Steve Lortz

Mike - You wrote, "...you say I didn't present the stakes, when I did present them. I said that the stakes are the same for NOT experimenting and staying with current traditional paradigms and later finding out that THIS was the wrong course to take."

No, Mike, the stakes are not the same. When a person invites an alien spirit to take up residence in his mind, that person has anteed his SANITY into the pot.

I know. I've been there. I tried it. I didn't like it.

You wrote, "...you are in the role of one of the types who bewitched the Galatians..."

Galatians 3:1a reads, "O foolish ["anoetos" = "unthinking"] Galatians, who hath bewitched you..."

The Galatians were bewitched because they didn't use their critical faculties to consider what they were being told. They weren't exercising their 5-senses through practice to discern both good and evil. Which of us is encouraging people to think, and which is advocating turning that function over to an alien spirit, Mike?

You wrote, "I notice that after 'your' people heed your warning, then you have little planned for their continued growth..."

How revealing that YOU refer to people in terms of ownership. I don't own any people here. I don't pretend to. What is the agenda YOU have prepared for those who ante up their sanity? ACFWAs (Advanced Christ Formed Within Ambassadors)? An ACFW Leadership Training Program?

No thanks... double no thanks... too much of an OLG to fall for all that crap again.

Love,

Steve

Danny - I sculpt original figures from which manufacturers make molds and sell reproductions. I've spent the last couple of years doing critters for the Glorantha universe. I picked up doing some of the Usagi Yojimbo figures this past year. I'm looking forward to seeing what's going to turn up next.

It IS fun, but I'm a self-employed free-lancer, and just like every other field, I had to pay my dues to get where I'm at. If your son's got some serious interest, I'd be happy to share some of my experiences with him.

Love,

Steve

Now for the "try it, you'll like it!" business.

The Word of God says we're supposed to try things,

*****

I John 4:1 "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world."

*****

What does it mean to "try the spirits"? Does it mean we go, "Oh, look, there's a Jungian archtype. Let's invite it in and see how it treats us."

"Wait, there's a shaman totem spirit over there. Let's see what it can do."

"How about that ancient soul from Atlantis? I'll bet she can channel some really hot spiritual understanding!"

Is that what it means to "try the spirits"? I don't think so. The word "try" is "dokimazo", which means to assay, to judge the quality of, to assess.

The standard we are to use in assessing spirits is the Word of God. In John's specific situation, the false spirits were having their false prophets say that Jesus hadn't really come in the flesh. This contradicted John 1:14a, "And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us..."

Today, false spirits are promoting a thousand and one different perversions of the Word, but their tactics are still the same, and we still have the same standard to recognize their godawful twists. Not convoluted rationalizations, but the simplicity that is in Christ.

Mike wrote, "...I'm well aware of the adversary's first tactic on Eve was to get her to question the integrity of God's Word... One difference is that Eve had a perfectly renewed mind and we don't. If Eve was to change her mind from what it was it would SURELY be bad.

"But for us to change our minds, sometimes its bad because we're right, and sometimes it's good because we were wrong to begin with and now closer to or on the truth.

"Because we don't start out perfect like Eve, we must experiment around and sometimes even to take risks to get to the truth or to more of the truth.

"From what I've presented PFAL mastery should look like a reasonable risk."

Soooo..... Eve's chances of being wrong in changing her mind were 100%, but my chances are only 50%/50%, because sometimes I'm right and sometimes I'm wrong already.

From what you've presented PFAL mastery should look like a reasonable risk, eh? You may have presented some odds (very dubiously odds at that), Mike, but what you didn't present were the stakes. Nobody can make a reasonable risk assessment without knowing the stakes.

I will give you the benefit of a doubt, and assume that you haven't yet crossed the will of your "advanced Christ formed within" spirit with your own will. If the time comes when you do, you'll find out the unspeakable profundity of the stakes you've anteed up. You've put your life in its hands. The risk you are asking people to take is NOT reasonable. I've taken those risks. I've been there. I HAVE tried it. I DIDN'T like it. If it weren't for the mercy and grace of God through Jesus Christ I'd be dead.

"From what I've presented about KJV verses being on every page, encouragement of context reading in PFAL and many other checks and balances like the exclusion of TWI and other ogre-nizations, this 'try it, you'll like it' invitation should look pretty safe."

But you've demonstrated that the voice of your "advanced Christ formed within" spirit trumps all KJV verses, all contexts, all checks and balances. There are NO checks and balances against your "advanced Christ formed within" spirit. There is NO safety in what you propose.

