What The Hey

I may join you potato. . . heartbreaking. But, you know what gets me? In this little scenario. . . the only way to get healing is to learn about God. . . from the only source on earth since the 1st century. . . . PFAL. . . . taught by the unrepentant man who did the hurting. Got me?. . . Sounds really reasonable. . . No?

Rascal nailed it. . . the lengths some have gone to simply to justify this man and his theology. Who was he anyway? Just some old guy from Ohio. . . . he wasn't my father or my uncle or guardian of the truth. . . No. . . . he wasn't really anything to me. Why did I EVER think he was?

Oh for Ch**** sake! Get a clue man!!

All the real devils are out trying to prove [attempting to prove once again - but horribly failing] they are "holier-than-you-know-who".

apparently jesus, too. according to vpw, jesus was a man, so he must be a liar... but wait, does that mean that maybe jesus wasn't a liar, since vpw was a liar, so perhaps he was lying when he said all men are liars, or maybe he was lying when he said jesus was a man, so that would mean jesus possibly wasn't a liar?

Who said that Jesus was just [only] a man? It sure wasn't VPW. VPW just said he wasn't God and that he [Jesus] was God's only begotten son - but not God Himself. (If you are going to argue a point you should get the facts straight first.)

If we can't get back to the "original" Word as God gave it from studying the Bible using those keys, then why did he [VPW] spend all that time teaching those keys and how to use them?

Good question - seeing how this was put across like VPW spent all that time teaching us those keys as: "a great big waste of someone's time."

Because we can get back to the original Word as God gave it. There's just one (well, maybe two) little problems here though:

1. People think they already know everything about those keys and they also think they know how to fully use them.

I on the other hand however, believe differently.

Boy - you're fooling yourself if you think "everybody" cares about getting back to the "original" Word as God gave it by studying the bible.

Here is one "key" to understanding the bible that wasn't mentioned in PFAL - but it is still "key" when it comes down to someone understanding the bible - which is also the second part of the forementioned problem.

2. Whatever it is people really DO care about is whatever they spend the majority of their time on/in/or with.

Mastering those keys, and sadly, even the bible and other materials for biblical study (even PFAL) doesn't come close to making the top of their list.

During the Gospel Period, people had no spirit so the body-and-soul believers could only observe life from a senses point of view. Men in the gospels asked Jesus as recorded in John 6:30, “What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee?” Time and time again inquirers asked for tangible proof. Thomas insisted, “Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails...I will not believe.” In the gospels, people had to see in order to believe. But the Church epistles establish the order that a person first believes and then he sees. Thus you and I do not first see and then believe; we first believe God’s Word and then we see the truth of it bear fruit in our lives as we walk on it. GMWD pg141 & 142

God’s Strength in Us

Victor Paul Wierwille

Steve, I was just wondering if you could show us the error in the objective reality cited above?

Love,

Jim

Sorry, he can't - nor can anyone else for that matter since all men are liars and only God is true.

Haven't you been listening?

You've only shown records and accounts from within the gospels where you believe the Kingdom of God = Kingdom of Heaven, but fail to show this same type of comparison from anywhere or anyplace in the Old Testament where the Kingdom of God = The Kingdom of Heaven. If you are going to be an honest biblical reasearch and claim these two kingdoms are the same, then you should be able to do this with the Old Testament, The Gospels, The Epistles, and all through the entire bible.

The problem you will run into is this: You can't offer the same proof the Kingdom of God=the Kingdom of Heaven anywhere or anyplace in or from the Old Testament, because any (and all) Old Testament references to The Kingdom of Heaven would be (and are) all prophetic - that is, with "The Kindom of Heaven" being fulfilled sometime in the future - which of course, begins in the gospels. Like I stated earlier. The Kingdom of Heaven had a beginning, the Kingdom of God is eternal.

