The most disturbing feature of The Way is not that the group respects
Wierwille, but that they place his work on par with Scripture and above the
Greek texts that are the Bible’s basis! --- John Juedes: Wierwille's Way with the Word
Although Wierwille takes up some topics that Bullinger does not, Receiving the Holy
Spirit Today is heavily based on the content, structure, and general conclusions of
The Giver and His Gifts. In addition, every section of Bullinger’s book has been
incorporated into Wierwille’s book in some form. --- John Juedes: Wierwille's Way with the Word
The most disturbing feature of The Way is not that the group respects
Wierwille, but that they place his work on par with Scripture and above the
Greek texts that are the Bible’s basis! --- John Juedes: Wierwille's Way with the Word
I'm thinking of Lom@x pounding his desk when confronted with vpw's plagiarism. "Vpw is the man GOD directed to put it all together"
Seriously? I used to respect him...guess that was misplaced.
He would threaten me by documenting conversations his people had with my wife. He seemed power drunk to me. I think they were anticipating another lawsuit.
He would threaten me by documenting conversations his people had with my wife. He seemed power drunk to me. I think they were anticipating another lawsuit.
Thats not the first time I have caught a wiff of that stuff but I chalked it up to Fr@nqui's influence. I should have known better and was appearantly fooled by Don's "cool" persona he puts off.
Thats not the first time I have caught a wiff of that stuff but I chalked it up to Fr@nqui's influence. I should have known better and was appearantly fooled by Don's "cool" persona he puts off.
I was in his office because numerous others were in conflict. His solution was to dismiss all complaints and go on a rant about The Word.
I was in his office because numerous others were in conflict. His solution was to dismiss all complaints and go on a rant about The Word.
Typical. These guys stop their ears as soon as anything disagrees with them and start lecturing with the very thing called in question: wierwilles word
Typical. These guys stop their ears as soon as anything disagrees with them and start lecturing with the very thing called in question: wierwilles word
Eventually Linder had to get involved, who has a reputation for "going to bat for his people" and getting things done. He had to bow out too.
Any conflict between a male leadership and female is squashed immediately.
I tried to read the J.Jeudes article but it seemed too familiar and too boring. Anything new in it, that hasn't appeared here dozens of times? He tries to portray himself as an insider, but it is obvious he was not receiving anything but gotcha points when he took the PFAL class. I don't know if he even finished it, but his criticisms had too much of an "outsider" flavor to them. I can pay much better attention to someone who was WITH THE PROGRAM for a little while. He seems like a puffed up know-nothing to me.
*/*/*/*
What interests me here was the conversation above on leaders and/or former leaders in TWI. I could prefer to discuss some of the fine points of that conversation later, though, because it was the people you all mentioned that interested me.
I would like to know the full names of the TWI-3 officials you mentioned above, if that is legal here.
If they are now in the new TWI-4 I'd like to eventually meet them. Before that, though, I'd want to check out their current positions and see if they changed anything. I am probably close to some of their positions, but I think I am more flexible than them in considering some things.
I completely lost track of who was who in TWI-2 shortly after 1988, and TWI-3 had a lot of officials completely new to me. The only high ranking names in TWI-4 I remember from the the olden days are Joe and Linda Coulter, having worked with Linda in the Bookstore, but only very rarely spoke with Joe.
Eventually Linder had to get involved, who has a reputation for "going to bat for his people" and getting things done. He had to bow out too.
Any conflict between a male leadership and female is squashed immediately.
Linder was good for standing up for folks...personally, I got a long with him and he was very helpful to me even as I was leaving twi. I'm sure he played double agent between me and Rosalie but I expected that and used it to my advantage.
I understand he was complicit with Craig, wierwille, etc.
Wierwille emphatically condemns “private interpretation” and demands that the
Word interpret itself.9 Yet the question remains whether he is manipu-
lating biblical evidence to bend the way that the Word “interprets itself”
to the advantage of his preconceived theology. --- --- John Juedes: Wierwille's Way with the Word
I probably didn't state my point very well. What I mean is that, when commenting on J.J's writings, the focus should be on what he wrote and not who wrote it. If's it's accurate, it shouldn't matter who said it or whether he is an insider or an outsider..
