"the Way:Living in Wonderland"

[WordWolf]

It would help if I could compare the year Dr H "rid him of his hang-ups"

and the year vpw got in trouble with his denomination

for the affair with his....

*blink* *blink*

*lightbulb*

You don't suppose.... is it even possible....

that the secretary he got in trouble for improper relations with wasn't

his secretary IN the church,

but the one he retained for the "Chimes Hour Youth Caravan",

could it?

If so, she was hired in 1947.

So, it COULD have been her, since she had been an employee for several years by then,

and she's since said she didn't think much of vpw as a Christian...

=======

And yes,

Mr "I-Love-the-Spotlight"

makes the announcement that,

YEARS AGO,

3 different assassination attempts

on his life had been made,

but at the time he said NOTHING?

This would not be typical of him.

What IS typical of him is, years after something

when it's "untraceable",

to suddenly add all sorts of outrageous claims.

He was even CAUGHT doing this sort of thing with the Tulsa blizzard.

(And confronted-which is when he started saying angels lied to him.)

[WordWolf]

vpw was expounding on his trip to India. He said Bishop K.C. Pillai invited them to India in 1955.

"Bishop Pillai was a converted Hindu who opened up for us the Eastern customs behind many scriptures. He had taken the class and had been teaching Orientalisms to us here. He said that Hindus would believe and would want to hear the Word of God. We went as a family, Dotsie and I and the three oldest children. John Paul was two months old, so he stayed with his aunt, Dotsie's sister.

It had never happened before that a man of God and his whole family went on a missionary tour. And I went unaffiliated, not under the flag of any denomination."

[First one in history???? How about that.]

pg-216.

"The non-Christians, they were fabulously responsive. I met with governors-of-states and other top men in the Central Government of India, as well as leading professionals and businessmen. I was the first minister invited to speak before the Jain convention. They responded because we brought with us only a teaching and research ministry of blessing to the people, irrespective of religious allegiance, with no acquisition of property and with no threat to the freedom of the nationals.

The response of the denominations-my own included-was supremely non-loving, even vociferously opposed. The National Council of Churches in India informed me that I was not representing the Evangelical and Reformed Church, which I never claimed anyway. From then on I stopped all mission support except one dollar per year."

[WordWolf]

"We went as a family, Dotsie and I and the three oldest children.

John Paul was two months old, so he stayed with his aunt, Dotsie's sister.

It had never happened before that a man of God and his whole family went on a missionary tour. And I went unaffiliated, not under the flag of any denomination."

[First of all, this trip separated a newborn from his family for OVER A YEAR if I read correctly.

Is that even HUMANE?

Second of all, John Paul seems to not be IN that family, since he just said J.P. was left home,

and the "WHOLE FAMILY" went on this trip.

Third of all, is there some basis for a claim that this was a never-before-done-trip:

a minister goes on a "missionary tour" with his family.

I know lots of MISSIONS have ministers with their families, and compared to LIVING THERE,

a "TOUR" is a rather wussy thing to be bragging about.

Fourth of all,

he said he went "unaffiliated".

Who PAID for this trip?

vpw either was paid for this trip, or he wasn't.

If he wasn't, he spent money for over a year there and arranged for rent paid for his residence

back home, for over a YEAR. That's a sizeable chunk of money.

Just travelling there and back would be a considerable sum, and even the cheapest food and

lodging adds up over MONTHS.

If he WAS paid for the trip, then who paid it?

The obvious answer is that he was paid by his DENOMINATION.

If he went, and they PAID HIM for a more-than-a-year trip,

he HARDLY went "unaffiliated".]

pg-216.

"The non-Christians, they were fabulously responsive. I met with governors-of-states and other top men in the Central Government of India, as well as leading professionals and businessmen. I was the first minister invited to speak before the Jain convention. They responded because we brought with us only a teaching and research ministry of blessing to the people, irrespective of religious allegiance, with no acquisition of property and with no threat to the freedom of the nationals.

The response of the denominations-my own included-was supremely non-loving, even vociferously opposed. The National Council of Churches in India informed me that I was not representing the Evangelical and Reformed Church, which I never claimed anyway. From then on I stopped all mission support except one dollar per year."

