1 Cor 4:18 Now some are puffed up, as though I would not come to you.
19 But I will come to you shortly, if the Lord will, and will know, not the speech of them which are puffed up, but the power.
20 For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power.
John 14:12
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
Mike, let’s hear it from you. You have lots of words to say. You preach PFAL.
Now I’d just like to know about the power that you have. Jesus says that you can do greater works than Jesus Christ. He raised the dead; made the blind to see; healed sick men and women of many types of disease; he calmed the weather; he enabled thousands upon thousands of people to eat; he turned water into wine; he walked on water; he enabled others to prosper in their businesses by catching megahauls of fish. All of these works are purely in the physical, in the here and now; there are visible results, benefits, profit for the people round about.
He also cast out devil spirits.
In addition to that, he confronted the elders of the established church.
Now, you are happy to confront the patrons of the Café, all of whom at one time have professed to be Christians though some now profess that they are not. Jesus did not spend much of his time confronting believers; he confronted leadership.
Dealing with devil spirits/demons was considered earlier in this thread (specifically in relation to you) and it may be better if we don’t discuss that side again.
Please, would you tell us about how many of the works like those of Jesus YOU have performed? When, where, upon whom? Let’s see your POWER in manifestation, in this physical world, right now. Show us when and how, by using the special powers of PFAL, YOU yourself have performed a selection of the real, physical, documentable types of works that Jesus Christ himself performed.
Otherwise:
James 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
And your faith in PFAL is just words. Just dead words.
I have answered this in years past, but maybe I'm due to answer it again.
When WE select pastors and ministers there are certain common sense and scriptural guidelines that we should follow. We do not have infinite wisdom, nor foreknowledge, nor the ability to read a person's heart, only their outward actions. We are often not so good at getting revelation accurate either. FOR THESE reasons the guidelines we are given when WE select leaders tell us to do it in such a way that we protect the flock, kind of erring on the safe side if any error is to take place.
Now when GOD selects a man to get a specific job done for Him, and it's a job that hadn't been done by anyone in thousands of years, and God is not hampered like we are. He has infinite wisdom, foreknowledge, and the ability to read a man's heart IN SPITE of his outward actions.
With all this in mind, do you think the guidelines for God are going to be the same for us? I don't. I think God is wise enough to not need the guidelines.
You see we did not select VPW to "put it all together" and distribute it around the world. God selected Dr to get the job done and it got done. Anyone hurt in the process would have probably gotten hurt some other way, and either way God is there to help them get healed if they want it.
I know hardly anyone has thought this through very far. This should be pondered for a while before a knee jerk rejection takes place.
Now I wonder how many older posters remember me answering this question years ago.
When God has selected a man to make His Word known, He has backed that man's ministry with specific signs that were seen by many people whose eyewitness testimony was recorded. The primary sign that supposedly validates VPW's ministry was the Snowstorm phenomenon (coming full circle back to that thread topic!) which NOBODY BUT HIM saw!
We know David repented because scripture gives us this assurance.
Could you please give me the scripture that assures you that "The same was not true with VP Wierwille."
I like the level of assurance scripture authority gives us, and I'm sure that if you have one it'll get the spelling of Dr's last name correct.
People that have confronted him have testified that he denied his sins and never repented. But you will probably not accept their testimony.
David wrote in the Psalms of his repentance. Could you please give me the reference in Studies in Abundant Living or other books, where VP admitted his drinking, sexual sins, etc., repented of them, and asked for forgiveness?
When God has selected a man to make His Word known, He has backed that man's ministry with specific signs that were seen by many people whose eyewitness testimony was recorded. The primary sign that supposedly validates VPW's ministry was the Snowstorm phenomenon (coming full circle back to that thread topic!) which NOBODY BUT HIM saw!
Mark, that kinda backs what I was posting at the same time.
You want to know what specific signs concerning VPW were evident to people .
I want to know what specific works concerning PFAL Mike has performed.
There should be something, visible, evident to all, documentable. Mike??
You misread what I posted. What I am saying is that Marks offerings (and others too) or and "only rule" do not even fit the criterion as to what an "only rule IS according to our teaching in the PFAL class, and that THEREFORE they did not understand what Dr was teaching there. The implication is that there are other things that they did not understand, and that complaints against the class are coming from people who did not properly receive the class. THEREFORE the class MAY POSSIBLY be correct.
