Raf
-
Posts
16,684 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
149
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Gallery
Posts posted by Raf
-
-
Hmmm. I'll leave this for others to decide:
Should I retract my objection to the snow story or not?
I have said all along that I do not have a copy of The Way: Living in Love. It has come to my attention that Wierwille's challenge to God was NOT (as I believed) "make it snow," but, rather, "Let me see it snow."
If that's the case, then God could have let HIM see it snow, and no one else (hence, a vision).
My problem is that a vision does little to verify a discussion with the Almighty, but since we're parsing words here, if one were to give VPW EVERY SINGLE benefit of the doubt, one would have to leave room for the "vision interpretation."
What's funny is, why didn't anyone (Mike) mention this before? It's not like I didn't ask.
Ok, so this particular derailment is back on track.
*******
Oldiesman: You mean, you don't believe what VPW wrote in Christians Should Be Prosperous?!?!
You and I gotta hang out and grab a beer one night.
********
Steve:
At the very least, Mike holds the PFAL book and Jesus Christ is Not God to be God-breathed. I come to this conclusion because in at least one case where they CLEARLY conflict with each other, Mike refers to the conflict as an "apparent contradiction" that needs to be resolved using the keys Wierwille taught for clearing up such matters in scripture.
[This message was edited by Rafael 1969 on January 02, 2003 at 14:16.]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Lifted Up:What weather reports? I have been staying out of this for some reasons, but I can't help being curious about that statement.
Just from a weather reporting point of view, a snow shower such as that in question would be unlikely to show up (or proof that it didn't happen) in any old weather reports, unless the point in question is precisely at an observing and reporting point for weather data. General conditions...the high and low temperature for that given day and whether or not there was precipitation...at even a very a nearby point...just will not tell you either way.
Lifted,
I'm just quoting part of your e-mail, for the sake of space.
Let's address the timeline of Wierwille's claim, and I'll ask people with a copy of The Way, Living in Love, to verify my facts and correct them if I am wrong.
Wierwille claims God spoke to him. He claims it snowed so heavily that he could not see the gas pumps that were so close to him. Then he claims that "approximately one month after" this incident, he starts his radio program.
We all know the date of the radio program, right? That's right, Oct. 3, 1942.
Do you want to tell me that a freak snowstorm in early September 1942 went unreported? That it sometimes snows in Ohio on the first day of school? Heavy enough that you can't see out your window?
Sorry, Wierwille lied.
I quote from Carol Van Drie:
quote:
Well, I made a phone call to the Paulding County Library which is the county that Payne is in. I stayed on the long distance call quite awhile with the librarian, because she searched the microfiche files for any news whatsoever about any snowstorm happening in September. Such a freak storm would have had to been reported in the local papers. The fact is, this "miracle" never occurred. Dr. Wierwille lied.
I simply don't by the suggestion that a September snowstorm would be so localized that only Wierwille would notice it, and that no one would find this storm worthy of mention.
Wierwille lied about the snowstorm. Period.
And again, he didn't say it was a vision. A vision, we cannot disprove. September snowfall we can. And we have.
-
I've been reading this and all I can say is that I have nothing to say. Mike, if 27 years of studying PFAL have failed to reveal to you its internal inconsistencies and flat-out inaccuracies, then nothing I can say on this thread or any other will convince you otherwise.
You REJECT the Bible and EXALT PFAL. That makes you an idolater, period. You accuse me of being a prosecutor in the court of traditional Christianity, which proves to me you are as illiterate as you are delusional. I pity you.
I was away from my computer and could not reply to the snow storm post a kajillion posts ago. I will in due time. I'm just busy at the moment.
-
quote:
I worship the God who gave these revelations. Aside from the written record God worked with Dr, what is there to respect in Dr that could be stretched into idolatry?
You're correct: Aside from the idol you're idolizing, I find no evidence of idolatry in your posts or positions.
