OK, we are indeed posting at the same time. Just read your reply, and thank you. I was beginning to lose faith in you! Give you up as "not ready" or something!
On the positive side, then. You feel that Jesus taught that believing was a "law"? That is, like the law of gravity. Was Jesus teaching his disciples "keys to the more abundant life" that he came to give?
I would say that the ideas and images are pretty much the same. Jesus said "believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them"; "give, and it shall be given unto you" etc etc.
I can't say it was a law that works like gravity; but a spiritual law, one that works, if one meets the conditions that God has asked. But its not like gravity because it is a spiritual law and might not be readily apparent or manifested like a physical law.
In my mind, I substitute the word "law" for "truth". It is a spiritual truth.
To me, the important thing is whether it is true or not, not whether it is a law or not.
Some good discussions along with the normal flotsam, etc. (And don't we all have differing opinions about which is which) but I think my interest is waning on this thread and the False Prophet thread. Just saying in case I don't get back here and notice that someone is addressing me. Y'all know where to find me.
Thank you all, and especially you, Oldies. You're a good sport.
Look...this "law of believing" is asinine...it doesn't exist!...the guy who taught you this drugged and raped young girls...how stupid can you be?
I hate to insult people but...really!...how stupid can you be?????????????
Its stoopid to think that folks should abandon spiritual truths that are assimilated believed and received only because of the sins of the communicator.
The guy who authored Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon, caused people to worship other gods and sacrifice their living babies to these false gods. People who want to continue to read and learn from these texts are stupid?
The guy who authored Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon, caused people to worship other gods and sacrifice their living babies to these false gods. People who want to continue to read and learn from these texts are stupid?
Oh let's not stop there Oldies. Many people think it's stupid to believe in a God who on many occasions commanded Israel to commit genocide. Who required (allegedly)a man to sacrifice his own son to prove a point. Or made a deal with the Devil just to prove how faithful a man (Job) was. "Yeah Satan -- go ahead and kill Job's children. Go ahead and take away from him all that I've blessed him with. I'll prove to you that even then the dude will love me." Some people think it's worse than being stupid to believe in such a God -- it's immoral. So they say.
The guy who authored Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon, caused people to worship other gods and sacrifice their living babies to these false gods. People who want to continue to read and learn from these texts are stupid?
I'd say not stupid.. just ill informed.
Kinda like those who enshrine and showcase the stolen works of a *man* who fulfilled perhaps ONE qualification for leadership in the church, and bailed out on the rest..
Kinda like those who enshrine and showcase the stolen works of a *man* who fulfilled perhaps ONE qualification for leadership in the church, and bailed out on the rest..
:) So, Mr. Squirrel, are you saying he actually at one time had more than one leadership qualification but sin led him to lose them? Which one qualification did he manage to maintain?
Hey, Oldies, speaking of proverbs, I think of "believing equals receiving" as just that: a proverb, not a law.
What is a proverb? It's a blanket statement that is generally true but does not apply in all situations.
Example: train up a child in the way that he should go, and when he is old, he will not depart from it.
Generally true. Always true? Of course not. But often true.
Same thing with "confession of belief yields receipt of confession." Catchy, I like it. Apply it as much as I can. It's useful, and helps maintain a positive attitude. So what if it doesn't work 100% of the time? It's not a law. My theological framework doesn't have to fall apart because of it.
"If you can dream it, you can do it."
That's another good one. It's inspiring, encouraging. Always true? Good heavens, no. No matter what I dream, I'll never be able to fly without the help of something: a hang glider, an airplane, a rocket pack... SOMETHING. But hey, it's a nice dream.
Proverbs. Truisms. Maxims. All these things are generally regarded as true with the understanding that they won't always apply in every situation.
Laws, on the other hand, apply in every situation. That's why they're laws. The law of gravity always applies. The effect of gravity may be negligible, depending on your distance from an object. On earth, I weigh... more than I want to. In space, I weigh nothing. The gravity of earth still has an effect on me, but because of my distance from the earth, that effect is negligible. If you wanted to calculate it, you could. But why?
There is no "law of believing." There's faith in God. There's believing His Word. There's "the power of positive thinking." But believing doesn't work with the kind of mathematical exactness or scientific precision that laws do.
From his track record, I don't think his profile fit any other qualification. Unless you qualify being married, while bullying the wife and chasing any skirt not attached to the floor with hammer and nails being the description of "husband of one wife"..