I probably didn't state my point very well. What I mean is that, when commenting on J.J's writings, the focus should be on what he wrote and not who wrote it. If's it's accurate, it shouldn't matter who said it or whether he is an insider or an outsider..
My apologies, I misunderstood. Thanks and oh yeah! I think the points you elaborate can go far in eliminating various and sundry logic fallacies employed by some critics who are incapable of actually reading the material and addressing it in turn.
Linder was good for standing up for folks...personally, I got a long with him and he was very helpful to me even as I was leaving twi. I'm sure he played double agent between me and Rosalie but I expected that and used it to my advantage.
I understand he was complicit with Craig, wierwille, etc.
Linder and I had a number of exchanges regarding numerous incidents.
Some things he said still bug me. When a corps guy gropped my wife, Linder said I gave her too much independence.
Sorry for the derail, Lomax had that cold stare and robotic enthusiasm about da Verd and vpw "putting it all together". Plagiarism was Gawd's will.
Wierwille emphatically condemns “private interpretation” and demands that the
Word interpret itself.9 Yet the question remains whether he is manipu-
lating biblical evidence to bend the way that the Word “interprets itself”
to the advantage of his preconceived theology. --- --- John Juedes: Wierwille's Way with the Word
This is exactly the complaint I heard about the research department from 2 members of that department before they were kicked out. This was circa 1977. I can retrieve the exact dates.
This is exactly the complaint I slowly developed myself in the following years about the research department, and it was from listening closely to weekly, public SNT tapes in the last years of VPW's life, 1978-85.
What I heard in those tapes made me think in those years (78-85) made me think that the Research Department cheated at times or that VPW cheated himself.
What blows my mind now looking back on those tapes, maybe 3 of them, was that VPW was trying to tell usthat he was “manipulating biblical evidence to bend the way that the Word “interprets itself” to the advantage of his preconceived theology.”
Now, those were J.Jeudes words and nomenclature selections that show his bias. I would word it differently now, but not back in the period 78-85 I was hearing these RINGER statements by VPW on the weekly tapes. Back then I would have agreed with Jeudes assessment.
Here is what VPW would say, paraphrasing totally.I’d love to retrieve these exact quotes someday, in the SNT transcripts that are slowly accumulating on YouTube lately.
Paraphrasing VPW on a SNT tape: “We sent Walter to Germany to find some manuscripts I just know had to exist.”
Hmmmm!That sounds like cheating to me.
That was obvious to me, back in 78-85, to be cheating on the evidence.
That sounds like “bias confirmation”?…is that the term?I’m still getting that memorized.
Why have not the sleuths of everything suspicious here at GSC missed this?I’ve been watching for 20 years here to see if anyone caught this. Maybe someone did, and I missed the posts.That would delight me if someone posted on this.I want the exact quote. Maybe Charlene gets into this in her book.I’ve been betting it is likely, and that was my main attraction to resume reading her book.
Back to the bending story.
Another SNT tape had this kind of quote, severely paraphrased again, because I have no idea which SNS tape it came from.
Paraphrasing VPW on a SNT tape: “Someday we’re going to find a manuscript that verifies this.”
That is obviously cheating, bending again! This isn’t how scientific research works. This is cherry picking among the manuscripts. This is worse than cherry picking among the manuscripts.It is cherry picking outside the manuscripts that have been found, and is really cherry picking among the imaginary manuscripts.Quite a departure from the scientific way of doing research, but the mathematicians were pretty lucky to do it once almost 200 years ago with the discovery of imaginary numbers.
How come not GreaseSpotters spotted that piece of SNT evidence ???
But the real corker I have almost perfectly memorized.
Nearly quoting VPW on a SNT tape: “We probably won’t find a manuscript in my lifetime that verifies this, but my spiritual awareness tells me what the original has to say.”
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*
So my paradigm of Biblical research at the TWI was severely shaken by these accumulating pieces of evidence.I couldn’t figure out why he was admitting it !!! I couldn’t figure out why no one else noticed it and objected !!!It was an complete anomaly that took me about 13 years to figure out.When I did finally see why he said it on tape and why the Research Department had that strange kind of mission, I came here and tried to explain it several times.