But you see, that's the point. The idol which you idolize is the written word of VPW, which you equate to the Word of God. You idolize the written word of VPW, which is NOT "the Word of God," and for that, sir, you are an idolater.
quote:
Haven't you ever been falsly accused of being a worshiper of Paul because you read and talked about the epistles more than the gospels? How did you handle such accusations?
First off, no one has ever accused me of worshipping Paul. Many people have been accused of exalting the epistles OVER the gospels, but the accusation was NOT that we were worshipping Paul. The accusation was that we were DIMINISHING the gospels and the other writings of scripture. So, if you want to talk about getting your accusations straight, you might want to start there.
Of course, if you were to do that, your straw man would have very little relevance to the discussion at hand.
quote:
Goey, you asked for some simple specifics some time ago. Here’s what I do NOT believe: That Dr is above God, or that Dr is above Jesus Christ. For you all to accuse me of this says to me your reading skills are lacking.
I accuse you of holding the writings of VPW on par with the Bible itself, indeed ABOVE par with any version of the Bible we have available to us. I accuse you of exalting the words of VPW over the Word of God itself.
quote:
If you are going to accuse me of something, let’s get it a LITTLE more accurate. Accuse me of thinking that Dr’s books to us are on the same level of PAUL’s.
Then you admit it. Fine.
The FACT that you are wrong about this is evidenced by the fact that NO ONE, not VPW, not LCM, not anyone else who ever knew or worked with VPW, has ever made the same claim. In other words, you are ascribing attributes to VPW's written works that exceed even the wildest egomaniacal rantings of VPW himself. You idolize his words. You worship the creation of a man. That is the textbook definition of idolatry.
quote:
That’s something you can attack me on.
No, the attack is not on you. It is on your position, which is foolish, unbiblical and ungodly.
quote:
It's very anti-tradition.
Anti-tradition. Anti-common-sense. Anti-Biblical. Anti-Christ.
quote:
I’ll admit to it, but I’ll deny that this stand of mine is wrong.
Your denials are worth the paper on which they're printed. Think about it.
-
Oldies,
I think what people are trying to say is that if not for TWI-1, God would have found another method to reach you. The problem, of course, is that such a statement is unprovable, unless you go back and change time (which is kind of what makes it unprovable).
The statement can only be proven by inference. God is resourceful. I have no trouble believing that if I never encountered TWI, God would have found some other way to reach me with the positive message I heard there. I think that is consistent with God's character and abilities.
So in that sense, God is not limited by people or organizations. TWI-1 fell. It no longer exists. So, is God's Word no longer available? Of course it is. God is resourceful. He can reach people, whether or not there's a TWI-1, a VPW, or even (gasp) an RAO!
Happy New Year.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Mike:Rafael, the reason I believe the first half of the 1942 promise ("I will teach you my Word like it hasn't been known since the first century...") is because I, myself, was a beneficiary of the second half of the promise("...if you will teach it to others.")
...
Even the CES people have put into some of their fundamental, charter-like documents that Dr DID in fact get more Word distributed around the world than any effort since the first century IN ONE PLACE.
Many other places over the centuries could offer some elements of this same truth, but Dr was the first, AND ONLY to get it all together in one place.
And there is your fundamental flaw, Mike.
Uniqueness of Wierwille's doctrine (all in one place) is NOT proof that there was a 1942 promise. The fact that he cobbled together an eclectic mix of doctrines does not prove that God spoke to him audibly in 1942.
I agree that he taught quite a bit. But I also believe that quite a bit of what he taught was wrong. That would be, to me, a HUGE indicator of the fact that the promise of 1942, if there WAS one, was not of God.
Think of all that Wierwille got wrong.
1. The Law of Believing.
2. Tithing.
3. The relevance of the gospels to Christians today.
4. dechomai and lambano (he BUTCHERED those words).
5. Adultery and fornication.
Those are not minor points. Those are MAJOR. Ok, so he may have a point on a lot of the things he taught. But if you expect me to think that God made a unique promise to this man, and all you have to prove it is that he collected other people's doctrines and put it together, then I understand why it took you 27 years to believe that stuff. Because if you spent 27 minutes THINKING about it, you would know how utterly absurd it is.
quote:
One place will have SIT accurate, but they shove the idolatrous trinity down the throats of their adherents as a REQUIREMENT. The same is the case in ALL other places: some great truths with some total baloney mixed in their written doctrinal requirements.
