“PFAL teaches you that you actually own a version of a translation of a modern critical text. It’s a good tool for beginners, but by 1985 Dr told us all to switch our mastery efforts to written PFAL.”
You responded with:
“vpw never said anything about "SWITCHING" from the Bible to pfal.
pfal was supposed to be a key to the Bible-Genesis to Revelation.
(pfal says so.)
vpw said people should put more time in pfal.
The claim was it was the BEST key to the Bible.
“In pfal, students are challenged to put all other reading materials aside
other than the Bible for 3 months.
There was never a challenge to put aside the Bible for 3 months.
There was no "switch" instruction.
Mike added this to the word of vpw.
When you add to the word of vpw, you no longer have the word of vpw.”
Well, in addition to being the BEST key, Dr also claimed that it was a God-breathed key.
If you had read a little more carefully you’d have seen that I wrote: “..but by 1985 Dr told us all to switch...” and that I had NOT written “..but in 1985 Dr told us all to switch...”
I could see your criticism having a sliver of validity had I written it the second way, but even then I could argue that even though I hadn’t quoted vpw verbatim I still had the general gist of what he said IN that year of 1985.
But I did write it the first way to indicate a spread out process of Dr telling us all to switch our mastery efforts from the KJV to the collaterals. I’ve outlined this process before and I can retrieve the details, but in short here it is.
In 1975 Dr hinted to the top leadership that mastering RHST would be a good thing. In 1979 he told all the AC students and grads that mastering RHST was a must. In 1984 he told the new students of PFAL that they should start thinking about mastering some of the books. In 1985, a month before he died, he mentioned on his last SNS tape that mastering ADAN was important. Two weeks later he said in his last teaching that everyone, ESPECIALLY top leadership, should master the collaterals.
The abbreviated sequence I just outlined has been presented here before in expanded form with total documentation. It was to this sequence that I referred when I wrote “..but by 1985 Dr told us all to switch...”
Prior to this sequence Dr had told us in the 1967 film class, and later in the PFAL book, that focused study of the Pauline Epistles in our KJV was important. The sequence outlined is a slow gradual switch from focused study of KJV to focused study of written PFAL.
The line you pounced on, WW, was meant to indicate a switch in Dr’s many urgings, not a quote of an exact line he said. I usually supply documentation when I am quoting him.
***
I had written to Raf: “I’ve tried both approaches. __ You’ve tried only one.”
You responded with: “INCORRECT. __ Raf's method was to use pfal's standard for Scripture to see if pfal was Scripture. If pfal was supposed to be Scripture, it would
pass its OWN tests.”
WW, I think you got it wrong here. I’ll start from the beginning, using Raf as an example, because the same holds for many here.
Raf has two differing methods at his disposal.
The first method, Method A, is how he approaches the ancient scriptures. He enters a study with an fundamental assumption that the originals were correct, and upon finding an Apparent Error he holds fast to his original assumption, and works the material until it fits and the AE evaporates, even if it takes years.
Method B is roughly how Raf approaches his professional field of journalism, and this method has no corresponding fundamental assumption to hold fast. When Raf applies Method B to PFAL he finds AE’s. He continues his investigation a little to see how solid they seem to be. If they pass all the tests he and his friends can muster up, they uncork the Champagne and celebrate.
Now, WW, here is where I will explain what I meant when I wrote: “I’ve tried both approaches. __ You’ve tried only one.”
Even though Raf knows Method A, he’s never applied it to PFAL. He’s only applied one method to the AEs of PFAL.
There were many years where I sporadically applied Method B to PFAL. By 1998 I thought I had found several errors worth correcting. I knew of Method A for studying Biblical AEs but I had never applied it to PFAL. Just the opposite I was ON GUARD AGAINST applying it to PFAL. In 1998 I changed.
I now have applied both methods to PFAL, while Raf (and others) have only applied one.
***
You quoted my response to Raf and then wrote: “Mike, most people see this post as blatantly self-contradictory.”
Well, it DOES contain a joke that you may have missed. I was deliberately contradictory there.
***
You wrote:
“This game with the "can you name the elements in" IS
a lure into some bizarre Mikean game.
Rather than post after post saying
"no one can answer the riddle I devised",
(which is more a matter of "WE REFUSE TO PLAY")
you could far more quickly just name the 5 Mikean
elements.”
WW, I’m once again proving to all that your understanding of the PFAL material is far from the mastery level Dr urged for over a ten year span.
The “game” you so detest is to collect the many elements of the law of believing that are scattered throughout written PFAL. So far I lined up 4 such elements. There is a 5th element that you and everyone here has heard dozens of times, but apparently not well enough to produce at my beckoning.
This is your chance to prove how well you knew the material. You have boasted about your great study of PFAL and how well you did on the AC entrance exam. I contend that you never knew the material well enough to have a deep working knowledge of it, and your inability to produce the 5th Element is my proof.
********
I am seeking PFAL grads who studied the books and can help me collect Elements that make up the law of believing.
We have 4 such elements.
1) Believing equals receiving.
2) Confession of belief yields receipt of confession.
3) Turning our believing toward the promises of God, limiting ourselves to the “Available List.”
4) Seeking to make our believing greater, like the centurion’s.
“PFAL teaches you that you actually own a version of a translation of a modern critical text. It’s a good tool for beginners, but by 1985 Dr told us all to switch our mastery efforts to written PFAL.”
You responded with:
“vpw never said anything about "SWITCHING" from the Bible to pfal.
pfal was supposed to be a key to the Bible-Genesis to Revelation.
(pfal says so.)
vpw said people should put more time in pfal.
The claim was it was the BEST key to the Bible.
“In pfal, students are challenged to put all other reading materials aside
other than the Bible for 3 months.
There was never a challenge to put aside the Bible for 3 months.
There was no "switch" instruction.
Mike added this to the word of vpw.
