yeah, socks, and the precedent was set in the first century.
Plenty of people died for their faith.
Just makes me think what my problem is when the Lord opens a door and I'm too much of a weeny to say anything cause I'm scared of what others might think.
Nobody is gonna stone me, probably, so what am I afraid of? Ya know?
Ok, topic #1 being Dr's many, many (and hidden) "Thus saith the Lord" statements.
I'd love to spend lots of time here. There are three such statements on which I've posted often: TNDC p. 34, TNDC p. 116, and PFAL p.83, and these three constitute the bulk of the overt claims Dr made in writing. Many others remain hidden, and I'd love to make them a major topic here.
Here's another of the many well hidden "Thus saith the Lord" statements we can find in Dr's teachings. This one has never been in my previous posts here at GSC. It's from the Sep/Oct 1983 Way Magazine where Dr's article focuses on a short list of vocabulary words that need to be sharply understood.
The list of words he handles in that article is: religion, Christianity, fact, truth, faith, believing, formed, made, created, body, soul, and spirit.
The title of the article is "The Importance of Words in God's Word."
The words "fact" and "Christianity" do NOT appear in the Young's Concordance or in the KJV, but they DO occur in the PFAL writings... a lot.
There is a passage in OMSW that will serve here in two ways. First, it illustrates another "Thus saith the Lord" statement, and second it will help calm those who are enraged at my above post on the new birth.
The passage is on page 124 and reads (with my bold fonts):
"It’s a remarkable thing that God put His promise in the past tense—“I have already given to you”—and He still does this today. Many, many times He puts in the past tense what still is the future for us."
I haven't the time to get into any more detail on this, but this passage in Dr's last book to us needs to be carefully pondered.
I'm thinking of doing more to eventually post that list of 90 "Thus saith the Lord" statements.
Each such statement carries two pieces of information for our consideration. First, we didn't pay good attention to Dr's teaching, especially as he got older. We didn't study, and especially we didn't MASTER the material we were given. If we had studied, we'd have seen and remembered these many times when Dr asserted that he was teaching authoritatively. Our assignment to master the material that Dr gave us with his dying last words was a NEEDED assignment, even for leadership.
Second, these statements give us a chance to believe, or not, that Dr was working for the True God. Even more, they force us to decide "yes" or "no" to Dr's teaching authority because they leave no gray area between.
***
A tally might be in order. Remember, all of the far out exotic claims I have made are contingent on written PFAL being the authoritative, given in English, written Word of God. If PFAL isn't this kind of 2000 years special, then I'll have to admit all my evidence of the changeover of administrations in our time is illusory.
But if written PFAL truly IS what Dr claimed it some 90 times over, then the new administration becomes obviously called for, and many other things line up in a marvelously "new" way.
***
So, let's tally a little:
1. TNDC 34 - every word true
2. TNDC 116 - not VPW but Holy Spirit
3. PFAL 83 - God-breathed... necessarily
4. BTMS - Preface
5. TNDC - Preface
6. WWAY - Preface
7. GMWD - Preface
8. OMSW 124 - many, many times... today
Hardly anyone even knows about #1. Most grads think that #2 only applies to leading us into tongues, but the context contains two words which dash that hypothesis to pieces. For #3 I've spent hours debating with posters who want this passage to say the opposite of what it does. Two of Dr's editors agree with me, though, that #3 is a very significant claim. The prefaces are hardly ever read by anyone, and some have even claimed that we should EXPECT to find no teaching in them. Lastly, #8 has hardly ever been seen by grads.
So, I'm almost ten percent done with my list. Until others come back posting here, or until this thread dies due to the planned software changeover, I'll continue with this list, just hoping that someone is reading it.
***
Entry #9 can be seen at the end of RHST's Introduction, where Dr claims Jesus Christ appointed him a spokesman. It's in the italic print.
Entry #10 can be seen in RHST's "Introduction to the Appendices" way in the back of the book. Can anyone see the TWO "Thus saith the Lord" statements that appear in this one short set of paragraphs?
Here is one that I think is real special. This one is in the Preface (where else?) to "Receiving The Holy Spirit Today" page x in the 7th edition.
There we read:
"If you are a Christian believer, I sincerely encourage you to study this book. Do not allow your past teachings or feelings to discourage you from going on to receive God’s best. If you need power and ability to face up to the snares of this life, you may find your answer while reading this book. It is my prayer that you may be edified, exhorted and comforted."
***
Let's look at this paragraph closely, sentence by sentence. I'm stunned, even now after seeing it many times in the past. There's so much in here.
"If you are a Christian believer, I sincerely encourage you to study this book."
This exhortation applies to us now as much as it did back then. We were often told by Dr to master the class materials. This is just one more place. Here he used the word "study" which is used in II Timothy 2:15, our point of departure (pfal p.115).
"Do not allow your past teachings or feelings to discourage you from going on to receive God’s best."
This encouragement applies to us now MORE than it did back then. Connecting this sentence with the previous one leads to two possible understandings: either "this book" IS God's best, or/and "this book" is instrumental to receiving "God's best." Looks like both are true to me.
"If you need power and ability to face up to the snares of this life, you may find your answer while reading this book."
There it is again: This book is God's answer to the how of the power, just like the above sentence. God's answer is God's Word. God's Word is the power of God. Twice establishes it. We may find our answer while reading "this book." Or how about MASTERING it?
"It is my prayer that you may be edified, exhorted and comforted."
WOW!!! That's what prophecy does! This book, RHST, is prophecy! Hey! I didn't write the book! It's been sitting there all that time, unnoticed. Think how many other treasures await us, hidden there by God.
Let's go back to "Thus saith" #3, PFAL page 83, for a moment.
Often I posted on this page, and often others tried to deny it outright. After many rounds, I evolved a concise way of putting it all.
Here is what is actually written on that page 83 of PFAL:
"The Bible was written so that you as a believer need not be blown about by every wind of doctrine
or theory or ideology. This Word of God does not change. Men change, ideologies change, opinions
change; but this Word of God lives and abides forever. It endures, it stands. Let’s see this from John 5:39.
