What a patronizing, condescending thing to say. What does "God's best" look like? Sounds like it won't be quite enough. Sounds like another limit on what God is able to do.
1.Lucky for me, it will be easy to change the term "anti-idol" so that it connects better with the folks at home. Can you give me some suggestions?
1. why would you assume your dumb-a$$ definitions would connect better with the folks at home?
Are they also dumb-a$$e$ like you?
3 hours ago, Mike said:
2. I chose "anti" with the thought of anti-matter in Physics in my mind. I also had an "antichrist"
association in there.
2.According to reputable sources likeAntimatter | Definition & Facts | Britannicastable antimatter does not appear to exist in our universe…so I understand why you would make a word combo like “anti-idol” – it doesn’t exist in our universe.
3 hours ago, Mike said:
3. The thing that is genuine "anti" in my proposed new term (Trademark Pending) is the reversal of excessive-love to excessive-hate.
My theory is that most of the people who are very anti-wierwille now WERE very pro-wierwille when first taking the class. Finding out that VPW was not the holy man they idolized at first caused them to "snap" against him with with the same zeal as when they positively idolized him.
3.Like your other theories this one is also based on confirmation bias andastral a$$-hole projection.
You criticize and condemn others for that which you faithfully practice – idolizing wierwille.
When a devoted follower finds out the teacher of PFAL – wierwille – was an unabashed plagiarist, pathological liar, sociopath, drunkard, egocentric, malignant narcissist, mean-spirited, abusive, sexual predator it can be overwhelming both intellectually and emotionally…
...Judging by your undying love for wierwille and PFAL displayed on Grease Spot Café for some 20 years it seems to me YOUMIKEhave never come to terms withthe REALvictor paul wierwille …Well… ifyou ever do snap out of your delusion, you’ll probably have to deal with grief and loss…experiencing emotional and psychological trauma correlates with grief and loss.
I’ve found there are two well-known models for dealing with grief and loss. One is from Elisabeth Kübler-Ross a Swiss-American psychiatrist and a pioneer in near-death studies. She theorized there were 5 stages of grief, but her studies were with people who were dying (terminally ill), not people who were grieving over the loss of a loved one. In her 1969 book “On Death and Dying” she proposed the 5 stages of grief and loss:
1. Denial and isolation
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance
I think there is some merit to her work although there’s a strong consensus among psychologists that people who are grieving over any kind of loss do not necessarily go through the stages in the same order or experience all of them.
The other model is from George Bonanno. His research is noted for contradicting Kübler-Ross’ 5 stages of grief. As a professor of clinical psychology at Columbia University, he conducted more than two decades of scientific studies on grief and trauma, which have been published in several papers of peer-reviewed journals in the field of psychology.
His studies came out of several thousand subjects and included people who have suffered losses in the U.S. and cross-cultural studies in various countries around the world. His subjects suffered losses through war, terrorism, deaths of children, premature deaths of spouses, sexual abuse, childhood diagnoses of AIDS, and other potentially devastating loss events or potential trauma events – such as losing a job, or one of the parents losing custody of a child through divorce, loss of a romantic relationship, loss of a pet, losing faith in one’s religion. Bonanno’s findings indicate that natural resilience is a part of the human psyche, and that there are four possible paths one could take in dealing with grief and loss. The four trajectories are as follows:
Resilience: "The ability of adults in otherwise normal circumstances who are exposed to an isolated and potentially highly disruptive event, such as the death of a close relation or a violent or life-threatening situation, to maintain relatively stable, healthy levels of psychological and physical functioning" as well as "the capacity for generative experiences and positive emotions".
Recovery: When "normal functioning temporarily gives way to threshold or sub-threshold psychopathology (e.g., symptoms of depression or post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD), usually for a period of at least several months, and then gradually returns to pre-event levels".
Chronic dysfunction: Prolonged suffering and inability to function, usually lasting several years or longer.
Delayed grief or trauma: When adjustment seems normal but then distress and symptoms increase months later. Researchers have not found evidence of delayed grief, but delayed trauma appears to be a genuine phenomenon.”
So, if you ever do “snap out of it” I sincerely wish you the best whatever path you find yourself on.
3 hours ago, Mike said:
4. It was a rush to idolize him and join the Corps early, and then a rush to anti-idolize him. In both rushes, there wasn't time to really sort things out properly.
This was the opening of my thread "Jumping to Concussions..." a few months ago. I am willing to change the term I came up with if someone can think of a better one.
4.now that you mention it - reviewing the opening on your Jump to ConcussionsthreadI see how you’ve deceived yourself – you refuse (for whatever reason) to see snapping as brainwashing. There’s a lot of stuff available to clear up your confusion, ignorance and maybe you’ll use better judgement in your choice of words – here’s a small sample:
(1) because in the 1970s I saw with my own eyes many grads go faster and farther than me in “going ga-ga” over VPW, going WOW, and going into the Corps. I thought they went without thinking it all through carefully, setting aside the emotions of love and excitement. I was slow with this; they were fast.
(2) because from 1986 till now, I saw with my own eyes many grads go faster and farther than me in being enraged over VPW’s revealed sins, going ape over throwing away all he ever said did regardless of its truth value. I think few think it all through carefully, setting aside the emotions of anger and unnecessary emotion. I go slow with this.
GreaseSpotters who are able to set aside this “anti-idol” will have a chance at earning some respect from TWI-4 people.
GreaseSpotters who are able to set aside this “anti-idol” can have a lot more credibility with all grads who have left TWI over the decades.
The good that came from PFAL and TWI-1 was far greater than the bad, and GreaseSpotters who can’t integrate this in their world-view will continue to have a terrible reputation with grads out there.Have you ever researched around with old grads to find out what they think of GreaseSpot?
[I provided the link because Mike's post was hidden in a reply. So, people can link and read all of what I'm replying to...]
Mike:
"The thing that is genuine "anti" in my proposed new term (Trademark Pending) is the reversal of excessive-love to excessive-hate.