When you add to the word of vpw, you no longer have the word of vpw.”
Well, in addition to being the BEST key, Dr also claimed that it was a God-breathed key.
If you had read a little more carefully you’d have seen that I wrote: “..but by 1985 Dr told us all to switch...” and that I had NOT written “..but in 1985 Dr told us all to switch...”
I could see your criticism having a sliver of validity had I written it the second way, but even then I could argue that even though I hadn’t quoted vpw verbatim I still had the general gist of what he said IN that year of 1985.
[You couldn't see my criticism having a sliver of validity
if I had a video clip of vpw himself saying he never wanted us to
stop reading the Bible, especially in favour of pfal.
You're unqualified to determine if my criticisms lack merit.]
But I did write it the first way to indicate a spread out process of Dr telling us all to switch our mastery efforts from the KJV to the collaterals. I’ve outlined this process before and I can retrieve the details, but in short here it is.
In 1975 Dr hinted to the top leadership that mastering RHST would be a good thing. In 1979 he told all the AC students and grads that mastering RHST was a must. In 1984 he told the new students of PFAL that they should start thinking about mastering some of the books. In 1985, a month before he died, he mentioned on his last SNS tape that mastering ADAN was important. Two weeks later he said in his last teaching that everyone, ESPECIALLY top leadership, should master the collaterals.
[For the sake of discussion, assuming all this was true...]
The abbreviated sequence I just outlined has been presented here before in expanded form with total documentation. It was to this sequence that I referred when I wrote “..but by 1985 Dr told us all to switch...”
[And NONE of that indicates a "SWITCH".
He wanted people to spend time in pfal.
DUUUUUUUUHHHH.
This concept of a "SWITCH", however, is a fiction supported
only by Mike and Mikean rewrites of the word of vpw.]
Prior to this sequence Dr had told us in the 1967 film class, and later in the PFAL book, that focused study of the Pauline Epistles in our KJV was important.
[if he later said "focused study of the Pauline Epistles is no longer important",
well, THEN there'd be evidence for some kind of "SWITCH", maybe.
SINCE he said NO SUCH THING....]
The sequence outlined is a slow gradual switch from focused study of KJV to focused study of written PFAL.
The line you pounced on, WW, was meant to indicate a switch in Dr’s many urgings, not a quote of an exact line he said. I usually supply documentation when I am quoting him.
[Even his supposed "last" teaching says nothing about DE-EMPHASIZING
the Bible and emphasizing pfal INSTEAD.
It mentioned an ADDITIONAL focus.]
***
I had written to Raf: “I’ve tried both approaches. __ You’ve tried only one.”
You responded with: “INCORRECT. __ Raf's method was to use pfal's standard for Scripture to see if pfal was Scripture. If pfal was supposed to be Scripture, it would
pass its OWN tests.”
WW, I think you got it wrong here. I’ll start from the beginning, using Raf as an example, because the same holds for many here.
[No, I got it right, and explained-for what must be the dozenth time-
how that worked. Since you're unwilling or unable to follow the
simple discussion, I'll follow along on your "answer" for a bit...]
Raf has two differing methods at his disposal.
[He has MORE THAN TWO methods at his disposal.]
The first method, Method A, is how he approaches the ancient scriptures. He enters a study with an fundamental assumption that the originals were correct, and upon finding an Apparent Error he holds fast to his original assumption, and works the material until it fits and the AE evaporates, even if it takes years.
Method B is roughly how Raf approaches his professional field of journalism, and this method has no corresponding fundamental assumption to hold fast. When Raf applies Method B to PFAL he finds AE’s. He continues his investigation a little to see how solid they seem to be. If they pass all the tests he and his friends can muster up, they uncork the Champagne and celebrate.
[if you weren't unable or unwilling to see clearly,
you'd see that I named a THIRD method you didn't touch upon.
And that leaves out at least a fourth method...]
Now, WW, here is where I will explain what I meant when I wrote: “I’ve tried both approaches. __ You’ve tried only one.”
Even though Raf knows Method A, he’s never applied it to PFAL. He’s only applied one method to the AEs of PFAL.
[You know rather little about his full history and study in this area.]
There were many years where I sporadically applied Method B to PFAL. By 1998 I thought I had found several errors worth correcting. I knew of Method A for studying Biblical AEs but I had never applied it to PFAL. Just the opposite I was ON GUARD AGAINST applying it to PFAL. In 1998 I changed.
I now have applied both methods to PFAL, while Raf (and others) have only applied one.
***
You quoted my response to Raf and then wrote: “Mike, most people see this post as blatantly self-contradictory.”
Well, it DOES contain a joke that you may have missed. I was deliberately contradictory there.
[Actually, I'm familiar with your usual attempt
to relabel your errors later as attempts to be clever
and attempt to outwit us. It's tiresome, but typical
by now.]
***
You wrote:
“This game with the "can you name the elements in" IS
a lure into some bizarre Mikean game.
Rather than post after post saying
"no one can answer the riddle I devised",
(which is more a matter of "WE REFUSE TO PLAY")
you could far more quickly just name the 5 Mikean
elements.”
WW, I’m once again proving to all that your understanding of the PFAL material is far from the mastery level Dr urged for over a ten year span.
[Mike, you're once again proving you think you can "outwit" us,
and proving that your ability to both communicate AND debate are
far from mastery, or general competence.
Rather than simply speaking plainly and at least getting respectful
disagreement,
you invite scorn with an elitist attitude-
and that from someone who can't deliver the steak to match his sizzle.]
The “game” you so detest is to collect the many elements of the law of believing that are scattered throughout written PFAL. So far I lined up 4 such elements. There is a 5th element that you and everyone here has heard dozens of times, but apparently not well enough to produce at my beckoning.
[As I've repeated,
we have no interest in producing diddly-squat at
"YOUR BECKONING."
As usual, this escapes you.