Look closely at the logic I just presented. It does not prove PFAL is a valid "only rule." It only proves that the criticisms by these individuals are not valid.
<snip>
please refer to godel's incompleteness theorem.
I refuse to measure the validity of "one rule" within the system that asserts its necessity.
Typical response........ In case you have not noticed their are at least 6 of you posting one to two posts a day just in the last pages of this thread. There is one Mike which I'm sure you are grateful for . Have you considered the time invested in trying to keep up with several questions from several posters? Like his answers or not why don't you give the man a break to answer, or is that the point just to harass someone in numbers.
Typical response........ In case you have not noticed their are at least 6 of you posting one to two posts a day just in the last pages of this thread. There is one Mike which I'm sure you are grateful for . Have you considered the time invested in trying to keep up with several questions from several posters? Like his answers or not why don't you give the man a break to answer, or is that the point just to harass someone in numbers.
My questions have all been very straightforward.
They are the type of questions that require short and to the point answers.
Perhaps if Mike didn't devote page after page after page to dodging them, he would have the time to answer them.
When WE select pastors and ministers there are certain common sense and scriptural guidelines that we should follow. We do not have infinite wisdom, nor foreknowledge, nor the ability to read a person's heart, only their outward actions. We are often not so good at getting revelation accurate either. FOR THESE reasons the guidelines we are given when WE select leaders tell us to do it in such a way that we protect the flock, kind of erring on the safe side if any error is to take place.
Now when GOD selects a man to get a specific job done for Him, and it's a job that hadn't been done by anyone in thousands of years, and God is not hampered like we are. He has infinite wisdom, foreknowledge, and the ability to read a man's heart IN SPITE of his outward actions.
With all this in mind, do you think the guidelines for God are going to be the same for us? I don't. I think God is wise enough to not need the guidelines.
You see we did not select VPW to "put it all together" and distribute it around the world. God selected Dr to get the job done and it got done. Anyone hurt in the process would have probably gotten hurt some other way, and either way God is there to help them get healed if they want it.
I know hardly anyone has thought this through very far. This should be pondered for a while before a knee jerk rejection takes place.
Now I wonder how many older posters remember me answering this question years ago.
God selected him? God and I have to have a serious sit down. . . . He won't let greedy, lecherous, old drunk, chain smoking, pervs be ministers, but He will trust one with all this dug up revelation? To fleecefeed His flock? Not buying it.
On what planet? Mars? You are warned in the bible about these guys. Warned and cautioned and told to steer clear. . . . Being young and stupid is one thing. . . . but now, with all that has been exposed concerning what we were involved in. . . . set aside the Christian aspect. How about some basic common sense?
For the record. . . Mike. . . VP had that creepy eye patch on when he made a grab for my backside. . . . wasn't a fatherly pat. He didn't have much time left to do some serious repenting.
Hardly a knee jerk reaction Mike. . . simple common sense.
To Add: I thought being a minister was God's calling on ones life. . . . not that we draw straws and pick the least offensive one.
They are the type of questions that require short and to the point answers.
Perhaps if Mike didn't devote page after page after page to dodging them, he would have the time to answer them.
Your questions may have been straightforward and to you they may require a short answer ,possibly because you have decided the answer in advance and you think it's short, Mike may see it differently if you don't want his answer and already have yours as what you want to hear then why bother the man?
Your questions may have been straightforward and to you they may require a short answer ,possibly because you have decided the answer in advance and you think it's short, Mike may see it differently if you don't want his answer and already have yours as what you want to hear then why bother the man?
How can I know if I want his answers or not if he never brings them out in the open?
Am I bothering him? I don't think so. He is, after all, the one who continues to broadcast and re-broadcast his PFAL infomercial.
Why advertise if you don't expect anyone to respond? Mike spends inordinate volumes of time and space pitching his product when he could simply answer a few simple questions and be done with it. I don't feel the least bit of sympathy. If he feels it's taking too much time, maybe he should rethink his priorities and be a bit less evasive.
How can I know if I want his answers or not if he never brings them out in the open?
Am I bothering him? I don't think so. He is, after all, the one who continues to broadcast and re-broadcast his PFAL infomercial.
Why advertise if you don't expect anyone to respond? Mike spends inordinate volumes of time and space pitching his product when he could simply answer a few simple questions and be done with it. I don't feel the least bit of sympathy. If he feels it's taking too much time, maybe he should rethink his priorities and be a bit less evasive.
Now what would you give for it?
