WordWolf

Zix, you're honestly certain there's no biological basis for all the activity? CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!

The moon's gravity affects the tides. Humans are mostly water. (We are all THAT close to drowning.) Even without the placebo effect, that accounts for plenty. (Like why I've been getting so much done tonight.) CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!

I'm thinking it's largely a matter of semantics- like being DESIGNATED heir versus receiving your inheritance. (See the end of Hebrews 1.) CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!

As much as I'd like to add this to the pile, I'm inclined against it. Technically, those under the law still don't have eternal life per se-that will come with Judgement Day and the resurrections. CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!

I'd prefer it, but someone keeps spraying invective like a skunk. (No pun intended.) CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!

(In deference to an idea that travelled well on another thread, I decided against forming my own religion, but chose to set up my own denomination. It stands for "Certain Lewd Fellows of the Baser Sort". Someone came up with that name on the old GSC, and I thought it was one of the funniest things I've ever seen.) CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!

Seaspray: A) Please add some steak to that sizzle. "More matter with less art." B) You've succeeded in demonstrating rather poor manners across the board. For all the cricitism and charges I give Mike, we have yet to devolve into name-calling and screaming matches. You've not demonstrated this same level of maturity. I actually was going to advocate giving you a bit of slack and seeing if you'd rise to the occassion, but I'll save myself the trouble. CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!

I won't address subject matter to much. I WILL recommend: A) be brief, clear and straightforward. If you get complicated, they're likely to just chuck the letter. Ditto a 20-pager. B) be loving. As an outie, you're supposed to be incapable of it. C) Be positive. Again, as an outie, you're supposed to be inferior and suffering now by comparison, if not a full-blown "greasespot by midnight." D) Be open to reestablishing SOME form of communication. They could use some space and time to think things over, and someone to think them over with. E) Present things and give them time and room to come to their own conclusions on them. Otherwise they may just be trading blind obedience to the bod for blind obedience to you. ----------------- As to subject matter, that depends on the specifics. I'll leave that to you and God. CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!

In case anyone thinks the question "what's the difference between the Bible and the Word of God as defined in PFAL" hasn't been beaten to its death already, I'll chime in. --------------------------------------------- From PFAL Session I-"The Greatest Secret in the World", Listening with a Purpose, Question 1. 'What is the greatest secret in the world today?' Answer, as given in harmony in each class, as quoted from the cue cards used by vpw... "The greatest secret in the world today is that the Bible is the revealed Word and Will of God." This also appears in the Advanced Class Review books. Those who can recite large sections of PFAL should all be able to chant that in harmony. Those who can only recite small snippets of PFAL should all be able to chant that in harmony. Since it's in the opening minutes of Session I, and is the TITLE of said session, anyone serious about "mastering PFAL", one would imagine, SHOULD encounter this material VERY, VERY EARLY in their efforts to "master" it. (If one does not start at the top of the first session, where DOES one start?) Of course, the opening segment also declares that PFAL is "a class on KEYS" not "the revealed Word and Will of God" , which MIGHT also pose a problem if one has decided to dogmatically ignore PFAL's internal testimony about itself. CLFOBS Ministries. Join NOW!

"It's highly repugnant for you to insist I return to something that I rationally rejected." Mike! We agree on something! Of course, I rationally rejected the nonsense that any man's uncredited eclectic ripoff can possibly equal the greatness of God's wonderful matchless Word- as vpw often referred to the book you so blithely spurn as "remnants". I think nobody's responded to your question about how we'd respond if you started solving "the errors of PFAL" because we're sure you're neither able nor willing to do so. I haven't formulated a response to the question "what will I do if Osama bin Laden moves next door to me" either-I don't expect to see it in my lifetime. Honestly, if you TRIED to solve several and FAILED each time, I'd have more respect for you than I do know-it would at least show you have the courage of your convictions. Solve even one and I think the PFAL Nitpickers Guild will be impressed. Personally, I expect them to perfect that cold fusion thing and stem cell regeneration before that, but, hey. I can be surprised. Anyway, we've documented-right under your nose- plenty of reasons we logically conclude PFAL is not worthy of being "mastered" any more than DuelMonsters is worthy of being "mastered". You've claimed to have logically concluded the opposite-how about some evidence of the logic process you used? I mean, stated in plain English, not hinted at, alluded to and otherwise obfuscated.