By now, this isn't news-you've been unable to comprehend
this since 2004, and people have brought this up a lot in the
last FEW YEARS.]
This is your chance to prove how well you knew the material.
You have boasted about your great study of PFAL and how well you did on the AC entrance exam.
[i've mentioned it when it was relevant,
although I suspect Mr Hammeroni could probably take me in a straight contest.
(On this thread, nobody else.) ]
I contend that you never knew the material well enough to have a deep working knowledge of it,
[You also contend that Jesus will be teaching from the Orange Book.
Your contensions do not carry any weight with me.]
and your inability to produce the 5th Element is my proof.
[by now,
all but the most slow-witted already know my answer to this.
Feel free to ask someone else my answer.
It's not a riddle or a puzzle, either.]
********
I am seeking PFAL grads who studied the books and can help me collect Elements that make up the law of believing.
We have 4 such elements.
1) Believing equals receiving.
2) Confession of belief yields receipt of confession.
3) Turning our believing toward the promises of God, limiting ourselves to the “Available List.”
4) Seeking to make our believing greater, like the centurion’s.
Mikey, hows come you're the only person on the entire planet that heard (or claims to have heard) veepee telling people to "put away the Bible and study PFAL"...
Mikey, hows come we all have to take the claims you make on your word alone? hows come you can never come up with any real, physical proof?
Mikey, hows come you don't believe the posters who worked with veepee on PFAL who have come on here and openly refuted what you're saying?
You wrote: “Mikey, hows come you're the only person on the entire planet...”
You seem to equate GSC with the entire planet. I’m merely the only one on GSC who...
***
You wrote: “Mikey, hows come we all have to take the claims you make on your word alone?”
I often offer page references, tape numbers, and I can now even offer by e-mail any mp3 clips of taped quotes I cite.
***
You wrote: “...hows come you don't believe the posters who worked with...”
Because they too disobeyed Dr and didn’t master it the way he insisted on. I think they did a wonderful job prior to 1985 in their editing work with Dr, but an inadequate job in their private study in that same time period, especially in the later years. I blew it too during that time period in my private study, and worse.
After 1985, all of Dr’s editors lived in defiance of his final instructions, and so I don’t see God’s hand of guidance on their current positions regarding these matters like I see it was on them prior to 1985.
I could elaborate, but won’t. The above is a brief outline and summary. There are some details and qualifications to add but I wont now.
Trudging on in spite of my lack of ability to impress you, WW or anyone else, we so far have 4 Elements to the law of believing, and I expect the count to go up.
1) Believing equals receiving.
2) Confession of belief yields receipt of confession.
3) Turning our believing toward the promises of God, limiting ourselves to the “Available List.”
4) Seeking to make our believing greater, like the centurion’s.
Before anyone can criticize the law of believing as it’s presented in PFAL that ENTIRE law must be examined.
If someone only investigates a small portion of written PFAL and concludes that the teaching in PFAL on this law is invalid, then I am not impressed!
Let’s add to our collection of Elements so that the law of believing can be properly discussed.
You wrote: "Mikey, hows come you're the only person on the entire planet..."
You seem to equate GSC with the entire planet. I’m merely the only one on GSC who...
***
You wrote: "Mikey, hows come we all have to take the claims you make on your word alone?"
I often offer page references, tape numbers, and I can now even offer by e-mail any mp3 clips of taped quotes I cite.
Okay... please cite, any way you wish, difinitive sources for veepee saying words to the effect of "Study PFAL over the Bible, Study PFAL instead of the Bible, Put away your Bible and focus only on PFAL" ...or words similar to those... go ahead, we'll wait.
***
You wrote: "...hows come you don't believe the posters who worked with..."
Because they too disobeyed Dr and didn’t master it the way he insisted on. I think they did a wonderful job prior to 1985 in their editing work with Dr, but an inadequate job in their private study in that same time period, especially in the later years. I blew it too during that time period in my private study, and worse.
After 1985, all of Dr's editors lived in defiance of his final instructions, and so I don't see God's hand of guidance on their current positions regarding these matters like I see it was on them prior to 1985.
I could elaborate, but won't. The above is a brief outline and summary. There are some details and qualifications to add but I wont now.
Again, you are the only one who seems to believe this (of course feel free to post specific sources) and you refuse to believe the posters who have come forth stating how veepee himself said exactly the opposite of what you claim he did.
If you'd only admit that you have taken veepee's instructions to "master PFAL" and twisted that around to mean that "PFAL replaces the Bible"... and that it's "just your gut feeling or you holy spirit within told you these things... that would be OK... but you keep insisting that veepee said these things and the fact is he didn't...
Just admit that you are the author of your ideas... that's all... you'll really feel better for it... and who knows? Maybe there's more crowns up in heaven for you... but at least I'd bet that you'd be better accepted around here if you just "owned up to" these theories and quit trying to foist them off on veepee... we'd still come around here to play with you, but at least everything would be on the up and up then...
Denial is a tough mind set to post in I'd imagine.
Number 3 is not an element in Wierwille's law of believing. It's an element in the expanded and revised law of believing because too many people recognized the law of believing was an emperor with no clothes.
You wrote: “Number 3 is not an element in Wierwille's law of believing. It's an element in the expanded and revised law of believing because too many people recognized the law of believing was an emperor with no clothes.”
Here is my rendering of Element #3: “Turning our believing toward the promises of God, limiting ourselves to the ‘Available List.’”