“Search the scriptures ....” It does not say search Shakespeare or Kant or Plato or Aristotle or V.P.
Wierwille’s writings or the writings of a denomination. No, it says, “Search the scriptures ....” because
all Scripture is God-breathed. Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; not what
Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures – they are God-breathed."
The key sentence is the last one. It's taken nearly word-for-word exactly from the '67 film class, so everyone was exposed to this sentence a maximum number of times. Here's how we heard it in the film class:
"'Search the scriptures.' It doesn't say search Shakespeare or Kant or Plato or Aristotle or V.P. Wierwille's writings or the writings of my denomination, no. It's says, 'search the scriptures!' Why search the
scriptures? Because all scripture is God-breathed. But not all that V.P. Wierwille would write would of necessity be God-breathed, nor what Shakespeare said nor Kant nor Plato not Aristotle or Freud. But the scriptures; they are God-breathed. All scripture, all of it."
How many times were we exposed to this sentence? Many. Yet it eludes us to this day. Why? What many posters tried to assert was that this key sentence in Dr's teaching to us was equivalent to the following sentence of their own composition: "Not what Wierwille writes will be God-breathed; not what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures – they are God-breathed."
But that's not at all the choice of words Dr used. What Dr said and wrote says the exact opposite of the above sentence. It’s the addition of just a few words, “not all” and “necessarily” that make the big difference.
The ACTUAL sentence reads (with my bold fonts): "Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; not what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures – they are God-breathed."
The phrase "not all" implies "some." If I eat NOT ALL of a pizza pie, then that means there's SOME left for you.
This means Dr's statement on PFAL page 83 asserts that ... SOME some of what Wierwille writes will OF NECESSITY be God-breathed.
I have verified my grammar and logic on this one sentence with two of Dr's editors, one of whom worked on the PFAL book and remembered well that one key sentence. The other was a long time editor of the magazine.
Way in the back of in the book "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today" can be found an isolated "hidden" set of passages that, when I first came upon them a few years ago, the only thing I could think was "What is this doing all the way back HERE?" I could remember seeing it many years prior, in my first reading, but in those days EVERYTHING seemed so cosmic and amazing that it blended into the background in no time. But lately, when I came back to PFAL, this set of paragraphs totally astounded me in how oddly they seemed to be hidden in the back of the book.
If you were specially attentive, you might have noticed that in the middle of "How the Word Works" Dr hints to us that doing word studies in the PFAL writings would be a useful thing to do. I don't mean normal word studies with the KV and a concordance. That would be a "Bible" word study. I mean a PFAL word study: looking at previous usages (in PFAL, not in the Bible) of a word for deeper meaning.
For me to track down "Masters of the Word" to see Dr's previous usage of the word "master" and thus better understand his use of that word in his final instructions to us is an example of a PFAL word study, only partially completed.
Dr will again hint to the profit of doing PFAL word studies in this set of paragraphs tucked away in the back of RHST. Watch close for the word studies issue to come up in the middle of all this, because there is a lot of action here.
***
Let's look at the "Introduction to Appendixes" in RHST to see these TWO ways that Dr says, in essence, "Thus saith the Lord." One point to keep in consideration is that the first such appendix, right on the next pages, is titled "The Word Receive" and is on dechomai and lombano.
First I'll reprint the entire passage before I work on a line by line commentary. This is From "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today" page 223 in the 7th edition 1982 (p.257 6th ed. 1972). Hold on to your hats, this gets intense:
"If we believe that throughout the Scriptures we have the words of God and not man, many difficulties will disappear. We must allow the Divine Author the rights and privileges claimed and operated by every human author -- that He may quote, adapt, or repeat in varied forms His own previously written or spoken words. God could have used other forms had He chosen to do so, but it has pleased Him to repeat His own word or words, introducing them in different contexts, with new applications and connotations. Thus it obligates us
to study the context, the paragraph, and the section where the same word appears, and where it was used previously, to see it is used in a different sense or not.
"The greatest satisfaction of any Biblical scholar is to fathom what can be searched out from God's Word and to quietly accept that which is untraceable and cannot be explored or found out.
"Ephesians 3:8 - anexichniastos -- unsearchable, untraceable, cannot be explored or found out.
"Romans 11:33 uses this same word translated 'past finding out.'
"Romans 11:33 - anexerunetos - translated 'un-searchable' simply means inscrutable or incomprehensible, that which can be apprehended but not comprehended.
"These appendixes have been added to this volume for those who desire to search out and explore the deeper reason for the way in which God has set truth in perfect order in His Word."
I noted above that often we seem to be finding things that were hidden in Dr's books, and that this is a prime example, being tucked away in the very back of the Holy Spirit Book. Interestingly, the very topic of this passage centers on the hidden element in God's Word.
Also above, I made brief mention that the first appendix following this introduction deals with dechomai and lombano. In PFAL'77 (and I think also in the Advanced Class) Dr explained how God started revealing to him the teaching on dechomai and lombano. Dr was reading a text that was open to a place that had both dechomai and lombano on the same page. God made the printed letters of those two words stand out high above all the other words on the page to get Dr's attention.
God used many means to deliver His Word to Dr "like it has not been known since the first century." God gave Dr revelation as to WHO's other research he should spend any time on, checking it out, and who's research should be avoided altogether. God also gave him revelation as to WHICH PARTS of an other researcher's material was to be accepted by Dr, and which to reject, and God's ownership of these revelations superceded all human copyright questions. God gave Dr phenomena like the heightened block letters of dechomai and lombano. And God gave Dr what he often described as a spiritual awareness. You know, the stuff we THINK we have at times too.
In this "Introduction to the Appendixes" of the Holy Spirit book, Dr points out that a person can get some facts from 5-senses tracking, but some truths can ONLY come by direct revelation. What he's really getting to, and introducing here is the Appendix on dechomai and lombano and the revelations God gave him on that subject.
***
Now let's examine the opening lines closely.
"If we believe that throughout the Scriptures we have the words of God and not man, many difficulties will disappear."