ALWAYS had anger issues..
never a time I can think of, he didn't or wouldn't accept some kind of lucrative "gift" from admiring, adoring, and financially strapped "followers"..
I helped buy the twig hopper.. I think one of the harley's.. and the auditorium that has (had?) his name on it.. I coulda used the money to eat better at the time.
Squeezing it for all it's worth.. "apt to teach" was about the only one, in my opinion. And he even went to the dark side of the force on that one.. taught some real vile stuff. How the senses world was gonna get the government to back and execute me because of da word..
but like they said in the sixties.. if you can't play well, play loud..
From his track record, I don't think his profile fit any other qualification. Unless you qualify being married, while bullying the wife and chasing any skirt not attached to the floor with hammer and nails being the description of "husband of one wife"..
ALWAYS had anger issues..
never a time I can think of, he didn't or wouldn't accept some kind of lucrative "gift" from admiring, adoring, and financially strapped "followers"..
I helped buy the twig hopper.. I think one of the harley's.. and the auditorium that has (had?) his name on it.. I coulda used the money to eat better at the time.
Squeezing it for all it's worth.. "apt to teach" was about the only one, in my opinion. And he even went to the dark side of the force on that one.. taught some real vile stuff. How the senses world was gonna get the government to back and execute me because of da word..
but like they said in the sixties.. if you can't play well, play loud..
he certainly could play loud..
Ya know -- I sure do wish I had a copy of Mrs. Wierwille's book. I remember writing to . . . can't remember what her name was . . . asking if I could purchase it. She wrote back to me saying essentially -- We don't sell such books to former members of TWI. I wrote back to her saying -- Yeah, but even the dogs eat the crumbs from the Master's table.
Ya know -- I sure do wish I had a copy of Mrs. Wierwille's book. I remember writing to . . . can't remember what her name was . . . asking if I could purchase it. She wrote back to me saying essentially -- We don't sell such books to former members of TWI. I wrote back to her saying -- Yeah, but even the dogs eat the crumbs from the Master's table.
ROFLMAO - Larry you do have a priceless sense of humor!!!! You might also have asked her how there could be "former members" if TWI does not have membership? LOL LOL
ROFLMAO - Larry you do have a priceless sense of humor!!!!
:) Where some people see my sense of humor others see it as being "caustic".
You might also have asked her how there could be "former members" if TWI does not have membership? LOL LOL
I suppose, even though I didn't say so, from my response to her you might have gathered what she actually was saying to me when I made my request. I figured if reminding her of what the scriptures said didn't change her mind nothing else would have. Oh well. Such is life.
There is no "law of believing." There's faith in God. There's believing His Word. There's "the power of positive thinking." But believing doesn't work with the kind of mathematical exactness or scientific precision that laws do.
So if there's no law of believing, then for someone to call it a law would be a figure of speech, right? To me, anything exaggerated is hyperbole. Like in Gen. when Nimrod built a tower to reach "unto heaven". Even if that project had been completed, the tower would not have reached unto heaven, so it's hyperbole. But you don't like that word here.
So what happened to the mathematical exactness and scientific precision of the law of thermodynamics, or whatever law it is that says that if you get thrown into a burning fiery furnace, your body will be consumed by the fire? Didn't happen to Daniel's three friends. Laws can be superceded by other laws, including the law of Meshach, Shadrach, and Abennego's believing.
Johniam, don't misrepresent me. I have no problem with YOU calling "the law of believing" hyperbole.
I have a problem with you or anyone else saying that's the way Wierwille saw it and presented it. He didn't. He was not exaggerating when he called it a law. There's nothing to suggest that he was.
As for God superceding ANY law, I leave that to His power. That doesn't make it any less a law.
And no, hyperbole is not "anything exaggerated." A hyperbole is an extreme example of exaggeration. It's the difference between "I'll bet a hundred bucks the law of believing is bunk," vs. "I'll bet all the money in the world the law of believing is bunk."
Not if the sayings are presenting themselves as sayings and not as "immutable laws of life."
Read the book of Proverbs. Can you honestly say that everything in it is true always? Of course not. They're not SUPPOSED to be blanket statements that cover every circumstance described. Sometimes you train up a child in the way that he should go, and when he is old, he sticks his middle finger up at you and goes his own way. Doesn't make the proverb untrue; it makes the kid a jerk.