You wrote, "...PFAL mastery should look like a reasonable risk... this 'try it, you'll like it' invitation should look pretty safe."

You didn't write "should BE a reasonable risk" or "should BE pretty safe". You wrote "should LOOK like a reasonable risk" and "should LOOK pretty safe."

Why are you more concerned with appearance than with substance, Mike? Could it be that you are crafting the appearance to conceal the substance? It wouldn't surprise me in the least, because your sole reason for being in these forums is to recruit people to your program of "mastering PFAL", a program that entails people inviting alien spirits into their minds.

You wrote, "No, there's no OBVIOUS evil in what I purpose, yet you look away from the obvious evil all around you and go after an 'evil' that you must admit is in a very subtle and foundational area."

I DO have to admit that the evil you purpose is in a very subtle and foundational area. You've done all you can to remove its OBVIOUSness. All the more reason to shine the brightest possible light on your evil.

More when I get back from Origins.

Love,

Steve

Tomorrow I'm travelling to Columbus, OH, to attend Origins, a national gaming convention. There I intend to do a lot of schmoozing, round up some more work for the coming year, and generally have as much fun as my aging body will allow. The upshot is, I will be gone from this forum for about a week. By the time I get back, there will probably be so much stuff posted here it will take me several days of reading to catch back up. So I'll be gone for a while.

Before I go though, I want to address two points regarding things Mike has written.

First, this "You're possessed!" business.

This is from Mike's post of April 28, '03, 19:48, about 1/2 way down page 13 of this thread,

*****

"...this 'Christ' within (a la Gal. 4:19) is NOT the same as the familiar foundational topic 'Christ in you the hope of glory.' The Col. 1:25 type of 'Christ in' is pneuma hagion, holy spirit, the gift that does not affect the mind, because the 'Christ in' is in the spirit catagory, while the mind is in the soul catagory.

"Christ FORMED within the mind is something spiritual happening in the natural realm. This Christ is formed and grows in a renewed mind... This Christ formed within is the new man...

"This new man is advanced. He's God's REAL masterpiece. From the 5-senses perspective, receiving pneuma hagion where there was none before is a masterful stroke of grace on God's part. But the 5-senses view cannot contain the advance Christ Formed. From God's perspective, the REAL masterpiece is this Christ formed in the soul. It's the NEW spirit mentioned in the 'Are You Limiting God?' chapter of the Blue Book.

"The advanced Christ formed within fits well (while Christ in the hope does not) with this phrase from Part I of 'The Love Way' posted last week: 'Your spirit must have the privilege of meditating in the Word.' This indicates that it's not 'pneuma hagion' Dr is talking about, but the 'spirit of God' that's born into the soul catagory, a different, later process from that created spirit we were first taught. This spirit is capable of 'meditating' in the Word, a mental process, not in the spiritual catagory of holy spirit. This advanced Christ formed within is the NEW man and the NEW spirit. It's one notch away from the spiritual body.

"Notice also from Part I of 'The Love Way' above that the REAL man is described as 'your spirit'. Again this can't be pneuma hagion, but something even bigger. This spirit is fed by the Word, not SIT."

*****

Mike's "advanced Christ formed within" is a spirit. We know this because, "This spirit is fed by the Word, not SIT."

Mike's "advanced Christ formed within" is not pneuma hagion, the gift of holy spirit. We see this from: "...this 'Christ' within... is not the same as the familiar foundational topic 'Christ in you the hope of glory'"; "...This indicates that it's not 'pneuma hagion' Dr is talking about, but the 'spirit of God' that's born into the soul catagory, a different, later process from that created spirit we were first taught"; and "Again this can't be pneuma hagion, but something even bigger."

Mike's "advanced Christ formed within" spirit inhabits a person's mind: "Christ FORMED within the mind is something spiritual happening in the natural realm. This Christ is formed and grows in a renewed mind..."; "This spirit is capable of 'meditating' in the Word, a mental process..."

Mike's "advanced Christ formed within" spirit enters into a person's mind through some different, later process than the process of receiving holy spirit.

These are Mike's own words. I haven't read anything into them. According to Mike, there is a spirit other than the gift of holy spirit inhabiting his mind. As we've seen in other places, Mike relies on this spirit to reveal hidden meanings to him, meanings that often contradict the 5-senses meanings of both the Bible AND Wiewille's writings.