This is just as true with Dr's books as with the ancient scriptures. In fact, it's MORE true with Dr's books, because we don't really HAVE original scriptures to work with, just mis-copies, translations, and versions. At best we only have man's translations, or versions like the KJV.
If we had believed that Dr's books were of God, we would have obeyed his final instructions to master them, and the ministry would have straightened out, instead careening into the big meltdown. But we did NOT do this and as a result many difficulties appeared. I believe as we return to a meek receiving of the PFAL books "MANY DIFFICULTIES WILL DISAPPEAR."
"We must allow the Divine Author the rights and privileges claimed and operated by every human author -- that He may quote, adapt, or repeat in varied forms His own previously written or spoken words. God could have used other forms had He chosen to do so, but it has pleased Him to repeat His own word or words, introducing them in different con-texts, with new applications and connotations."
How many traditionalists want to confine God to the KJV or some other version, and forbid Him to re-issue, improve the surviving remnants, and further clarify to our culture HIS OWN original words?
Many to most is the answer. Many to most people DO FORBID God these options. That's why we have "many difficulties." As a body we pretty much have all forbidden God the above liberties we would easily grant any human author. Tradition hates to admit the above. Tradition is a prison. The above sentences are talking about Dr's books, NOT the ancient scriptures and their derivatives. How do I know that? Next sentences (WITH MY CAPS):
"Thus it obligates us to study the context, the PARAGRAPH, and the SECTION where the same word appears, and where it was used previously, to see it is used in a different sense or not."
How many of people have Bible versions that are organized into paragraphs and sections? Not too many. How about none? Traditional Bibles are organized into books, chapters, and verses. Look in the table of contents of your Holy Spirit book. It's organized into chapters and SECTIONS and, or course, PARAGRAPHS.
How many times have you ever heard anybody refer to a "paragraph" or a "section" in the Bible? These words are primarily talking about the very book they appear in, "Receiving The Holy Spirit Today." Can they also apply to a Bible version? Yes, as long as it's rightly divided via the PFAL guidance that started in 1942. These words can also apply to the other PFAL collateral books which are organized into "parts."
This passage mentioning "PARAGRAPH" and "SECTION" are telling us that doing word studies within this very book, "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today," is a worth while thing to do. This is hidden "Thus saith the Lord" statement #10.
The phrase "...the same word appears, and where it was used previously, to see it is used in a different sense or not." refers to the process of doing a word study.
***
Next lines:
"The greatest satisfaction of any Biblical scholar is to fathom what can be searched out from God's Word and to quietly accept that which is untraceable and cannot be explored or found out."
How many people can find a passage in the Bible that talks about "free will"? What Dr taught us about "free will" and "foreknowledge" and many other subjects cannot be easily traced in the Bible. Dr got those things by revelation, not by tracking them in the Bible. There are many other items like this that I may someday write a post about, but here I will mention one more untrackable item. It's about what is coming in the NEXT two pages in the Holy Spirit book. The passage we're examining is the "Introduction to the Appendixes" and two pages later is Appendix I "The word Receive" on dechomai and lombano.
Several paragraphs above I mentioned a little of how Dr got what he got on dechomai and lombano. He did not track down all of this information via his 5-senses; he got some by revelation. This information can't be totally figured out by scholars or by 5-senses methods. Scholars who are meek can read this book on "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today" and then they can "quietly accept that which is untraceable and cannot be explored or found out."
We can quietly accept the PFAL revelations on dechomai and lombano because they are from God. This is hidden "Thus saith the Lord" statement #11.
***
"These appendixes have been added to this volume for those who desire to search out and explore the deeper reason for the way in which God has set truth in perfect order in His Word."
We desire this deeper, spiritual understanding of God's Word. A 5-senses understanding is too limited to defeat the adversary, who has run the 5-senses realm for many centuries. By meekly searching out and systematically mastering the treasure God has provided in English for us in PFAL we will see "many difficulties disappear." We have the pure Word of God.
On page 3 of this thread (July 24, 2005 15:39 PST) I mentioned a "thus saith" but it was never assigned a number. Here's a repeat of what I posted there.
In the Sept/Oct 1983 Way Magazine Dr's article focuses on a short list of vocabulary words that need to be sharply understood.
The list of words he handles in that article is: religion, Christianity, fact, truth, faith, believing, formed, made, created, body, soul, and spirit.
The title of the article is "The Importance of Words in God's Word."
The words "fact" and "Christianity" do NOT appear in the Young's Concordance or in the KJV, but they DO occur in the PFAL writings... a lot.
This next "thus saith" statement has already appeared in this thread, but I purposely avoided distracting myself by pointing it out. I'd like to know if anyone saw this already. If not, we can consider it a little hidden, can we not?
This is the text from the last Session of the class, just before we were led into tongues. This time I'll bold font only that section for this statement #14
***
In that segment 66 of the '67 film class Dr says:
"And, in my classes on Power For Abundant Living, nobody ever gets missed, because, if you're in this class, you've heard the Word, you've believed God's Word, God is always faithful. And nobody ever misses, if you'll do exactly what I tell you to do, right down to the minute detail.
"It's like, in I Thessalonians, chapter 2, verse 13. Remember where the Apostle Paul said: 'I thank my God, that, when you received the Word of God which you heard of us, you received it not as the word of man, but as it is in truth, the Word of God.'
"Now, if you'll be as honest with God as that Word of God says, you too can walk into the greatness of the manifestation of the power of God. But, if you think this is just V.P. Wierwille talking, you'll never get it."
***
So this statement #14 is right in there with #2. We all heard it a maximum number of times.
Interestingly enough, the preceeding use of I Thess 2:13 in the film class was the THIRD such usage. Dr had already introduced the class to this verse and Paul's authoritative teaching being "like" his own God-given authority.
Here's the first such occurrence of I Thess 2:13 in the film class.