The only reason why one can show a comparison between these two Kingdoms from inside the gospels is because God didn't suspend "The Kingdom of God" (which is eternal without any beginning or end) in favor of "The Kingdom of Heaven" which began with the birth of Jesus Christ. Now Christ's Kingdom - The Kingdom of Heaven, is still part of "The Kingdom of God", but it is only "part of" that all entire expansive kingdom of God. A ham sandwich is still part of the pig, but a ham sandwich is not a pig or the same thing as a pig.

Mike,

If VPW's writings are the God-breathed Word, how do you explain the huge, glaring errors in them? Just one, which I mentioned before, is that he claimed that the Kingdom of God meant God's reign over all, but the Kingdom of Heaven refers to the reign of the King from Heaven. Anybody that can read can see that the phrases Kingdom of God and Kingdom of Heaven are synonymous and interchangeable. How do you explain such an obvious error in the "God-breathed" writings of Wierwille? Not to mention the many other errors in his writings.

Anybody who can read realizes these terms are NOT synonomous or interchangeable. The Kingdom of [or from] God is eternal. Being eternal it has no beginning or ending. It definately is not the same as the Kingdom of [or from] Heaven. The Kingdom of [or from] Heaven had a very definate beginning and it began with the birth of the King, Jesus Christ.

The belief these two terms are synonmous and interchangeable springs largely from trinitarian theology. If God=Jesus then out of necessity Kingdom of God would=Kingdom of Heaven. The glaring error is making these terms synonomous and interchangeable, being borne out of trinitarian thinking. (For something that supposedly has a "glaring error" to it, one would think that "glaring error" would make it impossible to spot any trinitarian theological bull*** as such.)

the snowstorm thread branches yet again... my question is:

is it necessary in life to have one sole source for your rule of faith and practice?

Mike seems to contend that everyone needs to have one, and only one. I disagree and would like to start a discussion on this topic.

and I do believe that this falls under "about the way" and not doctine, because it's something that vpw pushed hard, leading us to give up all outside points of reference by which to judge whether something is right or wrong.

No, it isn't necessary to have one sole source for your faith and practice. However it is necessary to have one sole source for truth. I realize how it would be easy to confuse these two, as there can be a lot of things in ones faith and practice that is true, but one's faith and practice does not always equal "the truth". Of course, believing the truth is going to end up setting you apart from the rest of the world. It all depends if you want to be a friend of Jesus Christ, or if you want to be a friend of the world. Either way, it's your decision. (See the gospel of John, chapter 17).

So Mike,

Have you heard what Wierwille did to those who disagreed with his only rule of faith and practice, Wierwille!?

Wait a minute, I mean .....

Wierwille according to Darby.....

Wierwille according to Bullinger.....

Wierwille according to Lamsa.....

Wierwille according to Leonard.....

Wierwille according to Pillai.....

Wierwille according to Roberts.....

etc. etc.

Was destroying lives biblical according to the God Breathed Word? Or was the God Breathed Word twisted to justify Wierwille destroying lives?

Wierwille destroying lives? Boy is that rich!

When he was alive half the people in TWI reached just for the chance just to touch his robe.

But now it feels incredibly icky -- yuck!"

(The rest of the time though, ''it felt very good, honest, and right.")

or this....I was talking about people that "say"they are bible believing.

I am sure alot of people in Jonestown were also "born again" but misdirected by Jim Jones. There are LOTS of errors in TWI and thats is where I was at(involved in..so I would like to try to protect others from the same mis direction.

That remark sure has got to be the height of arrogance, because you can't make someone believe God's Word if they don't want to believe it, so what makes you think you can protect someone from some "so-called mis-direction" if they dont want to believe that either?

Keep holding on to that view and you will end up being a "lone-ranger" [ahem] christian person out there all by yourself with your own personal vendetta to "save-the-world". Sounds like a totally wasted life. No thank you. :(

Yes, this bothers many. Not me, any more.

Paul was given the exclusive DIRECT revelation of the mystery, and then he put it into written form so OTHERS could have it.

I think it's the same way with PFAL. VPW was the only one to get it directly, but now we have it in print.