[Do we have any documentation- other than vpw's word-

that he was well-received by non-Christians?

BTW,

if he travelled on the ERC's dime, and used their title to open doors for him

(he ALWAYS used EVERY title he had-don't tell me he DIDN'T cite his group THERE),

then they were completely within their rights to say he was not representing them.

Nowadays, many groups have rules specifying who IS and is NOT allowed to represent

themselves as a spokesperson as opposed to simply a member or whatnot.]

Edited October 10, 2005 by WordWolf

[templelady]

The response of the denominations-my own included-was supremely non-loving, even vociferously opposed. The National Council of Churches in India informed me that I was not representing the Evangelical and Reformed Church, which I never claimed anyway.

HUH?!?!?

the response of the denominations MY OWN INCLUDED

which I never claimed anyway

So he never claimed to be representing the Evangelical and Reformed Church but somehow the National Council of Churches in INDIA no less, feels it is important to point out to him that he isn't

I take it from this that VPW had grown to such preemminece at this juncture that even the people in India knew who he was and sought clarification for who he represented.??!?!?

Sounds more like, to me, that he got in under some questionable credentials and someone did some background checks. OOPS

[WordWolf]

This is what I wrote before on this...

"BTW,

if he travelled on the ERC's dime, and used their title to open doors for him

(he ALWAYS used EVERY title he had-don't tell me he DIDN'T cite his group THERE),

then they were completely within their rights to say he was not representing them.

Nowadays, many groups have rules specifying who IS and is NOT allowed to represent

themselves as a spokesperson as opposed to simply a member or whatnot."

I'm figuring he waved his credentials whenever he arrived anyplace.

To a degree, that's fairly normal.

He raised it to a vocation, but that's a separate issue.

When he just showed up places, people would naturally also asked what organization he was

with, under whose auspice he was travelling.

That's normal.

It's also normal for them to say he's not their SPOKESPERSON, nor is he conducting

an officially-authorized investigation or whatever.

So,

either this was a normal notice and he went out of his way to be offended by it,

or this was a normal notice and he was ignorant of Standard Operating Procedure,

or this was NOT a normal notice, which meant he was flashing his title inappropriately.

[Allan]

How about this Mormonlady.."and I Joseph Smith was directed by an angel called 'Moron-i' to a place to dig up some gold plates, and when I dug them up they had strange writing on them that I didn't understand, and the angel 'Moroni' translated them for me and this became the book of Mormon.

And bug**r me, I then had the plates taken off me, but I do remember also the revelation given to me that Jesus went to America and preached to the Indians because they are the remnant of the tribe of Israel"

Watch those 'glasshouses' MO !! At least VPW was a bit more credible than that, come on !!

[templelady]

Allan,

Please do not derail this thread--if you want to discuss LDS doctrine please go to the doctrinal thread

Thank YOU

Edited October 10, 2005 by templelady

[DooWap]

Allan,

You'll take Mo's advice and take your opinions to the Doctrinal forum. You have issues with the LDS?? Don't go derailing threads to make those issues known.

DooWap (moderator-on-duty)

[Allan]

Point taken DooDoo wrap

Sorry, I forgot only twis' DOCTRINE to be ridiculed on 'about the Way forum' !!

[WordWolf]

Whatever,

just so long as you post it in the appropriate forum.

(Preferably in the appropriate THREAD, too.)

[WordWolf]

"I could see that America was at a very low ebb spiritually. We had a lot of religion, but we sure lacked knowledge of the accuracy and integrity of God's Word, so that Christianity was just a name, a flag, a title."

"I wrote a long study of my research and observations called <BR> the Dilemma of Foreign Missions. That caused some furor from the top echelons. But all that has passed.

I just needed the freedom to work and teach to whoever was hungry.

I didn't need the pressure, the man-made rules."

"That's when I resigned in 1957 and we moved to that house on South Washington Street. I asked twelve people to stand with me for one year. But many of them were not in the church. I was still hung up on the denomination. I told others to stay with the church. I didn't want to disrupt anything, cause division or hardship. I didn't want to hurt anyone, so I told them to stay with the denomination."