My theory is that most of the people who are very anti-wierwille now WERE very pro-wierwille when first taking the class. Finding out that VPW was not the holy man they idolized at first caused them to "snap" against him with with the same zeal as when they positively idolized him.
It was a rush to idolize him and join the Corps early, and then a rush to anti-idolize him. In both rushes, there wasn't time to really sort things out properly."
WordWolf:
Taking people who dedicated themselves to God, their lives to God, who truly thought that loyalty was to God alone, and siphoning off that love of God and commitment, telling them this person was helping them get all of that done,
then them finding out that the supposed leader, who supposedly dedicated his life to God, instead dedicated his life to alcoholism, tobacco, rape, molestation, and creature comforts, and all his talk about dedication to God was all a SMOKESCREEN for that, all a trick to get them to hand over all their money so he could booze up, smoke up, and live it up, while taking dedicated women who dedicated their lives to God and molested them and raped them,
that will get an emotional reaction no matter who is involved.
People went from completely buying into layer upon layer of snow job, to suddenly learning in one moment how FALSE it was, how FRAUDULENT vpw was, how HYPOCRITICAL he was, how PREDATORY he was. That's bound to get an emotional reaction- unless, of course, one decided never to actually address ANY of it. If one decided to blow all of it off under "boys will be boys", then things that outrage Jesus can be swept under the rug, and one can go on to ridicule people who have a legitimate emotional response to destroyed lives, hurt lives, capital crimes, causing God's people to hurt and stumble and savaging them.
The only reasons I have this theory are:
(1) because in the 1970s I saw with my own eyes many grads go faster and farther than me in “going ga-ga” over VPW, going WOW, and going into the Corps. I thought they went without thinking it all through carefully, setting aside the emotions of love and excitement. I was slow with this; they were fast.
(2) because from 1986 till now, I saw with my own eyes many grads go faster and farther than me in being enraged over VPW’s revealed sins, going ape over throwing away all he ever said did regardless of its truth value. I think few think it all through carefully, setting aside the emotions of anger and unnecessary emotion. I go slow with this.
WordWolf:
People encountered happy, genuine Christians. They were told the reason they were so happy was this group teaching the Bible. They visit the group and are told much the same. They join the happy, genuine Christians, enjoying fellowship with them (by the normal usage of the word.) They are told, repeatedly, that the key to being so happy is this class this guy teaches, and how everybody there all agrees. Eventually, they buy into it, and take the class taught by the man who called himself "THE TEACHER" and built up his image so everybody sold him like that. All through the class, there's grads who keep up the love and fellowship. Afterwards, they're treated as somewhat higher, having that in common with the happy, genuine Christians. They're talked into taking more classes. They're leaned on- carefully- to donate their time and money- first 10%, then more, then all of their discretionary income- because of how holy the organization is, how important to God its leader is, how hard he works for both God and his people.
Convinced (eventually) that to grow most with God will be to go WOW, some go. When they return, they're treated like heroes. Then they're convinced that to REALLY grow with God will be to go Corps. Dedicated to God, these poor, naive kids go Corps and try their best, absorbing the lessons taught there- many of which were unhealthy and exploited their loyalty, all by the so-called godly leader.
They put in thousands upon thousands of hours of their lives, and much of their income, even choosing lesser jobs so they can attend events once a year, all because they're trying to do their best for God, and told this is how they do it.
Then,
they discover it was all built on lies. The only legit Christianity there was the LOCAL form they FIRST experienced. All the legit Christians had been shilling for a fraud, a conman, who sold lots of classes, lots of books, lots of events, always making a profit at every level, a man whose teachings were all cobbled together from the work of other, legit Christians. This man then took that money, and spent lots on creature comforts, chain-smoked, drank all day because he was addicted to alcohol AND tobacco, and in between all that set up an ELABORATE system to rape and molest some of God's women, covering his tracks at every level.
The most dedicated of God's people respond to that by being enraged.
Then Mike comes along and dares to say there's something wrong with that-that their anger and emotion are "unnecessary", that they should ignore all of that and stay loyal to the alcoholic rapist because he taught some good Bible. Mike doesn't seem to get a lot of converts to his thinking- for which he blames the people he tries to recruit.
"The good that came from PFAL and TWI-1 was far greater than the bad, and GreaseSpotters who can’t integrate this in their world-view will continue to have a terrible reputation with grads out there."
WordWolf:
This isn't about popularity, it's about TRUTH. When people come here- and lots of them come here- they come here to read the truth. The truth is that the good that came in early twi came from the Jesus People that were recruited. What vpw contributed mostly is the "bad" we object to- and most people have no trouble understanding that once they learn what was hidden from them BY vpw. People like Mike who can't integrate this in his world-view will spend the rest of their lives spinning their wheels and being allowed to show up places, but never quite getting the RESPECT he thinks he has earned. I have people who disagree with me fundamentally on all sorts of stuff, but most of them respect me nonetheless, because I have earned their respect through integrity if nothing else.
I've interacted with grads out there. They have no problem finding out what I believe. I have a GOOD reputation among them, and when I speak on God's Word, they take it seriously (I have proof.)
it's possible that the good in twi- which came from the Jesus People- was far greater than the bad- the rapes, molestations, vices, greed, vanity and so on that came from vpw- but even if it was, I'd be slow to say so, especially to those who were victimized by vpw and his system. Is human life subject to CALCULATIONS, how much HARM is worth how much BLESSING? The Blessing of The Lord benefits with NO SORROW added with it. That's not a description of twi in ANY era.
Have you ever researched around with old grads to find out what they think of GreaseSpot?
[I know that they all come here when they want the truth on what twi is doing lately or has done since they checked in last- including people who are embarrassed to SAY they check in here. I know twi's innies come here to find out the truth on twi. I know twi's hierarchy knows all that- they insisted we post a letter of theirs to their own followers in order to do damage control on what information leaked out via the GSC. And there's thousands who posted here and have moved on with their lives- GSC success stories.