"The woman of folly is boisterous,
She is naive and knows nothing.
She sits at the doorway of her house,
On a seat by the high places of the city,
Calling to those who pass by,
Who are making their paths straight:
“Whoever is naive, let him turn in here,”
And to him who lacks understanding she says,
“Stolen water is sweet;
And bread eaten in secret is pleasant.”
Is there a woman somewhere who really sits at her front stoop and says "Come on in, naive people! I've got stolen food for you!"
Of course not. And the Bible is not saying there is. These are expressions. The woman doesn't say those things, but the Bible treats it like she might as well say those things.
The proverbs of Solomon.
A wise son makes a father glad,
But a foolish son is a grief to his mother
Ok, so a foolish son is NOT a grief to his father, and a good son doesn't make his mother proud. Right?
The LORD will not allow the righteous to hunger,
But He will reject the craving of the wicked.
Wanna know who the unrighteous are? Look at the hungry. God will not allow the righteous to go hungry, so if you spot someone who's hungry, you've found an unrighteous man. Right?
Of course not.
A gracious woman attains honor,
And ruthless men attain riches.
Okay, so the ruthless men attain riches, but they don't use them for food, because only the unrighteous are hungry. Right?
Of course not.
There are six things that get on my nerves, seven that really tick me off...
Wait, is it six or seven?
It's a proverb, ferpete's sake, you don't have to get all bent out of shape about it!
The book of Proverbs contains wisdom: God-breathed wisdom. Granted, it's more authoritative than "early to bed, early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy and wise," but the bottom line is not every proverb in the book of proverbs is meant to be some kind of blanket statement that covers every scenario that fits the description.
Weird, I don't remember Solomon preaching at people (writing scriptures...) AFTER he fell into idolatry.
He was sinning to God yes, but, was he hurting people too?
I dunno.
I think the example is ridiculous.
Doc Vic preached and wrote WHILE he was drugging and sexually harrassing women.
Yelled from the pulpit and wanted us to think he was ''so righteous''. He was trusted and looked upon as the one to emulate.......all the while lying and manipulating.
Solomon was in the boundaries of his law (many wives) and broke God's law by following other gods.....
How does a proverb being generally true make Proverbs any less the Word of God? Hint: It doesn't.
johnyouare:
Laws can be superceded by other laws, including the law of Meshach, Shadrach, and Abennego's believing.
Okay, my jaw is on the floor. Do you really think their believing "quenched the violence of fire"?? They confessed their faith in God, though they made a critical 'law of believing' error by expressing doubt when they said "but if not..."
I think the Fourth Man who joined them in the furnace had something to do with their deliverance. BTW, the critical isue wasn't their believing fercryinoutloud, it was their steadfast obedience and faithfulness.
There really is a forest if you'll look beyond those trees.
But of course, harm does befall the righteous. The statement it a truism, not a mathematically exact and scientifically precise law. And a wise person knows the difference between a maxim, a truism, a proverb and a steadfast "this is always true and there are no exceptions" kind of statement.
Weird, I don't remember Solomon preaching at people (writing scriptures...) AFTER he fell into idolatry.
He was sinning to God yes, but, was he hurting people too?
I dunno.
I think the example is ridiculous.
Doc Vic preached and wrote WHILE he was drugging and sexually harrassing women.
Yelled from the pulpit and wanted us to think he was ''so righteous''. He was trusted and looked upon as the one to emulate.......all the while lying and manipulating.
Solomon was in the boundaries of his law (many wives) and broke God's law by following other gods.....
maybe I am missing something. :unsure:
This is similiar to Eli the prophet. He was still a prophet when he recognized that Samuel was being called of God - but God didn't talk to him. I'm sure folks still consulted him, still believed his words. Perhaps he even gave good advice, Godly advice, so-to-speak.
However, he knew better than to ignore when Samuel said that he had a dream and that God had spoken to him in that dream.
Eli was no longer able to hear God - yet he was able to do some things for God.
Makes you wonder about VPW. It is entirely possible that he was able to do lots of stuff that seemed Godly and perhaps even were - but he most likely was so far out in left field that he was mowing someone else's lawn...
Having a discussion where some folks re-interpret what vpwactually wrote is like playing Battleship with someone who cheats. They keep moving their boats around.
This thing has taken so many twist and turns and gone off on so many tangents, you would think there would be personal, anecdotal evidence out the yingyang. (good or bad)
The key word here is personal, as in, "This actually happened to me as a result of the law of believing."
