That God can and does forgive great sinners is very well documented. That God can and does work with the unworkable is very well documented.
So, the more lucid I make my case for the possibility of God working with a sinner to greatly bless us, the more my message MUST be eliminated, in order to pay homage to the Pure Evil model.
This pure evil model is a creation of yours. See above.
Quote
When the message is made more and more clear, and more and more misunderstandings eliminated, then the messenger, the bearer of the message, must be portrayed as evil, self absorbed, or insane.
So every systematic attack on me BROADCASTS to every reader here, that my message is being shoved under the rug, because it is coming out as too lucid.
Accually, this is the same point, see above. Now if you'd like to show me something contrary from the bible, I'm all ears.
Here are two reasons my message is hard to deal with:
This stepping aside of mine from the hero worship charge exposes the schitzo nature of the Pure Evil model of VPW that has become the central element of Greasespot Correctness.
With the plagiarism charge, everything in PFAL is described as coming from good, holy, respected teachers. But then I bring out some of the PFAL material here and those same ideas suddenly become tainted by the Pure Evil model.
THAT’s one of the reasons my message is so hard to deal with. Good ideas from Bullinger, Kenyon, Styles, Leonard suddenly become bad ideas when they’re in PFAL. That’s a schitzo problem.
"the Pure Evil model of VPW that has become the central element of Greasespot Correctness."
You have grossly and intentionally misrepresented the purpose of this site. An apology might be in order.
"With the plagiarism charge, everything in PFAL is described as coming from good, holy, respected teachers. But then I bring out some of the PFAL material here and those same ideas suddenly become tainted by the Pure Evil model."
Once again, you fail to grasp the gravity of plagiarism. Furthermore, no one has offered the premise you erroneously attribute to GSC posters in the above statement.
You are free to offer any opinion of your own as long as you attribute it to yourself. Please stop misrepresenting the opinions of other posters.
"the Pure Evil model of VPW that has become the central element of Greasespot Correctness."
You have grossly and intentionally misrepresented the purpose of this site. An apology might be in order.
You have grossly and intentionally misrepresented my statement.
I wrote: “the Pure Evil model of VPW that HAS BECOME the central element of Greasespot Correctness.”
I say that the Pure Evil model is a defacto central element, not the original intention. I think I’m helping GS get back to more efficiently helping people.
The Pure Evil model of VPW causes GS to miss out on helping a whole (and possibly large) demographic consisting of TWI refugees and those still stuck in TWI. There are people who feel quite blessed with what they learned in PFAL so they put up with the abuses (or memories of them) from TWI. There is at least one active poster here who did once fit into that category. I read his story.
I’m helping those TWI oppressed people to see the GREAT difference between what happened in the books from what happened with the administrators, sometimes including VPW as well.
The difference between VPW and the contents of the books is blurred by this Pure Evil model. I don’t remember it being that well installed 10 years ago, and there were FAR MORE proPFAL posters here then as well.
I think the Pure Evil model, that looks to me to have taken over here, causes lots of people to find zero help here.
You have grossly and intentionally misrepresented my statement.
I wrote: “the Pure Evil model of VPW that HAS BECOME the central element of Greasespot Correctness.”
I say that the Pure Evil model is a defacto central element, not the original intention. I think I’m helping GS get back to more efficiently helping people.
And what makes you think GS isn't helping people the way it is?
Quote
The Pure Evil model of VPW causes GS to miss out on helping a whole (and possibly large) demographic consisting of TWI refugees and those still stuck in TWI. There are people who feel quite blessed with what they learned in PFAL so they put up with the abuses (or memories of them) from TWI. There is at least one active poster here who did once fit into that category. I read his story.
I’m helping those TWI oppressed people to see the GREAT difference between what happened in the books from what happened with the administrators, sometimes including VPW as well.
Didn't you say several post back that you had a proPLAF thread and not many people showed up? Again, if there are so many of these people where are they? I think most of us are aware PLAF was a scam
Quote
I think the Pure Evil model, that looks to me to have taken over here, causes lots of people to find zero help here.
