Refiner

Selectively quoting WW: Well okay then I begin to see the need for the doctrine of “The power of Believing” to be developed, because there was no “Spirit” back in 1500BC for Moses to be illuminated by, until the notion of “Spirit” being “loaned” to him is developed. I must have missed the “Placed Upon” explanation as laid out in PFAL. Such an explanation is indeed required if there are only the types “5 senses” man and “Spiritual” man identified. The only immediate way I could envisage “natural” man receiving any “Word” from God would be direct verbal communication or stone tablets that he could lay his eyeballs on. After all, ideas developed through thought upon a subject, and dreams or visions, are not of the 5 senses now are they? Are they?? Perhaps Im being disputatious , deliberately obstructionist, and need to be publicly screeched at. Examples yes, By all means. Instruct me as you will.

Yes Vickles. Perhaps, "natural man" always having had capacity for "spirit", something animals never had, well, perhaps that is the difference between man and cow. Mayhap there sould be a tentative 4th dividing- Body, soul, man soul, and spirit. Yes, that would work I think.

I knew that YOU would crack open at least SOME books DM. Being the studious type that you are. ;)-->

A plant couldnt manifest abundance though. It has no "soul" :D-->

Vickles. My take on that is that "Believing" is open to anything with Body and Soul. After all, there are three divisions. Body. Soul. Spirit. The ability to "believe" is open to those with "body" and "soul" yes? But if that is the case, then a cow could manifest the Abundance into its life couldnt it? At the very least a cow should be able to "believe"

Thank you. Of course, Im not being a smarty pants and criticizing. Regarding my own church, well, I swallowed it without question. Im merely curious whether people here were more studious than I was.

How many of you actually cracked open a Greek /Hebrew Biblical lexicon and checked to see if Doctor Wierwilles interpretations of Greek/Hebrew words were correct? Or did you just accept that he was right? Im curious.

It sure do. Its amazing what slips out "between the lines" isnt it.

Well having reached the ¾ way mark in the PFAL Orange book I am caused to wonder about a couple things that revolve around the Pentecost experience. Doctor Wierwille writes that there was no “Spirit” in man after the fall until the possibility of it was restored at PENTECOST. So ..(correct me if Im wrong).. From the “Fall” until “Pentecost” man comprised only “Body” and “Soul”. Now in the latter sections of the Orange book He claims that “Faith” is of the “Spirit” and is not available to the “Natural Man”.Faith wasn’t AVAILABLE in the time the Gospels are pertinent to. Dr Wierwille claims that Gospel references to "Faith" apply to something different than Post Pentecost "faith" As Well what about Hebrews 11? Which says Abel had “faith”, Noah had “faith”etc. Now of course I know that Doctor Wierwille explains this away by saying that The original meanings of the Greek and Hebrew words are different from the meanings impuned to them by misled Scholars and that “faith” when used in regard to the OT/ Jesus periods doesn’t mean the same thing as “faith” when used post Pentecost. But did anyone here CHECK to see whether Wierwilles claimed interpretations of these Greek/Hebrew words were correct? Im curious. IS he correct? Now my second concern pertains to the same thing, the fact that ALL MEN between The Fall and Pentecost were “Natural Men”, They having no access to “Spirit”. Now if this is so, how did the OT Writers receive their message from God so as to write the OT? 1 Corinthians 2 v 14 says….Well, you know what it says. The Natural man cannot receive the things of the spirit. Did the OT Writers use their power to BELIEVE to write the OT? I only see him offer two options : POWER TO BELIEVE and FAITH How did the OT Writers RECIEVE the "Word" then? Again, it comes down to Doctor Wierwilles explanations as to the meanings of original words in original texts. Is anybody able to offer an opinion on whether they think Wierwilles interpretations on these 2 points are CORRECT? How CLOSE to the TRUTH do you guys think he was? ;)--> Mike???

And the notion about "7 administration". I have never heard that before either. There are very many ideas in the book that I have never heard of before.