And Wierwille had no baloney?
Baloney.
quote:
I did this for 27 years, at the time often envying many of you, who believed and jumped in with both feet immediately, much quicker than I was able to. But I will say this: every single element of truth Dr taught passed my tests during those 27 years.
Well, OF COURSE! You dismiss the blatant dishonesty and sexual depravity that permeated his life and doctrine! That's right, it permeated his DOCTRINE. That's a big deal, man!
quote:
I could never suggest or desire that any of you quickly believe everything I say either.
I don't think there's any danger of that happening.
quote:
As I suggested to one of you privately yesterday, might I suggest taking things in the way the noble Bereans did with Paul in Acts 17? Now, I'm NOT comparing myself with the Apostle Paul! (Did I catch you thinking that way about what I just said?) The Bereans didn't know that Paul was going to go on to be a superstar. But they listened with an open mind, and THEN searched the scriptures DAILY whether they were true, and FINALLY they believed.
They searched the scriptures to find out whether what Paul said ABOUT CHRIST was true. They did not search the scriptures to find out whether what Paul said about HIMSELF was true. You're asking us to search the scriptures to see if the 1942 promise is true? Puh-lease.
quote:
The noble Bereans ALSO did listen with open mind, and not a hostile, contrarian, investigative mind that’s already made up.
An open mind considers evidence. You've already shown yourself to be the one who has discarded evidence specifically because it detracts from your hero-worshipping stance. How DARE you insult the people here at GS, accusing us of not having an open mind to this lunacy? You give people NO CREDIT for having thought these things through over the years. Only you and your 27 years of open mindedness have been honest? How DARE you?
quote:
Then the opposite tack is often employed here in how anti-VPW material is greeted with open arms and never investigated with the same scrutiny as the pro.'
Horse hit. As you VERY WELL know, there are plenty of people who are able to separate the good of VPW from the bad, who acknowledge his faults without dismissing absolutely everything he taught.
quote:
Research Geek, who is well respected here, posted a spectacularly excellent page on rules of logic a few weeks ago where he complains that these rules are OFTEN being broken here. So, those of you who accepted what he said there, please don’t bug me about my complaint of the same. Double standards greatly diminish the credibility of those who hold them.
Mike, I want you to read that paragraph to yourself over and over again, especially the last sentence. It applies far more to you than it does to me. Just, trust me on this one, a'ight?
quote:
So, Rafael, for me it does NOT all boil down to a blind belief in the 1942 promise.
Yes it does.
quote:
There's such a fine balance between gullibility and skepticism.
What fine balance? They're polar opposites. You have shown yourself to be gullible when it comes to VPW's testimony of himself, and skeptical when it comes to any objective or subjective third person analysis of what anyone else has to say about him. That's not balance. That's Jonestown Kool-Aid.
quote:
Let’s aspire to higher standards.
How's this for a higher standard? Study God's Word, learn it, pray to Him for guidance. Rely on Him, His Word and His Spirit/spirit to guide you to a full understanding of Him, through His Son, Jesus Christ.
You need help, Mike. Your idolatry cannot stand.
-
It all goes back to the 1942 promise.
Well, here's my nickel.
The 1942 promise did not happen. How do I know this? Because VPW cited supporting evidence to prove the promise did happen, and the supporting evidence has been shown to be false. That's why you have to ignore the snow on the gas pumps story, isn't it, Mike? Because the snow on the gas pumps story PROVES the LIE on which you've based your entire brand of Wierwille worship.
You see, VPW asked God to make it snow, and VPW said that God made it snow. He did not say it was a vision. He said it snowed. He did not say he asked God to "show him" snow. He said he asked God to MAKE IT snow.
It didn't snow. The weather reports from that day in that region prove it did not snow that day. VPW was lying. If he was lying about the snow (and he was), then I have no reason, none, to believe he was telling the truth about the promise.