Once again your condemning others for judging Saint Vic's behavior, meanwhile you have no qualms judging their behavior.
And what makes you think GS isn't helping people the way it is?
I did not say that. Never. It has helped me in a number of ways. Not the ways of focus now, but I can see benefits to me and many of my proPFAL friends I met here. Where ARE they, BTW? I've only seen johniam, and just a peek.
Didn't you say several post back that you had a proPLAF thread and not many people showed up? Again, if there are so many of these people where are they?
.Lots of reasons. Not wasting time itemizing. Besides, it was 10 years ago! I forget a lot of why. It would take another waste of time to dig my memory up for it.
I think most of us are aware PLAF was a scam
.Most posting here, now. yes. Never know about readers.
Once again your condemning others for judging Saint Vic's behavior, meanwhile you have no qualms judging their behavior.
.I'm not intentionally trying to judge people here. I judge whether I want JOIN you in condemning behavior and I judge that action FOR ME to be not my cup of tea. I have MORE important things to do. Sorry. I got my priorities; you got yours.
In the interest of promoting civil conversation,
May I propose that I confine my activities in the Doctrinal Forum?
That way posters can engage me and my message with less of the silent reading audience being a factor in their minds. I'm not interested in disrupting your mission. If my posting in here does that, I can move.
Aw shucks! I forgot that I wasn't finished with the 22 statements.
If it bothers anyone that my leaving for Doctrinal would break up this fine set of 22 statements we all never knew were in PFAL... if it bothers anyone much, then I can stay just long enough to finish the set of 22 statements.
Didn't you say several post back that you had a proPLAF thread and not many people showed up? Again, if there are so many of these people where are they?
.Lots of reasons. Not wasting time itemizing. Besides, it was 10 years ago! I forget a lot of why. It would take another waste of time to dig my memory up for it.
Your the one claiming you know the GS audience better than anyone else. I thought you also said that thread was still up. Typically when you don't haave an answer you fall back on claiming you don't have the time.
Once again your condemning others for judging Saint Vic's behavior, meanwhile you have no qualms judging their behavior.
.I'm not intentionally trying to judge people here. I judge whether I want JOIN you in condemning behavior and I judge that action FOR ME to be not my cup of tea. I have MORE important things to do. Sorry. I got my priorities; you got yours.
Yah, I see all that important stuff you have to do and your priorities, you'd rather judge people at GS, than Saint Vic.
You judge all the time, when you accuse us of attacking the messenger or throwing stones or pouncing. But let's not look at Saint Vic's behavior and certainly let's not judge that.
You judge most when you try to sell the "pure evil" model. You don't know what's in the minds of all those proPLAF people who aren't posting, yet you know what's in the mind of all GS posters, right?
As I told you a couple of posts back, I can't judge the person as a whole. However, I can judge their behavior. And I can see what the bible says is the results of tha behavior. So, being a drunk, a theif, and an adulterer the bible says Saint Vic will not inherit the Kingdom of God, which includes revelation.
It has helped me in a number of ways. Not the ways of focus now, but I can see benefits to me and many of my proPFAL friends I met here. Where ARE they, BTW? I've only seen johniam, and just a peek.
If you will recall, I offered you, personally, an opportunity to cite examples of how the "God Breathed" PFAL has benefited your life. As of this moment, you have not responded.
May I propose that I confine my activities in the Doctrinal Forum?
It's not a doctrinal matter. You have proposed the idea that PFAL is God Breathed. That's not a doctrine, it's an opinion. Thus far, you have done absolutely nothing to logically argue that point without circuitous reasoning. You just keep insisting people must believe it because you say so.
Edit: My dad was fond of saying "Poop or get off the potty chair."
So every systematic attack on me BROADCASTS to every reader here, that my message is being shoved under the rug, because it is coming out as too lucid.
Because you did not make an argument but rather just a narcissistic pronouncement, this message is just more quasi-intellectual bull$hit.
I wrote: “the Pure Evil model of VPW that HAS BECOME the central element of Greasespot Correctness.”