PFAL has many very strange concepts that I have never read before. Such as the idea that there was no capacity for "faith" before pentecost. And that there were nothing but "Natural men" before Pentecost. Does anyone know where these concepts originated? Did VPW concieve then originally? Or did he get these notions from someone else? I get the feeling that the "Rightly Dividing" notion about getting rid of the chapter breaks and verse divisions was his own idea. I conclude this based on his great enthusiasm for the notion. (Expert comment needed from someone who knows the History)

You got ME thinking now George. Im at work and being a naughty boy lurking here, :D--> but I'll sure think on what youve said and get back atcha

Excellent post ! They sure can make those Greek / Hebrew words mean anything they want eh? I think I have never seen so much absorption with the Greek and Hebrew as I see in this church.

I think that if you just researched her Doctors utterances on one subject, say "Faith", if you went thru the book and just culled out everything he wrote on the subject of "faith", well you would find that his doctrine of faith doesnt add up and is in contradiction with itself. His writings on faith are mixed in with a whole load of mumbo jumbo on other subjects and so are lost in the general swill. Of course, a book like this is not for the brand new recruit, by the time you read PFAL you are already half absorbed in the group.

Hey George. You asked the vital question- why does a man sit there wrestling with doctrine he cant understand, and still convince himself it must be true doctrine. TomS gave the answer. So you were part of the solution as well. Good work!

Hey Tom Strange. I think you have given me a vital KEY and unlocked a door. Many thanks. undershepherding huh?

George Aar! That very question is the reason I keep coming back to these groups. Why do people do it??How does it precisely occur?? Before I die i hope to completely figure out the pure mechanisms involved in the conversion process. Its a divine mystery. Oh, I know that the church 'love bombs' recruits.But its more than that. As well, often, a mystical experience is involved for the individual. TomS makes a striking point, all that positive reinforcement reassuring that the process works makes a powerful influence. I hadnt considered that as vital, but I think the man is correct. If a) everyone is glowing enthusiastic around you about the "process"- b) you cant fathom the process and are confused = c) You must be a dummy. (Youre not a dummy George, I speak metaphorically)

Not much of a hit Exy. Theres only a thimble full. They wouldnt want to encourage anyone to the sin of gluttony -->

I posted my assessment of PFAL in the Doctrine forum.....for those interested in my bizarre opinions on such matters. :o-->

They "compromise with the world"? Their "spirituality" must be "weak". The "Temptations of the world" luring them. Satan , who goes about "like a roaring Lion" insidiously worming his way into their lives thru tricking them into "compromising" and "searing" their "christian consciences". :D--> Just thought id throw in a few JW Cliches GFO