That does not mean EVERYTHING he taught was bunk. But it does mean that the things he taught were of no more value than that of any other Christian teacher. (In fact, I would argue that it places a greater burden on Wierwille's doctrine, as he has already demonstrated a willingness to lie in God's name).
-
Hey, I was a Geer splinter!
-
quote:
Originally posted by Mike:George, that's an OPINION not a fact.
It's only factual that a lot of people report it as such. I don't believe the details of those reports. Sorry. There was a time when I did. Now I don't because I dug a little deeper.
I forget who first said this, but it's so worth repeating here:
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion. You are not entitled to your own facts. Wierwille's abuses, lies and indiscretions are facts. You may decide whether they outweigh his preaching and teaching ministry, but you are not entitled to decide whether or not they are facts. They are. Facts.
-
1
-
-
Actually, let's look at those topics again...
"So, here are the topics I deliberately ignore now that I’ve made my decision based on careful consideration of the facts and the truths: sex scandals, plagiarism, weather reports.... the list goes on,"
The sex scandals: which prove that he had an ulterior motive in his doctrine on abortion and his teachings on sexuality in general.
The plagiarism: which calls into question his integrity as a researcher, and his honesty as a presenter of God's Word.
The weather reports, which prove his rampant dishonesty when it comes to matters regarding his calling as a man of God.
Yeah, once those are dismissed, it's easy to talk about the covenant between VPW and God.
-
1
-
-
it..........................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
.........just...............
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
.............won't..........
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
die!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
quote:
Originally posted by WordWolf:Do you think we'll have to deal with
"special editions" in several years, once we've
all bought copies?
Actually, I simply don't recall if its in the theatrical release. But it's definitely in the extended.
-
-
quote:
Originally posted by Mike:After weighing more data than most of you, and after having more time to sift through it all than most of you, I feel confident in rejecting your unanimity on all these negative subjects regarding VPW.
And I reject your conclusion right back.
quote:
Um, yes it is.
This is not a glassy eyed hero worshiper type of a decision.
quote:
It’s a decision that I knew was very unpopular and that I’d loose friends over. I even lost a wife over it.
Sorry to hear that. I honestly would not lose a friend over his opinion of VPW. I would lose a friend who continually insisted that I was ignorant, or lacking in relevant information, who nonetheless declined to provide the information he believes would lead me to the same conclusion.
quote:
How many of you stand up to disapproval like this?
Don't patronize us. I'm standing up to it right now, from you.
quote:
How many of you really stood up to the abuses as you saw your fellow believers getting trounced by the Corps Gestapo?
You mean, how many of us told our former branch leader to his face that he was full of it and that we were going to follow God and not men, not even TWI? How many of us looked "our" new branch leader in the eye and told him that TWI was abandoning the very principles on which it claimed to be founded? You know, coming on a message board and saying "I like VPW" isn't exactly my idea of courage. Big WHOOP.
quote:
Or did you wait until you, yourself were a victim before you got angry? Did you speak up before they kicked you out, or did you only speak up at a time and place where you were safe, like far from of TWI and in the approving arms of GSers?
Mike, I appreciate your blunt honesty, but your comment above... well, it doesn't apply to me, so I'll shut up. But if you want a nickel's worth of free advice, it was a cheap shot.
quote:
I was a very lone and lonely voice against the problems in the ministry and I learned to ignore the disapproval of corrupt minded leadership. Well corrupt minded leadership rises up in any and every human organization, so if you don’t start learning to go against the stream here in GS, then you’ll get bit in the butt again.
Sometimes, sometimes, the stream is taking you in the right direction. So listen, what you need to keep in mind is: what is your goal, and how are you going to get there? If that means going against the stream, then go. If it means going with the stream, then go. But if going against the stream means agreeing with you, then I'm dropping my oars in the water right now.
quote:
So, here are the topics I deliberately ignore now that I’ve made my decision based on careful consideration of the facts and the truths: sex scandals, plagiarism, weather reports.... the list goes on, but these are the items that most GSers seem to get hung up on.