This is segment 11:
"You see very few of us have gone back to the Word, we have gone back to men. And we have said well what did Kant say, what did Plato say, what did Aristotle say, what did this theologian say, what did this man say, what did this other person say? Class, back to the Word! The Word and nothing but the Word! For it's this Word which is the Will of God! That's right, bless your heart.
"Look at I Thessalonians, I Thessalonians chapter two; Acts, Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, I Thessalonians; the same trouble tonight I had before, this India paper is just a little to thin to find all these scriptures so quickly; but they're in here. I Thessalonians 2:13 listen to this: 'For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us,...'
"You see they received the Word of God which they heard of Paul it was Paul's vocabulary but what he was speaking was God's Word. But to the senses ears the people could have said, "well that's Paul talking, that's just Paul, yeah that's just Paul." Like they say, "oh, that's just Dr. Wierwille, yeah..." I've heard that, no, no, no. ..thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually [which effectually] worketh also in you that [do one thing--go to church every Sunday morning, sit in the front pew and shout glory hallelujah, believe in all the social action programs; no a thousand times no. Works effectually in those who do one thing. What?] believe [believe].
This next occurrence of I Thess 2:13 is longer, more spread out, and more subtle. It's in in segment 13, near the end:
"Let me show you something from I Thessalonians two thirteen, listen to this: I Thessalonians 2:13: 'For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.'
"You know, you may have the Word of God, you may know the Word of God but it does not work effectually in people. It does not work effectively with power until we do one thing. Believe. You believe that Word and lo and behold you speak that Word and it produces the same results today that it has produced at any time in the history of civilization since that Word has been given.
"You know, the Bible says that we are to abide in the Word. We are to abide in the Word and we're to let this Word abide in you. To the end that we abide in the Word this Word takes the Master's place in our lives through our renewed mind and then it becomes our vocabulary but it is God's Word. We speak, this is our vocabulary, we speak the Word but as we speak the Word it is God's Word. 'I thank my God that when ye received the Word which ye heard of us ye received it not as the word of man,' sounds like it, 'but as the Word of God which worketh effectually in those that believe.'
"This Word of God cannot be broken, that's right. Just cannot be broken, not one iota of it can be broken, for what God promised He is not only able but willing to perform and that whole Word fits like a hand in a glove.
"You see it is this Word of God that really thrills a man. In Luke chapter twenty-four. Matthew, Mark, Luke, let me just check this with you. Luke twenty-four listen to verse thirty-two:Luke 24:32: 'And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?'
"This was speaking about Jesus on the road to Emmaus after the ressurection as he spoke to these men. He opened unto them the scriptures. You see how their hearts thrilled, how their hearts burned within them because he opened to them the scriptures.
"I've never seen a man or a woman or a boy or a girl in these classes on Power for Abundant Living whose soul just has not thrilled with an effervescence and with an abundance and with a glow when this Word of God started to unfold, started to fit like a hand in a glove. It made sense and how their hearts burned within them. How they thrilled at the greatness of God's Word!"
***
That was "Thus saith the Lord" statements #16. Seen alone, this one is extremely subtle. Seen with the other two, this one glows!
***
Since I'm doing Dr's "Thus saith the Lord" statements, why not include his accounts of the 1942 promise. Here is one such account from that piece titled "Light Began to Dawn" which Ana Fontana posted in an earlier thread. Actually, that's not it's original title, as this was taken from within the announcements on an old SNS tape #214, from October 17, 1965.
"And so, all of this stuff began to build. And so finally, as I kept praying, I just said to the Father, I said 'Father, teach me the Word––teach me the Word.' And one night, something happened, which to me is the greatest thing I don’t––I see only one experience that perhaps is greater than this in the Bible, and that’s the Apostle Paul’s experience on the road to Damascus. Outside of that, I see nothing in the Word that equals how God revealed Himself to me and talked to me and told me as plain as day: 'That if I would study the Word, He would teach me the Word like He had not been able to teach it to anybody since the first generation.' And of course at that time I thought, 'Now that’s a dandy!' 'Boy, if I learned this Word of God, everybody’ll listen to me, the whole church will be blessed. My denomination will grow by leaps and bounds because we’ll have the Word of God.'
"And I thought that was terrific! But during the process of that revelation––and I can’t tell it all to you because we’re already closing off; but during the process of it, I said: 'Father, how will I know that this is You and that You’ll really teach it to me?' Because I had worked the Word in commentaries and the rest of it and I couldn’t understand it––couldn’t get it to fit. It happened to be bright sunshine like today––like it’s been today and yesterday––what we people refer to, I guess as 'Indian Summer'––beautiful day. And the sun was shining brightly; it was in the Fall of the year––gorgeous! And there wasn’t a cloud in the sky. And just on the inside of me it seemed to say, 'Well, just say to the Father, Well, if––if it’ll just snow––right now, you’ll just know that this is God talking to you.' But, you see I’d never had much experience with God talking to me, and this business of He saying to me, just as audibly as I’m speaking to you, that He’d teach me the Word if I’d teach it, sort of shook me.
"I’d been expecting to hear from heaven for a long time, but I hadn’t heard that way before, you know. Ah, my ears were perhaps clogged up, since that time I’ve heard a lot of things––from Him. But, then I said, 'Lord, if this is really true, I’d like to see it snow.' And I opened my eyes––must not have been over three seconds, and I was sitting in front of the window looking East, the sun was––ah, West. The sun was in the West and there wasn’t a cloud in the sky ‘cause I could see the whole area. I closed my eyes when God said to me that He would teach me the Word if I’d teach it. And I said, 'Lord, to know that this is true, I’d like to see it snow.' And I opened my eyes and it was pitch––almost pitch black outside and the snow was falling so thick, I have never seen it fall that thick since that day. And I sat in that little office and I cried like a baby, because I guess it was about my time to cry, because I’d grown up but didn’t know the Word.
"And from that day on and He’d promised to teach me the Word, I have tried with all my heart, from time to time––all along, to learn this Word. One of the reasons there are sections of the Word perhaps that I––I don’t know, because I do too much cement pouring and a few other items that have to be done and that have to be taken care of. But I am absolutely confident that there is no portion of God’s Word that God would not teach me and unfold to me if I studied the Word to show myself approved unto Him by rightly dividing it.