Does it walk like a duck? Does it quack like a duck? What conclusions are we to draw?

What does the bona fide, God-breathed Word have to say about these things?

*****

II Corinthians 11:3 "But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

4 "For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him."

*****

Paul was NOT highly in favor of receiving other spirits.

Paul was NOT interested in rationalizing lies by appealing to rules of grammar so fine that only the high-resolution spirit inhabiting Mike's mind can see them. Paul was concerned that the Corinthians MINDS might be CORRUPTED from the simplicity that is in Christ.

I'll post more later today.

Love,

Steve

Oh... just one more thing... That was one of the feeblest straw man/ad hominem attacks I've seen in a long time.

*****

WARNING: The OLG Extraordinaire of the United States has determined that experimentally believing the lie, that PFAL was God-breathed, is addictive, presents a clear hazard to mental health, and has been demonstrated to trigger severe cases of nous adokimos.

Do not believe that PFAL was God-breathed, even experimentally, if you are pregnant, operate heavy machinery, or value your ability to tell the difference between true and false.

Consult a bona fide theologian or grammarian before swallowing THIS pill.

*****

I had to repeat this warning since some of you have shown that you do not understand it.

For instance, Mike asks, "Do you mean 'official' theologian or grammarian? Like yourself for instance?"

No, Mike, "official" actually means "official" while "bona fide" actually means "bona fide": made, done, presented, etc. in good faith; without deception or fraud; synonyms - honest, sincere, lawful, legal, genuine; antonyms - spurious, deceitful, false.

It's interesting to note, Mike, how you had to change words before you could mount your "straw man/ad hominem" attack. Don't your realize, if you change even ONE word of the Lortz, you no longer have the word of the Lortz?

I guess not, since you are perfectly willing to change "not all" to "some" in the words of Wierwille, and whole TONS of words in the actual God-breathed Word.

I don't claim any "official" title on this thread except "OLG Extraordinaire of the United States by Popular Acclaim".

Love,

S. Lortz, OLG Extraordinaire of the United States by Popular Acclaim

Oh... just one more thing... I'm placing my "OLG Extraordinaire's Warning" in the public domain. Please feel free to copy and paste it in any thread you please, as many times as you think is appropriate.

All I ask is that you don't mess with the wording. After all... it is the true, reliable, untattered message of THE OLG Extraordinaire. We wouldn't want anything to slip past us, leak out, or any other stuff to be allowed in, would we?

If you are inspired to compose warnings of your own, please do so. I think this could be highly enjoyable, and spiritually profitable at the same time.

Love,

S. Lortz, OLG Extraordinaire by Popular Acclaim

lovematters - Bishop Sheen! Yes... I remember our family watching his show when I was a child, and we weren't even Catholic. I'm going to have to go watch a few of his shows presently in syndication, to check out for myself how closely Wierwille imitated Bishop Fulton Sheen.

Love,

Steve

WARNING: The OLG Extraordinaire of the United States has determined that experimentally believing the lie, that PFAL was God-breathed, is addictive, presents a clear hazard to mental health, and has been demonstrated to trigger severe cases of nous adokimos.

Do not believe that PFAL was God-breathed, even experimentally, if you are pregnant, operate heavy machinery or value your ability to tell the difference between true and false.

Consult a bona fide theologian or grammarian before swallowing THIS pill.

excathedra nailed it, "what a sad thread".

Last night I was considering how to discuss truth with Mike when he insists on using lies to defend lies, and the realization dawned on me that Mike cannot really tell the difference anymore between true and false.

Mike so desired to believe the lie five years ago that PFAL is God-breathed, he willingly suspended his ability to judge. He had to. Otherwise, the cognitive dissonance would have been overwhelming.

Since then, by his own admission, Mike has diligently exercised his senses through practice to ignore the differences between between true and false.

Mike has rendered his own mind "adokimos", devoid of judgment, without ability to test or prove.

It's like he wanted to download the lie that PFAL is God-breathed, but his anti-viral software wouldn't let him do it. So he disabled his anti-viral protection. Now the viruses are running the show, and Mike can't turn the anti-virus software back on.

The only way Mike could be delivered now is if he made a genuine appeal to God, and the true God miraculously cut through the crap. That's what the true God did with me.

excathedra was right... sad, sad, sad.

Love,

Steve

Oh... just one more thing... before they chase me out of here. Mike wrote, "Experimentally believing my message will open up more logic and detail than an adversarial examiner can spot. Try it, you'll like it."

