and "this crowd was here specifically to meet with vpw."
He then accepted that this was EXACTLY what those single still images
meant.
However, they are not "proof".
You forgot to mention that HCW was sitting next to an eye witness of the healing.
And yes, I am biased, but I admit it. You don’t.
I'll bow out to lessen any disruption. ... but first...
Raf,
You wrote (with my bold fonts): "It's a gag he heard or read somewhere, and whether he read it in an actual newspaper clipping, a homiletic joke book, or an old piece of literature, it falls square into the category of teaching devices. It doesn't need to be true: it only needs to illustrate a point."
It's a gag he heard or read somewhere, and whether he read it in an actual newspaper clipping, a homiletic joke book, or an old piece of literature, it falls square into the category of teaching devices.It doesn't need to be true: it only needs to illustrate a point.
As much as I respect you Raf I disagree--If he presented it as a joke it would have been one thing, but since he was the 'teacher of truth' and presented it as a true event it does need to be true...at least if any of his words will have any weight --
I realize it was a common trick in leadership teachings to make up some story, steal one or embellish one before launching into their 'biblical' point. It always irked me to no end, especially when I heard the exact same story from different people that was exactly the same and total fabrication...( The other day I was at the store when.......) .
If they need a teaching tool find something real. How does someone illustate truth by using something imaginary?
If it is a real point, there will be more than enough real illustrations around.
Its in the little things that you see where someones concern for truth really lies
and "this crowd was here specifically to meet with vpw."
He then accepted that this was EXACTLY what those single still images
meant.
However, they are not "proof".
You forgot to mention that HCW was sitting next to an eye witness of the healing.
[No,
HCW spoke to someone who said "this is a picture of the guy vpw healed."
That's VERY different from "I saw vpw heal this man."
We can drag this out all over again if you can't live without it.]
And yes, I am biased, but I admit it. You don’t.
[i have an opinion. I don't let that opinion attempt to rewrite the facts.
Everybody has an opinion.
If they attempt to rewrite the facts to suit their opinion,
that's a bias.
The existence of this thread-and its initial post-
is testimony to the fact that
A) I have an opinion
B) I prefer to know the facts]
I'll bow out to lessen any disruption. ... but first...
Raf,
You wrote (with my bold fonts): "It's a gag he heard or read somewhere, and whether he read it in an actual newspaper clipping, a homiletic joke book, or an old piece of literature, it falls square into the category of teaching devices. It doesn't need to be true: it only needs to illustrate a point."
I admire your objectivity here.
[i thought he had a great point as well.
Therefore, the points of discussion would still center around
"was this actually a newspaper clipping"
(if not, he lied in the class/Orange Book)
or another source
(if he had claimed he heard such a story going around,
I would only ask if there was such a group, or if it was
just a story. That he heard a story, I'd accept.)
A separate talking-point would be
"what point is it meant to illustrate", and
"was it meant to illustrate more than he claimed?"
As much as I respect you Raf I disagree--If he presented it as a joke it would have been one thing, but since he was the 'teacher of truth' and presented it as a true event it does need to be true...at least if any of his words will have any weight --
I realize it was a common trick in leadership teachings to make up some story, steal one or embellish one before launching into their 'biblical' point. It always irked me to no end, especially when I heard the exact same story from different people that was exactly the same and total fabrication...( The other day I was at the store when.......) .
If they need a teaching tool find something real. How does someone illustate truth by using something imaginary?
If it is a real point, there will be more than enough real illustrations around.
Its in the little things that you see where someones concern for truth really lies
Ok, I take it back-this is also worth discussing.
There's a style of teaching called "homiletics".
In homiletics, an illustration can be made up out of nowhere to make a point.
Whether that is ethical or "right" is a matter of opinion.
In the same school, Bible language researchers dug for the truth,
and Bible historians dug for the truth,
and homileticists learned to use made-up stories to make a point.
I guess it's worth a separate discussion:
'does training in Homiletics condition a preacher to lie and make up stuff
and hobble his ethics?'
Of course,
there is a big difference between using real examples, or making it clear
an example is "apocryphal", and giving them all the same treatment.