Those are the issues that most clearly demonstrate the flawed character of VPW. Like I said in the other thread, if you dismiss those issues in order to evaluate the doctrine, then I'm totally with you. But if you're going to dismiss those issues in order to continue exalting VPW as some uniquely qualified man of God, then I'm not with you. And it's obvious that you're doing the latter.
quote:
With that said, I’m going to continue making the data available to those who want it.
BRING IT ON!!!!
[This message was edited by Rafael 1969 on December 27, 2002 at 8:42.]
-
Is anyone else having a serious case of deja vu? I mean, we've been here before. I am just SURE of it: someone came along and posted Wierwille's last teaching, citing the Living Victoriously comment where Wierwille says "if I knew this was the last time blah blah blah."
I am as concerned with Wierwille's last teaching as I am with Oswald Chambers', CS Lewis', etc. In other words, not at all.
It's the content of the message that counts, not the gravity placed on it by the messenger. Wierwille's last teaching has some kind of profound importance? Oh, for heaven's sake.
Hope you had a good night's sleep, Mike.
P.S. "The Joy of Service" was also a chapter in the book "Our Times," edited by Chris Geer and published in 1990.
-
Wordwolf:
quote:
We still haven't heard how Smeagol became Gollum,or what he was before he became Gollum.
Yes, I know the answer, but a lot of people didn't
read the book.
Actually, Gandalf explains it to Frodo in the extended version of Fellowship of the Ring, at the Mines of Moria. If you have not seen the extended version, old friend, get thee to a Blockbuster NOW.
-
The key to any good psych test is in its participants not knowing what the test is about. Since I know what it's about, my answers are tainted by that knowledge.
-
quote:
Oh yeah, they completely paradoxed the TNG series finale. I guess continuity is just for "lesser" shows.
Zix, the TNG series finale only showed one possible future. The moment Picard came back and told everyone what he knew about the future, that future became only one possibility among many. In fact, we KNOW that future cannot come to pass because in it, Admiral Riker commanded the Enterprise-D, which was destroyed in Generations.
I am SUCH a geek!
So anyway, once Picard came back and started blabbing about the future, he polluted the timeline, so the future of the characters was no longer "set," so to speak.
I know, I know, "this is no time to argue about time. We don't have the time."
-
Is this some kind of psychological test? If (as I suspect) it is, then Buck's answer is hilarious.
-
How about a movie called,
Star Trek: Enough Already
The alpha quadrant is threatened by a seemingly indestructible and undefeatable threat. The Enterprise-E, the only ship in the quadrant, is sent to deal with the threat by talking to it for two hours. The threat, sensing danger, immediately destroys the Enterprise-E, killing everything on board except Data's head, which drifts uncontrollably toward the nearest star. Just when it seems all hope is lost and Data's head is going to melt - it does.
Starfleet, which observes the calamity using one of its ubiquitous cameras, sends 371 other ships to deal with the threat. Unfortunately, the 371 ships won't be ready until Tuesday.
Faced with all but certain destruction, Starfleet surrenders, and the undefeatable threat destroys Starfleet, along with the final remnants of ILM studios on earth, ensuring that the 745th Star Wars movie will not be made.
The movie ends with a close up of the undefeatable threat.
A single gold band.
One ring to rule them all.
-
Good LUCK! HAHAHAHAHAHA LUCK LUCK LUCK!!!! Wooohooooo! Good LUCK!
May God sustain you through the good times and the bad, and may you always have the courage and the wisdom to recall the love that brought you to this day.
-
Have a happy birthday Mark.
-
-
Garth, where was your believing? How could you believe for all of us to miss your birthday?
Do you know why we all missed it? It was the FEAR in the heart and life of Garth P.
I'm so ashamed of you. Get thee behind me.
No, wait, that sounds sick.
Happy birthday.
Actual Errors in PFAL
in About The Way
Posted
I'm not talking about errors that are subject to interpretation. Whether you believe the dead are alive now, for example, really depends on your worldview and your interpretation of scripture. Whether you believe in "the law of believing" depends on your interpretation of certain words of Christ.