I'm not gonna tell ya what I'm "believing" will happen.
It's kinda like keeping your wish a secret as you break the "wishbone".
quote: Okay, my jaw is on the floor. Do you really think their believing "quenched the violence of fire"??
Yes. Sure, God had to do His part, but if those three had been afraid, they'd be dead. Same for Peter in Acts 12 when the angel busted him out of jail. He was sleeping for God's sakes. Some things you can't believe for without God signing off on it; other things you can. I think believing has a lot to do with peoples' self esteem, which leads directly to positive and negative results. How do you feel when you go to a job interview? Think that just might have an effect on the outcome? Believing DOES work!
I don't believe VP really thought that all believing equals all receiving; he didn't teach it that way. Raf, you're time in twi was in the late 80s/early 90s, right? He just did not teach it that way.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
35
52
21
51
Popular Days
Sep 4
93
Sep 6
84
Sep 5
78
Sep 7
38
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 35 posts
oldiesman 52 posts
doojable 21 posts
Larry N Moore 51 posts
Popular Days
Sep 4 2007
93 posts
Sep 6 2007
84 posts
Sep 5 2007
78 posts
Sep 7 2007
38 posts
doojable
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
I would say that the ideas and images are pretty much the same. Jesus said "believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them"; "give, and it shall be given unto you" etc etc.
I can't say it was a law that works like gravity; but a spiritual law, one that works, if one meets the conditions that God has asked. But its not like gravity because it is a spiritual law and might not be readily apparent or manifested like a physical law.
In my mind, I substitute the word "law" for "truth". It is a spiritual truth.
To me, the important thing is whether it is true or not, not whether it is a law or not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
anotherDan
Cool, Oldies.
Some good discussions along with the normal flotsam, etc. (And don't we all have differing opinions about which is which) but I think my interest is waning on this thread and the False Prophet thread. Just saying in case I don't get back here and notice that someone is addressing me. Y'all know where to find me.
Thank you all, and especially you, Oldies. You're a good sport.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Its stoopid to think that folks should abandon spiritual truths that are assimilated believed and received only because of the sins of the communicator.
The guy who authored Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon, caused people to worship other gods and sacrifice their living babies to these false gods. People who want to continue to read and learn from these texts are stupid?
Edited by oldiesmanLink to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Oh let's not stop there Oldies. Many people think it's stupid to believe in a God who on many occasions commanded Israel to commit genocide. Who required (allegedly)a man to sacrifice his own son to prove a point. Or made a deal with the Devil just to prove how faithful a man (Job) was. "Yeah Satan -- go ahead and kill Job's children. Go ahead and take away from him all that I've blessed him with. I'll prove to you that even then the dude will love me." Some people think it's worse than being stupid to believe in such a God -- it's immoral. So they say.
Edited by Larry N MooreLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I'd say not stupid.. just ill informed.
Kinda like those who enshrine and showcase the stolen works of a *man* who fulfilled perhaps ONE qualification for leadership in the church, and bailed out on the rest..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
:) So, Mr. Squirrel, are you saying he actually at one time had more than one leadership qualification but sin led him to lose them? Which one qualification did he manage to maintain?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Well, yes, some people do say that.
Hey, Oldies, speaking of proverbs, I think of "believing equals receiving" as just that: a proverb, not a law.
What is a proverb? It's a blanket statement that is generally true but does not apply in all situations.
Example: train up a child in the way that he should go, and when he is old, he will not depart from it.
Generally true. Always true? Of course not. But often true.
Same thing with "confession of belief yields receipt of confession." Catchy, I like it. Apply it as much as I can. It's useful, and helps maintain a positive attitude. So what if it doesn't work 100% of the time? It's not a law. My theological framework doesn't have to fall apart because of it.
"If you can dream it, you can do it."
That's another good one. It's inspiring, encouraging. Always true? Good heavens, no. No matter what I dream, I'll never be able to fly without the help of something: a hang glider, an airplane, a rocket pack... SOMETHING. But hey, it's a nice dream.
Proverbs. Truisms. Maxims. All these things are generally regarded as true with the understanding that they won't always apply in every situation.
Laws, on the other hand, apply in every situation. That's why they're laws. The law of gravity always applies. The effect of gravity may be negligible, depending on your distance from an object. On earth, I weigh... more than I want to. In space, I weigh nothing. The gravity of earth still has an effect on me, but because of my distance from the earth, that effect is negligible. If you wanted to calculate it, you could. But why?