The explanation is tied up in the topic “Our Only Rule for Faith and Practice.”And I can probably retrieve much of this in my archives.I tried every which way to explain this thing about the Research Department cheating and the SNT tapes of VPW admitting it, and how VPW's only rule for faith and practice figured into it.
But circa 2008 nobody at GreaseSpot got it, except two: Abigail and Oakspear.
There were about 70 people debating with me in those days. I forget who did that count. Abigail and Oakspear were part of that 70.
Abigail and Oakspear did NOT agree with my explanation, but they did understand it.
Anyway, we’d have to get a whole new thread going on “Only Rule” to get into my explanation.
Frankly, I do not have the time for that right now.Nor do I have the time right now to read the rest of the J.Jeudes article above, but I will save it, now that you tell me he gets into specific doctrinal issues later on.That will take time.Maybe until then you can give me a nutshell of the best one here.
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/
I am right now swamped with 5 threads with un-responded-to posts from this past week, plus reading Charlene’s book, and organizing my paper and digital notes on PFAL-T.
I promised my friends in TWI-4 that I’d get them a detailed written review and a set of suggestions.I just got started organizing that topic of the new PFAL-T class, and after I communicate it all to them, I’ll re-write it for folks here.
I just posted here in this thread to ask about the old and new TWI officials, partially named above.I got to back out for a pile up of chores at home, and it’s New Years Eve. I imagine everyone's schedule is similarly distracted.
Your quote of Jeudes in the thread caught my attention.
I wonder how he missed those 3 SNT tapes from 78-85. Had he heard the SNT tapes he could have worded his quote much more confidently than:
“Yetthe question remains whetherhe is manipulating biblical evidence to bend…”
*/*/*/*/*/*/*//*
Does anyone remember those paraphrased quotes from SNT tapes I pasted above?
VPW may have made statements like that on more than 3 tapes. My memory of this is a bit fuzzy.It may also be the case that some of the paraphrases above were actually from other tapes, like Rock of Ages, and not the set of SNT tapes.
But VPW made no secret that he was cherry picking manuscripts in a most curious way. There were other times and places where he tried to tell us things, but they sailed right over our heads.I include myself in this. Most of it all sailed over my head what it happened in 78-85, and it wasn’t until after 1998 that I started systematically backtracking on the tapes and collaterals.
I probably didn't state my point very well. What I mean is that, when commenting on J.J's writings, the focus should be on what he wrote and not who wrote it. If's it's accurate, it shouldn't matter who said it or whether he is an insider or an outsider..
Recommended Posts
OldSkool
The most disturbing feature of The Way is not that the group respects
Wierwille, but that they place his work on par with Scripture and above the
Greek texts that are the Bible’s basis! --- John Juedes: Wierwille's Way with the Word
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Although Wierwille takes up some topics that Bullinger does not, Receiving the Holy
Spirit Today is heavily based on the content, structure, and general conclusions of
The Giver and His Gifts. In addition, every section of Bullinger’s book has been
incorporated into Wierwille’s book in some form. --- John Juedes: Wierwille's Way with the Word
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I'm thinking of Lom@x pounding his desk when confronted with vpw's plagiarism. "Vpw is the man GOD directed to put it all together"
Edited by BolshevikLink to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Seriously? I used to respect him...guess that was misplaced.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
He would threaten me by documenting conversations his people had with my wife. He seemed power drunk to me. I think they were anticipating another lawsuit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Thats not the first time I have caught a wiff of that stuff but I chalked it up to Fr@nqui's influence. I should have known better and was appearantly fooled by Don's "cool" persona he puts off.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I was in his office because numerous others were in conflict. His solution was to dismiss all complaints and go on a rant about The Word.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Typical. These guys stop their ears as soon as anything disagrees with them and start lecturing with the very thing called in question: wierwilles word
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Eventually Linder had to get involved, who has a reputation for "going to bat for his people" and getting things done. He had to bow out too.