The only story I ever seriously tell where I use an apocryphal instance
is the one about "The Bridge",
and I always end that one by saying
"Ok-that never happened," and then making my point.
I usually didn't get too many made-up stories from leadership,
and those few I got sounded like obvious made-up stories.
(Like the house-builder who was preparing to retire.)
However, I DID face someone who told a story as if he had seen it
on TV, back in twi. He supposedly saw the tv show where one guy
from Wendy's refused to comment when asked if the beef in their
burgers was "stretched" by adding worms to the meat.
Imagine my surprise, years later, when I realized he was lying
Word Wolf. I swear to you on my mothers eyes, it happened just as I told you. And oh how we hoped to get that old gal to take the class. But she was having none of it. Does this prove that there really was this particular church? Well, I guess to me it does. I cannot refute what I saw and heard. But maybe the lady was an ectoplamatic devil spurt sent to help perpetuate the myth? Dunno. Know what I know though, and so does my Corps Sistah.
And by the way, I think that the Prototype, Adam, had a navel. :)
Mrs. Wierwille is not available for cross-examination. I would not consider her a credible witness, for various reasons. Did she actually witness it, or did VPW tell her, "that's the man I healed"? And if she is claiming to have witnessed it, is that claim credible?
I don't know if this event happened or not. If it happened, to God be the glory. If it didn't... I don't give a rat's mass. It would just be another in a long line of self-promoting Wierwillian inventions.
I thought my first should be positive and I finally found one I could agree with. :)
As for Adam's navel (or not), I don't know and I don't care. Seriously, what difference does it make? As for the navelites story, I guess VPW should have been confronted before he fell asleep if it meant that much - it's a little difficult for him to defend himself now against this and other accusations.
And WW. I didn't think you didn't believe me. But because it really is pretty incredible, I would expect anyone to say; "She really said that?!" or however you put it. But yeah, that's how it went down. Plus, she is the one who brought it up first, and that's why me and my Sistah dropped our jaws over the whole deal. We were pretty amazed about what she told us. We were like; "Wow! Dr. Wierwille told us about this, and here it is! Neat!"
Also, was she a little whacky? Well, in my opinion, anyone who would help start a new church over whether or not Adam had a navel has to be a little whacky. But, she did put her sentences together well enough I spose. We never gave it a thought that she may have been making it up or whatever. The fact that she had joined the other church of "Navel Believers", was, to be sure, very whacky. Okay, yeah, she was whacky. But since she brought it up and called it by the same name in the class, I guess we believed it. I guess I still do.
A person AND a picture like that qualifies as a courtroom proof, or at least acceptable evidence.
Tom is right; it's not evidence at all. A picture and a person would qualify as proof, but we have neither the picture nor the person. And the person, being dead, can't answer basic questions about what she said, what she meant when she said it, and whether her words were correctly interpreted by the hearer. Further, you can't ask the person whether she's telling what she personally witnessed or what her proven liar husband told her.
I'm not saying it shouldn't be believed. I am saying that no judge in his right mind would allow this evidence in a courtroom.
Umm... interesting first post. I wonder what you'll think after you've been around a while. :)
Thanks Raf,
Hmm... interesting response. I've "been around" for a long while, not here though and not TWI for a number of years. Though I wasn't officially excomunicated, I (along with my wife) were apparently "maked". Didn't change anything though. I did see and hear a lot about the hurt in the past 20 years or so.
It was good to hear that some have made it through and moved on with their lives. I can't put in to words how I feel about those that didn't make it or are still holding on to the past.
Got to go, but I'll be around; lurking if nothing else - though it will be difficult for me not to jump in. :)
Plus, she is the one who brought it up first, and that's why me and my Sistah dropped our jaws over the whole deal. We were pretty amazed about what she told us.
(snip)
Actually, that she brought it up first makes a considerable difference.
She didn't seize on something YOU said and run with it.
After all, what are the odds?
I mean, she still could have been messing with you, but it's less likely
As for Adam's navel (or not), I don't know and I don't care. Seriously, what difference does it make? As for the navelites story, I guess VPW should have been confronted before he fell asleep if it meant that much - it's a little difficult for him to defend himself now against this and other accusations.