Wait!!------There's more.
You have predetermined that his answer should be short. In order to do that you must then know the answer, otherwise you would have no idea if it was long or short. we can conclude from this that you already have the answer you wish to hear.
It's easy to fire off foolish questions designed to make someone type out a long time consuming answer for something that you admittedly have your short answer for. Which was the point, with several doing the same it is simply the circle game designed to silence him by trying to keep up.
It's easy to fire off foolish questions designed to make someone type out a long time consuming answer for something that you admittedly have your short answer for. Which was the point, with several doing the same it is simply the circle game designed to silence him by trying to keep up.
It's easy to just label someone's questions and presuppose they're "designed" for something other than actually
"getting answers". With several people trying to get answers- and lots of posts from someone like Mike going
on for PARAGRAPHS of "I only have limited time" (and spending a lot of it saying he's not going to answer
most questions), it looks like he's trying to duck most of them. Besides, he can answer questions at any pace
he sees fit. Since many of these are still the same questions from 2003 that STILL haven't been answered,
You have predetermined that his answer should be short. In order to do that you must then know the answer, otherwise you would have no idea if it was long or short. we can conclude from this that you already have the answer you wish to hear.
It's easy to fire off foolish questions designed to make someone type out a long time consuming answer for something that you admittedly have your short answer for. Which was the point, with several doing the same it is simply the circle game designed to silence him by trying to keep up.
Here is an example of a question that would warrant a short answer.
QUOTE (Mike @ Jan 30 2009, 12:19 PM) *
Christ formed within is Christ in you THE GLORY, whereas pneuma hagion is only the token, the hope of glory to come. It came.
My response
Reference?
****************************
Care to explain why you think that would require a lengthy answer?
Mike's answers aren't short because he doesn't want them to be short. He dodges the questions.
He takes a simple question and responds with lengthy jibber-jabber that makes no logical sense in context.
Then he belittles his audience by telling them they are either suffering from attention deficiency or just not smart enough or caring enough or their memories are faulty, or they lack proper study skills or they're not spiritually sharp enough to get "it", whatever "it" is. Then he cries, "Boo Hoo, poor me, I'm living a life of martyrdom for such a noble cause. Nobody understands me." Like the old saying goes, "You made your bed, now sleep in it."
You see we did not select VPW to "put it all together" and distribute it around the world. God selected Dr to get the job done and it got done. Anyone hurt in the process would have probably gotten hurt some other way, and either way God is there to help them get healed if they want it.
I know hardly anyone has thought this through very far. This should be pondered for a while before a knee jerk rejection takes place.
Now I wonder how many older posters remember me answering this question years ago.
Uh yeah, Mike, and I didn't buy it then either.
Mike had said that God needed a renegade type of personality, someone who would buck the tide of popular opinion, which is why He chose VPW to write PFAL. Never mind all the scripture verses that say what kind of man God chooses. God wanted an adulterer, child molester, drunkard, liar, and narcissist to teach PFAL because only he would have a mind free enough to dare to plagiarize, er, re-arrange the words of others to make them into God's holy PFAL.
And Mike? That stuff where you said those who were hurt by Wierwille would have been hurt some other way if he hadn't been around was about the lowest. If VP hadn't raped those women someone else would have? Sorry, the scripture I read, and there is nothing so-so in the texts about it, says something entirely different about how God thinks about child molesters and adulterers. Something about a millstone around the neck, and "go and sin no more."
You also sort of forgot my answer back then, which was that God didn't work with people while they were living in sin, but rather when they were doing His will. Even you acknowledge that Wierwille was steeped in debauchery throughout the time he was writing those books and running TWI.
Ok now, there’s an awful lot of jibber jabbin going on here but I don’t see anyone talking about “only rule” do I?
I’ve posted a lot of the teaching on this that we supposedly received in the class, and you folks are showing me (and the world) just how you probably missed it the first time around: you’re too focused on other matters.
Now I’m going to go over a what a few posters declared as their “only rule” and we’ll see why each one does not qualify as an “only rule” as we were taught it. I then eventually will pose a surprise killer question, maybe tonight, I’m not sure.
***
To last night’s question I see no one found the answer.
The question was: “Where did VPW tell us that the Word was buried?
The following is from Elena Whiteside’s “The Way: Living In Love” pages 178, 179 (with my bold fonts) :
I was praying. And I told Father that He could have the whole thing, unless there were real genuine answers that I wouldn't ever have to back up on.