I say that the Pure Evil model is a defacto central element, not the original intention. I think I’m helping GS get back to more efficiently helping people.
The Pure Evil model of VPW causes GS to miss out on helping a whole (and possibly large) demographic consisting of TWI refugees and those still stuck in TWI. There are people who feel quite blessed with what they learned in PFAL so they put up with the abuses (or memories of them) from TWI. There is at least one active poster here who did once fit into that category. I read his story.
I’m helping those TWI oppressed people to see the GREAT difference between what happened in the books from what happened with the administrators, sometimes including VPW as well.
The difference between VPW and the contents of the books is blurred by this Pure Evil model. I don’t remember it being that well installed 10 years ago, and there were FAR MORE proPFAL posters here then as well.
I think the Pure Evil model, that looks to me to have taken over here, causes lots of people to find zero help here.
I posit that Mike's function here is similar to that of a Russian bot. Not really to argue his alleged thesis but rather to undermine the entire purpose of GSC by way of distracting, not quite fully coherent propaganda so that lurkers get a sense of cognitive dissonance about the primary message of the website.
I posit that Mike's function here is similar to that of a Russian bot. Not really to argue his alleged thesis but rather to undermine the entire purpose of GSC by way of distracting, not quite fully coherent propaganda so that lurkers get a sense of cognitive dissonance about the primary message of the website.
If you will recall, I offered you, personally, an opportunity to cite examples of how the "God Breathed" PFAL has benefited your life. As of this moment, you have not responded.
Citing the benefits to me are not what I normally think about and prepare myself to write on. Writing about me is not the message I want to get into. That demote it on my priority list. I have lots of other things I want to do in my life, and my time here is pretty much spoken for.
PLUS, I know anything I write here is going to be used against me, just like in courtroom situations. Shouldn’t I, just like in courtroom situations, block that influence mechanism.
A discussion of good logic and things close to it is better done in a conversational setting, and not in a courtroom jury influencing setting.
Is there any question that you (and others) ask me questions NOT to find and understand the details of my message, but to find suitable targets to attack?
I posit that Mike's function here is similar to that of a Russian bot. Not really to argue his alleged thesis but rather to undermine the entire purpose of GSC by way of distracting, not quite fully coherent propaganda so that lurkers get a sense of cognitive dissonance about the primary message of the website.
Here's the icon motto that has been mine since I signed up:
Friendly Opposition, Offering ANOTHER Other Side
If it was distraction I wanted, why would I offer to go into Doctrinal?
I think you are not thinking through the cognitive dissonance [proPFAL but antiTWI ] lurkers can get to see the Pure Evil model here versus the helping hand they saw in PFAL. I can help them separate VPW from PFAL.
You are simply arguing semantics with a madman who lives in his own reality and dreams he has insight into a world-shattering "revelation" entirely of his own making and definition.
DWBH, this very thought is one of the tiny points I am showing is incorrect.
It is definitely not of my own making. It comes from VPW quotes that he hid it from us until now.
Yes, there are some details that I am still working out the best I can as I go, but the major idea is stamped into VPW's whole ministry, and THAT's where I got it.
I'm not done proving this tiny point. It gets proved by the entirety of the list, not by any one item separately. If you can examine the 22 statements then you can see I picked up on what is in the texts and tapes.
Here is a passage (my bold fonts) on page 124 of OMSW:
"It’s a remarkable thing that God put His promise in the past tense—‘I have already given to you’—and He still does this today. Many, many times He puts in the past tense what still is the future for us."
Does anyone know where those many, many places are?
Dr says it's TODAY that God puts promises into the past tense that are still future FOR US.
Dr can only be referring to the modern revelations from God, TODAY, that Dr was putting into written form FOR US GRADS. There's the hidden "Thus saith."
Twice, in his last months, and IN WRITING Dr urged us to re-think everything we believed. This should include the new birth and everything we think about it, including whether or not we have fully arrived at that blessing.
This passage in OMSW p. 124 should get us thinking bigtime.
Some of the things we were totally sure of may need revamping or at least fine tuning, otherwise why would Dr challenge us to re-think everything?