Actually, vpw disagreed with Bullinger about which administrations/dispensations were which. They both totalled the results as 7. vpw claimed that #4 was "Christ" administration- which, apparently, lasted under 1 year, and was nearly indistinguishable from the Law Administration, #4. Then vpw said #5 was Grace (Pentecost to the Gathering Together), # 6 was the Appearing (Gathering Together thru the Apocalypse, ending in the end of Revelation 20), and the Final, of Glory Administration, #7, was everything after that. Bullinger had written that # 7 was the Glory Dispensation, also. (Personally, I prefer the term "stewardship" to "administration" or "dispensation".) Bullinger, however, had written #4 was the Law, which vpw appears to have copied. However, Bullinger seems to have agreed with Jesus that "not one jot or tittle will pass away from the Law, til all be fulfilled", and that it wasn't "finished" until the crucifixion. That means the "Christ administration" is the last year of the Law "administration". Then Grace becomes #4, and the Appearing becomes #5. Between #5 and # 7 comes the Millenial reign, lasting 1,000 years. Having had a chance to review Bullinger before making his own statements, why, then, did vpw renumber #5 & #6 with no real explanation, and certainly less justification than Bullinger's named ones? Here are, as I see it, the possibilities. A) "God told him Bullinger was wrong." (A la Mike) B) vpw was obsessed with coming up with his own spin on things, so he renamed the oikonomia and renumbered them. C) vpw was so obsessed with making everything fit his clockwork construct that he juggled the numbers until Grace =#5. D) B & C.

"Finally obey our Father in the Word." A) I never went out to disobey God OR His Word. Even if everybody here whipped out all my sins, I've this confidence-that I've a better track record on doing "my utmost for his highest" than certain leaders who felt free to exploit their positions (to name but one problem). B) Our Father in the Word. Ooooo, our Father in the Word. A nice title to bestow homage and worship on a man. Find anyplace in the Bible where it says we're supposed to CALL anyone that? Abraham is our Father in believing (Romans 4). Our Father is in heaven-God Almighty, once and for all. Was Christ divided? Did Paul baptize in the name of Paul? Even vpw admitted on tape that he didn't die for us. "...but I didn't die for you. *man's shout from offsides* It was Jesus Christ! You said it, man!..." The one who gave out that himself was some great one was Simon the sorcerer. Philip preached that CHRIST was some great one.

Yes, I agree. If he wanted to teach the principle, the healing of Naaman (to name one) would have served better. Since he picked an example that didn't illustrate his STATED principle, he must have been following an UNSTATED rule in using it. Something like "see how evil established religion gets?" would fit the bill. Then again, Brutus is an honourable man. -->

Why's the bod putting up with people actually thinking and living for themselves now, when it was verboten for so long? Follow the money. The bod stands to lose too much abs money if they get dogmatic now. So, they're willing to put up with some inconsistency and lapsed "integrity" in order to keep the money coming in, which is a higher priority. They're slaves to their own greed, to a degree. No man-or bod-can serve 2 masters. They've made their choice, I've made mine.

Thanks. People keep arriving here every few months, so it becomes necessary to bring them up to speed.

Shows how much vpw knew about history, if he thinks Lincoln was trying to split the country. No-the cross doesn't affect vampires that way. You make a big wooden cross & bust the guy over his head. Or you sharpen the bottom and stake him with it. Werewolves are not affected by silver, either. However, they have been known to be distressed by screenshots of Bea Arthur. (Oddly enough, Conan O'Brien seems to know about that. I'd LOVE to know how HE found out.)

As you can see, there's a variety of positions and opinions here, all the honest opinions of the posters. Some are no longer Christian, so think it was all bunk. Some are Christian, but think it was all so badly mangled, it's healthier to start from scratch. Some are Christian, but think it was mostly bathwater, and will keep a little. Some are Christian, but think it was mostly baby, and will keep a lot. One is Christian (supposedly) and asserts there is no bathwater, it was all baby. Depending on who you ask, each one is a perfectly-legitimate position.

Abraham Lincoln and Mother Teresa? No kidding. I think a couple of those guys have dabbled in occultism, but I don't know that any of them was 'hardcore'.