I'm sure there's a few grads to whom this does not apply- there's always a minority- but I'm not going to throw away integrity and truth just to try to cozy up to people who value both so little that they spurn the GSC. I'm not here to make friends- although I've made some anyway- people who DO value truth and integrity. I do have a reputation, and it's not for being snuggly-wuggly, it's for telling the unadulterated truth. I didn't get that overnight nor by accident. It was the by-product of many decisions to value truth and integrity. People who don't make those decisions may get baffled as to how anyone can disagree with me or even dislike me, but still respect me. Well. the answer is there for those who want to know.]
What a patronizing, condescending thing to say. What does "God's best" look like? Sounds like it won't be quite enough. Sounds like another limit on what God is able to do.
"If my God was as small as your God, I'd get me a NEW God."- vpw
Let me agree, again, the Bible teaches exactly what you say it does. Jesus IS present in his lordship, directing the affairs of the church in Acts. But what about NOW? He's directing the affairs of church A and of church B, which go to war over belly buttons (not really, but the real disputes are just as substantive). When two churches, both directed by the lordship of the present Christ, disagree on a point of doctrine, who settles it? Church C? Church C doesn't believe in belly buttons.
It's only the Word that can resolve disputes, Biblically. "Try the spirits," the Bible says. How? Against what standard? Your gut? What if your gut disagrees with another believer's gut? Listen for the still small voice? But they don't agree with each other.
"The Word takes the place of the absent Christ" is the only way to resolve disagreements about the will of God.
Isn't it?
Raf,
You have questioned both Jesus Christ’s authority (Quote: He is also absent in his authority.) and his present lordship (Quote: Jesus IS present in his lordship, directing the affairs of the church in Acts. But what about NOW?)
I say that just because we can’t go to him in person to resolve a dispute or because two churches disagree on a point of doctrine does not mean Jesus’ authority is absent or puts in doubt His lordship NOW.This is not just my opinion, it is what the Bible says.
You spoke of the Bible in the following ways:
·Seriously. The scriptures teach what they teach, whether I accept it as gospel or reject it as fantasy.
·I believe the Bible teaches what it teaches.
·I think one can look at the Bible fairly and come to a conclusion about what it teaches, even without believing it.
·It's only the Word that can resolve disputes
·Someone has to be wrong! Who judges? It has to be something outside the populace.The Word?Hypothetically, yeah.
·If it serves no other purpose shouldn't the Bible define Christianity?
So what does the Bible teach about the Lordship of Jesus Christ?
Every Epistle Paul wrote to the church has the same salutation of “Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” except for two where Paul switches things up a bit.Colossians 1:2“We always thank God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” and 1 Thess 1:1“To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace and peace to you.”Jesus is as much Lord now as he was in the book of Acts.
The word “Lord” means master and a master has authority which is what the Bible teaches.Ephesians 1:20-23 …he (God) raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21 far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22 And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.The head controls the body whether it’s a human body or the body of Christ.Jesus Christ is the head of his body NOW.
The word “Lord” also means a person exercising absolute ownership rights which is what the Bible teaches.Romans 14:8 If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.
Jesus Christ is Lord.It’s decided.It’s settled.There is no doubt about it no matter how many disputes and disagreements there are among believers and among churches?
Do you a scripture that says Christ is absent or that the Bible takes the place of the absent Christ?
Ahhh...there it is. You do hold to the garbage that wierwille taught that having a relationship with Jesus Christ is anti-Christ becuase its' not the absent-Christ, non-biblical garbage that wierwille taught. Your posts indicate a high level of dishonesty.
Lucky for me, it will be easy to change th.....blah blah blah....
Hey genius, when you leave the content of your post inside a quote box you essentially bury your own post because very few people will actually realize you buried your own comments in a quote and will keep it moving...dont know why Im teliing you this...you post very little of value but hey....now you know....or you knew all along and are once again employing trolling techniques to try and make threads unreadable. Or maybe you try and bury it in a quote box because it's difficult to quote in response.
You have questioned both Jesus Christ’s authority (Quote: He is also absent in his authority.) and his present lordship (Quote: Jesus IS present in his lordship, directing the affairs of the church in Acts. But what about NOW?)
I say that just because we can’t go to him in person to resolve a dispute or because two churches disagree on a point of doctrine does not mean Jesus’ authority is absent or puts in doubt His lordship NOW.This is not just my opinion, it is what the Bible says.
You spoke of the Bible in the following ways:
·Seriously. The scriptures teach what they teach, whether I accept it as gospel or reject it as fantasy.
·I believe the Bible teaches what it teaches.
·I think one can look at the Bible fairly and come to a conclusion about what it teaches, even without believing it.
·It's only the Word that can resolve disputes
·Someone has to be wrong! Who judges? It has to be something outside the populace.The Word?Hypothetically, yeah.
·If it serves no other purpose shouldn't the Bible define Christianity?
So what does the Bible teach about the Lordship of Jesus Christ?
Every Epistle Paul wrote to the church has the same salutation of “Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” except for two where Paul switches things up a bit.Colossians 1:2“We always thank God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” and 1 Thess 1:1“To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace and peace to you.”Jesus is as much Lord now as he was in the book of Acts.
The word “Lord” means master and a master has authority which is what the Bible teaches.Ephesians 1:20-23 …he (God) raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21 far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22 And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.The head controls the body whether it’s a human body or the body of Christ.Jesus Christ is the head of his body NOW.
The word “Lord” also means a person exercising absolute ownership rights which is what the Bible teaches.Romans 14:8 If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.
Jesus Christ is Lord.It’s decided.It’s settled.There is no doubt about it no matter how many disputes and disagreements there are among believers and among churches?
Do you a scripture that says Christ is absent or that the Bible takes the place of the absent Christ?
I seem to remember TWI splitting the use of the term Lord between God and Jesus. In their minds these are completely separate beings, in a chain of command. (With your spirit subservient to your mind to your body etc) That’s easy to screw up because of the fine lines.
If God and Jesus are one being then focusing on one Lord seems a simpler task.
