YES! He did say that phrase, and then he moved on to the details.
VPW used the figure of speech "The Bible interprets itself" to summarize the topic, and to make it memorable. That that phrase NOT to supply the details, but to summarize them, figuratively.
It is a self referential mnemonic, easy to remember, and signifies great importance, being a figure of speech.
He then spends lots of time in the film class explaining what he means by that catchy phrase. He spends many pages on it in the book. It is a highly detailed topic, and it served me well.
I don't focus on the summary at the beginning of the topic, the figure of speech, the self referential mnemonic. That has a limited purpose; the meat comes later in the details.
I think these conversations exist just so that Mike, under pressure to explain, comes up with new and inventive ways to re write history.
While I do acknowledge VP had the narcissism to invent a “self referential mnemonic” It just gets weirder and weirder at every turn.
But I guess that is the nature of an old wineskin. You have to attach a spiritual significance to the history or it is just another disposable aluminum can that the homeless gather for the recycle fee.
Paul was describing the quality of natural men found in Israel, but the same spiritless condition afflicts natural man outside Israel as well.
I realize NONE of the old man nature vanishes with the new birth, but what changes with the new birth is the ability to rise above that spiritless nature, AT TIMES.
There’s some wierwille doctrines that may be more problematic with the unintended consequences of how wierwille-followers put the theories into practice. Like the trichotomy view of humankind - ideally body , soul and spirit…I’ve noticed that wierwille was often presumptuous with his pet “doctrines” - his attitude was manipulative and became a template for how wierwille-followers should think and act in the context of evangelizing and counseling - more on this in a bit.
just to clear the air, we’re not discussing a complicated surgical operation for separating conjoined twins. As a Christian, I’m of opinion it really doesn’t matter if one leans toward a trichotomy view or a dichotomy view as long as we interact with others in an appropriate biblical manner and have a Christlike attitude – whether evangelizing folks who are not Christian or counseling someone who is.
And thinking sensibly – it’s probably best to leave it up to God as far as He’s the only one who really knows what’s going on inside a person. I know at times we might have a tendency to feel overconfident, assuming the Holy Spirit is leading us to push an idea. For all we know the Holy Spirit may have already been working in this person’s life and might even be active in their heart as we evangelize and/or counsel as a friend.
Back when I was in TWI most of us had a cookie-cutter approach to evangelizing and counseling. The PFAL class was considered a guaranteed formula for resolving any problem. We believed the PFAL class was the best way to get someone born again. And once a person was a grad of the class in many one-on-one counseling situations a typical solution to propose would often be some pat answer from the PFAL class. Trouble with finances? – give money to God (i.e., the ministry) and God will bless you back with even more money. Don't like your Twig coordinator? Renew your mind. So-and-so mocks the law of believing? “Well, that’s because they’re a natural man - and we know they think the things of God are foolish.”
In effect wierwille-followers play the part of the Holy Spirit - in judging who has spirit and how the person should be “handled”.
...Back when I was in TWI most of us had a cookie-cutter approach to evangelizing and counseling. The PFAL class was considered a guaranteed formula for resolving any problem. We believed the PFAL class was the best way to get someone born again. And once a person was a grad of the class in many one-on-one counseling situations a typical solution to propose would often be some pat answer from the PFAL class. ...
Mike in purple .
Back when I was in TWI … .WHEN?
TWI was so segmented by history, and changes in the BOT that it helps to know when, when I hear stories of how things went wrong or stale or evil.
One major segment to consider is the change-over to Craig, which was gradual in practice, from grooming in 1981, to installation in 1982, to VPW’s physical fading in early 1985.
Another thing that is important for TWI stories is whether it was before the 1986 meltdown or after it.
ANOTHER major segment that I ask myself when I hear a TWI story (of how things went wrong, usually) is whether the story takes place within the Corps or outside the Corps.
most of us had a cookie-cutter approach to evangelizing and counseling. The PFAL class was considered a guaranteed formula for resolving any problem.
Yes, that was the FOUNDATION.
Some people I knew in TWI (I was 72-88nonCorps) built some good structures on that foundation, and some did not.
I think in later years, and within the Corps, that trend I saw continued, and the cookie-cutter approach grew in the early 80s, and went insane after 1986.
Yes, that cookie-cutter approach is how things would start out sometimes, until the people would get some experience and progress to greater learning from the Bible directly.
We believed the PFAL class was the best way to get someone born again.
Not all of us, and not all of the time… or segments.
My experiences and beliefs back in the 70s and early 80s were that by the time a person arrived at Session One, all the hoops they jumped through to sign up probably got any empties filled to capacity.
*/*/*/*
Definitely “we” believed the PFAL class was the best way to help people inexperienced with the Bible (like me at age 22) to be able to read it myself and grow from it.
It was a good way to get someone born again, but the foundation it gave us was sound and many built good renewed minds for years on it, and still are.
And once a person was a grad of the class in many one-on-one counseling situations a typical solution to propose would often be some pat answer from the PFAL class. ...
Not everyone was that shallow in my 70s-early80s experience. Some got good at it.
In the crazy post-1986 years, I don’t know, but I heard stories…
If you guys feel so inclined hit the link and search for intreprets itself...or any combination...never occurs.
However, when you modify your searh and remove intrepret and only seach for itself. You get 58 hits. The most relevant hits are in the Introduction. And I quote:
Quote
OPEN THE BOOK" and let it speak for itself, with the full conviction that if this can be done it can speak more loudly, and more effectively for itself, than any man can speak on its behalf.
I feel theres one of two possibilities here:
1) wierwille lazily took "let it speak for itself" and reworded it to "the Bible intreprets itself".