There is no "law of believing." There's faith in God. There's believing His Word. There's "the power of positive thinking." But believing doesn't work with the kind of mathematical exactness or scientific precision that laws do.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
From his track record, I don't think his profile fit any other qualification. Unless you qualify being married, while bullying the wife and chasing any skirt not attached to the floor with hammer and nails being the description of "husband of one wife"..
ALWAYS had anger issues..
never a time I can think of, he didn't or wouldn't accept some kind of lucrative "gift" from admiring, adoring, and financially strapped "followers"..
I helped buy the twig hopper.. I think one of the harley's.. and the auditorium that has (had?) his name on it.. I coulda used the money to eat better at the time.
Squeezing it for all it's worth.. "apt to teach" was about the only one, in my opinion. And he even went to the dark side of the force on that one.. taught some real vile stuff. How the senses world was gonna get the government to back and execute me because of da word..
but like they said in the sixties.. if you can't play well, play loud..
he certainly could play loud..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Ya know -- I sure do wish I had a copy of Mrs. Wierwille's book. I remember writing to . . . can't remember what her name was . . . asking if I could purchase it. She wrote back to me saying essentially -- We don't sell such books to former members of TWI. I wrote back to her saying -- Yeah, but even the dogs eat the crumbs from the Master's table.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
ROFLMAO - Larry you do have a priceless sense of humor!!!! You might also have asked her how there could be "former members" if TWI does not have membership? LOL LOL
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
:) Where some people see my sense of humor others see it as being "caustic".
I suppose, even though I didn't say so, from my response to her you might have gathered what she actually was saying to me when I made my request. I figured if reminding her of what the scriptures said didn't change her mind nothing else would have. Oh well. Such is life.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote:
There is no "law of believing." There's faith in God. There's believing His Word. There's "the power of positive thinking." But believing doesn't work with the kind of mathematical exactness or scientific precision that laws do.
So if there's no law of believing, then for someone to call it a law would be a figure of speech, right? To me, anything exaggerated is hyperbole. Like in Gen. when Nimrod built a tower to reach "unto heaven". Even if that project had been completed, the tower would not have reached unto heaven, so it's hyperbole. But you don't like that word here.
So what happened to the mathematical exactness and scientific precision of the law of thermodynamics, or whatever law it is that says that if you get thrown into a burning fiery furnace, your body will be consumed by the fire? Didn't happen to Daniel's three friends. Laws can be superceded by other laws, including the law of Meshach, Shadrach, and Abennego's believing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Johniam, don't misrepresent me. I have no problem with YOU calling "the law of believing" hyperbole.
I have a problem with you or anyone else saying that's the way Wierwille saw it and presented it. He didn't. He was not exaggerating when he called it a law. There's nothing to suggest that he was.
As for God superceding ANY law, I leave that to His power. That doesn't make it any less a law.
And no, hyperbole is not "anything exaggerated." A hyperbole is an extreme example of exaggeration. It's the difference between "I'll bet a hundred bucks the law of believing is bunk," vs. "I'll bet all the money in the world the law of believing is bunk."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Yeah but I thought the Proverbs of Solomon is the Word of God and the Word of God is truth?
You know, Holy Men of God Spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit?
That a little bigger than "generally true" wouldn't you think?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
No, I wouldn't.
Not if the sayings are presenting themselves as sayings and not as "immutable laws of life."
Read the book of Proverbs. Can you honestly say that everything in it is true always? Of course not. They're not SUPPOSED to be blanket statements that cover every circumstance described. Sometimes you train up a child in the way that he should go, and when he is old, he sticks his middle finger up at you and goes his own way. Doesn't make the proverb untrue; it makes the kid a jerk.
"The woman of folly is boisterous,
She is naive and knows nothing.
She sits at the doorway of her house,
On a seat by the high places of the city,
Calling to those who pass by,
Who are making their paths straight:
“Whoever is naive, let him turn in here,”
And to him who lacks understanding she says,
“Stolen water is sweet;
And bread eaten in secret is pleasant.”
Is there a woman somewhere who really sits at her front stoop and says "Come on in, naive people! I've got stolen food for you!"
Of course not. And the Bible is not saying there is. These are expressions. The woman doesn't say those things, but the Bible treats it like she might as well say those things.