"And that began the ministry that has cost me, sense-knowledge, more than anybody will ever realize––except those of us who’ve gone through it. It gives ya’ a whole set of new friends. It caused people, heads of my denomination, through various times when I appeared teaching, like in India, even to write letters against me that I was not a member of the denomination at all––and I’d been born in the lousy place. Isn’t that something? And I have them on file––have them in my files, you ought to see ‘em, I got a sheet this big.
"These are prices you pay. Then you say, well, why don’t I reciprocate? Because, people, you can’t fight and work the Word too. You can’t be fighting all the time and trying to defend yourself against the unbelievers, because the unbelievers are many more than the believers. And we’ve got only one job to do, as far as my life is concerned, and that is to teach the Word. Whether anybody believes it or not, that’s not my responsibility. But to teach it is my responsibility, because He said He’d teach me the Word if I would do one thing––teach it.
"Now in order to teach it, I have to study the Word; and when I study it, He shows it to me, then I can teach it."
About 6 years later, Dr again explained his 1942 experience to Elena Whiteside and she quoted him in her book "The Way - Living in Love." The following is from pages 178-181
***
"Then Rosalind left. It was the fall of the year. Kids were back in school already. It must have been September. I was sitting in my office, an old dentist's office just around the corner from the church where I served — I'll show you that too when we get there. I bet you it's still there, though I haven't been back here since I left.
"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.
"Well, I couldn't believe that God talked to me right then. You see, God's right here. He always has been here. He is still here. And God is willing and able to reveal everything to anyone or everyone. But we are just unable to receive it. We don’t believe it. It's like, you can't pour a gallon of water in a teacup. It's just not big enough to receive it, take it all in. You have to make the cup bigger first. You build up the container, and then you fill it little by little. He fills us a little bit at a time as we can take it. He knows how much we can take because God knows everything. God doesn't waste His revelation on people who cannot believe it.
"Paul had to be tremendously built up to believe —receive — the mystery that had been hidden since before the foundations of the world. John, too, had to be built up to receive the revelation set forth in the book of Revelation. It's taken many years and a lot of trips and searching to build my believing to this point also. But God knows our hearts.
"Well, on the day God spoke to me, I couldn't believe it. But then I came to the point by the next day where I said to myself — maybe it's true. So the next day I talked to God again. I said, 'Lord, if it's really true what you said to me yesterday, if that was really you talking to me, you've got to give me a sign so that I really know, so that I can believe.'
"The sky was crystal blue and clear. Not a cloud in sight. It was a beautiful early autumn day. I said, 'If that was really you, and you meant what you said, give me a sign. Let me see it snow.’ My eyes were tightly shut as I prayed. And then I opened them.
"The sky was so white and thick with snow, I couldn't see the tanks at the filling station on the corner not 75 feet away." Doctor relates this phenomenon in a joyous voice. The car swerves off the highway, onto a narrow black-top road, and the sign with the arrow reads: "Payne, 2 miles." The overcast sky turns restlessly over our heads, and the sparse sprinkling of snowflakes thickens on the windshield. Doctor laughs aloud.
"It reminds me of that day in 1942. It reminds me of that other time it snowed." We pull into a sleepy, small midwestern town. Around two corners, we're by a one-story building, the front of which is a many-paned display window.
"That's the old dentist's office that was my office," Doctor remarks. By now, the snow is swirling around us. At the corner stands the Marathon Gas Station. Doctor shakes his head from side to side. His face breaks into a ready smile. His eyes are blue, laughing or crying. "It reminds me of the day..." he trails off. "That's where I was sitting when I prayed to God to teach me the Word and show me how. And when I opened my eyes, it was snowing so hard I couldn't see those gas pumps right there." He points to the pumps a dozen yards or more from the window. A car has just pulled in. The dentist's office is deserted now, empty through the window."
In the 1979 Advanced Class, Segment #5, Dr says the following:
"I have set for our people, and it’s set in the book on 'Receiving the Holy Spirit Today,' and people, when you reach the Advanced Class, you ought to be able almost to quote this line for line. You should have mastered this book by the time you get to the Advanced Class. If you haven’t, you better get busy and do it - work it to where you understand the Word of God in every facet, in every way of it’s utilization regarding the holy spirit field - all of them, you must know this book, in and out. But I’ve discovered as I’ve worked among my people, and even all the grads of the Advanced Class, there still are areas where we got to push ourselves."
This urging to the AC students was some 6 years prior to Dr's final instructions to us, yet has some striking similarities. In this 1979 statement he says outright that NONE of the top leadership (all AC grads) had done what they (we) needed to do. In 1985 he says, specially addressing top leadership, that there was a lot of the wrong kind of mastering going on, and none of the right kind.
That Dr would, in 1979, demand such rigorous RHST mastery of all his AC students can only mean that he thought such a book was WORTH mastering, and that it was NECESSARY to master if the Word of God was to be known. Such a worthy book could only come from God. That's why I count this !979 AC segment #5 as "Thus saith the Lord" statement #19.
***
The same thing holds for Dr's set of final instructions in 1985. Books we were told to master had to be worthy of such mastery, and had to be of God.
"Thus saith the Lord" statement #20 is "The Joy of Serving" Dr's Last/Lost Teaching
Reconstructing past events is no where near as accurate as printed records or tapes, but some things can be brought out by memory and partial print/tape records, especially if it's multiple witness testimony.
An interesting example of such a reconstruction came to me by e-mail.
Several years ago I posted a small announcement on the http://www.eph320.com website about finding Dr's last teaching,"The Joy of Serving." It was posted there for about a year and I received about 40 inquiries, which then led to many other contacts. In this way (and others) I conducted an informal poll where the results showed that a staggering 99% of all non-Corps grads were completely unaware of Dr's last teaching.