My, THAT attitude certainly changed...if this account was true, of course. He made it a hobby to attack denominations whenever he could.

[WordWolf]

If most people had said the problem was "foreign missions",

I'd be more likely to believe them.

In this case, however,

I think there's strong evidence that he found the timing right

to split from any formal organization,

since he now had a marketable product and had already

begun to market it.

Before,

he needed the financial support of the denomination.

Now, he didnt,

so he cut his ties pretty quickly.

====

In other news,

he left for India 1955,

and made his split after returning, in 1957.

Looks to me like there's over a year of travelling there, as I thought...

[WordWolf]

pg-227.

"Back in 1961, I had a vision of doing the 'Power for Abundant Living' Class on 16mm sound-color film. So I began working my mind, everytime I taught that class, on producing the film. In about 1963, I tried once to raise the money, but it blew. People just didn't share my vision. So I took another route. Around that time we had a TV program in Lima called 'The Teacher'. We did black and white video tape. I loved working on camera. It's hard work, but I loved it. However, the films were of very poor quality. We couldn't really use them again. A couple of years later Dave Anderson came on the scene and asked to see those films. I was embarassed, but I let him use them. He found them fantastic attention-getters. They could really communicate. Film is a great media, involving two of your senses, and Dave saw that potential. He and Bob Wierwille saw the vision. They raised part of the money and really spread the vision of the film.

That was only the beginning though. The making of that film took the greatest amount of discipline and renewed mind for two months before we went into the studio and for the time we were shooting."

pg-228.

"The actual filming took twelve days. But there are no words in my vocabulary to describe it. We filmed in 28-minute segments, and everytime before I walked out on camera, I had almost completely memorized what I would do in that time-the charts, the scriptures, everything. We did as much as three and a half to four hours of filming in one day.

The first day, the lights burned both my eyes. They were too bright. I looked right into 8000 watts all the time. By 2am after the first day's shooting, I couldn't get them open. They were swollen shut. We talked to Dr Collier Powell and he told Dotsie that we'd better stop or I'd be blind for the rest of my life. The second day, I went back, and we put in a whole day. But the third day, I couldn't go, couldn't open my eyes. The next day, the camera man changed the lighting so it wasn't so bright, and I went back on.

We still did those 28-minute segments, but between sessions Dotsie would put ice cubes on my eyes, and Donna would read the next session to me. Then in ten to thirty minutes I'd be ready and I'd go on again. Every hour I was totally soaked from the heat which went as high as 95 degrees. The air conditioning system couldn't run during filming. It's like every other thing I do- Satan fights like crazy. But you make up your mind: God's the majority and that's it."

[def59]

Again we see the evidence that vpw either ignored the advice of an expert or embellished a story to pump himself up.

[WordWolf]

pg-229.

"When we finished for the day, I'd walk off that set, put on an old shirt, go in the camper and lie down with more ice cubes on my eyes. Then all night I'd have ice cubes too. At 8am I'd get up. At 8:30am Emma Schroer, the make-up lady, came in and by 10:30 we'd leave for Dayton. We took our own camper and cars and our own food. We had to have everything absolutely ready for those twelve days. The charts alone took over 200 man-hours. The last few days of filming some people stayed up all night, night after night, getting those charts ready to go for the next day."

Then he spent a paragraph detailing who had done what. Considering his usual proclivities, I'm surprised he did.

"I looked right into 8000 watts all the time."

Really? Was that the state of the art at that time? 8000 watts.. lessee. That's a BANK of EIGHTY one-hundred watt bulbs. I wonder how valid this claim is. I know the old film formats required a higher light level than modern equipment, but was this the norm?

Originally posted by WordWolf:

"No pun intended, but please ENLIGHTEN us-I'd like to hear more.

At least tell me the configuration of klieg lights.

Do they stack vertically in a narrow column?"