What Mike means is that if you allow the same ideas to lodge (take up residence) in your hair as he has allowed to lodge in his, they can give YOU a mental swirly, too! It goes so well with the trailing streamer of logical toilet paper :-)

Love,

S. Lortz, OLG Extraordinaire by Popular Acclaim

Mike - Your recent (June 19, '03, 03:06) foray into the realm of "make it up as you go along" weasel-grammar was breath-taking, to say the least. As I read that piece of work, I was reminded of Richard Gere's tap number in the movie "Chicago". Spectacular to watch, but deceitful, and totally contrary to truth.

Fortunately, your post was brief enough that we can go through it word for word. Will the number of inconsistencies be huge? Probably not... it's such a brief post for you... but I'm certain the number will be sufficiently large.

You wrote, "Steve, I disagree that all laws of logic or grammar insist on your interpretation of PFAL page 83."

Unfortunately for your case, Mike, it doesn't make diddly-squat difference whether YOU agree or not. What matters is that the interpretation I presented agrees with the rules of grammar applied to exactly what Wierwille wrote. Before proceeding, let's review the written material and its 5-senses meaning.

On page 83 of PFAL, this is exactly what Wierwille wrote, "It does not say search Shakespeare or Kant or Plato or Aristotle or V.P. Wierwille's writings or the writings of a denomination. No, it says, 'Search the scriptures...' because all scripture is God-breathed. Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; not what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures - they are God-breathed."

The 5-senses meaning of this passage, according to all the laws of grammar, is as follows: Wierwille's words fall into the same catagory as the words of Shakespeare, Kant, Plato, Aristotle, Calvin, Luther, Wesley, Graham, Roberts and denominational writings; the words in this catagory are different from the words in the catagory called "Scripture" because ALL the words of Scripture are God-breathed, while NOT ALL the words of the other catagory will necessarily be God-breathed.

Let's start with the context and work inward. Chapter 6 of PFAL (pp 81-92), titled "That Man May Be Perfect", is about the function of God's Word. The chapter begins with a citation of II Timothy 3:16, and ends with a citation of II Timothy 3:16&17. The over-arching context of the paragraph on page 83 is "All scripture is given by inspiration of God [God-breathed], and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness."

The first part of the paragraph on page 83 reads, "The Bible was written so that you as a believer need not be blown about by every wind of doctrine or theory or ideology. This Word of God does not change. Men change, ideologies change, opinions change; but this Word of God lives and abides forever. It endures, it stands. Let's see this from John 5:39. "Search the scriptures..."

The first sentence of the paragraph contrasts the written Bible ("All scripture" according to the over-arching context, II Timothy 3:16) with "every wind of doctrine or theory or theology."

The second, third and forth sentences contrast "This Word of God" (the written Bible, "All scripture") with men, ideologies and opinions. Men, ideologies and opinions change, according to Wierwille, while "this Word of God" (the written Bible, "All scripture") does not.

So the context within the first part of the paragraph sets up a series of contrasts between the written Word of God ("All scripture") and the products of men; winds of doctrine, theories, theologies, men, ideologies, opinions.

With the fifth and sixth sentences, Wierwille introduces a new citation, "Let's see this from John 5:39. 'Search the scriptures...'".

So the "this" of the fifth sentence refers to the contrast between the written Word and the writings of men. Wierwille is introducing John 5:39 to point up that contrast.

As we have seen above, in the rest of the paragraph under consideration, Wierwille continues the series of contrasts: the writings of the Scriptures with the writings of Shakespeare, Kant, Plato, Aristotle, Wierwille and denominations; the writings of the Scriptures with the writings of Wierwille, Calvin, Luther, Wesley, Graham, and Roberts.

The "Not all" that begins the last sentence of the paragraph is a contrasting allusion to the "All" that begins II Timothy 3:16, "All scripture is God-breathed..." ALL scripture is God-breathed, but NOT ALL that men write is God-breathed.

In the whole paragraph, Wierwille places his own writings squarely in among the writings of the other men.

I have to pack it in for the night. I will continue parsing Mike's highly entertaining, though not highly meaningful, adventure in speculative grammar tomorrow morning.

Love,

Steve

In his post of June 19, '03, 02:37, Goey asked, "Mike, do you just make this stuff up as you go along?"

A short time later, Mike responded, "You know, Goey, if I did that it would be a sure fire way of guaranteeing a huge number of inconsistencies."