Any conflict between a male leadership and female is squashed immediately.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I tried to read the J.Jeudes article but it seemed too familiar and too boring. Anything new in it, that hasn't appeared here dozens of times? He tries to portray himself as an insider, but it is obvious he was not receiving anything but gotcha points when he took the PFAL class. I don't know if he even finished it, but his criticisms had too much of an "outsider" flavor to them. I can pay much better attention to someone who was WITH THE PROGRAM for a little while. He seems like a puffed up know-nothing to me.
*/*/*/*
What interests me here was the conversation above on leaders and/or former leaders in TWI. I could prefer to discuss some of the fine points of that conversation later, though, because it was the people you all mentioned that interested me.
I would like to know the full names of the TWI-3 officials you mentioned above, if that is legal here.
If they are now in the new TWI-4 I'd like to eventually meet them. Before that, though, I'd want to check out their current positions and see if they changed anything. I am probably close to some of their positions, but I think I am more flexible than them in considering some things.
I completely lost track of who was who in TWI-2 shortly after 1988, and TWI-3 had a lot of officials completely new to me. The only high ranking names in TWI-4 I remember from the the olden days are Joe and Linda Coulter, having worked with Linda in the Bookstore, but only very rarely spoke with Joe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Linder was good for standing up for folks...personally, I got a long with him and he was very helpful to me even as I was leaving twi. I'm sure he played double agent between me and Rosalie but I expected that and used it to my advantage.
I understand he was complicit with Craig, wierwille, etc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
J.J's criticisms should be based on content, not the man.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Those critiscism are most definately content based. In this article he gets into wierwille's research methogs using 4 topics
Edited by OldSkoolLink to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Wierwille emphatically condemns “private interpretation” and demands that the
Word interpret itself.9 Yet the question remains whether he is manipu-
lating biblical evidence to bend the way that the Word “interprets itself”
to the advantage of his preconceived theology. --- --- John Juedes: Wierwille's Way with the Word
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I probably didn't state my point very well. What I mean is that, when commenting on J.J's writings, the focus should be on what he wrote and not who wrote it. If's it's accurate, it shouldn't matter who said it or whether he is an insider or an outsider..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
My apologies, I misunderstood. Thanks and oh yeah! I think the points you elaborate can go far in eliminating various and sundry logic fallacies employed by some critics who are incapable of actually reading the material and addressing it in turn.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Linder and I had a number of exchanges regarding numerous incidents.
Some things he said still bug me. When a corps guy gropped my wife, Linder said I gave her too much independence.
Sorry for the derail, Lomax had that cold stare and robotic enthusiasm about da Verd and vpw "putting it all together". Plagiarism was Gawd's will.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
This is exactly the complaint I heard about the research department from 2 members of that department before they were kicked out. This was circa 1977. I can retrieve the exact dates.
This is exactly the complaint I slowly developed myself in the following years about the research department, and it was from listening closely to weekly, public SNT tapes in the last years of VPW's life, 1978-85.
What I heard in those tapes made me think in those years (78-85) made me think that the Research Department cheated at times or that VPW cheated himself.
What blows my mind now looking back on those tapes, maybe 3 of them, was that VPW was trying to tell us that he was “manipulating biblical evidence to bend the way that the Word “interprets itself” to the advantage of his preconceived theology.”
Now, those were J.Jeudes words and nomenclature selections that show his bias. I would word it differently now, but not back in the period 78-85 I was hearing these RINGER statements by VPW on the weekly tapes. Back then I would have agreed with Jeudes assessment.
Here is what VPW would say, paraphrasing totally. I’d love to retrieve these exact quotes someday, in the SNT transcripts that are slowly accumulating on YouTube lately.
Paraphrasing VPW on a SNT tape:
“We sent Walter to Germany to find some manuscripts I just know had to exist.”
Hmmmm! That sounds like cheating to me.
That was obvious to me, back in 78-85, to be cheating on the evidence.
That sounds like “bias confirmation”? …is that the term? I’m still getting that memorized.
Why have not the sleuths of everything suspicious here at GSC missed this? I’ve been watching for 20 years here to see if anyone caught this. Maybe someone did, and I missed the posts. That would delight me if someone posted on this. I want the exact quote. Maybe Charlene gets into this in her book. I’ve been betting it is likely, and that was my main attraction to resume reading her book.