Nearly all of the respondents to the "eph320" announcement were unaware of this last teaching so I sent them copies. Like in my posting here, I also offered them other e-documents of VPW's material. A number of these people developed into pen pals over time. Reproduced below is a letter I received from one such person regarding Dr's last teaching at Emporia. Your going to see a pattern developing.
Dear Mike,
Yes, we certainly would like more. Hey! My name is MB. I used to be MS and I was in the 15th Corps. I was wondering if you were in the Corps too or if by chance I might have met you? I just wanted you to know I certainly did enjoy reading "The Joy of Service" again.
The year that Dr. Wierwille died, I was in residence at the Way College of Emporia. I will never forget the last 10:30 Fellowship we had with him up in the Ambassador Room.
He said,
Kids, the Word is not going to go over the world unless you and I take the collaterals and master them to the point you can teach them at the drop of a hat to someone you happen to run into.
He said, Its not in how many classes you run, its in how much of The Word of God you know and are able to teach on the spur of the moment.
He said, You've got to master it. And what I mean by mastering it is you don't turn to the next page until you completely understand and have committed to memory the first.
I have never forgotten those words and have shared them many times with believers that I know and with our fellowship that W and I ran for 9 years before we moved to XY. So it really blessed me to read your e-mail and see that someone else really caught on to the greatness of what Dr. was saying. God is great. We love you our brother and we will be anticipating more.
God Bless You,
MB
I keep in mind that this "record" of Dr's at Emporia is anecdotal, from an attendee's memory, and not a tape or published transcript. However, stacked with the accumulating mountain of hard evidence, this soft evidence can be appreciated since it fits well with that mountain. It in no way contradicts it, and adds more supporting data. I feel confident in placing this in the category of secondary confirmation of the theme that Dr wanted us to master the PFAL books, and NOT merely some of the principles in them. We aren't qualified to say what ALL those principles ARE until we've finished mastering everything.
Just to enrich your appreciation of these Emporia words, let's look again at these near-quotes of Dr:
1. Kids, the Word is not going to go over the world unless you and I take the collaterals and master them to the point you can teach them at the drop of a hat to someone you happen to run into.
2. Its not in how many classes you run, its in how much of The Word of God you know and are able to teach on the spur of the moment.
3. You've got to master it. And what I mean by mastering it is you don't turn to the next page until you completely understand and have committed to memory the first.
In the first paragraph (1) he instructs us to master the collaterals
...................to the degree of total impromptu teaching adeptness.
In the second paragraph (2) he instructs us to know "The Word of God"
...................to the degree of total impromptu teaching adeptness.
Does this seem to imply something? Did Dr say by implication that the collaterals are or reveal or give us The Word of God here?
It would seem, to a casual observer, that he was talking in paragraph (2) about KJV Bible mastery. Then similarly paragraph (3) would also refer to traditional Bible mastery, BUT that would be an impossible task.
However, if he was talking about the collaterals in all three paragraphs, then it's a totally do-able mastery task for us all, and everything fits consistently here, as well as with the other hard evidence we have.
The collaterals CAN mastered. That's not an impossible task at all. Mastering the KJV/etc is not humanly possible. Just "Figures of Speech" can fully occupy a full-time scholar's entire life span.
If at Emporia Dr meant collaterals in paragraphs (3) and (2) then this last Emporia address would then be in complete harmony with "The Joy of Serving" where collateral mastery is explicitly mentioned.
From that 1979 Advanced Class quote I posted, until his death in 1985, Dr explicitly hammered away at our need to master the collaterals. I understand now why he did this, after having worked on this mastery for over 7 years now. There's lots of surprises hidden in them. Lots of confirmation that it's the right track back to what we used to have, and more. Lots of apparent contradictions in the get cleared up as we go.
***
And now, just for further insight, let's compare these Emporia paragraphs with the "Masters of the Word" that I posted earlier and discussed in detail. There are several sentences in "Masters of the Word" that I'd like to point out.
These sentences of Dr's are:
1. We can only recondition ourselves to this as we ourselves become masters of the Word.
2. And if you want to know about the head of the Body, you've got to go to God's Word and read it.
3. This is why we have to be masters of the Word, we have to gain a knowledge of God, and we have to get our minds at peace with the Word so that our minds are no longer warring against it.
4. You've got to get to that point that you quit disputing with God's Word; just start believing it and then master it.
5. We just have to master the Word and let the Word have mastery in our lives.
6. Mastery of God's Word is not just my pleasure and responsibility because I am a preacher or a teacher.
It is as much yours as it is mine...
7. Let's become masters of God's Word and let it reign supreme in our lives.
We see that in all of these sentences from that article, whenever Dr refers to God's Word he doesn't mean the KJV, he means the collaterals. The KJV is for beginners, but not for mastery. We have something much better in them and straight from God.
I count Dr's last Emporia teaching as "Thus saith the Lord" number twenty-one.
I had turned of my computer and was all ready for bed when the urge to post one more "thus saith" hit me strong. Here goes.
Earlier on this thread I posted my analysis of "Masters of the Word" in conjunction with "How the Word Works." In that Part 4 (of 4) post I quoted from OMSW where hundreds of miners had daily walked over top of a huge vein of silver ore as they trudged off to mine relatively much smaller areas. I compared these miners with us grads as we "mined" our KJVs while right under our noses God was re-issuing His Word in modern English for us to see Him bigger than ever before. This was on pages 23 and 24 of OMSW.
On page 26 of OMSW there is an interesting passage for our inspection. There we read (with my bold fonts):
"Blind chance was not the author of life. Explore the mineral kingdom; explore the animal kingdom; explore the vegetable kingdom. From the lowest to the highest, there are marks that specifically call our attention to the superbly conceived reality of that which we observe. Some great design, some great intelligence confronts us everywhere we look in the realm of creation. We can always see an intelligent purpose behind this realm, which was brought about by some type of consistent power.
"Take a microscope, even a low-powered one. Focus under its lens an eyeglass, for example. You would see some imperfections in the glass, although perhaps only a few. Next, focus a high-powered microscope on the same eyeglass. You will find that the more high-powered the microscope, the greater the imperfections that will be seen in the glass. There are imperfections in anything man-made.