People are willingly following the reasoning of sexual predators?
The Word taking the place of the Absent Christ is a switcharoo. VPW wanted attention deflected, to him.
The Word represents an object. Christ represents a person.
There are people in relationships who can't remember the other person when not physically present. Think about how baffling that could be.
I know there's people not in the room with me now, I haven't forgotten, and I know haven't forgotten me. I have a picture on my desk, but won't forget them if the picture is not there.
I'm just picturing VPW handing this "the word takes the place of the absent christ" idea over to his followers like he's handing out flowers, "Here, this will remind you of me when I'm at work", (in case you're tempted to think of someone else).
(deadbeat dads are created by the stroke of a pen, not by character)
People are willingly following the reasoning of sexual predators?
The Word taking the place of the Absent Christ is a switcharoo. VPW wanted attention deflected, to him.
The Word represents an object. Christ represents a person.
There are people in relationships who can't remember the other person when not physically present. Think about how baffling that could be.
I know there's people not in the room with me now, I haven't forgotten, and I know haven't forgotten me. I have a picture on my desk, but won't forget them if the picture is not there.
I'm just picturing VPW handing this "the word takes the place of the absent christ" idea over to his followers like he's handing out flowers, "Here, this will remind you of me when I'm at work", (in case you're tempted to think of someone else).
(deadbeat dads are created by the stroke of a pen, not by character)
To be clear, I use the belly buttons as a tongue in cheek example of the things over which Christians disagree. I do not think it is much of an exaggeration to say that no matter what issue you choose, there are Christians on both sides of it. Baptism, the Trinity, immediate life after death, the reality of hell, the shape of the Earth, the necessity of works, the permanence of salvation, the need to keep kosher, military service and the pledge of allegiance, drinking, smoking, marriage, divorce, the sabbath... name the issue, serious or petty, and there are Christians who have killed each other over it.
What resolves disagreements when two followers of Christ, each claiming to walk by the spirit, contradict each other on a matter of doctrine or practice? Someone has to be wrong! Who judges?
It has to be something outside the populace.
The Word?
Hypothetically, yeah. If it serves no other purpose shouldn't the Bible define Christianity?
Etc
Raf, one way that has been discussed about Christ remaining present is concerning the relationship and fellowship we have with him since he is the head of the body to which we belong.So when one considers howmessages are sent back and forth between the brain and the parts of the human body in order to function, it makes sense to me that there is also a necessary 2-way communication going on between Christ and the members of his body.
The whole area of Christ communicating personally with believers by way of the holy spirit is new to me but I know from the book of Acts that he does do this.OldSkool lays this out clearly from scripture on page 70 of this thread.I simply want to learn more about how it works so I can apply it in my personal walk with Christ.
I am in no position to judge what others are saying Christ told them to do, say or believe.The only exception to this seems to be if it contradicts what the Bible says, but then how useful is this if there is no consensus on what the Bible actually says. (I did read about how personal prophecies given to specific individuals in CES were harmful.Obviously, in hindsight that was a big and those involved can choose to learn from it or not.)
I do not know how Christ is dealing with all the division within his body, but I do know it is our responsibility to obey 2 Timothy 2:15, “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a worker who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.” NASB
Will there ever be complete unity in the body of Christ about what the Bible teaches?No, not as long as Satan is still the god of this world.
So in the meantime, the discussions on GSC about what one thinks or believes regarding a topic go on, and they will continue to be proven helpful to others.
No one who's life was changed for the better by his ministry believes he was a fake, because he delivered the goods.
To those who expected him to be their perfect idea of a holy man, he was definitely NOT what they wanted.
But to those who received great truths and the ability to find more truths from PFAL are grateful to God for his walk, when he walked with God.
I think his old-man nature was completely contrary to what he really was and what he did when he was in fellowship. When he was in fellowship he did great things for us. THAT is what I prefer to focus on and magnify.
Focus on his old man nature and he was a failure.
Focus on his new man nature and he was a success.
The same holds for you and me.
When we walk in fellowship we are able to do wonderful things for people. When we walk out of fellowship, God covers for us the best He can, and waits for us to walk with Him again.
Exposing your gobbledygook, delusions and lies is in order over this.
Mike , you run up the flagpole your fantasy of a pathological liar, a cheating, thieving , sociopathic, mean and abusive sexual predator like it’s no worse than anyone else when they’re out of fellowship with the weak and sin-tolerant god that wierwille promoted.
the god that wierwille and you promote is indeed a fantasy of a sociopath’s creative imagination who - like the devotee cannot distinguish between what’s right and wrong, between truth and lies.
The way that wierwille presented himself through plagiarism and sincerity many thought he was the real deal and not a faker. Many thought their lives were changed for the better because that was the group hype . Narrow minded people feel their lives are better because they’re right and all others are wrong.
wierwille had a charismatic personality - many folks were attracted to his influence NOT because they thought he was a holy man - but because he made himself out to be a maverick - this appealed to the counterculture movement in its day. He went against mainstream Christianity and disparaged academia, cognitive skills and worldly logic. He was not your typical religious leader.
he turned the straight and narrow path of Christianity into something self-referential “as long as you love God & neighbor you can do as you full well please” . - as wierwille would often brag “anything done in the love of God is okay”. what a handy rule of thumb - if YOU THINK you’re doing something out of the love of God it’s okay. Plagiarizing the works of others so you can offer your followers a new and improved version of their work.
A sociopath will always have the advantage over folks with a conscience. Why push yourself to develop your research skills and original ideas when you can take the shortcut and plagiarize from others.
To focus on wierwille’s “successes” makes me wonder what is the definition of success. Do sociopaths congratulate each other over getting away with unconscionable acts?
Is Mike deluded or deranged for being so faithful and loyal to defend a sociopath? Do ‘great’ sociopaths think alike?
Exposing your gobbledygook, delusions and lies is in order over this.