The picture this exchange brings to mind is one of Mike, coming out of the restroom, without realizing he is trailing a long streamer of toilet paper stuck to his shoe.

Goey sez, "Hey, Mike, do you ignore your shoes when you come out of the restroom?"

Mike sez, "You know, Goey, if I did that it would be a sure fire way of guaranteeing a long streamer of toilet paper stuck to my shoe."

Firesign Theater couldn't have done it better.

Mike's overblown sense of self-importance has blinded him to the truth that nearly every one of his posts generates huge numbers of inconsistencies.

Love,

S. Lortz, OLG Extraordinaire by Popular Acclaim

WordWolf - You posted, "Steve, in case you missed it, Mike's answer to how you can tell what kind of spirit you're hearing from is by studying God's Word. Since Mike's stance is that pfal is the most accurate version of 'God's Word' extant, his answer is you'll know by studying the pfal materials."

I can see that I didn't state my question as well as I should have. I've grown accustomed to so many evasions, godawful twists and/or blanked recognitions from Mike, that I don't get really useful feedback from most of his responses. When I see that an honest and perceptive poster such as yourself hasn't gotten my question, I know that I have failed to communicate. So I'm going to restate my question later in this post.

I'm really interested in seeing how you develop your thoughts on Mike's quote highlighted in point "C" of your own recent post.

Thanks, WordWolf.

Mike - We agree that the adversary operates by distorting the meanings of written material, whether that material is the Word of God or PFAL, and that the 5-senses meanings provide the basis for building protection against him.

Here is my question:

*****

On page 83 of PFAL this is exactly what Wierwille wrote, "It does not say search Shakespeare or Kant or Plato or Aristotle or V.P. Wierwille's writings, or the writings of a denomination. No, it says, 'Search the Scriptures...' because all Scripture is God-breathed. Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; nor what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures - they are God-breathed."

The 5-senses meaning of this passage, according to all the laws of grammar, is as follows: Wierwille's words fall into the same catagory as the words of Shakespeare, Kant, Plato, Aristotle, Calvin, Luther, Wesley, Graham, Roberts and denominational writings; the words in this catagory are different from the words in the catagory called "Scripture" because ALL the words of Scripture are God-breathed, while NOT ALL the words of the other catagory will necessarily be God-breathed.

Say I am working this passage from PFAL when two different spiritual voices begin whispering to me. Spiritual voice "A" whispers, "Wierwille meant exactly what Wierwille wrote."

Spiritual voice "B" whispers, "We just don't KNOW exactly what Wierwille wrote. The spiritual meaning of this passage is that SOME that Wierwille wrote will NECESSARILY be God-breathed."

According to your own stated criteria, Mike, is whispering spiritual voice "B" the voice of God, or of the adversary?

*****

WordWolf - I hope I've stated the question clearly enough now. "According to your own stated criteria, Mike, is whispering spiritual voice "B" the voice of God, or of the adversary?" This is the question that is not going to go away, no matter how much Mike pretends that he's already answered it.

Love,

Steve

Oh... just one more thing... here's a hint for the potentially clueless:

In his post of June 9, '03, 00:35, a little over 1/2 way down page 20, Mike wrote these things...

"To rob us of the power the adversary has employed VERY SUBTLE changes and corruptions in the texts and in our understand [sic]. One word twisted here in the text... all adding up to a text that can't help the reader..."

and

"We were taught that just ONE word added, subtracted or changed and the results be [sic] catastrophic. Change just ONE word and you no longer have God's Word."

Now consider the following sentence:

SOME that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; nor what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures - they are God-breathed.

Well, Mike has made it plain for every OLG who reads that his response to my question is an evasion rather than a blanked recognition.

Mike, YOU wrote this, "As we master and learn the 5-senses messages in those books, with repeated and thorough readings, we can turn our attention to hear God whisper to us the hidden messages HE, GOD, put in there that our 5-senses would never pick up. Also the 5-senses readings help us build protection against devilish doctrines that are all around out there. Our adversary can and will attempt to whisper wrong meanings to us as we work the Word."

YOU wrote it, Mike, YOU wrote it!

If you can't tell the difference between the whisperings of God and the whisperings of our adversary, then you don't have any business endorsing ANY particular interpretation of ANY meaning.

If you refuse to divulge the true source of your spiritual meanings, well... that speaks volumes in itself.

This question is not going to go away.