And that's when He spoke to me audibly, just like I'm talking to you now. He said He would teach me the Word as it had not been known since the first century if I would teach it to others.
Well, I nearly flew off my chair. I couldn't believe that God would talk to me. He shakes his head slowly smiling. It's just too fantastic. People won't believe it. But He spoke to me just as plainly as I'm talking now to you.
But really, why is it so strange? When you think about it, you see in the Bible that all through the ages God talked to people. God talked to Moses, to all the prophets. God talked to Paul. All through the centuries, God has talked to people in times of great need. And that's what we have today -- a terrific need. People are just so far from hearing and believing the Word of God.
You don't get it in the theological schools. The Word is buried, just like it was in the time of Jeremiah. Oh, they had their priests, their higher echelons, their temples, their rituals. It all looked so religious, you know. But the Word of God was buried. Oh, they were teaching the people something -- they called it the Word of God maybe, but the Word was buried. God spoke directly to Jeremiah.
The Word is buried today. If there's no one around to teach it, God has to teach it Himself. You see, I am a product of my times. God knew me before the foundations of the world, just like He knew you and everyone else. We were all in God's foreknowledge from the beginnings.
God knew I would believe His Word. And every day I am more and more deeply convinced of this ministry which teaches people the accuracy and integrity of God's Word. Without this ministry the world would be in far greater spiritual darkness about His Word. There would be less light in the world. Where else but in this ministry do you find the Word of God so living and real? This is truly a time of terrific need. Doctor nods his head abruptly, as if to punctuate his urgency.
This is not the surprise killer question, but does anyone know where VPW again used the word "buried" to describe the Word, only years later?
We all heard and/or read this passage from “The Way: Living In Love” many times. It was on these pages we heard that VPW almost quit because he couldn’t find anything in his study and research that he “wouldn't ever have to back up on.” That’s what a rule is. It’s set. It’s finished. It doesn’t need revision or improvement. It has other characteristics too. Let’s get to them.
In a few cases grads presented their “only rule for faith and practice” confusing it with things like the idea of “the most important” rule for conduct, or confusing it with the “greatest commandment,” or confusing it with an abbreviated thumbnail summary of a system of rules.
On January 15, on the “snow” thread, in Post # 401 Twinky wrote:
“One rule for faith and practice: well, here's mine. God is love and in him is no darkness at all. Because he loves us, God will never leave us nor forsake us.”
On January 31, on this thread, in Post # 107 socks wrote:
“I do have a single rule of faith and practice, actually, to the original topic - and again in Galatians as it's written in these words, a perfect way to view it for every Christian - ‘I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.’”
On February 1, on this thread, in Post # 140 waysider wrote:
“If I had to declare ONE rule of faith and practice, it would be The Golden Rule.
It transcends religious boundaries and theological inclinations.”
Now, I ask you all (again, though, still not the killer question):
What is wrong with these three offerings?
Why can they NOT serve as an "only rule for faith and practice" as we were taught it?
Judging from the closeness of timestamps to our two posts, I take it that your post is not a response to mine, but a response to all that is above my post.
In response to your post I'd say that I want to know what to believe in SOME situations, but the need seems far less in others. For instance, I want to know what I can expect from God and what He expects of me. But when it comes to my favorite flavor of ice cream, or music I feel like I'm on my own and don't much need to have a rule as to what I must believe there.
"God knew I would believe His Word. And every day I am more and more deeply convinced of this ministry which teaches people the accuracy and integrity of God's Word. Without this ministry the world would be in far greater spiritual darkness about His Word. There would be less light in the world. Where else but in this ministry do you find the Word of God so living and real? This is truly a time of terrific need. "
Mike, VPW introduced a significant amount of "spiritual darkness" into the lives of TWI followers.
He pushed people into "greater spiritual darkness" and took away what light (understanding) they had. "The Word of God so living and real"? But it wasn't good enough for he himself to practice it, was it?
You consistently negate the effect of his behavior yet it is his behavior that has introduced so much darkness: his behavior in his debauched lifestyle (nothing like that he compelled rank-and-file believers to practice) and his behavior in his debauched teachings (doctrine), which has driven people away from the living God.
Therefore, his rule for faith and practice wasn't something that guided his own behavior - so why should it guide anyone else's?
Seems to me a rule for faith and practice would be inspirational for faith and practice, not an exercise in finding ways to scripturally support acting as you damned well pleased.