Here are only a few of Dr’s renderings:
PFAL p. 28, 29
The man with the withered hand who had this tremendous need, stretched out his hand. He did the impossible. How? He believed. Believe is a verb and a verb shows action. The man believed that what Jesus said was God's will; therefore, he stretched his hand forth. Once you have the promise of God, the “how” of receiving is to believe literally what that promise says. It appeared impossible for the man to stretch out his hand. Yet this man, believing what The Word said or what God said by way of Jesus Christ, stretched it forth
TNDC p. 52
What a joy it is to belong to the Church. When we belong to the Church, we belong to the greatest and powerful body in the world; there is nothing like Church anywhere. The Church has such great power that even the gates of hell cannot prevail against it. That is why the devil cannot harm the people of the Church when they know the name of Christ and use that name, believing in it. Can you see why our prayers must be answered when we believe that Christ is in us? We can receive anything from God that He has promised in The Word if we only know and believe it. Everything that has been revealed in The Word we can thank God for, and, if we believe, it will come to pass.
TNDC p. 54
Ask yourself honestly, “Do I have the power of attorney?” You do have the right, the God-given authority, to use the name of Jesus Christ and see things come to pass. Yet for years and years people inside the fellowship of believers have seen but few positive results. Why? Just to say the name of Jesus Christ is not all that is necessary; you must believe that when you are saying it things will come to pass. All power is energized by believing and it is up to you to operate believing. Believing is action. You must know that what the Word of God says, and then act upon that Word. As you hear The Word and act upon it, God will answer your requests.
BTMS p. 37
As we act on the promises of God, they become real to us and are evidenced in our lives. Synchronize your believing and confession on the promises of God’s Word and you will manifest a more than abundant life in Christ Jesus.
BTMS p. 46
Once you start practicing the law of believing – right believing, believing God – you will find that the evil things that have been governing your life will soon fade away. God is always the victor over evil; but it is up to you to believe God and to make His will your will. __ In all the New Testament epistles, you will never find Christian believers urged to have faith; they already have faith as believers, and they are encouraged to believe God and express what they already have. __ Romans 12:3: ... according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. __ The word “believe” is a verb which connotes action. Therefore, believing the Word of God, taking the Word of God literally and acting upon it, brings results. This is the law of believing and this is the action that will bring release and victory to your life in every situation. "If thou canst believe, all things are possible [presently available] to him that believeth."
I know that there are more of these, especially in the film class, because in 1989 I heard JAL make the same statement as yours quoted above, Raf. The next year on his next San Diego visit I showed JAL a list of about ten places in the class, documented by segment and how many minutes into the segment Dr teaches that the law of believing must be operated with our focus trained on the promises of God. He ignored my list. It didn’t fit into his agenda. Somewhere in my file cabinet I have that list if it’s needed.
When did God promise red drapes? When did God promise that Job's children would be eradicated? When did God promise Tilly a canning factory? (Anyone ever verify that story)?
Point is, yes, Wierwille often spoke about believing God. But he often spoke about believing with the same effectiveness apart from God. God was just gravy in the law of believing, not a requirement. Element 3 falls!
Element #3 falls only in those minds that exclude many PFAL passages like the ones I just cited above.
I take it you would insist that Dr ALWAYS mention Element #3 every time he talks about believing, even though he had already saturated the Foundational materials with it.
*************************************************
*************************************************
*************************************************
*************************************************
Tom,
You wrote: “If you'd only admit that you have taken veepee's instructions to "master PFAL" and twisted that around to mean that "PFAL replaces the Bible"... and that it's "just your gut feeling or you holy spirit within told you these things... that would be OK... but you keep insisting that veepee said these things and the fact is he didn't...”
There are some things that I have repeatedly admitted I cannot prove. Maybe you missed them. I haven’t seen you posting near me in many months. Some things can only be proved by God to each of us individually.
At least twice now I’ve strongly argued to separate myself from your above sentence "PFAL replaces the Bible." Did you miss those arguments?
There are some things I try to prove, but it’s usually like my post above to Raf, where I prove that what people think is not in the collaterals actually ARE in the collaterals.
I sense with you and some others here that you only focus on (and remember) those passages of mine that will fit into your agenda of harassment. Have you even seen the places where I identify what logic I try to display and what I do not?
***
You wrote: “Just admit that you are the author of your ideas...”
There are some things I post regarding the history of the ministry that are my own synthesis, but even there I try and anchor my theories to the tape and print record. I know I strongly generalize about things like us grads not studying hard enough, but there are reasons for that that will become more clear if people like you dropped the harassment mode and got into a little listening.
Why DO you harass, anyway? Do you think if people believe me it will be a danger to them? Can’t you see I am very much aware of the terrible problems that crept into the ministry and that I am very carefully avoiding any movement toward what actually caused those problems? Just what good are you doing with your harassment? What Word of God do YOU have for our edification? Do you even believe in the Bible you think I‘m trying to “replace” to the point of acting on it?
***
BTW, for those masterful PFAL students playing the game,
the 5th Element can be found in the passages I posted above.
Oakspear,
You seem to have little ego invested in me being dead wrong.
The next year on his next San Diego visit I showed JAL a list of about ten places in the class, documented by segment and how many minutes into the segment Dr teaches that the law of believing must be operated with our focus trained on the promises of God. He ignored my list. It didn’t fit into his agenda.
Gee Mike... after all it was his agenda as opposed to your agenda... but I bet he was really blessed that you pointed all of that out to him...
So Mike... are you saying that you no longer 'stand by' these statements you've previously made in these forums with the utmost conviction?
"PFAL is 'God's Word reissued'."
This means "we don't need any versions of the Bible anymore, only PFAL."
"PFAL is the Word of God, that the Holy Spirit has provided us with His Word in written form in PFAL, and it (PFAL) carries all the authority of God Almighty."
"Christ is currently learning from PFAL and will be teaching from PFAL materials when he returns."
"Betraying Dr's revelations is betraying God."
"You just need to feed that Christ inside with the pure Word of PFAL."
No, Mike. I assume that if element 3 is not stated, it's implied. I don't force element 3 in there when it's not there, and in many cases explained and explored by Wierwille, element 3 is not there, stated or unstated.
Does it hurt to contort yourself into such self-delusion, Mike?