Love,

Steve

Oh... just one more thing... If you're having trouble with olfaction, you might consider what Paul had to say in II Corinthians 2:14-16, "Now thanks be unto God which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place. For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish: To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things."

If you really can't tell the difference between God's voice and our adversary's, Mike, I don't suppose we can expect you to tell the difference between the smell of death and the smell of life.

How about you, seaspray? According to Mike's written criteria, which source do you think is whispering spiritual voice "B"?

Love,

Steve

Mike - In your post of June 13, 2003, 12:25, about 2/3 of the way down page 22 of this thread, you wrote, "I don't look to spirits... for the spiritual understanding of PFAL, I ask THE Holy Spirit, my Daddy."

I have no doubt you are asking the Holy Spirit for understanding, Mike, but whose answers are you listening to?

In your post of April 24, 2003, 22:48, about 2/3 of the way down page 12 of this thread, you wrote, "Did you know that it's very possible to receive a revelation from the devil, and not be possessed? Jesus Christ heard a voice and saw a vision, but he recognized the contradictions with the written Word... It wasn't like the devil looked ugly, with red skin, a tail and horns. He probably was the most beautiful thing Jesus had ever seen in his life! But Jesus wasn't fooled or distracted because he spent so much time with the written Word."

In the same post, you also wrote, "Dr said we weren't responsible for thoughts that occur to us (devil revelations), but we ARE responsible for not letting them lodge (take up residence) in our hair."

And also, "As we master and learn the 5-senses messages in those books [PFAL, et al.], with repeated and thorough readings, we can turn our attention to hear God whisper to us the hidden messages HE, GOD, put in there that our 5-senses would never pick up. Also the 5-senses readings help us build protection against devilish doctrines that are all around out there. Our adversary can and will attempt to whisper wrong meanings to us as we work the Word."

On page 83 of PFAL, this is exactly what Wierwille wrote, "It does not say search Shakespeare or Kant or Plato or Aristotle or V.P. Wierwille's writings, or the writings of a denomination. No, it says 'Search the Scriptures...' because all Scripture is God-breathed. Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; nor what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures - they are God-breathed."

The 5-senses meaning of this passage, according to all the rules of grammar, is as follows: Wierwille's words fall into the same catagory as the words of Shakespeare, Kant, Plato, Aristotle, Calvin, Luther, Wesley, Graham, Roberts and denominational writings; the words in this catagory are different from the words in the catagory called "Scripture" because ALL the words of Scripture are necessarily God-breathed, while NOT ALL the words of the other catagory will necessarily be God-breathed.

Say I am working this passage from PFAL when two spiritual voices begin whispering different things to me.

Spiritual voice "A" whispers, "Wierwille meant exactly what Wierwille wrote."

Spiritual voice "B" whispers, "We just don't KNOW exactly what Wierwille wrote. The spiritual meaning of this passage is that SOME of what Wierwille writes will NECESSARILY be God-breathed."

According to your own stated criteria, Mike, is whispering spiritual voice "B" the Holy Spirit or the adversary?

This question is not going to go away.

Love,

Steve

Now, now, Ethelbert. My goal is not necessarily to get a straight answer out of Mike. Only time will tell if that is going to happen. I would be happy if Mike admits the truth, even if only to himself, that the line of thinking he has staked his life on for the past five years is false.

That's a humbling thing to do, in itself. I don't think we need to generate any artificial humiliation.

With love, and most Victorian regards,

Your humble and obedient servant,

S. Lortz, OLG Extraordinaire

Mike, Mike, Mike! It's always such a hoot to read the things you write!

You wrote, "I don't look to spirits (there's that sneaky 'You're possessed!' line of yours again) for the spiritual understanding of PFAL, I ask THE Holy Spirit, my Daddy."

Please give us the citations for any places where I wrote "You're possessed!" Use the search function if you like. You won't find any because I've never written that.

How about this, "Did you know that it's very possible to receive a revelation from the devil, and not be possessed? Jesus Christ heard a voice and saw a vision, but he recognized the contradictions with the written Word... It wasn't like the devil looked ugly, with red skin, a tail and horns. He probably was the most beautiful thing Jesus had ever seen in his life! But Jesus wasn't fooled or distracted because he had spent so much time with the written Word."

YOU wrote that, Mike! It's about 3/4 of the way down page 12.

You also wrote, "Dr said we weren't responsible for thoughts that occur to us (devil revelations), but we ARE responsible for not letting them lodge (take up residence) in our hair."