Ok now, there’s an awful lot of jibber jabbin going on here but I don’t see anyone talking about “only rule” do I?
Apparently you don't "see" it, but that doesn't mean it's not there.
I’ve posted a lot of the teaching on this that we supposedly received in the class, and you folks are showing me (and the world) just how you probably missed it the first time around: you’re too focused on other matters.
Unless we agree with you, we must have missed it and don't understand what you're saying. You don't seem to be able to accept the idea that we do know what you're saying and simply disagree with you. This is evidenced by the fact that you still throw out the same generalities about what we know, even though they have been responded to and debunked.
Unless we agree with you, we must have missed it and don't understand what you're saying. You don't seem to be able to accept the idea that we do know what you're saying and simply disagree with you. This is evidenced by the fact that you still throw out the same generalities about what we know, even though they have been responded to and debunked.
That includes his "Uriah" fallacy- despite the fact that I disproved it, predicted he'd post it in six months,
and then reposted my answer 6 months later almost to the day, since he posted it again in six months.
Mike had said that God needed a renegade type of personality, someone who would buck the tide of popular opinion, which is why He chose VPW to write PFAL. Never mind all the scripture verses that say what kind of man God chooses. God wanted an adulterer, child molester, drunkard, liar, and narcissist to teach PFAL because only he would have a mind free enough to dare to plagiarize, er, re-arrange the words of others to make them into God's holy PFAL.
And Mike? That stuff where you said those who were hurt by Wierwille would have been hurt some other way if he hadn't been around was about the lowest. If VP hadn't raped those women someone else would have? Sorry, the scripture I read, and there is nothing so-so in the texts about it, says something entirely different about how God thinks about child molesters and adulterers. Something about a millstone around the neck, and "go and sin no more."
You also sort of forgot my answer back then, which was that God didn't work with people while they were living in sin, but rather when they were doing His will. Even you acknowledge that Wierwille was steeped in debauchery throughout the time he was writing those books and running TWI.
-- Shaz
I just didn't want this to go by . . . especially the bolded parts. That last bit. . . . about God working in those who obey Him. .. .I'm thinking Shazdancer just might have the scripture to back that one up.
I`m glad that you reposted shaz` answere to THAT bit of garbage.
Wow, well said...women and children would have been abused and raped, families would have been torn apart, lives destroyed anyway whether vpw or those he educated were personally responsible or not.
That is the creepies accusiation I have seen yet laid at God`s feet in defense of the false prophet.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
74
42
33
32
Popular Days
Feb 2
66
Jan 30
53
Feb 1
50
Feb 3
23
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 74 posts
waysider 42 posts
potato 33 posts
Bolshevik 32 posts
Popular Days
Feb 2 2009
66 posts
Jan 30 2009
53 posts
Feb 1 2009
50 posts
Feb 3 2009
23 posts
Popular Posts
potato
the snowstorm thread branches yet again... my question is: is it necessary in life to have one sole source for your rule of faith and practice? Mike seems to contend that everyone needs to have on
waysider
Would that include VP Wierwille? Would that include VP Wierwille?
geisha779
Wordwolf, So glad that is what you took away rom my heart felt and honest post. Because I reject this doctrine and do not have any interest in reading the theology. . . I am hiding and possibly afra
Posted Images
Twinky
Mike, let’s hear it from you. You have lots of words to say. You preach PFAL.
Now I’d just like to know about the power that you have. Jesus says that you can do greater works than Jesus Christ. He raised the dead; made the blind to see; healed sick men and women of many types of disease; he calmed the weather; he enabled thousands upon thousands of people to eat; he turned water into wine; he walked on water; he enabled others to prosper in their businesses by catching megahauls of fish. All of these works are purely in the physical, in the here and now; there are visible results, benefits, profit for the people round about.
He also cast out devil spirits.
In addition to that, he confronted the elders of the established church.
Now, you are happy to confront the patrons of the Café, all of whom at one time have professed to be Christians though some now profess that they are not. Jesus did not spend much of his time confronting believers; he confronted leadership.
Dealing with devil spirits/demons was considered earlier in this thread (specifically in relation to you) and it may be better if we don’t discuss that side again.
Please, would you tell us about how many of the works like those of Jesus YOU have performed? When, where, upon whom? Let’s see your POWER in manifestation, in this physical world, right now. Show us when and how, by using the special powers of PFAL, YOU yourself have performed a selection of the real, physical, documentable types of works that Jesus Christ himself performed.