Mike , you run up the flagpole your fantasy of a pathological liar, a cheating, thieving , sociopathic, mean and abusive sexual predator like it’s no worse than anyone else when they’re out of fellowship with the weak and sin-tolerant god that wierwille promoted.
the god that wierwille and you promote is indeed a fantasy of a sociopath’s creative imagination who - like the devotee cannot distinguish between what’s right and wrong, between truth and lies.
The way that wierwille presented himself through plagiarism and sincerity many thought he was the real deal and not a faker. Many thought their lives were changed for the better because that was the group hype . Narrow minded people feel their lives are better because they’re right and all others are wrong.
wierwille had a charismatic personality - many folks were attracted to his influence NOT because they thought he was a holy man - but because he made himself out to be a maverick - this appealed to the counterculture movement in its day. He went against mainstream Christianity and disparaged academia, cognitive skills and worldly logic. He was not your typical religious leader.
he turned the straight and narrow path of Christianity into something self-referential “as long as you love God & neighbor you can do as you full well please” . - as wierwille would often brag “anything done in the love of God is okay”. what a handy rule of thumb - if YOU THINK you’re doing something out of the love of God it’s okay. Plagiarizing the works of others so you can offer your followers a new and improved version of their work.
A sociopath will always have the advantage over folks with a conscience. Why push yourself to develop your research skills and original ideas when you can take the shortcut and plagiarize from others.
To focus on wierwille’s “successes” makes me wonder what is the definition of success. Do sociopaths congratulate each other over getting away with unconscionable acts?
Is Mike deluded or deranged for being so faithful and loyal to defend a sociopath? Do ‘great’ sociopaths think alike?
I was hoping for an answer but Mike probably was reproved by his fellowship coordinator for posting here...
I was hoping for an answer but Mike probably was reproved by his fellowship coordinator for posting here...
Come on now! You were hoping I'd entangle my self in T-Bones web above, even though I've handled those points lots of times in the past 20 years. Maybe I should get myself edjumicated on the Advanced Search engine here and retrieve my old answers?
No, I want to go in different directions.
But HERE in this thread I have some news. I found the old Way Mag article "What is Jesus Christ Doing Up There?" and will scan it in soon for discussion.
That will mean another bump-back on reading Undertow, but that is a stable iron in the fire. I want to see the story about the Research Dept, because I had a number of interactions with that department around the same years Charlene was in it.
Another project I am considering is a Doctrinal thread about God limiting Himself. Does He have a budget? I've brought this up a few times with almost zero detail. However, I have an old folder going back to the late 70s on it that I have been throwing verses into every now and then.
Come on now! You were hoping I'd entangle my self in T-Bones web above, even though I've handled those points lots of times in the past 20 years. Maybe I should get myself edjumicated on the Advanced Search engine here and retrieve my old answers?
That's it!
Let's have a web competition! A web-off if you will.
But HERE in this thread I have some news. I found the old Way Mag article "What is Jesus Christ Doing Up There?" and will scan it in soon for discussion.
Cool. Post it up and let's compare it to scripture. Who knows might have some good points.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
427
271
423
257
Popular Days
Feb 14
142
Oct 13
105
Jan 18
101
Oct 8
88
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 427 posts
T-Bone 271 posts
OldSkool 423 posts
Nathan_Jr 257 posts
Popular Days
Feb 14 2023
142 posts
Oct 13 2022
105 posts
Jan 18 2023
101 posts
Oct 8 2022
88 posts
Popular Posts
OldSkool
First off, Biblically speaking, Christ has never been absent...that doctrine does not come close to occuring anywhere in the Bible. Yet the way international teaches the word of God takes the place of
Bolshevik
Mike's apparent anger toward Christ and emphasis on obedience . . . that's Wayworld . . . that's the annihilation of the individual
waysider
Soooo...He used ONE verse from the Amplified Bible, HALF a chapter from the New English Bible and required PFAL '77 students to get some version from the 1800's that has a name so unremarkable you can
Posted Images
Nathan_Jr
Mike: "God covers for us the best He can"
****
What a patronizing, condescending thing to say. What does "God's best" look like? Sounds like it won't be quite enough. Sounds like another limit on what God is able to do.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
1. why would you assume your dumb-a$$ definitions would connect better with the folks at home?
Are they also dumb-a$$e$ like you?
2.According to reputable sources like Antimatter | Definition & Facts | Britannica stable antimatter does not appear to exist in our universe…so I understand why you would make a word combo like “anti-idol” – it doesn’t exist in our universe.
3.Like your other theories this one is also based on confirmation bias and
astrala$$-hole projection.You criticize and condemn others for that which you faithfully practice – idolizing wierwille.
When a devoted follower finds out the teacher of PFAL – wierwille – was an unabashed plagiarist, pathological liar, sociopath, drunkard, egocentric, malignant narcissist, mean-spirited, abusive, sexual predator it can be overwhelming both intellectually and emotionally…
...Judging by your undying love for wierwille and PFAL displayed on Grease Spot Café for some 20 years it seems to me YOU MIKE have never come to terms with the REAL victor paul wierwille …Well… if you ever do snap out of your delusion, you’ll probably have to deal with grief and loss…experiencing emotional and psychological trauma correlates with grief and loss.
I’ve found there are two well-known models for dealing with grief and loss. One is from Elisabeth Kübler-Ross a Swiss-American psychiatrist and a pioneer in near-death studies. She theorized there were 5 stages of grief, but her studies were with people who were dying (terminally ill), not people who were grieving over the loss of a loved one. In her 1969 book “On Death and Dying” she proposed the 5 stages of grief and loss:
1. Denial and isolation
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance
I think there is some merit to her work although there’s a strong consensus among psychologists that people who are grieving over any kind of loss do not necessarily go through the stages in the same order or experience all of them.
The other model is from George Bonanno. His research is noted for contradicting Kübler-Ross’ 5 stages of grief. As a professor of clinical psychology at Columbia University, he conducted more than two decades of scientific studies on grief and trauma, which have been published in several papers of peer-reviewed journals in the field of psychology.