Quote--"Once you start practicing the law of believing – right believing, believing God – you will find that the evil things that have been governing your life will soon fade away. God is always the victor over evil; but it is up to you to believe God and to make His will your will."
This is the line that has caused me (and I'm sure others) no end of condemnation. If things went wrong during TWI life, it was because I caused it to happen by my unbelief.
I know that having a positive attitude helps in determing the course of our lives-just as having a negative attitude can do the same. But the fact remains that things happen that are at times outside our control (New Orleans comes to mind). In TWI world negative things happened to me as a direct result of decisions made by other people. But when the worst happened, I was told that they happened because of my believing. That utterly destroyed my confidence. I spent the rest of my time in TWI and long after condeming myself for things I believed I brought on myself. Why? Because of those sentences.
It was a subtle method of control. If you are a success, it's because TWI taught you right believing. If you are not, you didn't listen. TWI may not be novel in that approach, but they perfected it.
That may be an over-simplification, but I had to butt in and say my pieace.
Each of those statements has an immediate context and a remote context.
...yes
When I made those statements did you pay ANY attention to those contexts?
...about as much as I usually do
If so, do you remember the contexts now?
...doesn't really matter
When you saved those statements did you save the contexts too, or at least the statements’ locations so that you could refer back to the contexts?
...you can probably infer from the above responses what my answer is...
If not, why not? Could it be that you don’t really care about what I meant, that you only care about harassing me?
Well first of all I prefer to think of it as playing with you, I'd have to take you seriously to harass you.
Second of all see my answer to your next question.
Third of all... do you really care about what I mean when I type? You never directly answer the simple questions I ask of you... many times only requiring a simple 'yes' or 'no'.
Do you agree that taking something out of it’s context can alter it’s meaning?
You worded that very well and the key words are can alter... Of course I agree with that statement.
But in the case of these selected quotes of yours they stand on their own. What they say 'alone' is exactly what they say 'in context'.
They are pretty straight forward statements made by you Mike.
So now, please be so kind as to answer the question put forth: Do you still 'stand by' these statements you've made previously? ...or are you now distancing yourself from them?
That's all... I think it's a fairly easy question... it's either "yes", "no" or "I'm not so sure anymore" isn't it?
I too had felt that kind of condemnation. There are two ways I got over it. One was to look at more sentences and bring them into the mix. Focus on just one or two sentences is a sure way of missing the big picture.
The other way I got over it was the realization (from the broad mix of sentences) that the NORMAL human condition is to have wrong believing or a lack of believing. Absolutely every human has an uphill fight to believe. Some don’t show it, but the Word says they struggle somewhere in their lives.
Also, passages like the following (which contains another Element! ... the 6th) helped me a lot when I finally discovered them in recent years. This is from GMWD p. 18, 19:
Verse 3 of Psalms 103 very plainly says, “Who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all [without exception] thy diseases.” Does God forgive your sins? Well then, does God heal you? He must or He is a liar; but God is no liar. People may then question, “Well, why doesn’t God heal everybody?” Healing for all is God’s will. But when we fail to rise up to our rightful and legal privileges, due to a variety of causes—the greatest cause being a negative society where people talk about, expect, and cope with negative things—we fail to be healed. To claim and manifest God’s healing we must believe on the positives of His Word, not the negatives of the world. If we would become immersed in the Word and start living, we would find that God is still able to quiet down the nerves; God is still able to bring health and peace without antibiotics, sedatives, or alcohol.
Verse 4:
Who redeemeth thy life from destruction...
God redeems us from the destruction that is constantly around to destroy us. Do you get the impact of this truth? That which surrounds us everyday, that which endeavors to kill us prematurely– God has redeemed our lives from that type of destruction. And He adds to this safeness the warmth and love which makes life enjoyable.
When we augment our memory with the fullness of the text we will have great light.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
89
149
306
85
Popular Days
Feb 10
62
Feb 20
61
Feb 11
46
Mar 2
45
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 89 posts
CM 149 posts
Mike 306 posts
Tom Strange 85 posts
Popular Days
Feb 10 2006
62 posts
Feb 20 2006
61 posts
Feb 11 2006
46 posts
Mar 2 2006
45 posts
Posted Images
CM
on another note
if something someone says is "God breathed" (which is a poor translation imo)
that don't mean it is to be worshiped and followed to the letter
that's like making the bible the golden calf
or in the case of pfal the golden dog
even Jesus broke the letter of Moses Law which would mean sin
stick that in your pipe and smoke it a while
I John says something about you cannot sin.
A piece of the puzzle-or is it a riddle.
With quite the ending and beginning.
The bible talks about the beginning....
It's your beginning...
The Word in the flesh.
The Word is God.
Is it to be worshiped?
Or is it something like "in spirit and truth".
Beyond the letter of the bible into something greater.
Then the bible and other writings can be seen.
worship in spirit and in truth
in spirit-in the spirit
and in the truth which is not readily seen by the carnal eye
Edited by CMLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
WordWolf,
I had written:
“PFAL teaches you that you actually own a version of a translation of a modern critical text. It’s a good tool for beginners, but by 1985 Dr told us all to switch our mastery efforts to written PFAL.”
You responded with:
“vpw never said anything about "SWITCHING" from the Bible to pfal.
pfal was supposed to be a key to the Bible-Genesis to Revelation.
(pfal says so.)
vpw said people should put more time in pfal.
The claim was it was the BEST key to the Bible.
“In pfal, students are challenged to put all other reading materials aside
other than the Bible for 3 months.
There was never a challenge to put aside the Bible for 3 months.
There was no "switch" instruction.
Mike added this to the word of vpw.
When you add to the word of vpw, you no longer have the word of vpw.”
Well, in addition to being the BEST key, Dr also claimed that it was a God-breathed key.
If you had read a little more carefully you’d have seen that I wrote: “..but by 1985 Dr told us all to switch...” and that I had NOT written “..but in 1985 Dr told us all to switch...”