There were four (or maybe five -- it's been over forty years) lights in a linear array. They were usually horizontal, but I think the line could be rotated. Each light was as bright as a sun lamp -- maybe 500 W, so it's posible we had about 2000 W shining in our living room. I was joking, of course, about the ice cubes; but each of us really did squint for a while until our eyes adjusted.

George

So, a really bright set of klieg lights is 2000 W, eh?

Then, doubling that would have been totally unnecessary in order to film (4000 W.)

And multiplying by FOUR (8000 W) sounds like a wild exaggeration.

What was the deal with

"and I would be blinded for life if I went back the next day.

So I went back the next 2 days and didnt become blinded for life",

anyway? Anyone?

[GeorgeStGeorge]

WW,

You may comparing apples and oranges here (or at least oranges and tangerines).

I don't know how a professional lighting system would compare with the lights my dad used to film super-8 home movies.

Also, light intensity diminishes as the square of the distance from the source. So, lights four times as powerful would give the same illumination if they were twice as far away. VP's set was probably larger than my living room.

George

[Allan]

Geesh..now we're talking about how bright VPWs' lightbulbs were nearly 50 years ago ??

And people have the audacity to suggest I need help ??

[WordWolf]

Yes.

And if you're disinterested in the lightbulb illumination level,

there's plenty of other threads to interest you.

I'm disinterested in convincing you this thread is interesting and useful to lots of people.

If it's not so to you, find a thread that thrills you.

===============

George,

that's true, and it's good to bring the physics of this into the discussion.

The reason I don't think it is a factor, though, is not because I doubt your

calculations. I think they're correct.

The pics in the book don't show a huge studio. The entire area-including the camera plus wherever

the lights are SUPPOSED to be-is a small stage. vpw is at one side, the camera on the other.

There's not a lot of room to PUT lights in, which is why I wondered if they fit in a tight vertical column.

If there was a bulky, heavy bank of lights, they would "have to be stupider than stupid"

(as vpw said) to keep dragging it in and out of the room continuously.

The physics of the pictures make it possible but inlikely that the lights might be in a NARROW vertical

column.

More likely, they moved the lights in and out periodically, and positioned them CENTRALLY.

vpw claimed he looked "into" the lights. We know he looked into the camera. Therefore, the camera

(to his right in the pics) could not have been ACROSS from the lights (to his left in the pics.)

The camera was edged to the middle of the room, and moved forward and back as stage directions

required. Whenever a chart needed to go up, the cameraman moved forward to isolate vpw onscreen,

and allow room for the chart-flipper to pass BEHIND him and not cross the line of shot.

Therefore, the lights were across the middle of the room, to a greater or lesser degree.

Further, vpw said he looked "into" the lights, and that would have been impossible at wattages far in

excess of what YOU used.

We saw the videos, and the room didnt look brightly lit in them. They were lit, but not washed-out.

If THAT much light was used in THAT small a room, there would have been a wash-out effect.

So,

were there bright lights?

I think we all say "yes".

How bright were they?

Well, 2000 watts would have been bright enough, 4000 watts (double that) would be the high range for

what they might have used. This business of 8000 watts looks like he plain exaggerated.

(What else is new?)

Furthermore, 8000 watts probably WOULD have prevented him from filming the SECOND day,

let alone a third. Finally, someone LOWERED the lights and it was still bright.

They weren't lowered MUCH in terms of overall brightness-we didn't go from day to night across

a session or anything.

So,

I think he exaggerated, but the lights WERE bright.

[templelady]

The first day, the lights burned both my eyes. They were too bright. I looked right into 8000 watts all the time. By 2am after the first day's shooting, I couldn't get them open. They were swollen shut. We talked to Dr Collier Powell and he told Dotsie that we'd better stop or I'd be blind for the rest of my life. The second day, I went back, and we put in a whole day. But the third day, I couldn't go, couldn't open my eyes. The next day, the camera man changed the lighting so it wasn't so bright, and I went back on.

Now here is the thing:

Setting aside the fact that I seriously doubt VPW would have risked lifelong blindness to film 'piffle'

I have had a mild case of snow blindness.

Once your eyes become sensitized the first time, they react 10 times faster on subsequent exposures. They have a built in defense mechanism.