His studies came out of several thousand subjects and included people who have suffered losses in the U.S. and cross-cultural studies in various countries around the world. His subjects suffered losses through war, terrorism, deaths of children, premature deaths of spouses, sexual abuse, childhood diagnoses of AIDS, and other potentially devastating loss events or potential trauma events – such as losing a job, or one of the parents losing custody of a child through divorce, loss of a romantic relationship, loss of a pet, losing faith in one’s religion. Bonanno’s findings indicate that natural resilience is a part of the human psyche, and that there are four possible paths one could take in dealing with grief and loss. The four trajectories are as follows:
Resilience: "The ability of adults in otherwise normal circumstances who are exposed to an isolated and potentially highly disruptive event, such as the death of a close relation or a violent or life-threatening situation, to maintain relatively stable, healthy levels of psychological and physical functioning" as well as "the capacity for generative experiences and positive emotions".
Recovery: When "normal functioning temporarily gives way to threshold or sub-threshold psychopathology (e.g., symptoms of depression or post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD), usually for a period of at least several months, and then gradually returns to pre-event levels".
Chronic dysfunction: Prolonged suffering and inability to function, usually lasting several years or longer.
Delayed grief or trauma: When adjustment seems normal but then distress and symptoms increase months later. Researchers have not found evidence of delayed grief, but delayed trauma appears to be a genuine phenomenon.”
(for more details on the above see Wikipedia on Grief and Wikipedia on George Bonanno )
So, if you ever do “snap out of it” I sincerely wish you the best whatever path you find yourself on.
4.now that you mention it - reviewing the opening on your Jump to Concussions thread I see how you’ve deceived yourself – you refuse (for whatever reason) to see snapping as brainwashing. There’s a lot of stuff available to clear up your confusion, ignorance and maybe you’ll use better judgement in your choice of words – here’s a small sample:
Snapping: America's Epidemic of Sudden Personality Change - Wikipedia
Brainwashing - Wikipedia
Brainwashing | Britannica
The Cult that Snapped: The Journey into the Way International by Karl Kahler | eBook | Barnes & Noble® (barnesandnoble.com)
The Art of Brainwashing | Psychology Today
How Brainwashing Works | HowStuffWorks
This Is What Happens When You Snap | Psychology Today
5. Mike, 2 words cognitive dissonance look into it!
What Is Cognitive Dissonance? Definition and Examples (verywellmind.com)
Cognitive dissonance: Definition, effects, and examples (medicalnewstoday.com)
Cognitive Dissonance: What It Is & Why It Matters (psycom.net)
~ ~ ~ ~
I hope all this helps
Edited by T-BoneTypos were fixed by the Anti-Typos editor after he won in arm wrestle against the Anti-Editor
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
[I provided the link because Mike's post was hidden in a reply. So, people can link and read all of what I'm replying to...]
Mike:
"The thing that is genuine "anti" in my proposed new term (Trademark Pending) is the reversal of excessive-love to excessive-hate.
My theory is that most of the people who are very anti-wierwille now WERE very pro-wierwille when first taking the class. Finding out that VPW was not the holy man they idolized at first caused them to "snap" against him with with the same zeal as when they positively idolized him.
It was a rush to idolize him and join the Corps early, and then a rush to anti-idolize him. In both rushes, there wasn't time to really sort things out properly."
WordWolf:
Taking people who dedicated themselves to God, their lives to God, who truly thought that loyalty was to God alone, and siphoning off that love of God and commitment, telling them this person was helping them get all of that done,
then them finding out that the supposed leader, who supposedly dedicated his life to God, instead dedicated his life to alcoholism, tobacco, rape, molestation, and creature comforts, and all his talk about dedication to God was all a SMOKESCREEN for that, all a trick to get them to hand over all their money so he could booze up, smoke up, and live it up, while taking dedicated women who dedicated their lives to God and molested them and raped them,
that will get an emotional reaction no matter who is involved.
People went from completely buying into layer upon layer of snow job, to suddenly learning in one moment how FALSE it was, how FRAUDULENT vpw was, how HYPOCRITICAL he was, how PREDATORY he was. That's bound to get an emotional reaction- unless, of course, one decided never to actually address ANY of it. If one decided to blow all of it off under "boys will be boys", then things that outrage Jesus can be swept under the rug, and one can go on to ridicule people who have a legitimate emotional response to destroyed lives, hurt lives, capital crimes, causing God's people to hurt and stumble and savaging them.
The only reasons I have this theory are:
(1) because in the 1970s I saw with my own eyes many grads go faster and farther than me in “going ga-ga” over VPW, going WOW, and going into the Corps. I thought they went without thinking it all through carefully, setting aside the emotions of love and excitement. I was slow with this; they were fast.
(2) because from 1986 till now, I saw with my own eyes many grads go faster and farther than me in being enraged over VPW’s revealed sins, going ape over throwing away all he ever said did regardless of its truth value. I think few think it all through carefully, setting aside the emotions of anger and unnecessary emotion. I go slow with this.
WordWolf:
People encountered happy, genuine Christians. They were told the reason they were so happy was this group teaching the Bible. They visit the group and are told much the same. They join the happy, genuine Christians, enjoying fellowship with them (by the normal usage of the word.) They are told, repeatedly, that the key to being so happy is this class this guy teaches, and how everybody there all agrees. Eventually, they buy into it, and take the class taught by the man who called himself "THE TEACHER" and built up his image so everybody sold him like that. All through the class, there's grads who keep up the love and fellowship. Afterwards, they're treated as somewhat higher, having that in common with the happy, genuine Christians. They're talked into taking more classes. They're leaned on- carefully- to donate their time and money- first 10%, then more, then all of their discretionary income- because of how holy the organization is, how important to God its leader is, how hard he works for both God and his people.
Convinced (eventually) that to grow most with God will be to go WOW, some go. When they return, they're treated like heroes. Then they're convinced that to REALLY grow with God will be to go Corps. Dedicated to God, these poor, naive kids go Corps and try their best, absorbing the lessons taught there- many of which were unhealthy and exploited their loyalty, all by the so-called godly leader.