Otherwise:
And your faith in PFAL is just words. Just dead words.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
When God has selected a man to make His Word known, He has backed that man's ministry with specific signs that were seen by many people whose eyewitness testimony was recorded. The primary sign that supposedly validates VPW's ministry was the Snowstorm phenomenon (coming full circle back to that thread topic!) which NOBODY BUT HIM saw!
People that have confronted him have testified that he denied his sins and never repented. But you will probably not accept their testimony.
David wrote in the Psalms of his repentance. Could you please give me the reference in Studies in Abundant Living or other books, where VP admitted his drinking, sexual sins, etc., repented of them, and asked for forgiveness?
BTW, what's wrong with how I spelled 'Wierwille'?
Edited by Mark ClarkeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Mark, that kinda backs what I was posting at the same time.
You want to know what specific signs concerning VPW were evident to people .
I want to know what specific works concerning PFAL Mike has performed.
There should be something, visible, evident to all, documentable. Mike??
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
You dodged my question---again.
(Not that I'm surprised.)
My question was---"What does PFAL say we should expect of our ministers and teachers?", not how they are chosen?
You're the guy who says he knows more about PFAL than all of us.
Surely this should be easy-------AND SHORT!
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
potato
please refer to godel's incompleteness theorem.
I refuse to measure the validity of "one rule" within the system that asserts its necessity.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Typical response........ In case you have not noticed their are at least 6 of you posting one to two posts a day just in the last pages of this thread. There is one Mike which I'm sure you are grateful for . Have you considered the time invested in trying to keep up with several questions from several posters? Like his answers or not why don't you give the man a break to answer, or is that the point just to harass someone in numbers.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
My questions have all been very straightforward.
They are the type of questions that require short and to the point answers.
Perhaps if Mike didn't devote page after page after page to dodging them, he would have the time to answer them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
God selected him? God and I have to have a serious sit down. . . . He won't let greedy, lecherous, old drunk, chain smoking, pervs be ministers, but He will trust one with all this dug up revelation? To fleecefeed His flock? Not buying it.
On what planet? Mars? You are warned in the bible about these guys. Warned and cautioned and told to steer clear. . . . Being young and stupid is one thing. . . . but now, with all that has been exposed concerning what we were involved in. . . . set aside the Christian aspect. How about some basic common sense?
For the record. . . Mike. . . VP had that creepy eye patch on when he made a grab for my backside. . . . wasn't a fatherly pat. He didn't have much time left to do some serious repenting.
Hardly a knee jerk reaction Mike. . . simple common sense.
To Add: I thought being a minister was God's calling on ones life. . . . not that we draw straws and pick the least offensive one.
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Your questions may have been straightforward and to you they may require a short answer ,possibly because you have decided the answer in advance and you think it's short, Mike may see it differently if you don't want his answer and already have yours as what you want to hear then why bother the man?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
How can I know if I want his answers or not if he never brings them out in the open?
Am I bothering him? I don't think so. He is, after all, the one who continues to broadcast and re-broadcast his PFAL infomercial.
Why advertise if you don't expect anyone to respond? Mike spends inordinate volumes of time and space pitching his product when he could simply answer a few simple questions and be done with it. I don't feel the least bit of sympathy. If he feels it's taking too much time, maybe he should rethink his priorities and be a bit less evasive.
Now what would you give for it?
Wait!!------There's more.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
You have predetermined that his answer should be short. In order to do that you must then know the answer, otherwise you would have no idea if it was long or short. we can conclude from this that you already have the answer you wish to hear.
It's easy to fire off foolish questions designed to make someone type out a long time consuming answer for something that you admittedly have your short answer for. Which was the point, with several doing the same it is simply the circle game designed to silence him by trying to keep up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
It's easy to just label someone's questions and presuppose they're "designed" for something other than actually
"getting answers". With several people trying to get answers- and lots of posts from someone like Mike going
on for PARAGRAPHS of "I only have limited time" (and spending a lot of it saying he's not going to answer
most questions), it looks like he's trying to duck most of them. Besides, he can answer questions at any pace
he sees fit. Since many of these are still the same questions from 2003 that STILL haven't been answered,
it should be easy TO answer them now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Here is an example of a question that would warrant a short answer.
QUOTE (Mike @ Jan 30 2009, 12:19 PM) *
Christ formed within is Christ in you THE GLORY, whereas pneuma hagion is only the token, the hope of glory to come. It came.