I could see your criticism having a sliver of validity had I written it the second way, but even then I could argue that even though I hadn’t quoted vpw verbatim I still had the general gist of what he said IN that year of 1985.
But I did write it the first way to indicate a spread out process of Dr telling us all to switch our mastery efforts from the KJV to the collaterals. I’ve outlined this process before and I can retrieve the details, but in short here it is.
In 1975 Dr hinted to the top leadership that mastering RHST would be a good thing. In 1979 he told all the AC students and grads that mastering RHST was a must. In 1984 he told the new students of PFAL that they should start thinking about mastering some of the books. In 1985, a month before he died, he mentioned on his last SNS tape that mastering ADAN was important. Two weeks later he said in his last teaching that everyone, ESPECIALLY top leadership, should master the collaterals.
The abbreviated sequence I just outlined has been presented here before in expanded form with total documentation. It was to this sequence that I referred when I wrote “..but by 1985 Dr told us all to switch...”
Prior to this sequence Dr had told us in the 1967 film class, and later in the PFAL book, that focused study of the Pauline Epistles in our KJV was important. The sequence outlined is a slow gradual switch from focused study of KJV to focused study of written PFAL.
The line you pounced on, WW, was meant to indicate a switch in Dr’s many urgings, not a quote of an exact line he said. I usually supply documentation when I am quoting him.
***
I had written to Raf: “I’ve tried both approaches. __ You’ve tried only one.”
You responded with: “INCORRECT. __ Raf's method was to use pfal's standard for Scripture to see if pfal was Scripture. If pfal was supposed to be Scripture, it would
pass its OWN tests.”
WW, I think you got it wrong here. I’ll start from the beginning, using Raf as an example, because the same holds for many here.
Raf has two differing methods at his disposal.
The first method, Method A, is how he approaches the ancient scriptures. He enters a study with an fundamental assumption that the originals were correct, and upon finding an Apparent Error he holds fast to his original assumption, and works the material until it fits and the AE evaporates, even if it takes years.
Method B is roughly how Raf approaches his professional field of journalism, and this method has no corresponding fundamental assumption to hold fast. When Raf applies Method B to PFAL he finds AE’s. He continues his investigation a little to see how solid they seem to be. If they pass all the tests he and his friends can muster up, they uncork the Champagne and celebrate.
Now, WW, here is where I will explain what I meant when I wrote: “I’ve tried both approaches. __ You’ve tried only one.”
Even though Raf knows Method A, he’s never applied it to PFAL. He’s only applied one method to the AEs of PFAL.
There were many years where I sporadically applied Method B to PFAL. By 1998 I thought I had found several errors worth correcting. I knew of Method A for studying Biblical AEs but I had never applied it to PFAL. Just the opposite I was ON GUARD AGAINST applying it to PFAL. In 1998 I changed.
I now have applied both methods to PFAL, while Raf (and others) have only applied one.
***
You quoted my response to Raf and then wrote: “Mike, most people see this post as blatantly self-contradictory.”
Well, it DOES contain a joke that you may have missed. I was deliberately contradictory there.
***
You wrote:
“This game with the "can you name the elements in" IS
a lure into some bizarre Mikean game.
Rather than post after post saying
"no one can answer the riddle I devised",
(which is more a matter of "WE REFUSE TO PLAY")
you could far more quickly just name the 5 Mikean
elements.”
WW, I’m once again proving to all that your understanding of the PFAL material is far from the mastery level Dr urged for over a ten year span.
The “game” you so detest is to collect the many elements of the law of believing that are scattered throughout written PFAL. So far I lined up 4 such elements. There is a 5th element that you and everyone here has heard dozens of times, but apparently not well enough to produce at my beckoning.
This is your chance to prove how well you knew the material. You have boasted about your great study of PFAL and how well you did on the AC entrance exam. I contend that you never knew the material well enough to have a deep working knowledge of it, and your inability to produce the 5th Element is my proof.
********
I am seeking PFAL grads who studied the books and can help me collect Elements that make up the law of believing.
We have 4 such elements.
1) Believing equals receiving.
2) Confession of belief yields receipt of confession.
3) Turning our believing toward the promises of God, limiting ourselves to the “Available List.”
4) Seeking to make our believing greater, like the centurion’s.
Who can help me find the 5th?
I expect to find many more than 5.
The 5th Element is known to all here.
All have heard it many times.
This is a spot quiz.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
what I want to know is: where is that champagne that got uncorked after we found all those actual arrors?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Mikey, hows come you're the only person on the entire planet that heard (or claims to have heard) veepee telling people to "put away the Bible and study PFAL"...
Mikey, hows come we all have to take the claims you make on your word alone? hows come you can never come up with any real, physical proof?
Mikey, hows come you don't believe the posters who worked with veepee on PFAL who have come on here and openly refuted what you're saying?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Tom,
You wrote: “Mikey, hows come you're the only person on the entire planet...”
You seem to equate GSC with the entire planet. I’m merely the only one on GSC who...
***
You wrote: “Mikey, hows come we all have to take the claims you make on your word alone?”
I often offer page references, tape numbers, and I can now even offer by e-mail any mp3 clips of taped quotes I cite.
***
You wrote: “...hows come you don't believe the posters who worked with...”
Because they too disobeyed Dr and didn’t master it the way he insisted on. I think they did a wonderful job prior to 1985 in their editing work with Dr, but an inadequate job in their private study in that same time period, especially in the later years. I blew it too during that time period in my private study, and worse.
After 1985, all of Dr’s editors lived in defiance of his final instructions, and so I don’t see God’s hand of guidance on their current positions regarding these matters like I see it was on them prior to 1985.
I could elaborate, but won’t. The above is a brief outline and summary. There are some details and qualifications to add but I wont now.