But some errors are concrete. They are objective. If I told you 2+2=5, you would be able to say I am wrong, flat out, and that there was no room for misinterpretation of that fact. I can't say, "well, it's just your interpretation that 2+2=4, but you're just not enlightened enough to know that it's really 5."
The purpose of this thread is to document actual errors in PFAL, primarily the book, but also the class. Why rehash this stuff? Simple: for those who believe that PFAL is “God-breathed,” it is necessary to point out that God cannot get things wrong, especially when it comes to matters of Biblical interpretation. So, let’s look at some documentable errors in PFAL.
Number 1
In PFAL, Wierwille writes that David is called “a man after God’s own heart” only AFTER the events in II Samuel related to Bathsheba and Uriah.
In truth, David is called “a man after God’s own heart” in I Samuel, long before he is king, long before he met Bathsheba.
Number 2
In PFAL, Wierwille writes that there is no word “lama” in the Aramaic.
In truth, there IS such a word in Palestinian Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke. It means “why?”
Number 3
In PFAL, Wierwille writes that the word “lama” should probably be replaced with “lmna,” “for this purpose,” which is never used in a question.
In truth, “lmna” can be used in a question, something Wierwille acknowledged near the end of his life, and which is acknowledged in TWI’s very own Aramaic Interlinear.
Number 4
In PFAL, Wierwille notes the distinction between “thoroughly” and “throughly.”
In truth, the latter is an archaic form of the former. They mean precisely the same thing (Wierwille failed to follow his own principle of interpreting words according to their Biblical usage).
Number 5
In PFAL, Wierwille writes of the difference between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven.
In truth, the Bible uses these terms interchangeably. There is no difference whatsoever in their usage. Jesus uses them interchangeably. (I debated whether this is a difference in interpretation or a difference in fact. My conclusion is that this is a difference in fact, as it is plain to anyone who cares to look up the parallel usages of the two terms).
Number 6
In PFAL, Wierwille says “apistia” is the kind of unbelief held by people who don’t know enough to believe, while “apatheia” is the kind of unbelief held by people who’ve heard enough, but don’t care.
In truth, the word “apistia” is used of the disciples after the resurrection (Mark 16:14) and of Israel (Romans 3: 1-3). Neither can be said to have not heard enough to believe.
Number 7
In PFAL, Wierwille defines “apostle” as one who brings new light to his generation. It may be old light, but it is new to the generation that hears it.
In truth, “apostle” means “sent one.” It does not carry the definition Wierwille applies to it (indeed, such a definition leads one to wonder how the term could apply to more than one person in any given generation, while we KNOW that there were 12 during Jesus’ lifetime, and 13 if we include Jesus himself – the Apostle and High Priest of our confession. Or is it profession? Whatever).
Number 8
In PFAL Wierwille writes that “all without distinction” means anyone within a specific category.
In truth, basic grammar tells us that all in a certain category means “all WITH a distinction,” the distinction being membership in that category. This error is so fundamentally blatant that Wierwille himself corrected it in Jesus Christ is Not God.
Number 9
In PFAL, Wierwille writes that the gospels are written to Israel and/or to the church of the gospels.
In truth, the gospels are all written after the resurrection, and they are written to practicing Christians. There was nothing written specifically TO the church of the gospels.
Number 10
In PFAL, Wierwille states that in Luke 2, Jesus was taken to the temple for bar-mitzvah at age 12 instead of 13 because he was considered illegitimate.
In truth, the passage in Luke 2 has nothing whatsoever to do with bar-mitzvah. The passage states rather clearly that they were celebrating Passover, not Jesus’ bar-mitzvah.
In addition, there is no such custom in Judaism (treating illegitimate children differently for the purpose of bar-mitzvah). Wierwille cites “an old piece of literature” as his source for this bizarre claim.
Any one of these FACTS should be sufficient to prove that PFAL is not the perfect utterance of God Almighty, but (at best) the flawed work of a flawed man trying to communicate a system for reading and understanding the Bible.