They put in thousands upon thousands of hours of their lives, and much of their income, even choosing lesser jobs so they can attend events once a year, all because they're trying to do their best for God, and told this is how they do it.
Then,
they discover it was all built on lies. The only legit Christianity there was the LOCAL form they FIRST experienced. All the legit Christians had been shilling for a fraud, a conman, who sold lots of classes, lots of books, lots of events, always making a profit at every level, a man whose teachings were all cobbled together from the work of other, legit Christians. This man then took that money, and spent lots on creature comforts, chain-smoked, drank all day because he was addicted to alcohol AND tobacco, and in between all that set up an ELABORATE system to rape and molest some of God's women, covering his tracks at every level.
The most dedicated of God's people respond to that by being enraged.
Then Mike comes along and dares to say there's something wrong with that-that their anger and emotion are "unnecessary", that they should ignore all of that and stay loyal to the alcoholic rapist because he taught some good Bible. Mike doesn't seem to get a lot of converts to his thinking- for which he blames the people he tries to recruit.
"The good that came from PFAL and TWI-1 was far greater than the bad, and GreaseSpotters who can’t integrate this in their world-view will continue to have a terrible reputation with grads out there."
WordWolf:
This isn't about popularity, it's about TRUTH. When people come here- and lots of them come here- they come here to read the truth. The truth is that the good that came in early twi came from the Jesus People that were recruited. What vpw contributed mostly is the "bad" we object to- and most people have no trouble understanding that once they learn what was hidden from them BY vpw. People like Mike who can't integrate this in his world-view will spend the rest of their lives spinning their wheels and being allowed to show up places, but never quite getting the RESPECT he thinks he has earned. I have people who disagree with me fundamentally on all sorts of stuff, but most of them respect me nonetheless, because I have earned their respect through integrity if nothing else.
I've interacted with grads out there. They have no problem finding out what I believe. I have a GOOD reputation among them, and when I speak on God's Word, they take it seriously (I have proof.)
it's possible that the good in twi- which came from the Jesus People- was far greater than the bad- the rapes, molestations, vices, greed, vanity and so on that came from vpw- but even if it was, I'd be slow to say so, especially to those who were victimized by vpw and his system. Is human life subject to CALCULATIONS, how much HARM is worth how much BLESSING? The Blessing of The Lord benefits with NO SORROW added with it. That's not a description of twi in ANY era.
Have you ever researched around with old grads to find out what they think of GreaseSpot?
[I know that they all come here when they want the truth on what twi is doing lately or has done since they checked in last- including people who are embarrassed to SAY they check in here. I know twi's innies come here to find out the truth on twi. I know twi's hierarchy knows all that- they insisted we post a letter of theirs to their own followers in order to do damage control on what information leaked out via the GSC. And there's thousands who posted here and have moved on with their lives- GSC success stories.
I'm sure there's a few grads to whom this does not apply- there's always a minority- but I'm not going to throw away integrity and truth just to try to cozy up to people who value both so little that they spurn the GSC. I'm not here to make friends- although I've made some anyway- people who DO value truth and integrity. I do have a reputation, and it's not for being snuggly-wuggly, it's for telling the unadulterated truth. I didn't get that overnight nor by accident. It was the by-product of many decisions to value truth and integrity. People who don't make those decisions may get baffled as to how anyone can disagree with me or even dislike me, but still respect me. Well. the answer is there for those who want to know.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
"If my God was as small as your God, I'd get me a NEW God."- vpw
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Raf,
You have questioned both Jesus Christ’s authority (Quote: He is also absent in his authority.) and his present lordship (Quote: Jesus IS present in his lordship, directing the affairs of the church in Acts. But what about NOW?)
I say that just because we can’t go to him in person to resolve a dispute or because two churches disagree on a point of doctrine does not mean Jesus’ authority is absent or puts in doubt His lordship NOW. This is not just my opinion, it is what the Bible says.
You spoke of the Bible in the following ways:
· Seriously. The scriptures teach what they teach, whether I accept it as gospel or reject it as fantasy.
· I believe the Bible teaches what it teaches.
· I think one can look at the Bible fairly and come to a conclusion about what it teaches, even without believing it.
· It's only the Word that can resolve disputes
· Someone has to be wrong! Who judges? It has to be something outside the populace. The Word? Hypothetically, yeah.
· If it serves no other purpose shouldn't the Bible define Christianity?
So what does the Bible teach about the Lordship of Jesus Christ?
Every Epistle Paul wrote to the church has the same salutation of “Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” except for two where Paul switches things up a bit. Colossians 1:2 “We always thank God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” and 1 Thess 1:1 “To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace and peace to you.” Jesus is as much Lord now as he was in the book of Acts.
The word “Lord” means master and a master has authority which is what the Bible teaches. Ephesians 1:20-23 …he (God) raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21 far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22 And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way. The head controls the body whether it’s a human body or the body of Christ. Jesus Christ is the head of his body NOW.
The word “Lord” also means a person exercising absolute ownership rights which is what the Bible teaches. Romans 14:8 If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.
Jesus Christ is Lord. It’s decided. It’s settled. There is no doubt about it no matter how many disputes and disagreements there are among believers and among churches?
Do you a scripture that says Christ is absent or that the Bible takes the place of the absent Christ?
Edited by CharityLink to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Ahhh...there it is. You do hold to the garbage that wierwille taught that having a relationship with Jesus Christ is anti-Christ becuase its' not the absent-Christ, non-biblical garbage that wierwille taught. Your posts indicate a high level of dishonesty.
Edited by OldSkoolLink to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Hey genius, when you leave the content of your post inside a quote box you essentially bury your own post because very few people will actually realize you buried your own comments in a quote and will keep it moving...dont know why Im teliing you this...you post very little of value but hey....now you know....or you knew all along and are once again employing trolling techniques to try and make threads unreadable. Or maybe you try and bury it in a quote box because it's difficult to quote in response.