I nearly fell off my chair when I first read this passage in recent years. It leads to many answers as to why thing went so wrong for us. I knew I had to re-think everything.
Just to be thorough, here are those two times in writing at the VERY END of his life, where Dr urged us to re-think everything:
JA85 p.17 R up "Our Only Rule for Faith and Practice" You have to honestly come to the place that you're willing to keep asking yourself, 'Where did I learn what I believe? How did I get to the place where I believe what I believe today?' For the most part, men believe what they have received from tradition and not from directly reading it in the Word of God.
JA85 p.12 L low "The Fountainhead of All Truth" (Our Times) We must honestly come to the place of asking ourselves: Where did I learn this? How did I get to the place of believing this? Who taught me this? The counterfeit is so much like the genuine, you have to know the accuracy of the Word to separate truth from error.
***
The only candidates for where Dr is referring to God doing this many, many times today is in the PFAL writings. The only place where Dr points to God's Word being alive today is in the PFAL revelations. Dr said (in an Our Times article) that if he knew any other place where he could get the Word he'd go there. (I think it's "How the Word Works")
Actually, certain facts that are used in PFAL he DID go to get, the last I know of being the star of Bethlehem work of Dr. Martin of Pasadena. He's credited in JCPS.
But the only place that is ever acknowledged by Dr as modern (today's) God breathed writings, where God could many, many times do the past tense thing, is PFAL.
The key words in the OMSW passage are "today," and "many, many times," and "for us."
***
Yes, well before Dr died he pointed out with increasing intensity* that we needed to shift gears and focus on the written materials God inspired him to write. The days of trying to obtain God's Word from the ancient manuscripts was essentially finished by 1982, but when Dr announced this* in October of 1982 at Craig's installation and ON TAPE, there was no corresponding action to change the direction of the ministry.
* - both of these items will be expanded soon.
***
In segment #6 of the 1979 AC Dr teaches that we can only become like minded (and thus enjoy community believing) by studying the same thing.
Here's how he put it:
"'Such as I have, I give' such as you have, you give. You can’t give, class, beyond what you’ve got. First Corinthians, one, ten - such an important verse of scripture, maybe so many of them are - I should all - have all of them put on charts but only put on, I guess, what I feel in my heart I’d like to have. First Corinthians, one, ten: 'Now I beseech . . .' The word 'beseech' means to implore - lovingly beg you. We have it here on this chart.
"'. . . [Implore - lovingly beg] you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, [Number one:] that ye all speak [and the word 'speak' is lalao - it literally means 'running off of the mouth” - so that we should all have the running off of the mouth - talking about] the same [what?] (thing), [Number two:] . . . that there be no [what?] divisions among you; [And number three:] but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind [nous] and in the same [what?] (judgment).”
"And class, that can only be when we all speak the same thing on God’s Word. No one will ever qualify for first Corinthians one, ten, unless they get their heads and their hearts into the accuracy of the integrity and the greatness of God’s Word. How will we ever speak the same thing unless we study the same thing, people, and let the Word of God speak for itself. If you and I do not rightly divide the Word of God, there’s gonna be division among us."
***
The only common thing for study and mastery we were given is written PFAL.
Citing the benefits to me are not what I normally think about and prepare myself to write on. Writing about me is not the message I want to get into. That demote it on my priority list. I have lots of other things I want to do in my life, and my time here is pretty much spoken for.
PLUS, I know anything I write here is going to be used against me, just like in courtroom situations. Shouldn’t I, just like in courtroom situations, block that influence mechanism.
A discussion of good logic and things close to it is better done in a conversational setting, and not in a courtroom jury influencing setting.
Is there any question that you (and others) ask me questions NOT to find and understand the details of my message, but to find suitable targets to attack?
You sound more and more like Professor Irwin Corey with each response you post.
Yes, well before Dr died he pointed out with increasing intensity* that we needed to shift gears and focus on the written materials God inspired him to write.
Except, ya know, he didn't really "write" PFAL. He simply plagiarized works that were already written and pawned them off as his own. Even you have conceded he "compiled" existing works.