All through the ages God had to find ONE person to get His revelation into print, and it seems that one person never met the criteria of his contemporaries. God looks at different things than people do. His ways are not our ways. If it were up to me I'd not have chose VPW for the job, but what do I know?

Let's just assume for a moment what the outcome would have been if VPW decided to never teach the Word of God to others at all. Would God still have taught VPW "the Word like it wasn't known since the 1st century?" Personally I think the outcome would have been very different. For one thing, I'm pretty sure none of us would be here chatting or having any kind of discussion like this on this board.

.... And more people are starting to get the "Big Picture" without relying on one Teacher to put it together for them.

Why is it then that for most people the "big picture" turns out to be just another Picasso Dora Maar au Chat when it comes to Christianity? (See post above.)

NOTE TO MODERATORS

Thank you for quelling the straying from the topic.

I'm doing my best to stay on topic, and respond to people's posts addressed to me.

It's this sticky issue of how slippery an "only rule for faith and practice" is that drove VPW to almost throw in the towel 2 days before the 1942 snowstorm.

What God offered him by way of the snowstorm was a RULE that he'd never have to bend, ie, the revelation/teaching God would provide for him IF HE WOULD TEACH IT TO OTHERS.

It is for THIS reason I am posting ON TOPIC with this "only rule" stuff. I'm trying to show what was going on in VPW's mind as he sensed a need for an unbendable rule, something he'd "never have to back up on" as he prayed to God and heard the voiced and received the snow as confirmation.

THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE regarding "VPW and the Snowstorm" which is the title of this thread.

Thank you for quelling the straying from the topic.

Here's the rub I think most people are having with this, that is, that God provided the revelation/teaching exclusively and strictly to VPW and to nobody else. I for one, don't believe this to be the case. The deal God made with VPW was He would teach him IF he would teach others. It seems the deal breaker in this situation would be that God wouldn't teach him the Word if he wouldn't teach it to others.

What I am basically saying is the revelation/teaching that God provided for VPW was strictly upon a conditional bases - that is, if we are to go by that statement alone. If that is the case, then the revelation/teaching could only be made availble to VPW IF he would teach others and it wouldn't be available if he didn't.

So the real question that must be answered is, did VPW teach others the Word of God or didn't he? (VPW certainly wouldn't have accomplished the things he did during his lifetime if he re-negged on the deal he made with God if you ask me.)

You left out that I engaged in hyperbole, a perfectly valid figure of speech (look it up in your Funk & Wagnall's, or Bullinger, if you prefer) to describe what would constitute acceptable hard evidence.

Otherwise, yeah, you pretty much nailed it Oaks.

The defintition of Hyperbole = exaggeration, overstatement. Well, for one thing, I'm certainly convinced you've said more than a mouthful about a lot of things.

My oh my. All this discussion and you are only lead to this conclusion:

Some people believe: God forbid anything VPW ever said or taught from the bible = "Thus saith the Lord."

But if the Lord himself would have said or taught it instead ... to them it still wouldn't prove to be anything.

Now, if Mike has a copy of the video or audio class (one & the same) or an dependable transcript, I would tend to believe him, but would feel better if an additional witness could verify what he's saying. I've not found Mike to be a liar, but he does tend to quote what backs up his position while ignoring the rest.

He does, so you can believe him - or do you need more witnesses?

It isn't surprising those who have difficulty accepting the permanence of salvation are likewise oblivious to the different biblical administrations. Afterall, what can one say about salvation? It is the greatest thing God has ever done to give man everlasting life and for you as a Christian to say, "I am going to live forever!" What an amazing thing, what a great truth! What a blessing it is to know that - and for you to know that from God's Word. Surely none of us deserve everlasting life, and yet that is the gift God says He has given to us and that He has promised to us in His Word.