I feel this is more than plausible given wierwille used this ploy throughout his plagaraistic career coupled with the fact that a lot of The Word Intreprets Itself section in the PFLAP book clearly traces to this source. Not to mention we already know that wierwille pulled heavily from Bullinger elsewhere.
2) He didnt get the concept from this book at all and the concept originates elsewhere, cause when you google the words a lot of people think the Bible is the only book that intreprets itself.
Not really.
I'm not done inventing it.
That was version 1.0 of the "self referential mnemonic."
Version 2.0 gets a new name "self-referential mnem-selfic"
Once it gets heavy use, we can call it a SRMS.
That's the nature of figures of speech. They not only are attention getters themselves, but even their names can be attention getting.
If it weren't against my religion, I'd have copyrighted it before posting.
Good greasy grief! You are literally tying to take advantage of how wierwille structered his PFLAP book into Parts. Then you are saying its all used as a memory peg and is figurative and not literal? I need say no more. I mean it's by your own words. This is about as dishonest as you can get.
Not really.
I'm not done inventing it.
That was version 1.0 of the "self referential mnemonic."
Version 2.0 gets a new name "self-referential mnem-selfic"
Once it gets heavy use, we can call it a SRMS.
That's the nature of figures of speech. They not only are attention getters themselves, but even their names can be attention getting.
If it weren't against my religion, I'd have copyrighted it before posting.
Let me know when you get to 2.0. The 2s are always more appealing than the 1s. I mean when you can get to version 3.0 or 4.0 then you are really talking.
I mean no person can truly say they have changed before they label themselves “version 4”.
TWI was so segmented by history, and changes in the BOT that it helps to know when, when I hear stories of how things went wrong or stale or evil.
One major segment to consider is the change-over to Craig, which was gradual in practice, from grooming in 1981, to installation in 1982, to VPW’s physical fading in early 1985.
Twi's history is only segmented by you. Blaming Craig is like blaming the leaf produced by a toxic plant for it's own toxcicity when the toxins are produced by the root.
TWI history is very straightforward and very linear. No divisions at all. The group today is a group that started with wierwille and has paid untold amounts of money to BakerHostetter to learn how function within the confines of the law and only change what caused them problems.
Let me know when you get to 2.0. The 2s are always more appealing than the 1s. I mean when you can get to version 3.0 or 4.0 then you are really talking.
I mean no person can truly say they have changed before they label themselves “version 4”.
I think these conversations exist just so that Mike, under pressure to explain, comes up with new and inventive ways to re write history.
While I do acknowledge VP had the narcissism to invent a “self referential mnemonic” It just gets weirder and weirder at every turn.
But I guess that is the nature of an old wineskin. You have to attach a spiritual significance to the history or it is just another disposable aluminum can that the homeless gather for the recycle fee.
“the Bible interprets itself” which is code for wierwille interprets the Bible for us.
Mike explains what wierwille meant by “the Bible interprets itself” which is Mike re-writing PFAL for no one in particular. Makes me think of those ads that claim this product practically sells itself. Except the only one who supposedly bought it is “the salesman”.
It doesn’t matter – in light of my next comment, which exposes your false assumptionthat TWI WENT bad. It's been bad from the get-go!!!!! That will be handled in my next session.
And not that I need to establish credibility with someone like YOU who has NO CREDIBILITY HERE on Grease Spot Café – but for those new to Grease Spot I’ll mention my TWI involvement in brief here:
I was in TWI from 1974 to 1986 and served in various capacities Twig, Branch, Area Coordinator helping on a volunteer basis in numerous projects to establish new fellowships, run classes, develop coffee houses, and coordinate advances. I also participated in two notable programs: The Word Over the World(W.O.W.) missionary program and The Way Corps leadership training program. I did not realize it at the time but these were really part of an indoctrination process designed with the express purpose of getting me to accept a certain set of beliefs uncritically. I have served in several states: Texas, Louisiana, Indiana, Colorado, New York, Washington D.C. and Illinois.
[FYI for the extended version – please see the about me tab in my profile here
- if you can stay awake for the whole thing – zzzZZZZ ZZZzzzz - it’s about 110 pages - and keeps growing with updates-if you copied and pasted it into a word doc – which I do anytime I update it – kinda like an online journal of a cult-survivor.
I should warn everyone, if you are a big fan of wierwille and think everything is peachy keen with The Way International – then maybe you should not read it.
My primary target audience is anyone in the way corps – whether or not they’re still active in TWI – and more specifically they have a strong sense of disillusionment derived from the failure of TWI / the way corps program to fulfill its declared goals - and the perception of inconsistencies between the actions of certain TWI-leaders and the ideals they supposedly represent. These folks are my primary target audience because I understand and share similar feelings. The only big unresolved problem they may still have, is that they have not yet fully come to terms with the toxic legacy of victor paul wierwille.
Another reason – and probably the most necessary reason I keep writing is twofold. This has been great therapy…not that everything is fixed…it’s an ongoing lifetime project in which I have a vested interest.
And complementary to my story is the hope it might provide to the reader. NOT as a guide for how to leave The Way International and unpack the mental and emotional baggage. But merely as proof that it can be done, and it won’t ruin your life. Someone’s how-to’s, therapies, critical analysis of TWI's theories / practice and also personal recovery strategies may be totally different than mine – and I bet they'll probably work just as well. ]
5 hours ago, Mike said:
TWI was so segmented by history, and changes in the BOT that it helps to know when, when I hear stories of how things went wrong or stale or evil.
WENT wrong, stale or evil? It was evil from the start – did you forget about the floundering president and “original” cult-leader wierwille?