Except, ya know, he didn't really "write" PFAL. He simply plagiarized works that were already written and pawned them off as his own. Even you have conceded he "compiled" existing works.
I used a shorthand that my original proPFAL audience would understand.
It's the same shorthand we all use when we say Paul wrote Ephesians.
Is this actually new to you?
Did you think you found an error, and couldn't see what I meant?
DWBH, this very thought is one of the tiny points I am showing is incorrect.
It is definitely not of my own making. It comes from VPW quotes that he hid it from us until now.
Yes, there are some details that I am still working out the best I can as I go, but the major idea is stamped into VPW's whole ministry, and THAT's where I got it.
I'm not done proving this tiny point. It gets proved by the entirety of the list, not by any one item separately. If you can examine the 22 statements then you can see I picked up on what is in the texts and tapes.
Mike, I know this is off, but I recently finished "Losing The Way", by KS. What an interesting, and eye-opening book!! You can find it, in Barnes&Noble. The writer knew VPW personally; she has a lot of intresting things to say about him, and TWI. Shalom!
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
63
252
68
130
Popular Days
Jan 25
114
Jan 6
58
Jan 9
51
Jan 3
45
Top Posters In This Topic
Rocky 63 posts
Mike 252 posts
waysider 68 posts
So_crates 130 posts
Popular Days
Jan 25 2018
114 posts
Jan 6 2018
58 posts
Jan 9 2018
51 posts
Jan 3 2018
45 posts
Popular Posts
DontWorryBeHappy
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead."........Thomas Paine.
penworks
Here's an idea: we each drop out of this topic and go read a book.
DontWorryBeHappy
Can anyone tell me dictor paul's scriptural position on the word "Covfefe"? What is the true meaning of that word?? Mike's textual criticism, and use of the basic dictor "keys to research", is as made
Posted Images
So_crates
Yah, you've hit our nerves.
. That's why we're pointing out your message is "I have an ego the size of Betelguese" and everything else is being overshadowed by that fact.
And what makes you think this message is hard to deal with. It's just Saint Vic elevated to demigod status. We dealt with The Way, I'm pretty sure we can deal with this. You, however,....
Then why all the "I"s? I'd think if your message was so important, you would have been prepared to deliver it. Which your not. However, you are prepared to tell us YOUR theories and refer us to YOUR writings
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
HERE is Tic, working at his part time job as Wierwille's valet.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
That elevation is what you WANT my message to be.
If it's merely simple hero worship on my part, then it can be dealt with and suitably trashed.
But as I post details that show it is NOT worship of a man, but is actually worship of the God Who gave all those ideas to VPW’s teachers and to their teachers for centuries, then that plan is thwarted.
***
Here are two reasons my message is hard to deal with:
This stepping aside of mine from the hero worship charge exposes the schitzo nature of the Pure Evil model of VPW that has become the central element of Greasespot Correctness.
With the plagiarism charge, everything in PFAL is described as coming from good, holy, respected teachers. But then I bring out some of the PFAL material here and those same ideas suddenly become tainted by the Pure Evil model.
THAT’s one of the reasons my message is so hard to deal with. Good ideas from Bullinger, Kenyon, Styles, Leonard suddenly become bad ideas when they’re in PFAL. That’s a schitzo problem.
***
Another reason, I’m thinking, it’s like the situation surrounding that way Jesus was received by the Pharisees and the way it’s handled in JCNG.
If Jesus said he was God, then that would CLEARLY be insane and there’s no reason for management to feel threatened by him. But for Jesus to claim that he was the SON of God was TERRIFYINGLY POSSIBLE for them and NOT at all insane. It would be highly unusual, and a very big claim, but not an insane one because the scriptures had the idea in there already for many centuries.
It is scriptural that GOD is forgiving and flexible enough to overstep all of our criteria for who should be trusted as a teacher. That God can and does forgive great sinners is very well documented. That God can and does work with the unworkable is very well documented.
So, the more lucid I make my case for the possibility of God working with a sinner to greatly bless us, the more my message MUST be eliminated, in order to pay homage to the Pure Evil model.