Back to the bending story.
Another SNT tape had this kind of quote, severely paraphrased again, because I have no idea which SNS tape it came from.
Paraphrasing VPW on a SNT tape:
“Someday we’re going to find a manuscript that verifies this.”
That is obviously cheating, bending again! This isn’t how scientific research works. This is cherry picking among the manuscripts. This is worse than cherry picking among the manuscripts. It is cherry picking outside the manuscripts that have been found, and is really cherry picking among the imaginary manuscripts. Quite a departure from the scientific way of doing research, but the mathematicians were pretty lucky to do it once almost 200 years ago with the discovery of imaginary numbers.
How come not GreaseSpotters spotted that piece of SNT evidence ???
But the real corker I have almost perfectly memorized.
Nearly quoting VPW on a SNT tape:
“We probably won’t find a manuscript in my lifetime that verifies this, but my spiritual awareness tells me what the original has to say.”
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*
So my paradigm of Biblical research at the TWI was severely shaken by these accumulating pieces of evidence. I couldn’t figure out why he was admitting it !!! I couldn’t figure out why no one else noticed it and objected !!! It was an complete anomaly that took me about 13 years to figure out. When I did finally see why he said it on tape and why the Research Department had that strange kind of mission, I came here and tried to explain it several times.
The explanation is tied up in the topic “Our Only Rule for Faith and Practice.” And I can probably retrieve much of this in my archives. I tried every which way to explain this thing about the Research Department cheating and the SNT tapes of VPW admitting it, and how VPW's only rule for faith and practice figured into it.
But circa 2008 nobody at GreaseSpot got it, except two: Abigail and Oakspear.
There were about 70 people debating with me in those days. I forget who did that count. Abigail and Oakspear were part of that 70.
Abigail and Oakspear did NOT agree with my explanation, but they did understand it.
Anyway, we’d have to get a whole new thread going on “Only Rule” to get into my explanation.
Frankly, I do not have the time for that right now. Nor do I have the time right now to read the rest of the J.Jeudes article above, but I will save it, now that you tell me he gets into specific doctrinal issues later on. That will take time. Maybe until then you can give me a nutshell of the best one here.
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/
I am right now swamped with 5 threads with un-responded-to posts from this past week, plus reading Charlene’s book, and organizing my paper and digital notes on PFAL-T.
I promised my friends in TWI-4 that I’d get them a detailed written review and a set of suggestions. I just got started organizing that topic of the new PFAL-T class, and after I communicate it all to them, I’ll re-write it for folks here.
I just posted here in this thread to ask about the old and new TWI officials, partially named above. I got to back out for a pile up of chores at home, and it’s New Years Eve. I imagine everyone's schedule is similarly distracted.
Your quote of Jeudes in the thread caught my attention.
I wonder how he missed those 3 SNT tapes from 78-85. Had he heard the SNT tapes he could have worded his quote much more confidently than:
“Yet the question remains whether he is manipulating biblical evidence to bend…”
*/*/*/*/*/*/*//*
Does anyone remember those paraphrased quotes from SNT tapes I pasted above?
VPW may have made statements like that on more than 3 tapes. My memory of this is a bit fuzzy. It may also be the case that some of the paraphrases above were actually from other tapes, like Rock of Ages, and not the set of SNT tapes.
But VPW made no secret that he was cherry picking manuscripts in a most curious way. There were other times and places where he tried to tell us things, but they sailed right over our heads. I include myself in this. Most of it all sailed over my head what it happened in 78-85, and it wasn’t until after 1998 that I started systematically backtracking on the tapes and collaterals.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
I'm pretty sure linder was complicit in Martindale's affairs and was heading to court with the others.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Excellent. Thanks for this! Haven't read all of it yet, but.... mmmmph!
I'd rather read Juedes than listen to him, but his videos are important, too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Where have I heard this argument before?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
This is gaslighting in the form of victim blaming. I know this well. It triggers me to read it.
I'm a pacifist, but this inspires fantasies of violent retribution.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
"If it's accurate" is the key phrase here that makes the difference.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
I agree. And it is.
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.