How soon they forget you, my beloved Weltweisheit!
Yes – that’s right - the fake doctor verville was my boyvriend!
5 hours ago, Mike said:
One major segment to consider is the change-over to Craig, which was gradual in practice, from grooming in 1981, to installation in 1982, to VPW’s physical fading in early 1985.
Doesn’t matter – the cult of personality – i.e., the wierwille-cult lives on!
5 hours ago, Mike said:
Another thing that is important for TWI stories is whether it was before the 1986 meltdown or after it.
Doesn’t matter – the cult of personality – i.e., the wierwille-cult lives on!
5 hours ago, Mike said:
ANOTHER major segment that I ask myself when I hear a TWI story (of how things went wrong, usually) is whether the story takes place within the Corps or outside the Corps.
Doesn’t matter - the cult of personality – i.e., the wierwille-cult lives on in TWI and offshoots! < "original" and offshoot emojis)
5 hours ago, Mike said:
most of us had a cookie-cutter approach to evangelizing and counseling. The PFAL class was considered a guaranteed formula for resolving any problem.
Yes, that was the FOUNDATION.
Some people I knew in TWI (I was 72-88nonCorps) built some good structures on that foundation, and some did not.
I think in later years, and within the Corps, that trend I saw continued, and the cookie-cutter approach grew in the early 80s, and went insane after 1986.
Yes, that cookie-cutter approach is how things would start out sometimes, until the people would get some experience and progress to greater learning from the Bible directly.
Whether in the corps or out of the corps you know that it doesn’t matter - the baloney is the same - whether you bought it at the stupid-market (PFAL) or at the factory where it was mass-produced (way corps program to make little wierwille clones).
Scratch all the baloney after “Yes, that was the FOUNDATION”
And you can scratch all the baloney after “I think in later years, and within the Corps” because Mike was never in the corps but he’s gotta do something to shift the blame off of the floundering president and “original” cult-leader.
5 hours ago, Mike said:
We believed the PFAL class was the best way to get someone born again.
Not all of us, and not all of the time… or segments.
My experiences and beliefs back in the 70s and early 80s were that by the time a person arrived at Session One, all the hoops they jumped through to sign up probably got any empties filled to capacity.
here's one recent grad who just manifested...yup - he jumped thru a hula hoop of PFAL-baloney
5 hours ago, Mike said:
*/*/*/*
Definitely “we” believed the PFAL class was the best way to help people inexperienced with the Bible (like me at age 22) to be able to read it myself and grow from it.
The people that were the easiest to con were those who were inexperienced with the Bible and dealing with con artists
5 hours ago, Mike said:
It was a good way to get someone born again, but the foundation it gave us was sound and many built good renewed minds for years on it, and still are.
Well, that’s a load bull-baloney. "us" ?!?!?!I need specifics – not your imaginative exaggerations of a world that does not exist beyond your thick head....how many are you talking about? and qualify too! define what is "sound"! let me see if I agree with your idea of sound. and qualify what is "good renewed mind" ! what makes it good? what makes it renewed? Metrics - I need metrics! Statistics - I need statistics and all the raw data from your "field studies".
I'm calling your bluff !!!!!
You throw this baloney out there EVERY TIME SOMEONE TARNISHES YOUR PRECIOUS LITTLE IDOL.
5 hours ago, Mike said:
And once a person was a grad of the class in many one-on-one counseling situations a typical solution to propose would often be some pat answer from the PFAL class. ...
Not everyone was that shallow in my 70s-early80s experience. Some got good at it.
In the crazy post-1986 years, I don’t know, but I heard stories…
You have no credibility – I don’t care what you say. No matter what story you talk about there's no telling what's true and what's not...because in your 20 years of coming to Grease Spot Cafe your posts often reflect someone who has no capacity to distinguish fact from fiction - I don't care if you swear on a stack of PFAL books - or on a pile of bull$hit that's taller than the stack of PFAL books.
and the Bibe can be erroneously interpreted too - like Bullinger's 4 crucified which wierwille stupidly parroted!
On 11/29/2022 at 8:14 PM, Nathan_Jr said:
Dat’s riiiiight!Still, the Bible never interprets itself, even erroneously. Never. Ever.
Mike finally got it right. So, so right.
WE interpret the Bible.
Proud of ya, Mike!
On 11/29/2022 at 10:05 PM, Mike said:
HOWEVER, we want to avoid private (one's own) interpretation in the process.
And how do we do that?
Hint:
Remember the figure of speech includes the word "itself."
On 11/29/2022 at 11:41 PM, Mike said:
YES! He did say that phrase, and then he moved on to the details.
VPW used the figure of speech "The Bible interprets itself" to summarize the topic, and to make it memorable. That that phrase NOT to supply the details, but to summarize them, figuratively.
It is a self referential mnemonic, easy to remember, and signifies great importance, being a figure of speech.
He then spends lots of time in the film class explaining what he means by that catchy phrase. He spends many pages on it in the book. It is a highly detailed topic, and it served me well.
I don't focus on the summary at the beginning of the topic, the figure of speech, the self referential mnemonic. That has a limited purpose; the meat comes later in the details.
For those following along at home, note Mike’s convergent techniques of dishonesty so he appears to agree and disagree at the same time.
Mike uses many elements of deception…among the most significant are:
1.Mike throws in the term “mnemonic”a learning technique that aids information retention or retrieval (remembering) in the human memory for better understanding.Self-referential encodingis a method of organizing information in one's memory in which one interprets incoming information in relation to oneself, using one's self-concept as a background…by itself the technique is not troublesome – but combining fact with fiction yet being unable to differentiate between the two, makes for a very problematic form of memory organization…see alsoSelf-referential encoding - WikipediaandEncoding Definition (Psychology) And Its Role In Memory | BetterHelp.