When the message is made more and more clear, and more and more misunderstandings eliminated, then the messenger, the bearer of the message, must be portrayed as evil, self absorbed, or insane.
So every systematic attack on me BROADCASTS to every reader here, that my message is being shoved under the rug, because it is coming out as too lucid.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Which it is, as you refuse to entertain any idea other than your worship of Saint Vic
As I recall I showed you were in the bible Saint Vic was out of fellowship and could not recieve revelation. I further asked you "where the signs, miracles and wonders that follow the man of god like a tail follows a dog" were. You threw a hissy fit and refused to even consider it. You also refered me to a paper YOU wrote. Please show me "line by line and word by word" where it says in the bible someone out of fellowship can recieve revelation.
Further, I cannot judge the person, however I can judge their behavior, which I have done repeatedly. You too have judge peoples behavior, accusing them of throwing stones and pouncing on you and attacking the messanger. So, if I say Saint Vic would not inherit the Kingdom of God, and therefore not recieve revelation, its his behavior I'm judging and stating what the bible says about the behavior.
This pure evil model is a creation of yours. See above.
Accually, this is the same point, see above. Now if you'd like to show me something contrary from the bible, I'm all ears.
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
"the Pure Evil model of VPW that has become the central element of Greasespot Correctness."
You have grossly and intentionally misrepresented the purpose of this site. An apology might be in order.
"With the plagiarism charge, everything in PFAL is described as coming from good, holy, respected teachers. But then I bring out some of the PFAL material here and those same ideas suddenly become tainted by the Pure Evil model."
Once again, you fail to grasp the gravity of plagiarism. Furthermore, no one has offered the premise you erroneously attribute to GSC posters in the above statement.
You are free to offer any opinion of your own as long as you attribute it to yourself. Please stop misrepresenting the opinions of other posters.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
You have grossly and intentionally misrepresented my statement.
I wrote: “the Pure Evil model of VPW that HAS BECOME the central element of Greasespot Correctness.”
I say that the Pure Evil model is a defacto central element, not the original intention. I think I’m helping GS get back to more efficiently helping people.
The Pure Evil model of VPW causes GS to miss out on helping a whole (and possibly large) demographic consisting of TWI refugees and those still stuck in TWI. There are people who feel quite blessed with what they learned in PFAL so they put up with the abuses (or memories of them) from TWI. There is at least one active poster here who did once fit into that category. I read his story.
I’m helping those TWI oppressed people to see the GREAT difference between what happened in the books from what happened with the administrators, sometimes including VPW as well.
The difference between VPW and the contents of the books is blurred by this Pure Evil model. I don’t remember it being that well installed 10 years ago, and there were FAR MORE proPFAL posters here then as well.
I think the Pure Evil model, that looks to me to have taken over here, causes lots of people to find zero help here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
And what makes you think GS isn't helping people the way it is?
Didn't you say several post back that you had a proPLAF thread and not many people showed up? Again, if there are so many of these people where are they? I think most of us are aware PLAF was a scam
Once again your condemning others for judging Saint Vic's behavior, meanwhile you have no qualms judging their behavior.
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Aw shucks! I forgot that I wasn't finished with the 22 statements.
If it bothers anyone that my leaving for Doctrinal would break up this fine set of 22 statements we all never knew were in PFAL... if it bothers anyone much, then I can stay just long enough to finish the set of 22 statements.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
My origonal comments in black
Mikes comments in red
My final comments in BF
.
Didn't you say several post back that you had a proPLAF thread and not many people showed up? Again, if there are so many of these people where are they?
.Lots of reasons. Not wasting time itemizing. Besides, it was 10 years ago! I forget a lot of why. It would take another waste of time to dig my memory up for it.
Your the one claiming you know the GS audience better than anyone else. I thought you also said that thread was still up. Typically when you don't haave an answer you fall back on claiming you don't have the time.
Once again your condemning others for judging Saint Vic's behavior, meanwhile you have no qualms judging their behavior.