I agree on you on this particular. It should have been brought up while
he was alive (like some other things were, but they were buried.)
Furthermore, it's not a BIG deal. We've discussed a lot of the BIG deals
over the past several years. I was just curious about this one, and did a
search, and opened a discussion.
As you can see, not every discussion here is about something
earth-shaking. :) Frankly, I think the discussion that spun off this one
is more interesting.
BTW, I recommend the "pinned" "sticky" thread
"Welcome to the Greasespot Cafe" for basic advice to new arrivals,
and the forum "Greasespot 101" as basic information for new arrivals.
Enjoy your stay,
and feel free to jump into the discussions where you want.
If I could ask anything, it would be to not be one of the posters who
arrives here to "set us all straight" and presume they're the ONLY ones
who really "get it." We're already over our quota on those. :)
A year or so before I got in TWI I found a book in my mom's house. Can't remember the name of the book but it was like that newspaper column "News of the Weird". Nothing in there about Navelites, but there was one story about a town called Zion, Illinois, which was basically run by a religious sect. These people supposedly believed that the earth was flat and the sun was 30 miles from the earth and that you could get arrested for swearing on Sunday and that as recently as 1948 the Illinois Highway Patrol would actually warn motorists about this town. I've never heard anything about this town outside of that book.
OK, that said, I think it's possible that VPW heard of the Navelites from a similar source and didn't care if it was true or not just because it made such a nice example of the point he was trying to make. But anything's possible.
As far as Adam and Eve having navels or not, it makes more sense to me that they DID.
Really? I have never ever thought about it before. Guess I slept through that part of class. But think about it, if God made Adam (he did), there would be no need for a belly button (this is silly to be thinking about) maybe cain and abel had the first belly buttons? I work in a Day Spa so tomorrow I will bring this up and it will be intresting to hear the results there.
and feel free to jump into the discussions where you want.
If I could ask anything, it would be to not be one of the posters who
arrives here to "set us all straight" and presume they're the ONLY ones
who really "get it." We're already over our quota on those. :)
Thanks, and I trust I do not come off as trying to "set you all straight." Even if there are some who would try to do the same to me, I realize this is your site. If I do post a view which is contrary to yours please do not take it is as an attempt to "win you over"; I just might see things a bit differently. :)
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
4
13
4
3
Popular Days
Mar 9
19
Mar 8
9
Mar 1
8
Mar 2
8
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 4 posts
WordWolf 13 posts
Tom Strange 4 posts
Clifhanger 3 posts
Popular Days
Mar 9 2006
19 posts
Mar 8 2006
9 posts
Mar 1 2006
8 posts
Mar 2 2006
8 posts
Mike
WordWolf,
You wrote:
Ok, since you insist on bringing that up again,
here's how THAT discussion went.
HCW says he saw pictures of vpw in India.
HCW says he saw crowds around a train.
HCW says he saw a guy.
HCW says he was told "this is the guy vpw healed"
and "this crowd was here specifically to meet with vpw."
He then accepted that this was EXACTLY what those single still images
meant.
However, they are not "proof".
You forgot to mention that HCW was sitting next to an eye witness of the healing.
And yes, I am biased, but I admit it. You don’t.
I'll bow out to lessen any disruption. ... but first...
Raf,
You wrote (with my bold fonts): "It's a gag he heard or read somewhere, and whether he read it in an actual newspaper clipping, a homiletic joke book, or an old piece of literature, it falls square into the category of teaching devices. It doesn't need to be true: it only needs to illustrate a point."
I admire your objectivity here.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
well... he (Raf) is a professional writer... (and a nice guy to have a beer with)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
As much as I respect you Raf I disagree--If he presented it as a joke it would have been one thing, but since he was the 'teacher of truth' and presented it as a true event it does need to be true...at least if any of his words will have any weight --
I realize it was a common trick in leadership teachings to make up some story, steal one or embellish one before launching into their 'biblical' point. It always irked me to no end, especially when I heard the exact same story from different people that was exactly the same and total fabrication...( The other day I was at the store when.......) .
If they need a teaching tool find something real. How does someone illustate truth by using something imaginary?
If it is a real point, there will be more than enough real illustrations around.
Its in the little things that you see where someones concern for truth really lies
Edited by mstar1Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Ok, I take it back-this is also worth discussing.
There's a style of teaching called "homiletics".
In homiletics, an illustration can be made up out of nowhere to make a point.
Whether that is ethical or "right" is a matter of opinion.
In the same school, Bible language researchers dug for the truth,
and Bible historians dug for the truth,
and homileticists learned to use made-up stories to make a point.
I guess it's worth a separate discussion:
'does training in Homiletics condition a preacher to lie and make up stuff
and hobble his ethics?'
Of course,
there is a big difference between using real examples, or making it clear
an example is "apocryphal", and giving them all the same treatment.
The only story I ever seriously tell where I use an apocryphal instance
is the one about "The Bridge",
and I always end that one by saying
"Ok-that never happened," and then making my point.
I usually didn't get too many made-up stories from leadership,
and those few I got sounded like obvious made-up stories.
(Like the house-builder who was preparing to retire.)
However, I DID face someone who told a story as if he had seen it
on TV, back in twi. He supposedly saw the tv show where one guy
from Wendy's refused to comment when asked if the beef in their
burgers was "stretched" by adding worms to the meat.
Imagine my surprise, years later, when I realized he was lying
thru his teeth.
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/food/wormburg.asp
(For the record, a pound of earthworms is much more expensive
than a pound of beef.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kevlar2000
Aesop's fables come to mind.
Rocky and Bullwinkle also come to mind, but let's not go there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I started a new thread on this.
Kindly take moose and squirrel over to new thread,
Fearless Leader.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
Word Wolf. I swear to you on my mothers eyes, it happened just as I told you. And oh how we hoped to get that old gal to take the class. But she was having none of it. Does this prove that there really was this particular church? Well, I guess to me it does. I cannot refute what I saw and heard. But maybe the lady was an ectoplamatic devil spurt sent to help perpetuate the myth? Dunno. Know what I know though, and so does my Corps Sistah.
And by the way, I think that the Prototype, Adam, had a navel. :)
Edited by Jonny LingoLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Jonny,
I didn't question that she said it.
My only questions centered around her truthfulness.
At the time, did she seem like she was making up stories for attention?
(Sadly, some older people will say anything, since they are neglected
so completely unless they can hold an audience.)
Did she seem in her right mind otherwise?
(Also sadly, some people, usually also older, will have problems
develop in their brains where they are unable to distinguish between
fantasy and reality.)
So, I was asking if she seemed of sound mind and to be honest in
all OTHER things,
or if there were one or two other reasons to doubt her testimony.
I mean, I believed you were there and she said that...
(Unless you had replied and said "No, just funning you...")
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
WW,
I don't want to disrupt this thread, nor spread myself thin, so THIS has to be my last post here.
Wasn't it Mrs. Wierwille who was sitting with HCW and explaining to him the pictures?
She was there in India with Dr and witnessed the healing, didn't she?
I don't remember perfectly, and I can't find the thread.
A person AND a picture like that qualifies as a courtroom proof, or at least acceptable evidence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Mrs. Wierwille is not available for cross-examination. I would not consider her a credible witness, for various reasons. Did she actually witness it, or did VPW tell her, "that's the man I healed"? And if she is claiming to have witnessed it, is that claim credible?
I don't know if this event happened or not. If it happened, to God be the glory. If it didn't... I don't give a rat's mass. It would just be another in a long line of self-promoting Wierwillian inventions.
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Actually I think that's still regarded as "heresay" by the courts and not admissable... but it doesn't matter in the bigger scheme of things...
Heck... it doesn't matter if he parted the freakin' Red Sea in the bigger scheme of things...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Clifhanger
Well said Mike.
Oh, by the way, this is my first post here.
I thought my first should be positive and I finally found one I could agree with. :)
As for Adam's navel (or not), I don't know and I don't care. Seriously, what difference does it make? As for the navelites story, I guess VPW should have been confronted before he fell asleep if it meant that much - it's a little difficult for him to defend himself now against this and other accusations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Welcome, Clifhanger.
Umm... interesting first post. I wonder what you'll think after you've been around a while. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
Hey Cliff! Welcome!
And WW. I didn't think you didn't believe me. But because it really is pretty incredible, I would expect anyone to say; "She really said that?!" or however you put it. But yeah, that's how it went down. Plus, she is the one who brought it up first, and that's why me and my Sistah dropped our jaws over the whole deal. We were pretty amazed about what she told us. We were like; "Wow! Dr. Wierwille told us about this, and here it is! Neat!"
Also, was she a little whacky? Well, in my opinion, anyone who would help start a new church over whether or not Adam had a navel has to be a little whacky. But, she did put her sentences together well enough I spose. We never gave it a thought that she may have been making it up or whatever. The fact that she had joined the other church of "Navel Believers", was, to be sure, very whacky. Okay, yeah, she was whacky. But since she brought it up and called it by the same name in the class, I guess we believed it. I guess I still do.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Tom is right; it's not evidence at all. A picture and a person would qualify as proof, but we have neither the picture nor the person. And the person, being dead, can't answer basic questions about what she said, what she meant when she said it, and whether her words were correctly interpreted by the hearer. Further, you can't ask the person whether she's telling what she personally witnessed or what her proven liar husband told her.
I'm not saying it shouldn't be believed. I am saying that no judge in his right mind would allow this evidence in a courtroom.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Clifhanger
Thanks Raf,
Hmm... interesting response. I've "been around" for a long while, not here though and not TWI for a number of years. Though I wasn't officially excomunicated, I (along with my wife) were apparently "maked". Didn't change anything though. I did see and hear a lot about the hurt in the past 20 years or so.
It was good to hear that some have made it through and moved on with their lives. I can't put in to words how I feel about those that didn't make it or are still holding on to the past.
Got to go, but I'll be around; lurking if nothing else - though it will be difficult for me not to jump in. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Actually, that she brought it up first makes a considerable difference.
She didn't seize on something YOU said and run with it.
After all, what are the odds?
I mean, she still could have been messing with you, but it's less likely
under this scenario.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I agree on you on this particular. It should have been brought up while
he was alive (like some other things were, but they were buried.)
Furthermore, it's not a BIG deal. We've discussed a lot of the BIG deals
over the past several years. I was just curious about this one, and did a
search, and opened a discussion.
As you can see, not every discussion here is about something
earth-shaking. :) Frankly, I think the discussion that spun off this one
is more interesting.
BTW, I recommend the "pinned" "sticky" thread
"Welcome to the Greasespot Cafe" for basic advice to new arrivals,
and the forum "Greasespot 101" as basic information for new arrivals.
Enjoy your stay,
and feel free to jump into the discussions where you want.
If I could ask anything, it would be to not be one of the posters who
arrives here to "set us all straight" and presume they're the ONLY ones
who really "get it." We're already over our quota on those. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolchef1248 @adelphia.net
Link to comment
Share on other sites
freelady
Really? I have never ever thought about it before. Guess I slept through that part of class. But think about it, if God made Adam (he did), there would be no need for a belly button (this is silly to be thinking about) maybe cain and abel had the first belly buttons? I work in a Day Spa so tomorrow I will bring this up and it will be intresting to hear the results there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Clifhanger
Thanks, and I trust I do not come off as trying to "set you all straight." Even if there are some who would try to do the same to me, I realize this is your site. If I do post a view which is contrary to yours please do not take it is as an attempt to "win you over"; I just might see things a bit differently. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Seeing things differently is always accepted on the GSC.
Keep in mind that some people will give it a shot to convince you that another
position might have more merit.
Then again, some people will just open fire because you disagree.
It's one of the prices we pay in having open discussion here.
The goal many of us target is to "disagree without being disagreeable."
Some of us succeed in this.
Me, I'm a Christian who rarely strikes sparks with the pagans, wiccans
and things that go bump in the night. We disagree rather civilly. (Mostly.)
We respect that the other has the right to their opinion, and don't waste
the energy or bile necessary to go hammer and tongs over the nature
of God or whatever.
Please also note that most of us see the difference between an opinion
held and politely expressed,
and a post that insists that everyone else is WRONG!
Plus, at some point, EVERYBODY disagrees.
And yet,
somehow,
life goes on.....
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.