2.Mike leans heavily on confirmation bias. He has a tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms and supports his beliefs and values of wierwille/PFAL is the gold standard. He often reveals his favoritism by selecting information that supports his views, ignoring contrary information, or when he interprets ambiguous evidence as supporting his current attitudes. See also Confirmation bias - Wikipedia…we all tend to have confirmation bias to some degree - but it can be better managed by developing critical thinking skills.
3.Mike has a habit of reading into a Bible text – and even PFAL material. It’s his way of explaining something in order to introduce his own presuppositions, agendas or biases. It is commonly referred to as reading into the text. It is often done to "prove" a pre-held point of concern, and to provide confirmation bias corresponding with the pre-held interpretation and any agendas supported by it.see also Eisegesis - Wikipedia
4.I consider Mike a master at double-speak. He likes to redefine a term – which is, of course, to assign it a new meaning. Redefinition is a sub fallacy of equivocation. Double-talk is a form of speech in which inappropriate, invented, or nonsense words are interpolated into normal speech to give the appearance of knowledge and to confuse or mislead the listener/reader.see also Double-talk - Wikipedia,Equivocation - Wikipediaand Taxonomy vs Equivocation - What's the difference? | WikiDiff
Honey Badger kicks Shingles a$$ ! Honey Badger doesn't care
Didn't know all that...A friend of mine who is an avid hunter, would tell this old city boy stories about honey badgers and fisher ferrets and just blow my mind...I'm gonna stay a city boy in the safety and security of my favorite You Tube watching chair
I'm happy to discuss determinism and the illusion of free will, as long a we get to the bottom of this T7TMOG thing. This goes to the heart of cult manipulation and cult leadership and what it means to be a cult.
Decision and Game Theory versus Determinism
Since there wasn’t anything of interest going on, thought I’d post something related to this topic determinism and the illusion of free will.
Decision theory studies individual decision-making in situations in which an individual’s choice neither affects nor is affected by other individuals’ choices;
while game theory studies decision-making in situations where individuals do affect each other.
Decision theory asks questions like: what does it mean to choose rationally? How should we make choices when the consequences of our actions are uncertain? Buying insurance and deciding which job to take are examples of the kind of decisions studied by this discipline.
Game theory instead applies to all decisions that have a strategic component. The choices of an oligopolist, voting strategies, military tactical problems, deterrence, but also common phenomena such as threatening, promising, conflict and cooperation are its subject matter.
In a strategic situation, the goal is not just to choose rationally, but to choose in such a way that a mutual solution is achieved, so that choices ‘coordinate’ in the right way. The formal methods developed by game theory do not require that the subject making a choice be an intentional agent: coordinated interaction between animals or computers can be successfully modeled as well.
…determinism is appealing because it implies that our world and our beliefs are a natural and inevitable product of history…History cannot be explained deterministically, and it cannot be predicted because it is chaotic. So many forces are at work and their interactions are so complex that extremely small variations in the strength of the forces and the way they interact produce huge differences in outcomes.
From a Christian perspective I believe the universe is inhabited by intelligent free agents.
~ ~ ~ ~
In an article by J.I. Packer, free agency is described in more detail:
Free agency is a mark of human beings as such. All humans are free agents in the sense that they make their own decisions as to what they will do, choosing as they please in the light of their sense of right and wrong and the inclinations they feel. Thus, they are moral agents, answerable to God and each other for their voluntary choices.
So was Adam, both before and after he sinned; so are we now, and so are the glorified saints who are confirmed in grace in such a sense that they no longer have it in them to sin. Inability to sin will be one of the delights and glories of heaven, but it will not terminate anyone’s humanness; glorified saints will still make choices in accordance with their nature, and those choices will not be any the less the product of human free agency just because they will always be good and right.
Free will, however, has been defined by Christian teachers from the second century on as the ability to choose all the moral options that a situation offers, and Augustine affirmed against Pelagius and most of the Greek Fathers that original sin has robbed us of free will in this sense. We have no natural ability to discern and choose God’s way because we have no natural inclination Godward; our hearts are in bondage to sin, and only the grace of regeneration can free us from that slavery. This, for substance, was what Paul taught in Romans 6:16-23; only the freed will (Paul says, the freed person) freely and heartily chooses righteousness. A permanent love of righteousness—that is, an inclination of heart to the way of living that pleases God—is one aspect of the freedom that Christ gives (John 8:34-36; Gal. 5:1, 13).
It is worth observing that will is an abstraction. My will is not a part of me which I choose to move or not to move, like my hand or my foot; it is precisely me choosing to act and then going into action. The truth about free agency, and about Christ freeing sin’s slave from sin’s dominion, can be expressed more clearly if the word will is dropped and each person says: I am the morally responsible free agency; I am the slave of sin whom Christ must liberate; I am the fallen being who only have it in me to choose against God till God renews my heart.
Decision theory studies individual decision-making in situations in which an individual’s choice neither affects nor is affected by other individuals’ choices;
while game theory studies decision-making in situations where individuals do affect each other.
Decision theory asks questions like: what does it mean to choose rationally? How should we make choices when the consequences of our actions are uncertain? Buying insurance and deciding which job to take are examples of the kind of decisions studied by this discipline.
Game theory instead applies to all decisions that have a strategic component. The choices of an oligopolist, voting strategies, military tactical problems, deterrence, but also common phenomena such as threatening, promising, conflict and cooperation are its subject matter.