Yes. Our adversary, the fallen arch, loves to broadcast that he is equal to, but diametrically opposed to, the True God. Of course, he is a liar, and the father of lies, also. All his best efforts are cheap knockoffs of God's stuff. God rules "up" in Heaven. Satan, at one point, set his minions so as to claim rulership of the air, "up" to us. And so on. _______ Goey. thanks for the explanation. I knew that stuff was wrong, but I didn't have a verse handy.

Based on being able to "name that tune" in 2 notes, "Satisfaction" by the Rolling Stones and "Stairway to Heaven". (The theater version of Wayne's World had a scene where Wayne picks up a guitar in a store, plays 2 notes, and the clerk stops him, and points to a sign on the wall. "NO Stairway to Heaven". As one friend pointed out at the time, we all recognized the song when the clerk did. The video/tv versions of the movie don't have those 2 notes, & I don't like that.) For me, I'll add "Tall Cool One" by Robert Plant. For someone else, I'll add "We didn't Start the Fire" by Billy Joel. (He id'ed it before the instruments kicked in.) One more for me: "Running Down a Dream", by Tom Petty.

The word "cult" isn't as useful as it used to be, since it's used so broadly. Yes-one type defines cults by their techniques- are they authoritative and insular? etc. Another type defines cults by their doctrines- do they teach what we teach? etc. ------------------- Those of you who've read thru "Angels of Light" (on the "recommended reading" list for the Advanced class, and not even nearly as good as "the Challenging Counterfeit") may recall that among the various things it listed as having evil origins was a denying of the trinity. I've seen lists like that, too. ------------ Yes, often, "cult" is the brush that larger groups use to tar and feather smaller groups.

Well, that answered the Stiles' ripoffs a LOT better than I could. (I just remembered previous threads had documented it.) ------------------------ I do know that the pictures in the Founders Hall numbered Eight. You named 7 of them. That's ok, I know 2 of them, and one of them is the one you left out: J.E. Stiles. That was the first time I ever remember running across Stiles' name. I was told those pictures were men vpw admired or learned from. (No mention that any of their work ended up in the classes.)

I'm with Dot Matrix. HE...STOLE....MAGGIE MUGGINS? AND THE BOLOCCO BROTHERS, HENRY AND HERMAN????? (Johnny Jumpup is a flower, but, apparently, its use as a name was the same source also.) That's just obscene. Anyone who reads thru EW Bullinger's "How to Enjoy the Bible" (and can stay awake thru it) will see that whole sessions were ripped off of it. (If anyone knows of an edition of that book that doesn't have tiny print, I'd like to hear it.) Similarly, EW's Companion Bible reiterates a lot of his points. I've also heard that J.E. Stiles' book(& class?) have points that were ripped off in "Recieving the Holy Spirit Today" (the white book), which vpw supposedly developed entirely on his own, not long after studying under Stiles. Some of the collaterals were ripped off E.W. Kenyon's books. It seems that, except for Clarence Larkin, it was a standing policy of his to rip off work from Christians who used initials and pass it off as his own.

Jerry, I agree. I think he didn't really think through the whole "sonship rights" thing before making it an official doctrine, either. Furthermore, nobody seemed to do so in twi since then. I've heard discussions among outies, but not innies. I have heard, while in, someone (lcm) making a big deal about it being a good thing something was a sonship RIGHT and not a sonship OBLIGATION. I ignored him because he wasn't making sense.

Last time I looked this up, I sat with the interlinear & lexicon for a bit, & concluded I thought the best translation would be "and two other with him on this side and on THIS side". I'll look it over again later and see if I end up with the same conclusion-it's been over 10 years. :)--> ------------------------- Jerry, I had to add that comment because of all the good lines I'd already missed in the thread. Plus, with someone asserting that the orange book was "incorrectly translated" (from ENGLISH to ENGLISH? HOW?), I was reminded of General Chang's comment. ------------------------ BTW, if you really want it, Hamlet can now be purchased "in the original Klingon". No, I'm not posting a link-I don't want to see it again myself. :)--> Besides, if Hamlet was a Klingon, it would have been over in Act 1. Hamlet hears from his father, then in the next scene, Hamlet kills Claudius. The end. :)-->