The proverbs of Solomon.
A wise son makes a father glad,
But a foolish son is a grief to his mother
Ok, so a foolish son is NOT a grief to his father, and a good son doesn't make his mother proud. Right?
The LORD will not allow the righteous to hunger,
But He will reject the craving of the wicked.
Wanna know who the unrighteous are? Look at the hungry. God will not allow the righteous to go hungry, so if you spot someone who's hungry, you've found an unrighteous man. Right?
Of course not.
A gracious woman attains honor,
And ruthless men attain riches.
Okay, so the ruthless men attain riches, but they don't use them for food, because only the unrighteous are hungry. Right?
Of course not.
There are six things that get on my nerves, seven that really tick me off...
Wait, is it six or seven?
It's a proverb, ferpete's sake, you don't have to get all bent out of shape about it!
The book of Proverbs contains wisdom: God-breathed wisdom. Granted, it's more authoritative than "early to bed, early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy and wise," but the bottom line is not every proverb in the book of proverbs is meant to be some kind of blanket statement that covers every scenario that fits the description.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
No harm befalls the righteous,
But the wicked are filled with trouble.
Uh huh. That's always the truth, no exceptions, the law of righteousness.
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
bliss
Weird, I don't remember Solomon preaching at people (writing scriptures...) AFTER he fell into idolatry.
He was sinning to God yes, but, was he hurting people too?
I dunno.
I think the example is ridiculous.
Doc Vic preached and wrote WHILE he was drugging and sexually harrassing women.
Yelled from the pulpit and wanted us to think he was ''so righteous''. He was trusted and looked upon as the one to emulate.......all the while lying and manipulating.
Solomon was in the boundaries of his law (many wives) and broke God's law by following other gods.....
maybe I am missing something. :unsure:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheEvan
How does a proverb being generally true make Proverbs any less the Word of God? Hint: It doesn't.
johnyouare:
Okay, my jaw is on the floor. Do you really think their believing "quenched the violence of fire"?? They confessed their faith in God, though they made a critical 'law of believing' error by expressing doubt when they said "but if not..."
I think the Fourth Man who joined them in the furnace had something to do with their deliverance. BTW, the critical isue wasn't their believing fercryinoutloud, it was their steadfast obedience and faithfulness.
There really is a forest if you'll look beyond those trees.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
It's real simple:
Do you believe no harm befalls the righteous?
The book of Proverbs says so.
But of course, harm does befall the righteous. The statement it a truism, not a mathematically exact and scientifically precise law. And a wise person knows the difference between a maxim, a truism, a proverb and a steadfast "this is always true and there are no exceptions" kind of statement.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
This is similiar to Eli the prophet. He was still a prophet when he recognized that Samuel was being called of God - but God didn't talk to him. I'm sure folks still consulted him, still believed his words. Perhaps he even gave good advice, Godly advice, so-to-speak.
However, he knew better than to ignore when Samuel said that he had a dream and that God had spoken to him in that dream.
Eli was no longer able to hear God - yet he was able to do some things for God.
Makes you wonder about VPW. It is entirely possible that he was able to do lots of stuff that seemed Godly and perhaps even were - but he most likely was so far out in left field that he was mowing someone else's lawn...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Having a discussion where some folks re-interpret what vpw actually wrote is like playing Battleship with someone who cheats. They keep moving their boats around.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
This thing has taken so many twist and turns and gone off on so many tangents, you would think there would be personal, anecdotal evidence out the yingyang. (good or bad)
The key word here is personal, as in, "This actually happened to me as a result of the law of believing."
I'm not gonna tell ya what I'm "believing" will happen.
It's kinda like keeping your wish a secret as you break the "wishbone".
Anybody?
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: Okay, my jaw is on the floor. Do you really think their believing "quenched the violence of fire"??
Yes. Sure, God had to do His part, but if those three had been afraid, they'd be dead. Same for Peter in Acts 12 when the angel busted him out of jail. He was sleeping for God's sakes. Some things you can't believe for without God signing off on it; other things you can. I think believing has a lot to do with peoples' self esteem, which leads directly to positive and negative results. How do you feel when you go to a job interview? Think that just might have an effect on the outcome? Believing DOES work!
I don't believe VP really thought that all believing equals all receiving; he didn't teach it that way. Raf, you're time in twi was in the late 80s/early 90s, right? He just did not teach it that way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.