"This example of the eyeglass demonstrates a principle. The more high-powered the microscope used to observe the works of man the more imperfect the object appears. On the other hand, the more high-powered the microscope used to look upon something that God formed or made, the more perfect and orderly it appears. The closer the scrutiny of God’s Word, the more obvious become its beauty and perfection. It is only a man who uses a poor microscope who never sees the greatness of God’s Word. He does not observe it to see its perfection."
Now here we have an interesting situation. In Dr's last years and months, when this book, "Order My Steps in Thy Word," was being written he was also challenging grads left and right to master the collaterals.
Do you get it?
In those final months of Dr's life this book is released. There he writes that a microscope will reveal imperfections in man's work, but great beauty, perfection, and intelligent design in God's Word. He was telling us to look MUCH closer at PFAL, like with a microscope, to see its great beauty, perfection, and intelligent design... that it is the Word of God.
I count this as "Thus saith the Lord" statement #22.
Well thank you for giving my credibility a boost here, but I think you also gave me some homework tasks to do.
I had been working (very slowly) on the same text to refine it in lots of ways.
As posted here, and testified to by dmiller, it was meant for the consumption of a largely sympathetic AND a more knowledgeable audience. I took liberties with them, such as abbreviating some back-up and supporting paragraphs, that I wouldn’t take with the GSC audience at large, including silent lurkers. I can beef them back up later.
Because I’ve been working that text off and on for weeks, I noticed there’s also some missing material. What is posted above is a highly edited version of entire text of that PT, and unfortunately a little too much was edited out. I can supply that later too.
So, it should be kept in mind by everyone that the posted 22 text, so far, is a preliminary draft.
***
dmiller,
You wrote: “Like I said (somewhere else), those way rag articles were EDITED, yet you treated them like scripture, digging for hidden treasure, as if God Himself approved the orderly fashion in which they appeared on each page.”
Yes, God placed hidden treasure in an earthen vessel, as He is known to do.
First of all, it makes no difference between book and magazine, both got edited.
Yes, the materials were edited. I’ve handled this many times here. God worked not only with Dr on His project, but with Dr’s editors. I’ve often posted that it was a TEAM that produced the written materials, and God worked with the whole team, not just with Dr. Dr coordinated it.
***
Ex10,
You’re not a “cop out” in my eyes. I’m just not thinking that way. We all ran out of steam, me included.
All I know is that SOMETHING went well a long time ago, and I finally identified that something.
None of the bs that sprung up and choked us is in written PFAL.
***
Oakspear,
It’s definitely a great secret that written PFAL is God-breathed.
I’d say it even qualifies as the greatest secret in the whole world of OLGs.
Mike here is the breakdown on the notes for 73 -87 what was covered I think they did Acts those first years but not sure the others I have so I know that they are correct.
Corps Notes
1971 - (Unconfirmed but I think they did Acts)
1972 -(Unconfirmed but I think they did Acts)
1973 Timothy (Sept.1973 -through Aug. 1974)
1974 Timothy (through Aug. 1974)
Ephesians (Sept.1974-June 1975)
1975 Acts (Sept. through Jan 1977)
1976 Acts (Sept. through Jan 1977)
1977 Acts (Sept. through Jan 1977)
I & II Thessalonians (Feb.1977 - Feb 1978)
1978 I & II Thessalonians (Feb.1977 - Feb 1978)
Romans (Sept. 1978 - July 1980
1979 Romans (Sept. 1978 - July 1980
1980 Romans (Sept. 1978 - July 1980
1981 Ephesians (Sept.1981- through May.1982)
1982 Ephesians (Sept.1981- through May.1982)
I Corinthians (Sept. 1982)
1983 I I Corinthians (June 1983)
Galations (Sept.1983 through Nov. 1983)
1984 Philippians ( Jan.1984 through March 1984)
Colossians ( May1984 through June 1984)
Timothy ( Sept. 1984 through June. 1985 )
1985 Timothy & Titus ( Sept. 1984 through June. 1985 )
“...the basic doctrinal points taught in the PFAL 3 part series were done deals, and assumed to be correct as is. Some nuancing would be possible in certain records but from a "principle" standpoint the doctrinal messages were considered complete. Further "tweaking" would only clarify the details. That would be how I'd view the "early years", after PFAL was put on film the second time, in the version most of us took.”
It’s this that I refer to when I say there was an assumed atmosphere in the early 70’s that Dr spoke for God.
All my 22 ‘thus saith” statements take on greater intensity when it’s known how they appeared in this assumed atmosphere as a background or context.
In an earlier post you quoted my criticism of Raf’s method.
I had said to Raf:
“In your method, finding a seemingly solid error is the end of the process, followed only by uncorking the Champagne.
You retorted with:
“Don't you get tired of repeating this vicious lie? Raf's method BEGINS when an error is found. Then discussion and consideration begins. Research is done. Concepts are considered and exchanged. Knowledge grows. Then an error is either shown to be substantial, or it is shown to not be one. Action is then taken accordingly.
Ok, WW, let’s unmask this “vicious lie” of mine for the mere mis-comunication that it is.
You missed one phrase in my quote above. The phrase is “seemingly solid.”
I used an alliteration to abbreviate the process you describe above.
Here’s the expanded form of my quote:
“In your method, after you’ve found an item that looks like an error at first sight, after discussion and consideration, research done, concepts are considered and exchanged, knowledge grows, and the error is either shown to be substantial, action is then taken accordingly. That action would be uncorking the Champagne while posting this now seemingly solid error.”
That’s what I meant by “seemingly solid.”
Now, MY method would differ in that more PFAL page references would be considered, the process would go much slower, and at a lower priority level compared to my reading of PFAL for fellowship with my heavenly Father. I’d employ a lot of differing techniques in my method too numerous to mention here.
“There he goes changing the subject again. Mike, for the umpteenth time, if you want to start a thread on whether the BIBLE is God-breathed, have at it. This thread is about PFAL. Stop trying to change the subject. __ Just out of curiosity, why does your exaltation of PFAL require you to attack the integrity of God's Word (The Bible is the Word of God: according to PFAL)?”