So if you stood staring into lights so bright that your eyes swoll shut on day one

On day two, when those same lights hit your eyes again, your eyes would immediately start to swell shut. You might have 30-45 minutes, if that long. You can sooth your eyes with ice but they will continue to react to those lights which your brain now understands to be dangerous.

It takes several weeks before your eyes stop watering and reacting even with a mild case of snow blindness so I can'and swelling t imagine how long it would take for them to return to normal after two complete days of 8,000 watt lighting

Edited October 12, 2005 by templelady

[Oakspear]

Geesh..now we're talking about how bright VPWs' lightbulbs were nearly 50 years ago ??

And people have the audacity to suggest I need help ??

The point is to demonstrate the unreliability of VP's statements to anyone who might be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. How many out there still believe things simply because Wierwille said it?

For example: Even if one claims to have "worked the Word" on one's own, if the definitions of Greek & Hebrew words are Wierwille's, then the conclusions are going to be skewed

It's not that anyone really cares about light bulbs, but the holes in his story casts doubt on his truthfullness, and therefore his trustworthiness

Edited October 12, 2005 by Oakspear

[Ham]

It's like every other thing I do- Satan fights like crazy. But you make up your mind: God's the majority and that's it."

Seems like EVERYTHING he did.. got some kind of "fight"..

but why attribute to Satan? Cripe.. just another dodge from reality..

Perhaps reality is too shocking.. remove Satan from the equation, and you just may find that you are your own worst enemy..

Personally, I found that kind of belief rather enticing.. God forbid that I should be wrong about anything..

I just needed the freedom to work and teach to whoever was hungry.

Other words, well, lets not have lemons, let's have some lemonaide. No sugar, of course..

"I cast aside the benefits of any kind of ministerial association, alienated my congregation and higher ups, but let's look at the positive side.. at least I can do what I want to now.."

"That's when I resigned in 1957 and we moved to that house on South Washington Street. I asked twelve people to stand with me for one year.

My translation:

"after leaving my calling with reckless abandon, I needed a dozen or so people to support me in my time of crisis. Hmmm, lessee.. twelve incomes, and ten percent or more for each at that.."

In about 1963, I tried once to raise the money, but it blew. People just didn't share my vision.

"Despite constant brow-beating, and appeals for 'love', 'my' people somehow still managed to see my efforts as being the half-baked scheme that it indeed was".

The first day, the lights burned both my eyes. They were too bright. I looked right into 8000 watts all the time. By 2am after the first day's shooting, I couldn't get them open. They were swollen shut. We talked to Dr Collier Powell and he told Dotsie that we'd better stop or I'd be blind for the rest of my life. The second day, I went back, and we put in a whole day. But the third day, I couldn't go, couldn't open my eyes. The next day, the camera man changed the lighting so it wasn't so bright, and I went back on.

Ah, the birth pangs of PFAL.. "I bore you son.. and don't you forget it.."

"I was in labor for TWELVE STINKING DAYS!!!!!"

Jeeze..

I told others to stay with the church. I didn't want to disrupt anything, cause division or hardship. I didn't want to hurt anyone

I dunno..

"I didn't want to make such a big scene and make myself a large enough embarrassment that I would never be able to recover myself"

The charts alone took over 200 man-hours

No pay at that.. except Rhoda maybe..

Even back then he was developing his army of slave labor..

Edited October 12, 2005 by Mr. Hammeroni

[WordWolf]

Oakspear:

"The point is to demonstrate the unreliability of VP's statements to anyone who might be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. How many out there still believe things simply because Wierwille said it?

For example: Even if one claims to have "worked the Word" on one's own, if the definitions of Greek & Hebrew words are Wierwille's, then the conclusions are going to be skewed

It's not that anyone really cares about light bulbs, but the holes in his story casts doubt on his truthfullness, and therefore his trustworthiness."

==========

=======

The Undisputed GSC Master of PFAL:

" 'Ah, the birth pangs of PFAL...'I bore you son, and don't you forget it.

I was in labor for TWELVE STINKING DAYS!!!!!"

Geeze."