The first thing one has to have is an administrational point of view to make the scriptures "fit together" and to make the scriptures work properly. It is unfortunate that to so many the bible is just a confusing book, it's full of contradictions and perplexities. God didn't write the bible with the attitude of - Hah - they'll never figure that one out! It says in Timothy that God wants us to come to a knowledge of the truth. Actually it says He wants us to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. (1 Tim. 2:4)

Now if one is going to do that, then it is important that one studies the scriptures, and in order for the scriptures to make sense then we have to get some postulates correct first. You have to get some axioms correct - some fundamental beliefs about the bible we need to have correct in order for the bible to make any sense. One of the things you have to get correct is that the way God (and God is God and He can do things the way He wants to) but the way that God relates to man has been through a series of administrations.

Now this is very important to understand what an administration actually is. An administration (or a dispensation if you want to call it that) is not just a time period in the bible. What an administration is, is an administring of God's rules or regulations or His justice, and because when God starts administrating and stops adminstrating - as there is a point where He starts and a point where He stops, then an adminstration occurs within a period of time. Although technically speaking an administration is NOT a set period of time, an administration is a way of God's serving, a way of God's ruling if you will, an administration is a way of God's doing this. But because it occurs within a period of time, then for us to look at it and examine it closely it is much easier for us to look at it as a starting point and a stopping point, so we have multiple different periods of time in the bible.

This becomes very, very important when we are talking about the subject of salvation and that we understand administrations in this way. When we talk about salvation within these administrations, then we see there are differences. Now in any one of these biblical administrations - anyone could be saved. But in the old Testament and the gospels, a person was only saved by being faithful to God throughout their life. However in the grace administration (which was a secret and hidden from the other administrations) God did something entirely brand new. In the grace administration, God made salvation a one time, permanent experience. He also let us know that because in the grace administration God calls our salvation "birth", and God doesn't call salvation "birth" in the old Testament or in any other administration.

Right now as we stand here as Christians our salvation is permanent. It is based on a one time experience of "birth" from God (one can't get reborn twice from God or any more times from God) and it is born into us just like our natural birth - only this time it is of incorruptible seed rather than corruptible. In fact (which is the truth) it is more permanent than your natural birth because your natural birth is corruptible seed and at some point in time that seed is going to die!! This incorruptible seed from God however will NEVER DIE, and that is why it is permanent and why our salvation in this administration of grace is likewise permanent.

It's really not about that. It's about these men using the penis as a weapon. These women didn't necessarily find either of them attractive or within their standards of the kind of man to go for. And don't forget... they were brainwashed into thinking that they were serving God by meeting the Man'O'God's needs.

--------------------

excathedra

And THAT, Mark, is what is so heartbreaking.

...

But don't tell my heart

My achy breaky heart

I just don't think he'd understand

And if you tell my heart

My achy breaky heart

He might blow up and kill this man.

(Billy Ray Cyrus)

Kill the man?

Well - at least let us praise God that we can finally tear his wings off!

Yeah right. We're convinced you've got the skinny and the truth about VPW - and everyone and everything that has ever been associated with TWI.

Don't be offended that we just can't come to the same conclusions you have - that is, that you've got everything competely in balance regarding VPW, TWI, etc., when we see your vindictive fingers still stuck upon the scales of justice.

Maybe one could attach a few conditions to the prayer..

"God, send some one to save me. If he is a womanizing, abusive, plagiaristic, egotistical, arrogant sob who just wants to inflate his importance in history as only told by him, don't bother."

:)

How did you manage to figure that, since no one I know has ever prayed like that in their time of need or desperation. There are plenty of places I see where God uses some really big "srew-ups" to reach the other really big "screw-ups" that are out there. They wouldn't have listened to them otherwise - lack of experience.

So TWI wasn't the utopia - the heaven on earth you initially thought it was or should be. Divorcee's say pretty much the same thing when discussing what their marriage was like to their ex. That is why I agree with you 1000%. The real issue isn't over what people believe or don't believe. It's about the relationships they have with one another.