**********************************************************
**********************************************************
**********************************************************
**********************************************************
WordWolf,
You wrote: “This is STILL not impressing us”
Trudging on in spite of my lack of ability to impress you, WW or anyone else, we so far have 4 Elements to the law of believing, and I expect the count to go up.
1) Believing equals receiving.
2) Confession of belief yields receipt of confession.
3) Turning our believing toward the promises of God, limiting ourselves to the “Available List.”
4) Seeking to make our believing greater, like the centurion’s.
Before anyone can criticize the law of believing as it’s presented in PFAL that ENTIRE law must be examined.
If someone only investigates a small portion of written PFAL and concludes that the teaching in PFAL on this law is invalid, then I am not impressed!
Let’s add to our collection of Elements so that the law of believing can be properly discussed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
If you'd only admit that you have taken veepee's instructions to "master PFAL" and twisted that around to mean that "PFAL replaces the Bible"... and that it's "just your gut feeling or you holy spirit within told you these things... that would be OK... but you keep insisting that veepee said these things and the fact is he didn't...
Just admit that you are the author of your ideas... that's all... you'll really feel better for it... and who knows? Maybe there's more crowns up in heaven for you... but at least I'd bet that you'd be better accepted around here if you just "owned up to" these theories and quit trying to foist them off on veepee... we'd still come around here to play with you, but at least everything would be on the up and up then...
Denial is a tough mind set to post in I'd imagine.
carry on with the plan of the day
Edited by Tom StrangeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Number 3 is not an element in Wierwille's law of believing. It's an element in the expanded and revised law of believing because too many people recognized the law of believing was an emperor with no clothes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Raf,
You wrote: “Number 3 is not an element in Wierwille's law of believing. It's an element in the expanded and revised law of believing because too many people recognized the law of believing was an emperor with no clothes.”
Here is my rendering of Element #3: “Turning our believing toward the promises of God, limiting ourselves to the ‘Available List.’”
Here are only a few of Dr’s renderings:
PFAL p. 28, 29
The man with the withered hand who had this tremendous need, stretched out his hand. He did the impossible. How? He believed. Believe is a verb and a verb shows action. The man believed that what Jesus said was God's will; therefore, he stretched his hand forth. Once you have the promise of God, the “how” of receiving is to believe literally what that promise says. It appeared impossible for the man to stretch out his hand. Yet this man, believing what The Word said or what God said by way of Jesus Christ, stretched it forth
TNDC p. 52
What a joy it is to belong to the Church. When we belong to the Church, we belong to the greatest and powerful body in the world; there is nothing like Church anywhere. The Church has such great power that even the gates of hell cannot prevail against it. That is why the devil cannot harm the people of the Church when they know the name of Christ and use that name, believing in it. Can you see why our prayers must be answered when we believe that Christ is in us? We can receive anything from God that He has promised in The Word if we only know and believe it. Everything that has been revealed in The Word we can thank God for, and, if we believe, it will come to pass.
TNDC p. 54
Ask yourself honestly, “Do I have the power of attorney?” You do have the right, the God-given authority, to use the name of Jesus Christ and see things come to pass. Yet for years and years people inside the fellowship of believers have seen but few positive results. Why? Just to say the name of Jesus Christ is not all that is necessary; you must believe that when you are saying it things will come to pass. All power is energized by believing and it is up to you to operate believing. Believing is action. You must know that what the Word of God says, and then act upon that Word. As you hear The Word and act upon it, God will answer your requests.
BTMS p. 37
As we act on the promises of God, they become real to us and are evidenced in our lives. Synchronize your believing and confession on the promises of God’s Word and you will manifest a more than abundant life in Christ Jesus.
BTMS p. 46
Once you start practicing the law of believing – right believing, believing God – you will find that the evil things that have been governing your life will soon fade away. God is always the victor over evil; but it is up to you to believe God and to make His will your will. __ In all the New Testament epistles, you will never find Christian believers urged to have faith; they already have faith as believers, and they are encouraged to believe God and express what they already have. __ Romans 12:3: ... according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. __ The word “believe” is a verb which connotes action. Therefore, believing the Word of God, taking the Word of God literally and acting upon it, brings results. This is the law of believing and this is the action that will bring release and victory to your life in every situation. "If thou canst believe, all things are possible [presently available] to him that believeth."
I know that there are more of these, especially in the film class, because in 1989 I heard JAL make the same statement as yours quoted above, Raf. The next year on his next San Diego visit I showed JAL a list of about ten places in the class, documented by segment and how many minutes into the segment Dr teaches that the law of believing must be operated with our focus trained on the promises of God. He ignored my list. It didn’t fit into his agenda. Somewhere in my file cabinet I have that list if it’s needed.
Element #3 stands!
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Oh, I agree with all that wholeheartedly.
When did God promise red drapes? When did God promise that Job's children would be eradicated? When did God promise Tilly a canning factory? (Anyone ever verify that story)?
Point is, yes, Wierwille often spoke about believing God. But he often spoke about believing with the same effectiveness apart from God. God was just gravy in the law of believing, not a requirement. Element 3 falls!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Raf,
Element #3 falls only in those minds that exclude many PFAL passages like the ones I just cited above.
I take it you would insist that Dr ALWAYS mention Element #3 every time he talks about believing, even though he had already saturated the Foundational materials with it.
*************************************************
*************************************************
*************************************************
*************************************************
Tom,
You wrote: “If you'd only admit that you have taken veepee's instructions to "master PFAL" and twisted that around to mean that "PFAL replaces the Bible"... and that it's "just your gut feeling or you holy spirit within told you these things... that would be OK... but you keep insisting that veepee said these things and the fact is he didn't...”
There are some things that I have repeatedly admitted I cannot prove. Maybe you missed them. I haven’t seen you posting near me in many months. Some things can only be proved by God to each of us individually.
At least twice now I’ve strongly argued to separate myself from your above sentence "PFAL replaces the Bible." Did you miss those arguments?