.I'm not intentionally trying to judge people here. I judge whether I want JOIN you in condemning behavior and I judge that action FOR ME to be not my cup of tea. I have MORE important things to do. Sorry. I got my priorities; you got yours.
Yah, I see all that important stuff you have to do and your priorities, you'd rather judge people at GS, than Saint Vic.
You judge all the time, when you accuse us of attacking the messenger or throwing stones or pouncing. But let's not look at Saint Vic's behavior and certainly let's not judge that.
You judge most when you try to sell the "pure evil" model. You don't know what's in the minds of all those proPLAF people who aren't posting, yet you know what's in the mind of all GS posters, right?
As I told you a couple of posts back, I can't judge the person as a whole. However, I can judge their behavior. And I can see what the bible says is the results of tha behavior. So, being a drunk, a theif, and an adulterer the bible says Saint Vic will not inherit the Kingdom of God, which includes revelation.
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
If you will recall, I offered you, personally, an opportunity to cite examples of how the "God Breathed" PFAL has benefited your life. As of this moment, you have not responded.
May I propose that I confine my activities in the Doctrinal Forum?
It's not a doctrinal matter. You have proposed the idea that PFAL is God Breathed. That's not a doctrine, it's an opinion. Thus far, you have done absolutely nothing to logically argue that point without circuitous reasoning. You just keep insisting people must believe it because you say so.
Edit: My dad was fond of saying "Poop or get off the potty chair."
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Because you did not make an argument but rather just a narcissistic pronouncement, this message is just more quasi-intellectual bull$hit.
Really Socrates is right.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
I posit that Mike's function here is similar to that of a Russian bot. Not really to argue his alleged thesis but rather to undermine the entire purpose of GSC by way of distracting, not quite fully coherent propaganda so that lurkers get a sense of cognitive dissonance about the primary message of the website.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Hes trolling.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Citing the benefits to me are not what I normally think about and prepare myself to write on. Writing about me is not the message I want to get into. That demote it on my priority list. I have lots of other things I want to do in my life, and my time here is pretty much spoken for.
PLUS, I know anything I write here is going to be used against me, just like in courtroom situations. Shouldn’t I, just like in courtroom situations, block that influence mechanism.
A discussion of good logic and things close to it is better done in a conversational setting, and not in a courtroom jury influencing setting.
Is there any question that you (and others) ask me questions NOT to find and understand the details of my message, but to find suitable targets to attack?
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Here's the icon motto that has been mine since I signed up:
Friendly Opposition, Offering ANOTHER Other Side
If it was distraction I wanted, why would I offer to go into Doctrinal?
I think you are not thinking through the cognitive dissonance [proPFAL but antiTWI ] lurkers can get to see the Pure Evil model here versus the helping hand they saw in PFAL. I can help them separate VPW from PFAL.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
classic shoot the messenger, because the message is too uncomfortable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
DWBH, this very thought is one of the tiny points I am showing is incorrect.
It is definitely not of my own making. It comes from VPW quotes that he hid it from us until now.
Yes, there are some details that I am still working out the best I can as I go, but the major idea is stamped into VPW's whole ministry, and THAT's where I got it.
I'm not done proving this tiny point. It gets proved by the entirety of the list, not by any one item separately. If you can examine the 22 statements then you can see I picked up on what is in the texts and tapes.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
#8 - VPW "Thus Saith the Lord" Statement
This item has hardly ever been seen by grads.
Here is a passage (my bold fonts) on page 124 of OMSW:
"It’s a remarkable thing that God put His promise in the past tense—‘I have already given to you’—and He still does this today. Many, many times He puts in the past tense what still is the future for us."
Does anyone know where those many, many places are?
Dr says it's TODAY that God puts promises into the past tense that are still future FOR US.
Dr can only be referring to the modern revelations from God, TODAY, that Dr was putting into written form FOR US GRADS. There's the hidden "Thus saith."
Twice, in his last months, and IN WRITING Dr urged us to re-think everything we believed. This should include the new birth and everything we think about it, including whether or not we have fully arrived at that blessing.
