Larry N Moore

Well, this one . . . . . . isn't all that bad. The suspense is killing me as to what will come up as I keep posting. Maybe if the Admins could turn the feature off I might get bored with it and move on. Want to put a word into them about that possibility? ;)

Can you refresh my memory of what POP stood for? Yeah, I had to overlook a lot of things. But I was accustomed to doing so even in my earlier years. Love has a way of covering a multitude of sins -- so it's been said. If I was to jump on believers for every thing they did wrong I would have had little time for much else. I remember a time (very early) when I was in the back yard of a couple who was in my "twig" and finding a patch of marijuana growing there. I said nothing to them. About a year later they thanked me for not saying anything even though they knew I saw it. I remember thinking that they might outgrow the use of it and if they didn't so what. They were a great couple.

doojable, I realize you're asking for details but, the details would be long and complicated to share with you in this venue. Allow me to extract one statement I made in my letter and then you might be able to surmise from it that many of things already discussed on this board were things that led to my departure. I believe I mentioned that I was first introduced to TWI when I was 15. Took the PFAL class when I was 16 and left the ministry in 1995. So, doing the math I think that would be a approximately (I suck in math) 23 years. There was no "final straw" per se other than being asked to make a decision. So I did.

waysider, no offense taken. However, I think you're overlooking something. That letter was written in response to a face to face confrontation over changes taking place in the Ministry. There was nothing left to discuss face to face. A face to face meeting telling them of my decision, in my mind, would have been pointless. It would only afford the person the opportunity to inform me that I was wrong and I'm not sure I would have been able to refrain from slapping them in the face.

Although I don't think this is the appropriate thread for me to do so I'll share with you my portions of my letter of departure.

Well, listening and hearing have different connotations. You can hear something and yet not listen to it in the sense of following up on what you hear. In essence the term means to me (based on the record of Paul) that you hear what God says to you but, choose to disobey anyways. We can do that, ya know? It's that free will thingy. That doesn't mean God is going to give up on you. So, my response to someone who said I wasn't "HEAR(ING) HIM!" would have probably been -- "What's that you say? I'm a little hard of hearing."

I didn't forget to mention it because as you have demonstrated it wasn't necessary to do so. The point of it though is that anything someone else would tell you would be pertaining to what God had already said to you first. That license would only be one that you, yourself gave them and if you gave it to them out of fear then that should have told you something was wrong. My response would have been different but, that's just the way I've always been. Do you remember hearing in PFAL something about VP saying it wasn't his position to tell you what you should do but rather how to do it? I remember when people were being told to sell their homes -- anyone with half a brain should have known that was unbiblical. That's probably why TWI eventually lost a lot of followers. That's how I recall it also.

Well, although I'm not a Trinitarian myself, one would have to explain how Paul (on the road to Damascus) was able to talk with Jesus if talking to him was idolatry. It might interest you to know that even VP referred to Jesus as being God in the PFAL class. I suspect most didn't catch it though. That might be something you were taught but, it wasn't something I remember being taught. In fact I believe there is one section in PFAL where VP states God will speak to you first before He will speak to another concerning your personal life. I think it was in the section dealing with Paul wanting to go to Jerusalem even though God forbade him.

I don't know why it should be "the deciding factor" but, I'll say in essence that you're right. It doesn't matter to me who speaks the truth or what they personally do in their lives. I questioned a lot of things VP said and did and that is as it should be. What I disagreed with I put aside but, what I determined made sense I kept. He may have had his agenda but, I had my own and when I felt I could no longer function in TWI in accordance with my own agenda I simply departed. Now, if you would like to know anything else it might be better asked elsewhere.

You, like myself, are entitled to your opinion. We aren't participating on a board hosted by TWI. Hopefully, it won't come to the point where, like TWI, I'll become designated "mark and avoid" for having opinions differing from the group. But if it does -- I can live with that just as easily as I did when TWI applied that designation to me. In any case you are confusing the two. Again -- having a purpose and achieving it are not one and the same. I was asked a question. I answered it. I'm not responsible for how my answer is received.

ROTFLMAO! Now THAT ONE I like a lot. Hope I can keep it.

If I were to do that, wouldn't I be in essence accepting one person's interpretation of what II Peter 1:20, 21 says over another?

We all get something out anything we give our attention to. I cannot say your personal experience was not what you got out of it. However, one thing I did get out of it was "Knowledge puffeth up, but the love of God edifieth." I suppose if someone didn't get at least that much knowledge out of it then they missed the boat and anything else they got out of it wasn't worth a hill of beans.

Well, I'm not sure how far we can stretch an analogy. It does have its limits. One can consider prayer the equivalent to using a phone. In that analogy it will boil down to whether you believe Jesus hears you when you pray and whether he also answers you in some way.

I'm sure you're in good company of those who agree with you.

Well, if you go with the analogy that I, as a husband and father am the head of the household you might be able to see how that's possible. I leave the family almost every day to go to work -- thus I'm absent. During my absence my principles and/or rules governing the household are not simply discarded for it's reasonable for my family to expect I will return at some point.

Ok, I'll bite. If I recall Jesus was left behind and therefore lacking any other means to get to the boat he had no choice but to walk on the water. He needed to walk on the water because he wanted to hook up with his disciples. Peter, had a need to believe and therefore wanted to walk on the water to test his believing. So, how did I do?

Don't fret it Jean. You're just illustrating how two can become one flesh. ;)

The validity of the contents of PFAL does not invalidate its stated purpose in any way. You're setting up nothing more than a strawman argument and doing so, imo, out of desperation since you agree that that is "the STATED purpose". Many can claim a purpose for what they do but, whether they achieve that purpose is another matter.

If answering a question makes someone a Wierwille apologist then your thinking processes leave much to be desired. The question wasn't asked if the purpose of PFAL was achieved or true. I was simply asked what its stated purpose was. If you can't see the difference then perhaps you can likewise blame that on TWI. It will make you feel better, I'm sure.

Bolshevik, you're floundering. Let it go.

Dude, it was YOU that opened the can of worms when you asked me the question. It's not my problem that you don't like the answer. Next time keep that in mind before you ask questions which you'll be sorry you asked.

:) I better not. "This book, POWER FOR ABUNDANT LIVING, is one way of showing interested people the abundant life which Jesus Christ lived and which He came to make available to believers as it is revealed in the Word of God. This is a book containing Biblical keys. The contents herein do not teach the Scriptures from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21; rather, it is designed to set before the reader the basic keys in the Word of God so that Genesis to Revelation will unfold and so that the abundant life which Jesus Christ came to make available will become evident to those who want to appropriate God's abundance to their lives." Then I would suggest you stay out it if it makes you crazy.

Bolshevik, you asked me if I could tell you what the purpose of PFAL was. You changing the "goal posts" only makes you look foolish.

He's probably flipping hamburgers with Elvis at your local Burger King.