There are some things I try to prove, but it’s usually like my post above to Raf, where I prove that what people think is not in the collaterals actually ARE in the collaterals.
I sense with you and some others here that you only focus on (and remember) those passages of mine that will fit into your agenda of harassment. Have you even seen the places where I identify what logic I try to display and what I do not?
***
You wrote: “Just admit that you are the author of your ideas...”
There are some things I post regarding the history of the ministry that are my own synthesis, but even there I try and anchor my theories to the tape and print record. I know I strongly generalize about things like us grads not studying hard enough, but there are reasons for that that will become more clear if people like you dropped the harassment mode and got into a little listening.
Why DO you harass, anyway? Do you think if people believe me it will be a danger to them? Can’t you see I am very much aware of the terrible problems that crept into the ministry and that I am very carefully avoiding any movement toward what actually caused those problems? Just what good are you doing with your harassment? What Word of God do YOU have for our edification? Do you even believe in the Bible you think I‘m trying to “replace” to the point of acting on it?
***
BTW, for those masterful PFAL students playing the game,
the 5th Element can be found in the passages I posted above.
Oakspear,
You seem to have little ego invested in me being dead wrong.
Can you play the game and see the 5th Element?
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
No one likes to be proved wrong, except those who want to be right with God more than with men.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Mike
The only thing you've "proved" is that there are contradictions in VP's teaching.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
So Mike... are you saying that you no longer 'stand by' these statements you've previously made in these forums with the utmost conviction?
"PFAL is 'God's Word reissued'."
This means "we don't need any versions of the Bible anymore, only PFAL."
"PFAL is the Word of God, that the Holy Spirit has provided us with His Word in written form in PFAL, and it (PFAL) carries all the authority of God Almighty."
"Christ is currently learning from PFAL and will be teaching from PFAL materials when he returns."
"Betraying Dr's revelations is betraying God."
"You just need to feed that Christ inside with the pure Word of PFAL."
"Studying PFAL will defeat death."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
No, Mike. I assume that if element 3 is not stated, it's implied. I don't force element 3 in there when it's not there, and in many cases explained and explored by Wierwille, element 3 is not there, stated or unstated.
Does it hurt to contort yourself into such self-delusion, Mike?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Tom,
Each of those statements has an immediate context and a remote context.
When I made those statements did you pay ANY attention to those contexts?
If so, do you remember the contexts now?
When you saved those statements did you save the contexts too, or at least the statements’ locations so that you could refer back to the contexts?
If not, why not? Could it be that you don’t really care about what I meant, that you only care about harassing me?
Do you agree that taking something out of it’s context can alter it’s meaning?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
You mean like taking the "thus saith the lord" comments out of the context of where they appear might alter the true meaning? Is that what you mean?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Raf,
I always supply the location of my quotes so that anyone can examine the contexts.
***
The 3rd Element is richly taught in the texts; it is absent in the TVTs.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
topoftheworld
Quote--"Once you start practicing the law of believing – right believing, believing God – you will find that the evil things that have been governing your life will soon fade away. God is always the victor over evil; but it is up to you to believe God and to make His will your will."
This is the line that has caused me (and I'm sure others) no end of condemnation. If things went wrong during TWI life, it was because I caused it to happen by my unbelief.
I know that having a positive attitude helps in determing the course of our lives-just as having a negative attitude can do the same. But the fact remains that things happen that are at times outside our control (New Orleans comes to mind). In TWI world negative things happened to me as a direct result of decisions made by other people. But when the worst happened, I was told that they happened because of my believing. That utterly destroyed my confidence. I spent the rest of my time in TWI and long after condeming myself for things I believed I brought on myself. Why? Because of those sentences.
It was a subtle method of control. If you are a success, it's because TWI taught you right believing. If you are not, you didn't listen. TWI may not be novel in that approach, but they perfected it.
That may be an over-simplification, but I had to butt in and say my pieace.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Ex10,
Can you cite one of those contradictions you say I've displayed?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
That's all... I think it's a fairly easy question... it's either "yes", "no" or "I'm not so sure anymore" isn't it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Mike,
I could, but I won't.
Top
That's why the doctrine is so evil. And why I said it interferes with our relationship with Jesus Chirst as our Lord and Saviour.
Edited by ex10Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
topoftheworld,
I too had felt that kind of condemnation. There are two ways I got over it. One was to look at more sentences and bring them into the mix. Focus on just one or two sentences is a sure way of missing the big picture.
The other way I got over it was the realization (from the broad mix of sentences) that the NORMAL human condition is to have wrong believing or a lack of believing. Absolutely every human has an uphill fight to believe. Some don’t show it, but the Word says they struggle somewhere in their lives.
Also, passages like the following (which contains another Element! ... the 6th) helped me a lot when I finally discovered them in recent years. This is from GMWD p. 18, 19:
Verse 3 of Psalms 103 very plainly says, “Who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all [without exception] thy diseases.” Does God forgive your sins? Well then, does God heal you? He must or He is a liar; but God is no liar. People may then question, “Well, why doesn’t God heal everybody?” Healing for all is God’s will. But when we fail to rise up to our rightful and legal privileges, due to a variety of causes—the greatest cause being a negative society where people talk about, expect, and cope with negative things—we fail to be healed. To claim and manifest God’s healing we must believe on the positives of His Word, not the negatives of the world. If we would become immersed in the Word and start living, we would find that God is still able to quiet down the nerves; God is still able to bring health and peace without antibiotics, sedatives, or alcohol.
Verse 4:
Who redeemeth thy life from destruction...
God redeems us from the destruction that is constantly around to destroy us. Do you get the impact of this truth? That which surrounds us everyday, that which endeavors to kill us prematurely– God has redeemed our lives from that type of destruction. And He adds to this safeness the warmth and love which makes life enjoyable.
When we augment our memory with the fullness of the text we will have great light.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites