So_crates

23 minutes ago, Mike said:

There is no "maybe" about it. The active POSTING audience, we all know, is practiced and poised to poke holes in anything I say.

That's because you make it so easy. Stevie Wonder could see the glaring errors in the half baked theories you post.

13 minutes ago, Mike said:

Well, maybe you will see these two patterns, IF you actually look at them.  The bias to bash really is disabling for subtle patterns like these.

Maybe if you weren't so intellectually dishonest you'd see where you're off base. Changing definitions of words and filtering facts on the subject by tagging them "anti-cherry" smacks of intellectual dishonesty.

13 minutes ago, Mike said:

BTW, one of the lists is still not posted.  You seem to be gearing your mind to reject it before I post it.

As you geared to reject our criticisms before they were posted? Witness how you refused to change "budget" and "two doors" even though they were proven confusing.

13 minutes ago, Mike said:

I think the next funniest thing would be if you or someone else here was to say they can be an unbiased judge.  I'm waiting for someone to imply or even state that.

I find it hilarious that you whine about how Martindale and the Corps Nazis ruined the ministry, then you turn around and act just like them.

How unbiased are you?

14 hours ago, Mike said:

really is funny how committed you are to rejecting this hunch of mine, even before the first batch of scriptures you and the others were committed.  Not just gently biased against it, but fully committed.  LoL  It put on a good show for the Read-Only Audience at home, who happen to favor this hunch.

Then I posted my first list, and there was not the tiniest dent in the total bias, with more pure rejection of every point.  LoL

I’m laughing, but not surprised, because that is why I brought it here. I knew I’d get a maximally critical audience. This would be the acid test of my hunch. This way I get to see where my argument is weak and where it’s strong.  I learn which ways of expressing things works better.

Did you notice that I didn’t use the two analogy words “doors” or “budget” at all in my descriptions of the two patterns a few paragraphs above?  You had attached a lot of your bias commitment on those two words, so I thought I’d try another approach

I wanted to respond to as many comments as I could today.  In bits and pieces I am getting the second list of scriptures ready to post.

The whole thing smacks of Martindale explaining how mans downfall in Eden was due to homosexuality?

"Can you see it? No? Too bad. I do. Ha ha hahahahaha!"

24 minutes ago, T-Bone said:

That may be how YOU see it but that doesn’t make it so.

I believe the laws of physics were created by God. Science studies what can be observed and measured. The metaphysical realm by definition is beyond the five senses - thus beyond science.

Metaphysics is usually tackled by philosophy, theology, and such - disciplines that are  NOT hard science. The Bible is malleable - and so people…even believe it or not - fake doctors and cult-leaders can twist it around to say anything they want.

 

Stephen Colbert calls it "truthie": Something you wish were true, but isn't.

1 hour ago, Mike said:

I'm laughing at the irony of the blindness that a bias imparts.

The irony is in the bias being a feeling of super knowing.

You should know, that's what you displayed through this whole thread: a blind bias that's puffed you up. Say isn't there a verse or two about how the love of God isn't puffed up?

1 hour ago, Mike said:

But I wish you the best at the bema.

 

Seeing as God loves a haughty spirit, it should be me wishing you best at the bema.

40 minutes ago, Mike said:

I’m laughing, but not surprised, because that is why I brought it here. I knew I’d get a maximally critical audience.

Another reason to stay away from the Way and PLAF Today.

33 minutes ago, Mike said:

I’m laughing, but not surprised, because that is why I brought it here.

So you find this funny? You're laughing at me? That's only fair, because I'm laughing at you. You see, I know something you and your read only audience don't know. One day, when you finally get honest with yourself, if not then at the bema, you'll be me.

I pray you and your read only audience get what they deserve. Lord knows, I pray I get what I deserve.

On 3/8/2023 at 5:12 PM, Mike said:

When I heard things from VPW on God being limited

If Saint Vic was teaching about how limited God is, he's probably setting up an excuse for the dismal failure of his "law of believing."

It's no secret that many people approached Martindale concerned about where the promised prosperity was. Martindale's response: "You want prosperity? God on welfare."

If Martindale was getting doubtful questions, you know Saint Vic was getting them too. His excuse: Well, you see, God is limited.

2 hours ago, Mike said:

When I heard things from VPW on God being limited, it sounded like I should check it out in the Bible.  I found many places where it seemed to be saying that God indeed has done it this way, where He makes the rules, and He abides by them Himself.  I lean on the many scriptures that indicate that while this spiritual war wages, things are not always like theology want it to be. 

So, considering you're letting a man who couldn't follow the simplest of God's rules (like keeping his pants zipped) interpret scripture to you, just how do you or Saint Vic know what God's rules are?

1 hour ago, Mike said:

I take that as God playing by His rules

You obviously never served in the military. Any good soldier knows there are no rules to war. Even if there were rules, do you honestly think the devil would follow them?

Games have rules. That takes you into Martindale territory. He tried to sell the idea that this was a game and not a war.

1 hour ago, Mike said:

Here is where I opined that the law of believing we were taught was at the very elementary level, and the law was considered in the simplest configuration, which is where no other forces are at work competing against our believing.

As for believing, dumping tons of manure and hoping something beautiful will grow just isn't working for you.

First off, how much persistence did we need to get born again? To speak in tongues? So that's Saint Vic trying to cover up for his impotence in the spiritual world.

Second, is it possible for someone to be born again without knowing scripture?

Give you an example:

I went to the doctor because I was horribly tired all the time. The doctor took a blood test and sent the results to my house. I showed them to my mother, an LPN, and she thought they were bad news. All my blood cells were screwed up enough for me to need a blood transfusion.

I sent an email to my ex, explaining what my mother thought it was. A few days later, my ex calls me and spends 20 minutes telling me how to get born again. Not once did she quote scripture.

(I was found to have a rare form of lymphoma.)

So, you don't need persistence, not scripture to get born again, (all that's required is confessing with your mouth and believing in your heart), so why would you need it for any other type of believing?

A these little bits and bobs are just Saint Vic's way of blaming you for his lying about keeping his promise.

17 minutes ago, Mike said:

Show me how the verse on Cain opposes my hunch by simply lacking mention of both doors.

Show me a verse without mental gymnastics or torturing the language that mentions two doors

8 minutes ago, Mike said:

Show me now Cain is anti-cherry, or negates my hunch.  That's proof #1 I want to see from you.

God does seem to point out the equal access He and the devil had in the Garden.  That is always a question people have.  God answers it in Genesis there, and also in the Book of Job with the devil having an equal say in the courtroom analogy.

But to say that God has to point it out in EVERY instance of an major assertion. Got any proof or scriptures to back that up?   If that were true there would be a lot of "principle clutter" clogging up the intervention passages.

Really?!

Then I can take one verse or part of a verse and say its truth, right? "There is no God." And all those verses you have claiming there is one are "anti-cherry."

5 minutes ago, Mike said:

I just explained to WordWolf the subtle difference between anti-cherry verses and verses lacking cherry.

A bull excuse to get around something you can't explain.

11 minutes ago, Mike said:

I agree.  I am just slow at doing all that.  I thought I'd have the scriptures.

If I were cherry picking I'd be avoiding verses that somehow negate my hunchy thesis. 

Which you are doing. Just look at the Cain situation.

11 minutes ago, Mike said:

Let's call these verses "anti-cherry" verses.

But to present a verse that simply does not contain all the info as to what is going on would not qualify as an anti-cherry.  It would be a verse that simply chose to emphasize other things.

This is a subtle point.

So subtle its no point at all. One would think if your hunchy thesis were a principle, God would have pointed it out in evry instance, not just some. And you wouldn't have to do mental gymnastics to find it.

11 minutes ago, Mike said:

 

30 minutes ago, Mike said:

what I am doing is NOT intellectually dishonest.

Had I started this thread and said this is the truth, and I can prove it, and then I proceed as I have been, then THAT would be intellectually dishonest.

But I did not start this thread that way. I said it was a loose and wobbly hunch, and hardly a theory, and that I am working some of it out as I go.

Did you not get that at the beginning of the thread?
Did you not see me repeat all that several times throughout the thread?

Where you're being intellectually dishonest, sir, is by wanting to look at only one side of the issue and nit accepting evidence to the contrary.

As I recall, you bragged about being a trained scientist. If that's true, then you know as a scientist you look at all the all facts then reach a conclusion. YOU DON'T only look at facts that support your theory, say you are right, then call it a day.

EUREKA!! Cain is still beckoning. 

24 minutes ago, Mike said:

Quit thinking I am presenting this as polished and perfected.
Some of your questions I have not thought about yet, so I am attempting my best. I may want to retract some things.

Try to picture help me by finding verses that fit the pattern. I have no idea about Cain. You can feel fee to research it, but why not wait to see if this hunchy theory fills out in time?  Help me find good examples of double doors.

I see the new list as embracing scriptures that have finite measure stated, as opposed to infinite.  In other words limited amounts.

I am still working on the next list.

 

And you don't see this as intellectually dishonest?

"Please only show me the things that support my theory. I don't want to pay attention to the things that prove it wrong."

Dude, do you think I came down with yesterday's rain? If you haven't started a list of contrary verses, you never will. Your help me with this and I'll do that is nothing more than a poor attempt at future faking and manipulation. If you look at my forehead you'll see where they erased "stupid".

And a few post back you got all huffy and claimed you weren't cherry picking.

23 minutes ago, Mike said:

No, I wondering if that should be included in the open door at the resurrection.

Plus, think about it. The devil just hit him with his best shot, and 3 days later Jesus is up again.  I can see both God keeping the door open another 50 days, and the devil simultaneously stunned enough to not act.

 

You really should go back and read your response: the first excuse was there would be some overlap. Oddly enough, no overlap came. No mention of format, no mention of trouble reading it. In other words you're full of bull. Congratulations, you played yourself.

So, it's your contention that God kept the door open the whole time between resurrection and Pentecost and the devil just sat there twiddling his thumbs, right? Spirit does not get stunned. You can't stun the devil anymore than you can stun any other angel.

Cain murdered Able, what did God do to open the door?

1 hour ago, Mike said:

Yes. The reason I somewhat ignored it was the formatting sucked and too confusing to my eyes, and the group was too large.

Trim the number way down, and make it easier on the eyes, and I may feel like answering them.

I am hoping you will see that most of your questions should melt away if you carefully read this:

In other words, you're saying, I can't answer that so I'll bull my way out of it.

What about when the apostles first spoke in tongues? What did the devil do in return?

Or does that hurt your eyes, too?

38 minutes ago, Mike said:

First mistake is I did NOT say:
Both miracles and healing, according to Mike, open both 'doors.'"

First mistake, yes you did.

Look at the examples you presented and then look at your "two doors" claim.

Oh, by the way, revelation is three manifestations (word of wisdom, word of knowledge, discerning of spirits). So that's five manifestations you claim opens "doors". Do we open "doors when we SIT?

38 minutes ago, Mike said:

I think what happens is God strategically opens the doors, and shuts them as soon as possible.   While open angels and devils rush through the doors to do their intervention work. Also, at this time humans may be involved in getting work done.

And just as I originally asked do manifestations trigger this opening? As, most examples you present involve some type of manifestation.

38 minutes ago, Mike said:

*/*/*

Please notice that I said these peaks I am noticing are twin "major interventions with power."  

I am not talking about someone operating the 9 manifestations in general. 

I think you are, as you've also mention revelation as triggering the door opening.

38 minutes ago, Mike said:

Yes, miracles and some healings can be pretty major, but they can also be lesser in manifested power. As I said above, once the doors are open a human may be involved in doing some of the work.

A human has to be involved in the work from the jump. Or have you forgot that our believing starts the ball rolling.

38 minutes ago, Mike said:

*/*/*

With discerning of spirits, I think you are stretching the door analogy way out of shape, just like someone stretched the budget analogy the other day. The doors are doors of opportunity, not like the water-tight doors of a ship's compartments as you are over-envisioning.

So why isn't the opportunity always there? If there's nothing stopping devil spirits why should they hold off?

38 minutes ago, Mike said:

*/*/*

Cherry picked usually has a evil essence attached to it. It is false evidence.

It is like saying, "Mike,  there are a lot of verses that directly contradict the double doors idea, and you avoided picking them."

I asked you a group of questions earlier that you poo pooed.

Add to that list, when the apostles spoke in tongues for the first time, God opened the door and the devil responded, how?

38 minutes ago, Mike said:

Ok, then if you are going to accuse me of that, let me see the verses that I did not pick, but which directly contradict the double doors idea.

Now your getting ridiculous.

First off, you can't prove a negative.

Second, burden of proof lies with you. It not my job to convince you you're wrong, it's your job to convince me you're right.

38 minutes ago, Mike said:

I don't mean verses that simply lack clues that say "double doors."

I mean verses that say pretty directly that the double doors idea can't be valid.

 

You mean like all those verses you produced showing the words "double doors"?

38 minutes ago, Mike said:

Hey!  What I found was something different.  It's another Double Door scripture for my list.  I boiled the list down to single lines for review.  Also I hope it gets others seeing double doors open in the scriptures to help me build the list.

And I am also finishing up on the other scripture list. That's still a bunch of work, because it is much longer and more complicated.  Still thinking some of it through.

Here is the latest, brief Double Doors list:

 

Genesis - Both God and the devil had access to Adam and Eve

In Exodus - Moses’ rod turns into a snake, court magicians do same

Naaman healed of leprosy, Gehazi catches leprosy. 

Sampson’s last stand succeeds, and he dies.

Matt - John Baptist’s father w angel, cannot speak afterwards

Matt  – Holy Spirit on Jesus, devil on Jesus mind in desert 

Matt 4 – Devil tempts w/food, angels bring food

Acts - Stephen’s vision, Stephen’s stoning.

Acts – Paul sees Jesus, Paul blinded

Romans 5:20  death reigns, life reigns

1 Corinthians 16:9  great open door to Paul,  many adversaries

2 Corinthians - abundance of revelations, thorn in the flesh

Hey!

Have you given these questions any thought

Both miracles and healing, according to Mike, open both "doors." Seeing as miracles and healing are manifestations, do the other manifestations open both "doors"? 

Also, with discerning of spirits, does that mean a devil's spirit went through the "door" and was caught in the natural realm? If so, once exorcized, how would they get back to the spiritual realm as the door would be closed?

Or are you just accepting cherry picked verses that support your theory?

31 minutes ago, OldSkool said:

With the cult expert we were told to be honest and talk to them. Yes, they had to tell people to be honest.

Honest honest or Way honest?

I'm curious.

Both miracles and healing, according to Mike, open both "doors." Seeing as miracles and healing are manifestations, do the other manifestations open both "doors"? 

Also, with discerning of spirits, does that mean a devil's spirit went through the "door" and was caught in the natural realm? If so, once exorcized, how would they get back to the spiritual realm as the door would be closed?

@Mike

11 minutes ago, Mike said:

 

No, all these same questions came up in my life, and I asked them.  These questions also came up in my twigs, and as twig leader I felt I had to help find answers if I didn't have them immediately.  I led a twig '74-76, and 79-81, and lots of questions came up. 

People asked all these same kinds of questions before you folks came to do it. 

I would NEVER be able to make up the answers I posted. 

On some things I've been rusty, but not totally. It's been a great review for me. I wanted to do this years ago here, but it took a while for me to pull my old notes together.

Nope, not making it up.

There ARE some points I am less sure about. 
I am aware of them and want to work on them someday.

Interesting coincidence. You just happen to post about not making stuff up after you posted something that was obviously made up.

People do not forget they are going to die one day, so, by extension they are aware others are going to die, too.

Also, why mention you twig coordinator experience? Your post would be fine without it. But then it wouldn't have the air of authority you thought your made up stuff needed.

2 minutes ago, Mike said:

NO.
It wasn't that way at all.  

It was usually just a new grad who was expressing a little over enthusiasm for the law of believing, like the way OldSkool said he felt invincible with the class teaching on believing (?think it was OS?)

I'd mention the apostles dying because I could see the emotion had chased away their reasoning ability a tiny bit.  In the rush of feelings they were forgetting that the apostles died.  My gentle reminder would pull up their memory with no trouble.

Now aren't you ashamed your yourself for thinking the worst of your brothers and sisters? 

Did you REALLY think my friends were that ignorant?  Or was that just a "stage question" for the dramatic effect on the folks at home reading this?

 

I think it's more like you tried to pass off a whopper and got called out on it.

1 minute ago, Mike said:

Persistence in applying the law of believing is crucial also.

Remember the story where Jesus healed a blind man, but it didn't work right?

So, he did it again and it worked.

 

Yah, sure, how persistent do you think OS was with his son? You think that was a one shot deal?

How persist do you think I was in finding out where I went wrong? And now, at 67, after years of believing the stuff PLAF taught me and praying how many times,cnow that my youth is gone, God suddenly decides to tell me what I needed to know in my 20s, right?

If nothing else proves what bull this is, that does.