Well having read half the book “Power for Abundant Living” I feel that it is time I commented on what I have read so far. Now it may well be that Mr Wierwille was entirely correct in everything he ever claimed and wrote, I Don’t know. To establish whether he was correct one would have to take, at least, courses in the study of Biblical composition and a course in English. As well one would have to embark upon extensive learning in the matter of Intepreting Biblical Greek texts. And Biblical Hebrew texts. A course in science would probably help too. Only after one was fully conversant in these disciplines could he examine everything the good doctor claims and determine whether Dr Wierwilles conclusions are correct or fallacious. Unfortunately among cult recruits the tendency is to accept, without independent research, that the “Man of God” is qualified to pontificate on such matters and is, in fact, the worlds foremost authority on all the above mentioned subjects. Now, getting down to a few PFAL specifics: The first and most immediately striking thing about the PFAL book is its extensive referral to “Formulas” that appear to be SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLES. The formula “Availability / Receivability / Usability” is just one example of the many formulas expounded by 'professor' Wierwille. I haven’t seen anything quite like it this side of Marxism / Leninism. The reader will not be fatigued by me quoting extensively all the Scientific Formulas listed, rather, the main thing that concerns me about them is whether or not they are True. Simply because the formulas are expounded in Totalistic terms, and look very significant, does not mean that they are Gods SACRED SCIENCE. I think their veracity would have to be established by some evidence. Do they work? Do they produce the promised results when applied? Those kinds of proofs are what I am talking about. As well, many of the Sacred Science Formulas are expounded in quite CONFOUNDING LANGUAGE. Just one example from page 77: ......... Quote….Things equal to the same thing are equal to each other. Therefore God Breathed Word = moved by the Holy Spirit = revelation” … End Quote. .......... Whether this equation is correct or not I cannot say, though it certainly looks impressive and extremely significant. There is little doubt the unlearned might find it somewhat intimidating. Another matter that concerns me pertaining to the Scientific Principles is the evidence provided by Doctor Wierwille to confirm that they are also “Biblical principles”. Many of the scriptures cited in support of this position appear UNRELATED to the Scientific Principle being discussed. The “NEEDS / WANTS” PARALLEL is one such example. The scriptures cited in support of this equation don’t even mention the term “needs / wants” nor is the word “parallel” mentioned in any of the scriptures. This certainly would cause me to search in a Biblical concordance under the words “needs” “wants” and “Parallel” before accepting this formula as being a Biblical one. Also of concern is that many of the scripture verses quoted to support the Sacred Mathematics are from SCATTERED TEXTS. The Doctor may quote, for example, single verses from Timothy, Galatians and Ephesians to prove an equation. This use of scattered text to establish the Truth of a doctrine is something that has to be treated with extreme caution by the reader. It is a very common method of presenting “proof” that Totalitarian Religious cults are very prone to employing. Dr Wierwille indeed warns us himself against the dangers inherent in this practise of SELECTIVE QUOTATION when he says on page 124: .......... Quote:… “The Word of God is Truth. When we rightly divide it we have the true Word, when we wrongly divide it we have error” End Quote ........... And again on page 118: ............ Quote:… “Anyone can take the Word of God and make it say exactly what he wants by taking it out of its context”… End Quote. ........... I think that noone would dispute that the use of Selective Quotation and scattered texts is DIVIDING THE WORD. Let us hope that “error” has not resulted in the good doctors case. Herr doctor also utters forth most extensively upon matters pertaining to the word structure of the Bible. Specifically the placements of Chapter breaks, Verses and punctuation. He also condemns those learned 'researches of old' for inserting words into the text that were not originally there so as to confirm their pre established dogmas. One can only hope that Doctor Wierwille has not engaged himself in those practises he condemns others for. Actually this particular subject, which the good doctor calls RIGHTLY DIVIDING appears to be one that he is very personally partial to, believing that every letter of every word in the Bible was placed specifically in just that position it occupies by God Himself, so that Wierwille, 3000 years later, could correctly interpret the profound significance of its being there. Now he may well be “rightly dividing” in everything he says, and know for a fact where every single misplaced comma, incorrect verse division, and substituted word in the King James Bible is. Perhaps God Himself taught the class in Biblical composition that Herr Doctor graduated from. I myself do not profess to be the worlds foremost authority on such matters. Peace unto you all. ;)-->

Hey DMiller. This forum has been running for gawd knows how long, with people rehashing TWI doctrine ad nauseum all during that time, and you think that I should stop talking about it? I think not. Tell the boys down in "doctrine" to stop rehashing it why dont you.

Hey George, I think it is much more interesting than the phone book. In fact I think it one of the more extraordinary books of doctrine Ive ever read. The only thing I can think that is similar to its style is Marxism/Leninism. The book purports to be a scientific one in many ways, in that it offers formulas and equations, its quite unlike ant religious book Ive read before. I have some major issues with section one "Power of believing" and will post on that subject when I have time to put together an appropriate post. The second section "The Bible is the word of God" is much more impressive, Im still thinking upon my response to that section, which at the moment I feel very drawn towards as propounding very many truths.

Apologies if i did a bad thing putting that persons name up. As to the book... Well can only say one thing... AWESOME

I find it hard to imagine that anything could surpass the Tobe Hooper/ David Soul version.