ANY message from ANY spirit purporting that PFAL is God-breathed is devilish revelation, Mike, and you are responsible for letting it lodge in your hair. When you so longingly implore OLGs to "come back to PFAL" and to "master PFAL", you are asking them to let the lie take up residence in their minds, also.

You may very well be asking THE Holy Spirit, your Daddy, for understanding, Mike, but whose answers are you listening to?

You wrote, "As we master and learn the 5-senses messages in those books [PFAL, et al.], with repeated and thorough readings, we can then turn our attention to hear God whisper to us the hidden messages HE, GOD, put in there that our 5-senses would never pick up. Also the 5-senses readings help us build protection against devilish doctrines that are all around out there. Our adversary can and will attempt to whisper wrong meanings to us as we work the Word."

So... you can have TWO spirits whispering different meanings to you as you work the Word, Mike, God's and the devil's. How can you tell which whispering voice is whose? "...the 5-senses readings help us build protection against devilish doctrines..."

Wierwille wrote, "It does not say search Shakespeare or Kant or Plato or Aristotle or V.P. Wierwille's writings, or the writings of a denomination. No, it says, 'Search the Scriptures...' because all Scripture is God-breathed. Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; nor what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures - they are God-breathed."

The 5-senses meaning of this passage, according to all the laws of grammar, is as follows: Wierwille's words fall into the same catagory as the words of Shakespeare, Kant, Plato, Aristotle, Calvin, Luther, Wesley, Graham, Roberts and denominational writings; the words in this catagory are different from the words in the catagory we call "Scripture" because ALL of the words in the Scripture catagory are necessarily God-breathed, while NOT ALL of the words in the other catagory are necessarily God-breathed.

So what happens, Mike, if I'm studying this passage of PFAL, and two voices whisper to me. One whispers, "Wierwille meant exactly what he wrote."

The other whispers, "We can't KNOW exactly what Wierwille wrote. The spiritual meaning of this passage is actually that some of what Wierwille wrote HAS TO BE God-breathed."

Remember, "...the 5-senses readings help us build protection against devilish doctrines..." Which whispering voice is whose, Mike? Which whispering voice is whose?

Love,

Steve

Danny - It's always good to hear from you. Do you read "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen"? If you are an OLG, we could start the League of Extraordinary OLGs. Being invisible should certainly qualify you!

Love,

Steve

EWB - Thank you for your assessment of my efforts. Personally, I thought the fact that I am the spirit of TWI-2, that I am what went wrong with the ministry, and that I am "many villians" who wreaked ruination over thousands of miles should make me pretty extraordinary. But I'll accept your judgment, instead.

Love,

Steve

All and Sundry - Mike wrote, "Steve... You are the TWI-2 spirit that we all know we don't want. You are what went wrong with the ministry. You are the many villians that ruined things on the field thousands of miles from root locations."

Well, everybody, have I, or have I not, earned the right to add "extraordinaire" to my "OLG" title?

Love,

Steve Lortz, OLG Extraordinaire

Oh... Just one more thing... I only live about 125 miles from HQ. That's one of the reasons I knew what was going on there during 1986-7. So you see, you can't hold ME responsible for ruining "things on the field thousands of miles from root locations".

[This message was edited by Steve Lortz on June 13, 2003 at 14:51.]

Mark - "OLG" is Mike's acromyn for "older leader grad", anyone who held an official or unofficial leadership position in the Way between the time of Wierwille's retirement and the time of his death. OLGs are the target market in Mike's promotional effort.

Mike - I have read EVERY ONE of your posts on this thread. I have been doing it all along. How do you think I come up with so many contradictions :-)

You wrote, Mike, "Solving this detection problem would sure be a boon, wouldn't it!"

Then you wrote, "You avoid the data and details of what I post, EVEN TO YOU, and just chug along with your cheap imitation of Peter Faulk's 'Columbo'."

I take that as a high compliment, Mike! I admire Peter Faulk as an actor and I like the "Columbo" character. The writing on that show is so good, it's one of the few that I can enjoy watching over and over.

Love,

Steve Lortz, OLG Extraordinaire

Oh... One more thing... How can we master the 5-senses meaning of PFAL if we don't KNOW exactly what Wierwille wrote?

Goey - I agree with your post of June 13, 2003, 00:57, one hundred percent.

Mike - You wrote, "...They [trinitarians] can read their KJVs, and I can show them a verse that contradicts their theology, but they'll read it with a godawful twist and/or a blanked recognition. They can read it but at the same time they CAN'T read it."