Well...like I said on another thread...you earned the label...and after disrupting countless threads with your M.O...now you want to be considered in a persecuted minority?...Playing the victim card?..Poor, poor pitiful Whitedove, who uses "expressing my opinion" as an excuse to disrupt heartfelt threads with rudeness, insensity, and insulting insinuations?...Now you're soliciting pity?

...excuse me while I barf.

No doubt the "other thread" you are refering to is: Boot the Wierwille Apologists - a thread that you had started BTW.

To quote a non-Wierwille apologist who recently responded to you on that thread>

With all due respect, as you [GrouchoMarxJr]haven't crossed any lines with me (and believe me, you'd know it if you had) but your behavior hasn't been stellar either. I see you locking up with a lot of posters. No offense, but you're strongly opinionated, as am I [ChasUFarley], but your delivery isn't exactly tactful at times. That doesn't mean I start a thread, call out your name, and offer to ban you does it? Good grief. That's a bit extreme. Let the mods do their job and report what you think is unfair to them.

My sentiments exactly, ChasUFarley, and my sentiments don't always agree with yours or anybody else's here. GrouchoMarxJr is only interested in locking up with other poster's here (in this case WhiteDove) and merely starting threads to accomplish that.

This topic reminded me of the time( well, ,one of many times) I was raked over the coals by the limb leader in Ct. He happened to see me drive by on the states busiest highway, and was astonished that I didn't display a way bumper sticker.

I had 2 thoughts. One was frustration that I couldn't even drive down the street without doing something 'wrong', and the other was wondering why he'd even want to advertise the way on my piece of junk 200 dollar car which was all I could afford, and was usually stuck on the side of the road while I took advantage of the guy in my twig who knew how to fix cars, to come out and do repairs for free.

I was handed a bumper sticker, and practically followed out to my car to make sure I put it on. I don't recall if he made me pay for the bumper sticker, but it wouldn't surprise me if I did.

Maybe he gave you the bumper sticker to help keep that rusty bumper on your $200 junk car?

WTH:

What makes you think I was talking to you? OneWhoIsFree asked specifically where to find the pfal tapes.

(Or, I imagine, the DVDs or CDROMs or any comparable version.)

WW:

WTH:Yes, I mean Leonard's "Gifts of the Spirit" class, available from CTC of Texas.

I'm not "promoting BG Leonard's stuff."

Oh really? You could have fooled me. -- Right!

OneWhoIsFree ASKED about the material. That's where the material is available.

From the original class, not the knockoff.

Comparing CTC's class with vpw's class is like comparing genuine Listerine with generic knockoffs-

you'll end up wondering why you tolerated the bad taste in your mouth.

Yes, Leonard's class calls it "GIFT" and not "manifestation"- just like you call it "manifestationS" when I Corinthian 12

refers to it in the singular. Personally, I'd prefer BOTH of you use the terminology I use.

The word gifts in the KJV is in italics in 1 Corinthians 12:1. The word for spiritual is pneumatikos, and is plural. So 1 Corinthians 12:1 is better translated as: things of the spirit, spiritual things or spiritual matters. Spiritual things and spiritual matters are all plural, not singular.

That having been said, once once unclenches over the usage of the WORD "gift" and actually pays attention to

the CONCEPTS being taught, the WORD "gift" becomes a rather minor point.

Not so. In v4 of 1 Corinthians 12 it states, "Now there are diversities of gifts [the word: "gifts" in this verse is not in italics] but the same Spirit." The word for "gifts" in v4 is the word 'charismata' unlike in v1 where the word gifts IS italicized. There is NO word in any of the Greek texts for gifts in v1, however there is in v4 - which is the Greek word 'charismata', and there it is translated as gifts. This is hardly a "minor point" - especially when anyone can see it is a case where the same word (i.e. gifts) appears in English in both v1 and in v4, but in the the original it is a case where the word exists and where it doesn't. This is NOT a MINOR POINT at all!

From here, it's just an excuse to dismiss a class that was so good, vpw copied it word-for-word and claimed HE taught it.

Again, VPW taught manifestations of the spirit - (little s). BG taught (and he still teaches) Gifts of the Spirit - (big S). Anybody with eyes can see this is hardly a word-for-word (let alone, a letter-for-letter) copy of the same thing. V.P.W.=manifestations. B.G.=Gifts.

Students of the CTC class-as some who've posted here said- learn a LOT more than the pfal class offered them when they were offered it. Despite disagreeing with the word "gift."

This doesn't say a lot - considering what someone says they may or may not have learned and what they got from a class. I know people who took a lot of excellent classes but then flunked them. All that proves is that they don't know it all - so what's your point? Of course, the bad one's they breezed though and 'A'-ced them. So I suppose that's something to brag about?

When it comes to the TOTAL PICTURE of spiritual matters and educating others, some people understand less than they'd like to admit.[/b]

WW:

WTH:

1) Thanks for admitting where vpw STOLE the "snow on the pumps" from. He ripped off the man's class, AND his genuine spiritual experiences.

I didn't admit VPW stole anything from Leonard - his class or his (BG's) experiences. That is your claim, not mine. All I am saying is it is just as easy for one to dismiss BG's "experiences" as it is to dismiss VPW's "snow on the gas pump" experience. Unless you believe a man's "experiences" are a guarantee for truth - (since you are the one who is using the term: "genuine spiritual experiences") but I don't believe that nor claim that either.

2) "Now" YOU know this. We discussed this years ago. I MYSELF posted years ago that he STOLE the "1942 promise",

and posted this quote as documentation.

I already answered this one above.

3) Yes, that IS where I would advise someone to get their "holy spirit" education- if they were planning on getting it from "vpw's" pfal class.

So you are plugging BG's class. You just don't want to fess up to it.

Leonard never claimed any "snow on the gas pumps"- vpw added that in the 1970s.

(According to Mrs W, that was when he first made this claim.)

Leonard never claimed God promised him ALL answers on ALL subjects-just the ones he asked for on ONE subject.

VPW never claimed that God promised him ALL the answers on All subjects either. I suppose your going to insist VPW stole that from BG as well. (It sure wouldn't surprise me.)

Did Leonard make this claim up the way vpw made his claim up?

You tell me. Apparently you're the answer man with all the answers on BG Leonard and VPW - as you want people to believe you are.

Well, Leonard didn't just "talk the walk"- Leonard "walked the talk."

Of course, you're trying to say VPW didn't by "comparing VPW to BG." I wonder what God's Word has to say about comparing ourselves with those who commend themselves, and measuring ourselves by ourselves. (See 1 Corinthians 10:12 for the answer.)

BG Leonard may not have been perfect, but he WAS "the man he knew himself to be", and walked worthy (not perfect, as if any of us expected him to walk PERFECT) of the calling wherewith he was called.

Feel free to disprove me:

either find a "snow on gas pumps" account (or its equivalent) among Leonard's writings,

or find where Leonard was caught raping congregants or using them for filthy lucre's sake.

You believe you're trying to say something important by comparing BG Lenoard's 'holier-than-thou' life to VPW's sinful one. One could just as easily compare VPW's 'holier-than-thou' life to BG' sinful one to make the points you are making. But the truth is still what is stated in 1 Corinthians 12:10, but then, someone just doesn't want people to think he's being foolish by doing so. You sure can fool a lot of people on a lot of things when they don't know the answer from God's Word.

VP was a conman, not a king.

The Way was a cult, not a kingdom

Well, there goes someone's whole hypothesis then, huh?

Boy, am I upset. NOT!!

I do not mean this post in any way to lessen the sadness of a life lost...

how are we so sure that she 'commited suicide'?

bad things happened there...

about the only thing I know is that things were not as they seemed...

Well if you want to believe and treat everything K@rl K@hler. says in his book: "The Cult that Snapped" as if it were "The Gospel" like some people here do, then be my guest.