==========

======

templelady:

"Now here is the thing:

Setting aside the fact that I seriously doubt VPW would have risked lifelong blindness to film 'piffle'

I have had a mild case of snow blindness.

Once your eyes become sensitized the first time, they react 10 times faster on subsequent exposures. They have a built in-defense mechanism.

So if you stood staring into lights so bright that your eyes swelled shut on day one...

On day two, when those same lights hit your eyes again, your eyes would immediately start to swell shut. You might have 30-45 minutes, if that long. You can soothe your eyes with ice but they will continue to react to those lights which your brain now understands to be dangerous.

It takes several weeks before your eyes stop watering and reacting even with a mild case of snow blindness so I can'and swelling t imagine how long it would take for them to return to normal after two complete days of 8,000 watt lighting."

===========

[WordWolf]

"That film plus research in the holy spirit field are

the greatest blessing to anybody who wants to know the Word of God

and the power in His Word. They just lay it out to you. The work's

been done-the research and putting it into a shape that communicates

it-we've just got to reach the people with it now.

That film really made possible the tremendous growth of the ministry.

With it we could start many classes separately.

I could go out, and the film could go out.

I didn't have to be there, and that's when the blossoming really began."

====================

"That film plus research in the holy spirit field are

the greatest blessing to anybody who wants to know the Word of God

and the power in His Word.

They just lay it out to you."

Well, I'd agree at least in part. They contain a lot of useful information.

Not necessarily "the greatest blessing" or greatest in the world like he

usually claimed of just about EVERYTHING he was connected to.

"The work's been done-the research and putting it into a shape

that communicates it-"

True-and for that I thank BG Leonard, who's main DELAY was the caution

which was the natural reaction to having his carefully-constructed class

ripped-off by a fellow-Christian who LIED to him.

If not for that, my opinion is that Leonard would have made his classes

available on tape decades ago.

"we've just got to reach the people with it now."

vpw had succeeded in finding something valuable, and now he was

going to use his talents to market and distribute it,

granting himself an increasing finance-base of 10% of the income

of increasing numbers of people.

Actually,

I'd say the growth of the ministry was due to 3 factors:

A) the class itself-which was Leonard's

B) the taping of the class-which was just filming Leonard's work

C) the Christians on the field-without which fewer people would have

taken that class. They were the "advertising" and Leonard

provided the substance. vpw himself was purely in Marketing there...

[WordWolf]

Sorry I didnt find this in time to include this on the same page,

but TheEvan posted this once.

(1/17/05, 12:04pm)

"...surely you are familiar with the photos of Wierwille's first two 'PFAL' classes?

Well, most everybody was, as they were published often enough. Did you ever

see the rest of them? Like the ones picturing the water baptisms? I did.

But I didn't see them in Da Way.

I saw them in some old newsletters displayed at BG Leonard's 90th

birthday party, which we hosted for him. I was just casually leafing through some old

ones and you can imagine the jolt I got when my eyes landed on a familiar picture.

It was the old "1st Piffle Class" photo I'd seen so many times.

As you know, Wierwille had recently taken Leonard's class.

He returned to O-hiya to teach Leonard's class with Leonard's blessing.

The accompanying article was about this Rev. Wierwille teaching CTC's

Gifts of the Spirit course to members of his congregation in O-hiya.

Turns out wierwille lied to the man, co-opted the man's work as his own.

FAMILIAR PATTERN!

All of which disqualifies him in any way from having been in public ministry

of any kind. Period. However you burnish it and photograph it with a warm

hazy glow, the conclusion is clear in the harsh light of day."

Edited October 13, 2005 by WordWolf

[WordWolf]

==============

"That film plus research in the holy spirit field are

the greatest blessing to anybody who wants to know the Word of God

and the power in His Word. They just lay it out to you. The work's

been done-the research and putting it into a shape that communicates

it-we've just got to reach the people with it now.

That film really made possible the tremendous growth of the ministry.

With it we could start many classes separately. I could go out, and

the film could go out. I didn't have to be there, and that's when

the blossoming really began."

The film was made fall of 1967.

===============