In a strategic situation, the goal is not just to choose rationally, but to choose in such a way that a mutual solution is achieved, so that choices ‘coordinate’ in the right way. The formal methods developed by game theory do not require that the subject making a choice be an intentional agent: coordinated interaction between animals or computers can be successfully modeled as well.
…determinism is appealing because it implies that our world and our beliefs are a natural and inevitable product of history…History cannot be explained deterministically, and it cannot be predicted because it is chaotic. So many forces are at work and their interactions are so complex that extremely small variations in the strength of the forces and the way they interact produce huge differences in outcomes.
From a Christian perspective I believe the universe is inhabited by intelligent free agents.
~ ~ ~ ~
In an article by J.I. Packer, free agency is described in more detail:
Free agency is a mark of human beings as such. All humans are free agents in the sense that they make their own decisions as to what they will do, choosing as they please in the light of their sense of right and wrong and the inclinations they feel. Thus, they are moral agents, answerable to God and each other for their voluntary choices.
So was Adam, both before and after he sinned; so are we now, and so are the glorified saints who are confirmed in grace in such a sense that they no longer have it in them to sin. Inability to sin will be one of the delights and glories of heaven, but it will not terminate anyone’s humanness; glorified saints will still make choices in accordance with their nature, and those choices will not be any the less the product of human free agency just because they will always be good and right.
Free will, however, has been defined by Christian teachers from the second century on as the ability to choose all the moral options that a situation offers, and Augustine affirmed against Pelagius and most of the Greek Fathers that original sin has robbed us of free will in this sense. We have no natural ability to discern and choose God’s way because we have no natural inclination Godward; our hearts are in bondage to sin, and only the grace of regeneration can free us from that slavery. This, for substance, was what Paul taught in Romans 6:16-23; only the freed will (Paul says, the freed person) freely and heartily chooses righteousness. A permanent love of righteousness—that is, an inclination of heart to the way of living that pleases God—is one aspect of the freedom that Christ gives (John 8:34-36; Gal. 5:1, 13).
It is worth observing that will is an abstraction. My will is not a part of me which I choose to move or not to move, like my hand or my foot; it is precisely me choosing to act and then going into action. The truth about free agency, and about Christ freeing sin’s slave from sin’s dominion, can be expressed more clearly if the word will is dropped and each person says: I am the morally responsible free agency; I am the slave of sin whom Christ must liberate; I am the fallen being who only have it in me to choose against God till God renews my heart.
Hey T bone Merry Xmas. Nice write up and linked articles.
It really interests me to examine free will and the will of man because of the promulgation in TSCM (the so-called ministry TWI) of the greatest secret in the world today being the WOG = WOG
What does man’s will vs Gods will mean in context?
My really simplistic mental modeling goes with me reaching a hand up and grabbing Christs hand to pull me outta whatever mess I got myself into.
I’m sure free will is much more complex than that. But I’ve had analysis paralysis before too so don’t wanna go too far down that path.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
330
267
271
186
Popular Days
Nov 12
118
Nov 13
107
Nov 20
105
Nov 9
104
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 330 posts
T-Bone 267 posts
OldSkool 271 posts
Nathan_Jr 186 posts
Popular Days
Nov 12 2022
118 posts
Nov 13 2022
107 posts
Nov 20 2022
105 posts
Nov 9 2022
104 posts
Popular Posts
OldSkool
I do want to address this Mike. You constantly come at me like I have forgotten, or have been talked out of the truth of wierwille, or that I just don't understand where you are coming from. Personall
waysider
This right here. If you're unable to define and regulate your control factors and variables, your research is worthless. The best you could hope for would be an observational analysis of your collecte
Charity
I agree with So_Crates when he said "Here's a wild idea: why don't YOU become meek and I'll tell you about all the fruit in my life since I stopped making PLAF the center of my life." There have
Posted Images
chockfull
I think these conversations exist just so that Mike, under pressure to explain, comes up with new and inventive ways to re write history.
While I do acknowledge VP had the narcissism to invent a “self referential mnemonic” It just gets weirder and weirder at every turn.
But I guess that is the nature of an old wineskin. You have to attach a spiritual significance to the history or it is just another disposable aluminum can that the homeless gather for the recycle fee.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
I think he's pretty much just f&+#&-+ with us
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
There’s some wierwille doctrines that may be more problematic with the unintended consequences of how wierwille-followers put the theories into practice. Like the trichotomy view of humankind - ideally body , soul and spirit…I’ve noticed that wierwille was often presumptuous with his pet “doctrines” - his attitude was manipulative and became a template for how wierwille-followers should think and act in the context of evangelizing and counseling - more on this in a bit.
just to clear the air, we’re not discussing a complicated surgical operation for separating conjoined twins. As a Christian, I’m of opinion it really doesn’t matter if one leans toward a trichotomy view or a dichotomy view as long as we interact with others in an appropriate biblical manner and have a Christlike attitude – whether evangelizing folks who are not Christian or counseling someone who is.
And thinking sensibly – it’s probably best to leave it up to God as far as He’s the only one who really knows what’s going on inside a person. I know at times we might have a tendency to feel overconfident, assuming the Holy Spirit is leading us to push an idea. For all we know the Holy Spirit may have already been working in this person’s life and might even be active in their heart as we evangelize and/or counsel as a friend.
Back when I was in TWI most of us had a cookie-cutter approach to evangelizing and counseling. The PFAL class was considered a guaranteed formula for resolving any problem. We believed the PFAL class was the best way to get someone born again. And once a person was a grad of the class in many one-on-one counseling situations a typical solution to propose would often be some pat answer from the PFAL class. Trouble with finances? – give money to God (i.e., the ministry) and God will bless you back with even more money. Don't like your Twig coordinator? Renew your mind. So-and-so mocks the law of believing? “Well, that’s because they’re a natural man - and we know they think the things of God are foolish.”
In effect wierwille-followers play the part of the Holy Spirit - in judging who has spirit and how the person should be “handled”.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Love Animal House! That one is one of the all time classics and has a cool backstory on how it was made.
$100 Loshonta take another $100 Lo...yeah
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Mike in purple .
Back when I was in TWI … .WHEN?
TWI was so segmented by history, and changes in the BOT that it helps to know when, when I hear stories of how things went wrong or stale or evil.
One major segment to consider is the change-over to Craig, which was gradual in practice, from grooming in 1981, to installation in 1982, to VPW’s physical fading in early 1985.
Another thing that is important for TWI stories is whether it was before the 1986 meltdown or after it.
ANOTHER major segment that I ask myself when I hear a TWI story (of how things went wrong, usually) is whether the story takes place within the Corps or outside the Corps.
most of us had a cookie-cutter approach to evangelizing and counseling. The PFAL class was considered a guaranteed formula for resolving any problem.
Yes, that was the FOUNDATION.
Some people I knew in TWI (I was 72-88nonCorps) built some good structures on that foundation, and some did not.
I think in later years, and within the Corps, that trend I saw continued, and the cookie-cutter approach grew in the early 80s, and went insane after 1986.
Yes, that cookie-cutter approach is how things would start out sometimes, until the people would get some experience and progress to greater learning from the Bible directly.
We believed the PFAL class was the best way to get someone born again.
Not all of us, and not all of the time… or segments.
My experiences and beliefs back in the 70s and early 80s were that by the time a person arrived at Session One, all the hoops they jumped through to sign up probably got any empties filled to capacity.
*/*/*/*
Definitely “we” believed the PFAL class was the best way to help people inexperienced with the Bible (like me at age 22) to be able to read it myself and grow from it.
It was a good way to get someone born again, but the foundation it gave us was sound and many built good renewed minds for years on it, and still are.
And once a person was a grad of the class in many one-on-one counseling situations a typical solution to propose would often be some pat answer from the PFAL class. ...
Not everyone was that shallow in my 70s-early80s experience. Some got good at it.
In the crazy post-1986 years, I don’t know, but I heard stories…
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Not really.
I'm not done inventing it.
That was version 1.0 of the "self referential mnemonic."
Version 2.0 gets a new name "self-referential mnem-selfic"
Once it gets heavy use, we can call it a SRMS.
That's the nature of figures of speech. They not only are attention getters themselves, but even their names can be attention getting.
If it weren't against my religion, I'd have copyrighted it before posting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Im correcting myself.
Bullinger never expressly stated this concept in How to Enjoy the Bible.
http://markfoster.net/rn/how_to_enjoy_the_bible_bullinger.pdf
If you guys feel so inclined hit the link and search for intreprets itself...or any combination...never occurs.
However, when you modify your searh and remove intrepret and only seach for itself. You get 58 hits. The most relevant hits are in the Introduction. And I quote:
I feel theres one of two possibilities here:
1) wierwille lazily took "let it speak for itself" and reworded it to "the Bible intreprets itself".
I feel this is more than plausible given wierwille used this ploy throughout his plagaraistic career coupled with the fact that a lot of The Word Intreprets Itself section in the PFLAP book clearly traces to this source. Not to mention we already know that wierwille pulled heavily from Bullinger elsewhere.
2) He didnt get the concept from this book at all and the concept originates elsewhere, cause when you google the words a lot of people think the Bible is the only book that intreprets itself.
Edited by OldSkoolLink to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Good greasy grief! You are literally tying to take advantage of how wierwille structered his PFLAP book into Parts. Then you are saying its all used as a memory peg and is figurative and not literal? I need say no more. I mean it's by your own words. This is about as dishonest as you can get.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Let me know when you get to 2.0. The 2s are always more appealing than the 1s. I mean when you can get to version 3.0 or 4.0 then you are really talking.
I mean no person can truly say they have changed before they label themselves “version 4”.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Twi's history is only segmented by you. Blaming Craig is like blaming the leaf produced by a toxic plant for it's own toxcicity when the toxins are produced by the root.
TWI history is very straightforward and very linear. No divisions at all. The group today is a group that started with wierwille and has paid untold amounts of money to BakerHostetter to learn how function within the confines of the law and only change what caused them problems.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
"Oh, It's a figure of speech."
Uhmmm, no, it's not. It's really not.
It's a simple, straightforward statement that expresses someone's opinion.
You can express your personal opinion, however whacky it may be, but you don't get to invent new figures of speech "Just Because".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
“the Bible interprets itself” which is code for wierwille interprets the Bible for us.
Mike explains what wierwille meant by “the Bible interprets itself” which is Mike re-writing PFAL for no one in particular. Makes me think of those ads that claim this product practically sells itself. Except the only one who supposedly bought it is “the salesman”.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
It doesn’t matter – in light of my next comment, which exposes your false assumption that TWI WENT bad. It's been bad from the get-go!!!!! That will be handled in my next session.
And not that I need to establish credibility with someone like YOU who has NO CREDIBILITY HERE on Grease Spot Café – but for those new to Grease Spot I’ll mention my TWI involvement in brief here:
I was in TWI from 1974 to 1986 and served in various capacities Twig, Branch, Area Coordinator helping on a volunteer basis in numerous projects to establish new fellowships, run classes, develop coffee houses, and coordinate advances. I also participated in two notable programs: The Word Over the World (W.O.W.) missionary program and The Way Corps leadership training program. I did not realize it at the time but these were really part of an indoctrination process designed with the express purpose of getting me to accept a certain set of beliefs uncritically. I have served in several states: Texas, Louisiana, Indiana, Colorado, New York, Washington D.C. and Illinois.
[FYI for the extended version – please see the about me tab in my profile here
- if you can stay awake for the whole thing – zzzZZZZ
ZZZzzzz - it’s about 110 pages - and keeps growing with updates -if you copied and pasted it into a word doc – which I do anytime I update it – kinda like an online journal of a cult-survivor.
I should warn everyone, if you are a big fan of wierwille and think everything is peachy keen with The Way International – then maybe you should not read it.
My primary target audience is anyone in the way corps – whether or not they’re still active in TWI – and more specifically they have a strong sense of disillusionment derived from the failure of TWI / the way corps program to fulfill its declared goals - and the perception of inconsistencies between the actions of certain TWI-leaders and the ideals they supposedly represent. These folks are my primary target audience because I understand and share similar feelings. The only big unresolved problem they may still have, is that they have not yet fully come to terms with the toxic legacy of victor paul wierwille.
Another reason – and probably the most necessary reason I keep writing is twofold. This has been great therapy…not that everything is fixed…it’s an ongoing lifetime project in which I have a vested interest.
And complementary to my story is the hope it might provide to the reader. NOT as a guide for how to leave The Way International and unpack the mental and emotional baggage. But merely as proof that it can be done, and it won’t ruin your life. Someone’s how-to’s, therapies, critical analysis of TWI's theories / practice and also personal recovery strategies may be totally different than mine – and I bet they'll probably work just as well.
]
WENT wrong, stale or evil? It was evil from the start – did you forget about the floundering president and “original” cult-leader wierwille?
How soon they forget you, my beloved Weltweisheit!
Yes – that’s right - the fake doctor verville was my boyvriend!
Doesn’t matter – the cult of personality – i.e., the wierwille-cult lives on!
Doesn’t matter – the cult of personality – i.e., the wierwille-cult lives on!
Doesn’t matter - the cult of personality – i.e., the wierwille-cult lives on in TWI and offshoots!
< "original" and offshoot emojis)
Whether in the corps or out of the corps you know that it doesn’t matter - the baloney is the same - whether you bought it at the stupid-market (PFAL) or at the factory where it was mass-produced (way corps program to make little wierwille clones).
Scratch all the baloney after “Yes, that was the FOUNDATION”
And you can scratch all the baloney after “I think in later years, and within the Corps” because Mike was never in the corps but he’s gotta do something to shift the blame off of the floundering president and “original” cult-leader.
here's one recent grad who just manifested...yup - he jumped thru a hula hoop of PFAL-baloney
The people that were the easiest to con were those who were inexperienced with the Bible and dealing with con artists
Well, that’s a load bull-baloney. "us" ?!?!?! I need specifics – not your imaginative exaggerations of a world that does not exist beyond your thick head....how many are you talking about? and qualify too! define what is "sound"! let me see if I agree with your idea of sound. and qualify what is "good renewed mind" ! what makes it good? what makes it renewed? Metrics - I need metrics! Statistics - I need statistics and all the raw data from your "field studies".
I'm calling your bluff !!!!!
You throw this baloney out there EVERY TIME SOMEONE TARNISHES YOUR PRECIOUS LITTLE IDOL.
You have no credibility – I don’t care what you say. No matter what story you talk about there's no telling what's true and what's not...because in your 20 years of coming to Grease Spot Cafe your posts often reflect someone who has no capacity to distinguish fact from fiction - I don't care if you swear on a stack of PFAL books - or on a pile of bull$hit that's taller than the stack of PFAL books.
Edited by T-Bonerevision
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
For those following along at home, note Mike’s convergent techniques of dishonesty so he appears to agree and disagree at the same time.
Mike uses many elements of deception…among the most significant are:
1. Mike throws in the term “mnemonic” a learning technique that aids information retention or retrieval (remembering) in the human memory for better understanding. Self-referential encoding is a method of organizing information in one's memory in which one interprets incoming information in relation to oneself, using one's self-concept as a background…by itself the technique is not troublesome – but combining fact with fiction yet being unable to differentiate between the two, makes for a very problematic form of memory organization…see also Self-referential encoding - Wikipedia and Encoding Definition (Psychology) And Its Role In Memory | BetterHelp.
2. Mike leans heavily on confirmation bias. He has a tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms and supports his beliefs and values of wierwille/PFAL is the gold standard. He often reveals his favoritism by selecting information that supports his views, ignoring contrary information, or when he interprets ambiguous evidence as supporting his current attitudes. See also Confirmation bias - Wikipedia …we all tend to have confirmation bias to some degree - but it can be better managed by developing critical thinking skills.
3. Mike has a habit of reading into a Bible text – and even PFAL material. It’s his way of explaining something in order to introduce his own presuppositions, agendas or biases. It is commonly referred to as reading into the text. It is often done to "prove" a pre-held point of concern, and to provide confirmation bias corresponding with the pre-held interpretation and any agendas supported by it. see also Eisegesis - Wikipedia
4. I consider Mike a master at double-speak. He likes to redefine a term – which is, of course, to assign it a new meaning. Redefinition is a sub fallacy of equivocation. Double-talk is a form of speech in which inappropriate, invented, or nonsense words are interpolated into normal speech to give the appearance of knowledge and to confuse or mislead the listener/reader. see also Double-talk - Wikipedia , Equivocation - Wikipedia and Taxonomy vs Equivocation - What's the difference? | WikiDiff
Edited by T-Bonerevision
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Shingles is the new determinism
Are you an anti-vaxxer?
Shingles doesn’t care.
Do you have dual citizenship of U.S. and New York?
Shingles doesn’t care.
Do you have overdue library books?
Shingles doesn’t care.
Are you born-again of the wrong seed?
Shingles doesn’t care.
Have you made any posts on this thread?
Shingles doesn’t care.
Did you just win the lottery?
Shingles doesn’t care.
Are you going to abundantly share of your lottery winnings?
Shingles doesn't care.
Do you like $hit on a shingle?
Shingles doesn’t care.
I've got blisters on my fingers!
Shingles doesn't care.
Do you think free willy is an illusion?
Shingles doesn't care.
Do you hate long and silly posts?
Shingles doesn't care.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
I love watching those critters....they are bada$$...
A honey badger shows up for two reasons...to kick a$$ and chew bubble gum...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Damn Rocky !!!!! I love it !!!!
Honey Badger kicks Shingles a$$ ! Honey Badger doesn't care
Didn't know all that...A friend of mine who is an avid hunter, would tell this old city boy stories about honey badgers and fisher ferrets and just blow my mind...I'm gonna stay a city boy in the safety and security of my favorite You Tube watching chair
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Absolutely!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Decision and Game Theory versus Determinism
Since there wasn’t anything of interest going on, thought I’d post something related to this topic determinism and the illusion of free will.
I read an article in Amazon.com: Concise Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: 9780415223645: Routledge Staff: Books , the following excerpts are from page 195ff, Decision and Game Theory:
Decision theory studies individual decision-making in situations in which an individual’s choice neither affects nor is affected by other individuals’ choices;
while game theory studies decision-making in situations where individuals do affect each other.
Decision theory asks questions like: what does it mean to choose rationally? How should we make choices when the consequences of our actions are uncertain? Buying insurance and deciding which job to take are examples of the kind of decisions studied by this discipline.
Game theory instead applies to all decisions that have a strategic component. The choices of an oligopolist, voting strategies, military tactical problems, deterrence, but also common phenomena such as threatening, promising, conflict and cooperation are its subject matter.
In a strategic situation, the goal is not just to choose rationally, but to choose in such a way that a mutual solution is achieved, so that choices ‘coordinate’ in the right way. The formal methods developed by game theory do not require that the subject making a choice be an intentional agent: coordinated interaction between animals or computers can be successfully modeled as well.
End of excerpts
~ ~ ~ ~
This correlates to a quote from page 240 of the book Amazon.com: Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind: 9780062316097: Harari, Yuval Noah: Books that I mentioned in an earlier post > here
…determinism is appealing because it implies that our world and our beliefs are a natural and inevitable product of history…History cannot be explained deterministically, and it cannot be predicted because it is chaotic. So many forces are at work and their interactions are so complex that extremely small variations in the strength of the forces and the way they interact produce huge differences in outcomes.
From a Christian perspective I believe the universe is inhabited by intelligent free agents.
~ ~ ~ ~
In an article by J.I. Packer, free agency is described in more detail:
Free agency is a mark of human beings as such. All humans are free agents in the sense that they make their own decisions as to what they will do, choosing as they please in the light of their sense of right and wrong and the inclinations they feel. Thus, they are moral agents, answerable to God and each other for their voluntary choices.
So was Adam, both before and after he sinned; so are we now, and so are the glorified saints who are confirmed in grace in such a sense that they no longer have it in them to sin. Inability to sin will be one of the delights and glories of heaven, but it will not terminate anyone’s humanness; glorified saints will still make choices in accordance with their nature, and those choices will not be any the less the product of human free agency just because they will always be good and right.
Free will, however, has been defined by Christian teachers from the second century on as the ability to choose all the moral options that a situation offers, and Augustine affirmed against Pelagius and most of the Greek Fathers that original sin has robbed us of free will in this sense. We have no natural ability to discern and choose God’s way because we have no natural inclination Godward; our hearts are in bondage to sin, and only the grace of regeneration can free us from that slavery. This, for substance, was what Paul taught in Romans 6:16-23; only the freed will (Paul says, the freed person) freely and heartily chooses righteousness. A permanent love of righteousness—that is, an inclination of heart to the way of living that pleases God—is one aspect of the freedom that Christ gives (John 8:34-36; Gal. 5:1, 13).
It is worth observing that will is an abstraction. My will is not a part of me which I choose to move or not to move, like my hand or my foot; it is precisely me choosing to act and then going into action. The truth about free agency, and about Christ freeing sin’s slave from sin’s dominion, can be expressed more clearly if the word will is dropped and each person says: I am the morally responsible free agency; I am the slave of sin whom Christ must liberate; I am the fallen being who only have it in me to choose against God till God renews my heart.
From : Inability: Free Will Vs. Free Agency | Monergism
That’s all for now, folks
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Boy aint that the truth...mikes trying to prove the collaterals havent been edited and whitewashed over the years....lmao
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Hey T bone Merry Xmas. Nice write up and linked articles.
It really interests me to examine free will and the will of man because of the promulgation in TSCM (the so-called ministry TWI) of the greatest secret in the world today being the WOG = WOG
What does man’s will vs Gods will mean in context?
My really simplistic mental modeling goes with me reaching a hand up and grabbing Christs hand to pull me outta whatever mess I got myself into.
I’m sure free will is much more complex than that. But I’ve had analysis paralysis before too so don’t wanna go too far down that path.
Cool discussion topic for sure.
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.