Edited by OldSkoolLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I seem to remember TWI splitting the use of the term Lord between God and Jesus. In their minds these are completely separate beings, in a chain of command. (With your spirit subservient to your mind to your body etc) That’s easy to screw up because of the fine lines.
If God and Jesus are one being then focusing on one Lord seems a simpler task.
Just thinking.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Was absent father / absent parent a term back in VPW's day?
Objects take the place of absent people, right?
Just wondering if Captain Creepy repackaged a cultural idea.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Father in "the Word” = deadbeat dad
Dead father in “the Word” = ghost dad
Creepy parallels
PFAL = ‘Bible’ class taught by a sexual predator
Ghost Dad = 1990 film starring a sexual predator
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
People are willingly following the reasoning of sexual predators?
The Word taking the place of the Absent Christ is a switcharoo. VPW wanted attention deflected, to him.
The Word represents an object. Christ represents a person.
There are people in relationships who can't remember the other person when not physically present. Think about how baffling that could be.
I know there's people not in the room with me now, I haven't forgotten, and I know haven't forgotten me. I have a picture on my desk, but won't forget them if the picture is not there.
I'm just picturing VPW handing this "the word takes the place of the absent christ" idea over to his followers like he's handing out flowers, "Here, this will remind you of me when I'm at work", (in case you're tempted to think of someone else).
(deadbeat dads are created by the stroke of a pen, not by character)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Yeah, right on the money.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Raf, one way that has been discussed about Christ remaining present is concerning the relationship and fellowship we have with him since he is the head of the body to which we belong. So when one considers how messages are sent back and forth between the brain and the parts of the human body in order to function, it makes sense to me that there is also a necessary 2-way communication going on between Christ and the members of his body.
The whole area of Christ communicating personally with believers by way of the holy spirit is new to me but I know from the book of Acts that he does do this. OldSkool lays this out clearly from scripture on page 70 of this thread. I simply want to learn more about how it works so I can apply it in my personal walk with Christ.
I am in no position to judge what others are saying Christ told them to do, say or believe. The only exception to this seems to be if it contradicts what the Bible says, but then how useful is this if there is no consensus on what the Bible actually says. (I did read about how personal prophecies given to specific individuals in CES were harmful. Obviously, in hindsight that was a big
and those involved can choose to learn from it or not.)
I do not know how Christ is dealing with all the division within his body, but I do know it is our responsibility to obey 2 Timothy 2:15, “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a worker who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.” NASB
Will there ever be complete unity in the body of Christ about what the Bible teaches? No, not as long as Satan is still the god of this world.
So in the meantime, the discussions on GSC about what one thinks or believes regarding a topic go on, and they will continue to be proven helpful to others.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Wow. Just.... wow...
Victor can hardly open his mouth or copy a page of text without showing his hand. A man of God? Which god?
To validate this trivialization and conceptualization of God, beleeef is required. A trivial concept of God must be TAUGHT and then beleeeved.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
. . .I'll teach you what I know. . And together we will grow. . . Clap your hands. . . Along The Way . . .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Hey Oldskool,
If Jesus was dead for 3 days and 3 nights. . . Scripture still existed .. . Technically?
. . .just sounds like a loophole in the red thread
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Jesus was physically present, but not for Thomas, though?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Yeah, would have to say thats sort of a conundrum...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Exposing your gobbledygook, delusions and lies is in order over this.
Mike , you run up the flagpole your fantasy of a pathological liar, a cheating, thieving , sociopathic, mean and abusive sexual predator like it’s no worse than anyone else when they’re out of fellowship with the weak and sin-tolerant god that wierwille promoted.
the god that wierwille and you promote is indeed a fantasy of a sociopath’s creative imagination who - like the devotee cannot distinguish between what’s right and wrong, between truth and lies.
The way that wierwille presented himself through plagiarism and sincerity many thought he was the real deal and not a faker. Many thought their lives were changed for the better because that was the group hype . Narrow minded people feel their lives are better because they’re right and all others are wrong.
wierwille had a charismatic personality - many folks were attracted to his influence NOT because they thought he was a holy man - but because he made himself out to be a maverick - this appealed to the counterculture movement in its day. He went against mainstream Christianity and disparaged academia, cognitive skills and worldly logic. He was not your typical religious leader.
he turned the straight and narrow path of Christianity into something self-referential “as long as you love God & neighbor you can do as you full well please” . - as wierwille would often brag “anything done in the love of God is okay”. what a handy rule of thumb - if YOU THINK you’re doing something out of the love of God it’s okay. Plagiarizing the works of others so you can offer your followers a new and improved version of their work.
A sociopath will always have the advantage over folks with a conscience. Why push yourself to develop your research skills and original ideas when you can take the shortcut and plagiarize from others.
To focus on wierwille’s “successes” makes me wonder what is the definition of success. Do sociopaths congratulate each other over getting away with unconscionable acts?
Is Mike deluded or deranged for being so faithful and loyal to defend a sociopath? Do ‘great’ sociopaths think alike?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
I was hoping for an answer but Mike probably was reproved by his fellowship coordinator for posting here...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Come on now! You were hoping I'd entangle my self in T-Bones web above, even though I've handled those points lots of times in the past 20 years. Maybe I should get myself edjumicated on the Advanced Search engine here and retrieve my old answers?
No, I want to go in different directions.
But HERE in this thread I have some news. I found the old Way Mag article "What is Jesus Christ Doing Up There?" and will scan it in soon for discussion.
That will mean another bump-back on reading Undertow, but that is a stable iron in the fire. I want to see the story about the Research Dept, because I had a number of interactions with that department around the same years Charlene was in it.
Another project I am considering is a Doctrinal thread about God limiting Himself. Does He have a budget? I've brought this up a few times with almost zero detail. However, I have an old folder going back to the late 70s on it that I have been throwing verses into every now and then.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
That's it!
Let's have a web competition! A web-off if you will.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Challenge accepted!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Cool. Post it up and let's compare it to scripture. Who knows might have some good points.
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.