This from the man who writes to me, as I sit with a copy of the Blue Book open in my hand, "We just don't KNOW exactly what Wierwille wrote..." Talk about your godawful twists and/or blanked recognition!

I wrote, "It's difficult to be certain of something that was written 2000 years ago in a foreign language to a foreign culture. We have to rely SO heavily on translators and interpreters. We ought to be able to KNOW something that was written in our own language, and our own culture, less than a lifetime ago."

To which you replied, Mike, "AMEN! That's PFAL!"

If that's truly the case, then why do we need spirits to reveal meanings of words and grammar that contradict the meanings of the words and the grammar ACTUALLY WRITTEN in PFAL?

More later about trying the spirits.

Love,

Steve, OLG extraordinaire

Mike - You wrote, I'm still reading and pondering your posts, and when time permits I will respond..."

Thank you, Mike. You *do* have a powerful mind, and I'm heartened to know you are turning it toward consideration of some of the things we've set before you. Meanwhile, here's some related information to ponder.

You wrote, "We just don't KNOW exactly what Wierwille wrote because so much slipped past us, so much has leaked out, and so much other stuff has been allowed in."

When I first read that, I was taken aback. Here I sit, with a copy of the Blue Book beside the computer, and you're telling me we can't KNOW exactly what Wierwille wrote. All I have to do is open my copy of the Blue Book and I can SEE exactly what Wierwille wrote!

Then it struck me, you have been so schooled to revere the knowledge that comes to you through a spirit... ANY vagrant spirit... that you no longer trust your sense perceptions, or your ability to understand them.

God hasn't given us the spirit of fear, but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. Let's use our sound minds to think a few things through.

God designed the kosmos. God designed man. God designed man to experience the kosmos, and operate within it, by means of his senses. God designed man to have access to observable data, through his senses, and to organize that sensible data through his reason. Why did God do these things? What was His purpose?

An observable datum is a "fact". Facts are not contrary or inferior to "truth". In judicial and scientific investigations, which are merely formalized expressions of the reasoning process, people use sensible "facts" to ESTABLISH "truths".

God designed man with 5-senses and reason so that man could use sensible data... *facts*... to ESTABLISH the *truth* of God's good, and acceptable, and perfect will!

Wierwille wrote, "Both realms or worlds are here: the natural world is factual; the spiritual world is true." This is exactly what Wierwille wrote, as recorded near the bottom of page 23 in "The Bible Tells Me So". None of this sentence has slipped past us, none of this sentence has leaked out, no other stuff has been allowed into this sentence. Yet it is wrong.

We know from the sensible data of God's written Word that spirits can lie, deceive and seduce. Not everything that comes from the "spirit world" is true.

Which brings us back to the question I asked in my post of April 24, 2003, 11:17, about half-way down page 12 of this thread, "How can a person distinguish between information that is coming from the holy spirit and information that is coming from demonic sources? Or in other words, how can a person detect counterfeit manifestations of the spirit?"

You replied a few hours later, "This question plagued me for DECADES!... This question of yours is at the heart of why things went so wrong... Solving this detection problem would sure be a boon, wouldn't it!"

You went on to write, "Jesus Christ received revelation from the devil in the desert... Because he had mastered God's written Word he recognized that these revelations were from the wrong source and rejected them."

When Jesus Christ was in the desert, he was able to recognize and reject the source of his temptations because he used his human reason to compare the sensible facts of his situation with facts he had learned by reading God's sensible Word. Jesus used his 5-senses and his reason to ESTABLISH the truth, and thereby distinguish the false.

False spirits don't want us to be able to distinguish the true from the false, because then, we would recognize them for what they are, false spirits. So they do everything they can to undermine our confidence in our God-given 5-senses and our God-given ability to reason.

Mike, you didn't get into this five years ago to get tied up in irrational knots. You got into this so you could have something to be sure of. It's difficult to be certain of something that was written 2000 years ago in a foreign language to a foreign culture. We have to rely SO heavily on translators and interpreters. We ought to be able to KNOW something that was written in our own language, and our own culture, less than a lifetime ago!

How did it get to this place, Mike, where you can't even KNOW what's plainly written in front of your face, without alien spirits to translate and interpret for you?

Love from your fellow OLG,

Steve

[This message was edited by Steve Lortz on June 12, 2003 at 15:00.

[This message was edited by Steve Lortz on June 12, 2003 at 15:03.]