My response
Reference?
****************************
Care to explain why you think that would require a lengthy answer?
Mike's answers aren't short because he doesn't want them to be short. He dodges the questions.
He takes a simple question and responds with lengthy jibber-jabber that makes no logical sense in context.
Then he belittles his audience by telling them they are either suffering from attention deficiency or just not smart enough or caring enough or their memories are faulty, or they lack proper study skills or they're not spiritually sharp enough to get "it", whatever "it" is. Then he cries, "Boo Hoo, poor me, I'm living a life of martyrdom for such a noble cause. Nobody understands me." Like the old saying goes, "You made your bed, now sleep in it."
It's really just that simple.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
shazdancer
From Mike...
Uh yeah, Mike, and I didn't buy it then either.
Mike had said that God needed a renegade type of personality, someone who would buck the tide of popular opinion, which is why He chose VPW to write PFAL. Never mind all the scripture verses that say what kind of man God chooses. God wanted an adulterer, child molester, drunkard, liar, and narcissist to teach PFAL because only he would have a mind free enough to dare to plagiarize, er, re-arrange the words of others to make them into God's holy PFAL.
And Mike? That stuff where you said those who were hurt by Wierwille would have been hurt some other way if he hadn't been around was about the lowest. If VP hadn't raped those women someone else would have? Sorry, the scripture I read, and there is nothing so-so in the texts about it, says something entirely different about how God thinks about child molesters and adulterers. Something about a millstone around the neck, and "go and sin no more."
You also sort of forgot my answer back then, which was that God didn't work with people while they were living in sin, but rather when they were doing His will. Even you acknowledge that Wierwille was steeped in debauchery throughout the time he was writing those books and running TWI.
-- Shaz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Ok now, there’s an awful lot of jibber jabbin going on here but I don’t see anyone talking about “only rule” do I?
I’ve posted a lot of the teaching on this that we supposedly received in the class, and you folks are showing me (and the world) just how you probably missed it the first time around: you’re too focused on other matters.
Now I’m going to go over a what a few posters declared as their “only rule” and we’ll see why each one does not qualify as an “only rule” as we were taught it. I then eventually will pose a surprise killer question, maybe tonight, I’m not sure.
***
To last night’s question I see no one found the answer.
The question was: “Where did VPW tell us that the Word was buried?
The following is from Elena Whiteside’s “The Way: Living In Love” pages 178, 179 (with my bold fonts) :
I was praying. And I told Father that He could have the whole thing, unless there were real genuine answers that I wouldn't ever have to back up on.
And that's when He spoke to me audibly, just like I'm talking to you now. He said He would teach me the Word as it had not been known since the first century if I would teach it to others.
Well, I nearly flew off my chair. I couldn't believe that God would talk to me. He shakes his head slowly smiling. It's just too fantastic. People won't believe it. But He spoke to me just as plainly as I'm talking now to you.
But really, why is it so strange? When you think about it, you see in the Bible that all through the ages God talked to people. God talked to Moses, to all the prophets. God talked to Paul. All through the centuries, God has talked to people in times of great need. And that's what we have today -- a terrific need. People are just so far from hearing and believing the Word of God.
You don't get it in the theological schools. The Word is buried, just like it was in the time of Jeremiah. Oh, they had their priests, their higher echelons, their temples, their rituals. It all looked so religious, you know. But the Word of God was buried. Oh, they were teaching the people something -- they called it the Word of God maybe, but the Word was buried. God spoke directly to Jeremiah.
The Word is buried today. If there's no one around to teach it, God has to teach it Himself. You see, I am a product of my times. God knew me before the foundations of the world, just like He knew you and everyone else. We were all in God's foreknowledge from the beginnings.
God knew I would believe His Word. And every day I am more and more deeply convinced of this ministry which teaches people the accuracy and integrity of God's Word. Without this ministry the world would be in far greater spiritual darkness about His Word. There would be less light in the world. Where else but in this ministry do you find the Word of God so living and real? This is truly a time of terrific need. Doctor nods his head abruptly, as if to punctuate his urgency.
This is not the surprise killer question, but does anyone know where VPW again used the word "buried" to describe the Word, only years later?
We all heard and/or read this passage from “The Way: Living In Love” many times. It was on these pages we heard that VPW almost quit because he couldn’t find anything in his study and research that he “wouldn't ever have to back up on.” That’s what a rule is. It’s set. It’s finished. It doesn’t need revision or improvement. It has other characteristics too. Let’s get to them.