This passage in OMSW p. 124 should get us thinking bigtime.
Some of the things we were totally sure of may need revamping or at least fine tuning, otherwise why would Dr challenge us to re-think everything?
I nearly fell off my chair when I first read this passage in recent years. It leads to many answers as to why thing went so wrong for us. I knew I had to re-think everything.
Just to be thorough, here are those two times in writing at the VERY END of his life, where Dr urged us to re-think everything:
JA85 p.17 R up "Our Only Rule for Faith and Practice"
You have to honestly come to the place that you're willing to keep asking yourself, 'Where did I learn what I believe? How did I get to the place where I believe what I believe today?' For the most part, men believe what they have received from tradition and not from directly reading it in the Word of God.
JA85 p.12 L low "The Fountainhead of All Truth" (Our Times)
We must honestly come to the place of asking ourselves: Where did I learn this? How did I get to the place of believing this? Who taught me this? The counterfeit is so much like the genuine, you have to know the accuracy of the Word to separate truth from error.
***
The only candidates for where Dr is referring to God doing this many, many times today is in the PFAL writings. The only place where Dr points to God's Word being alive today is in the PFAL revelations. Dr said (in an Our Times article) that if he knew any other place where he could get the Word he'd go there. (I think it's "How the Word Works")
Actually, certain facts that are used in PFAL he DID go to get, the last I know of being the star of Bethlehem work of Dr. Martin of Pasadena. He's credited in JCPS.
But the only place that is ever acknowledged by Dr as modern (today's) God breathed writings, where God could many, many times do the past tense thing, is PFAL.
The key words in the OMSW passage are "today," and "many, many times," and "for us."
***
Yes, well before Dr died he pointed out with increasing intensity* that we needed to shift gears and focus on the written materials God inspired him to write. The days of trying to obtain God's Word from the ancient manuscripts was essentially finished by 1982, but when Dr announced this* in October of 1982 at Craig's installation and ON TAPE, there was no corresponding action to change the direction of the ministry.
* - both of these items will be expanded soon.
***
In segment #6 of the 1979 AC Dr teaches that we can only become like minded (and thus enjoy community believing) by studying the same thing.
Here's how he put it:
"'Such as I have, I give' such as you have, you give. You can’t give, class, beyond what you’ve got. First Corinthians, one, ten - such an important verse of scripture, maybe so many of them are - I should all - have all of them put on charts but only put on, I guess, what I feel in my heart I’d like to have. First Corinthians, one, ten: 'Now I beseech . . .' The word 'beseech' means to implore - lovingly beg you. We have it here on this chart.
"'. . . [Implore - lovingly beg] you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, [Number one:] that ye all speak [and the word 'speak' is lalao - it literally means 'running off of the mouth” - so that we should all have the running off of the mouth - talking about] the same [what?] (thing), [Number two:] . . . that there be no [what?] divisions among you; [And number three:] but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind [nous] and in the same [what?] (judgment).”
"And class, that can only be when we all speak the same thing on God’s Word. No one will ever qualify for first Corinthians one, ten, unless they get their heads and their hearts into the accuracy of the integrity and the greatness of God’s Word. How will we ever speak the same thing unless we study the same thing, people, and let the Word of God speak for itself. If you and I do not rightly divide the Word of God, there’s gonna be division among us."
***
The only common thing for study and mastery we were given is written PFAL.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
You sound more and more like Professor Irwin Corey with each response you post.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Except, ya know, he didn't really "write" PFAL. He simply plagiarized works that were already written and pawned them off as his own. Even you have conceded he "compiled" existing works.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I used a shorthand that my original proPFAL audience would understand.
It's the same shorthand we all use when we say Paul wrote Ephesians.
Is this actually new to you?
Did you think you found an error, and couldn't see what I meant?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
Mike, I know this is off
, but I recently finished "Losing The Way", by KS. What an interesting, and eye-opening book!! You can find it, in Barnes&Noble. The writer knew VPW personally; she has a lot of intresting things to say about him, and TWI. Shalom!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
This is horribly flawed logic. Do I really need to explain why?
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.