In a few cases grads presented their “only rule for faith and practice” confusing it with things like the idea of “the most important” rule for conduct, or confusing it with the “greatest commandment,” or confusing it with an abbreviated thumbnail summary of a system of rules.
On January 15, on the “snow” thread, in Post # 401 Twinky wrote:
“One rule for faith and practice: well, here's mine. God is love and in him is no darkness at all. Because he loves us, God will never leave us nor forsake us.”
On January 31, on this thread, in Post # 107 socks wrote:
“I do have a single rule of faith and practice, actually, to the original topic - and again in Galatians as it's written in these words, a perfect way to view it for every Christian - ‘I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.’”
On February 1, on this thread, in Post # 140 waysider wrote:
“If I had to declare ONE rule of faith and practice, it would be The Golden Rule.
It transcends religious boundaries and theological inclinations.”
Now, I ask you all (again, though, still not the killer question):
What is wrong with these three offerings?
Why can they NOT serve as an "only rule for faith and practice" as we were taught it?
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
Mike, ive heard it put this way...
in spiritual practice...
its better to try and dig a 100 foot well
than it is to try and dig ten 10 foot wells
and so as long as you arent stopping people from digging their own well or wells
and are at peace where you are digging...
...Godspeed
Edited by sirguessalotLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Hi Todd,
Judging from the closeness of timestamps to our two posts, I take it that your post is not a response to mine, but a response to all that is above my post.
In response to your post I'd say that I want to know what to believe in SOME situations, but the need seems far less in others. For instance, I want to know what I can expect from God and what He expects of me. But when it comes to my favorite flavor of ice cream, or music I feel like I'm on my own and don't much need to have a rule as to what I must believe there.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
ok, sorry Mike, because ive edited these last two posts of mine...
your last response doesnt make sense
but ive also heard it put
that the spiritual practice we choose in life
is like choosing which boat we are going to cross the lake in
and one cant keep switching boats
and expect to make it to the other side
i know...a simplistic analogy
but i think it speaks in some way to what you are trying to say about the choice you have made
and regardless of the theology or practices involved
our culture has mostly come to remove rites of passage for the various stages of life
...so such a radical choice may seem foolish and stubborn to many of us
but there is a point where such a personal choice for "one rule for faith and practice" does serve a purpose
whether it is temporarily
...or for a race to the finish line
may i suggest that you start a blog or website to distill your thoughts?
im also guessing it may help you be more clear and coherent
by giving you something to reference when you post here
Edited by sirguessalotLink to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Mike, VPW introduced a significant amount of "spiritual darkness" into the lives of TWI followers.
He pushed people into "greater spiritual darkness" and took away what light (understanding) they had. "The Word of God so living and real"? But it wasn't good enough for he himself to practice it, was it?
You consistently negate the effect of his behavior yet it is his behavior that has introduced so much darkness: his behavior in his debauched lifestyle (nothing like that he compelled rank-and-file believers to practice) and his behavior in his debauched teachings (doctrine), which has driven people away from the living God.
Therefore, his rule for faith and practice wasn't something that guided his own behavior - so why should it guide anyone else's?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Well said Twinky!
Seems to me a rule for faith and practice would be inspirational for faith and practice, not an exercise in finding ways to scripturally support acting as you damned well pleased.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
Apparently you don't "see" it, but that doesn't mean it's not there.
Unless we agree with you, we must have missed it and don't understand what you're saying. You don't seem to be able to accept the idea that we do know what you're saying and simply disagree with you. This is evidenced by the fact that you still throw out the same generalities about what we know, even though they have been responded to and debunked.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
That includes his "Uriah" fallacy- despite the fact that I disproved it, predicted he'd post it in six months,
and then reposted my answer 6 months later almost to the day, since he posted it again in six months.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
I just didn't want this to go by . . . especially the bolded parts. That last bit. . . . about God working in those who obey Him. .. .I'm thinking Shazdancer just might have the scripture to back that one up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
I`m glad that you reposted shaz` answere to THAT bit of garbage.
Wow, well said...women and children would have been abused and raped, families would have been torn apart, lives destroyed anyway whether vpw or those he educated were personally responsible or not.
That is the creepies accusiation I have seen yet laid at God`s feet in defense of the false prophet.
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.