I think you mistook a rhetorical device for an attack.
I often do challenge people here to produce their “proof” for believing the ancient scriptures (the originals) are God-breathed.
I’m not attacking the integrity of those originals, though. I believe in them myself. I know why I believe in them, but I think many don’t know why THEY do.
There are some very close parallels between the ancient scriptures and PFAL. I’m not changing the subject when I bring up these parallels, nor am I attacking the scriptures that PFAL rests on and refers to constantly.
Instead of using my usual rhetorical device, which is interrogative, let me state it explicitly:
I say that the methods by which the ancient scriptures become to be believed to be God-breathed by many are VERY SIMILAR to the methods by which I came to believe PFAL to be God-breathed.
I say that the methods used to deal with AEs in PFAL should be VERY SIMILAR to the methods you, Raf, use to deal with AEs in the Bible texts available to you.
(As I write this, I am fully aware that some got thrown out on their behinds for disagreeing with PFAL, and were horribly treated.) But there were times.......when there was a nod in the direction of "further research is needed." ( I don't know if that was your experience or not, socks, since you were an "earlier generation" of corps than I was.)
Well, yes and no. I'd state it as such - that the basic doctrinal points taught in the PFAL 3 part series were done deals, and assumed to be correct as is. Some nuancing would be possible in certain records but from a "principle" standpoint the doctrinal messages were considered complete. Further "tweaking" would only clarify the details. That would be how I'd view the "early years", after PFAL was put on film the second time, in the version most of us took.
-----------------
What I meant was different from what you're saying. I meant that from the standpoint of VPW and The Way Inc. the PFAL class, as offered and taught, was a "done deal". In PFAL VPW didn't teach 12 sessions in the first series and leave ot open to further discussion on the doctrinal points. He was teaching a it "as is" - here's what the bible says, here's what it means. If he was able to clarify, confirm or enhance what was in PFAL - yes, perhaps. He might look at that. To change the teaching or the conclusions - no.
So if someone came and had different ideas on the major points - no dice.
As far as the atmosphere of the "grads" of that period being accepting of the god-breathed status of what PFAL taught, I wouldn't agree, not by my experience, the people I knew (and I knew quite a few) or the things I participated in.
Remember - if we take the statements of VPW that no one - no one, ever - had "mastered" PFAL, ever, to the point of "true mastery", including the books, then people at any period of time in the Way must have not done the "work" that VPW felt was necessary to do so. That certainly allows for some reservations of a sort, on the part of the people he's talking about. Not in all, and not to everything taught. But it's reasonable I thnk to factor into the reasons for such a statement by VPW that this idea of PFAL's "god-breath"edness may not have been fully embraced since I would say (and others have too) that it was never stated as such by VPW, and that if he inferred it or made statements to that effect, it didn't register to the point people accepted it.
And in fact, I would say it wasn't, along the lines of what most people here, including some from that early period, have said their understanding was. Some people have said that it was a very good class teaching the bible and "abundant life" topics that opened up new territory to many people that had never heard it before but - that there wasn't a conscious decision to embrace PFAL itself as "god-breathed", out of the mouth of God.
Again - PFAL could be attended and some, all, a little or a lot of that teaching from the bible accepted as correct, without any belief that the media itself was "god-breathed".
So to clarify - the "done deal"edness I'm referring to was on the part of PFAL and VPW. This atmosphere you're referring to may have included some people thinking PFAL was god-breathed. I certainly knew people who probably felt the very dust on the tape it played on was worth investigation, who had kind of a neurotic fascination with the trappings of PFAL and who probably felt there was learning to be had by the number of times VPW blinked everytime he said the word "pie". I don't know. But there were a few people who went off on tangents like that at times. They usually seemed to be that way about other things too.
It's easy to misunderstand what someone says or writes though. I just wanted to clarify what I meant. I thought it was clear in the post, but I guess not.
I was always under the (mistaken) impression that as more "research" was done on certain topics, that the teaching could be tweaked some.
As I stated before, I was young and naive. And the teaching on some subjects did change over time. A great examle is Eph. 6 and how the imagery changed from a soldier to an athlete. If the original PFAL was considered "God breathed" even by VPW himself, how and why could he have changed it over time?
VP also would ask certain people to look into certain subjects and then he would evaluate the results. Of couse, as long as PFAL wasn't directly challenged, every thing was hunky dory.
Mike, why is it so important to you that PFAL be "God breathed?" And that VPW himself considered it to be "God breathed?"
ex10, I agree. That sums it up for me too. I hope it clarifies for Mike what I (we) meant.
I have no special view into what VPW was thinking or planning while he put PFAL together. I wasn't there, and was young like you when I first took it. I would just say that within a couple years or so it was clear to me that he felt PFAL was enough as it was. Between the class itself, the good o' collaterals and the RTHST book he offered we got the basic nuts and bolts of the Way's theology. The class itself never changed, was never edited for any reasons, regardless of what they might have been.
RTHST went through revisions and reprints. Whatever changes occured never changed the basic teaching on the "gift", the manifestations, their operation, lambano/dechomai, any of that. The collaterals were compiled into books. The PFAL class transferral to video from the original was handled by 3rd Corps, under VPW's direction. The video versions that were then offered were as close to identical copies as they could be. No changes to that material were ever announced or recognized publically by VPW. Any changes that might have occured were negligible to those who retook it. We saw the first showing of it at the Way Nash after it was completed.
Of course PFAL doesn't have to be god-breathed, a new issuing of "God's Word", and as a result perfect in every way, one way or another. And if he'd declared that in session one in a way that everyone would have clearly understood I doubt I would felt compelled to accept it over time. VPW never clearly stated that. That's reinventing history and it places a burden on it that it was never meant to bear IMO. VPW may have even very well wanted to believe that it was - if a person wants to invent that kind of mythology around it fine, but that doesn't make it so.
You wrote: “Like I said (somewhere else), those way rag articles were EDITED, yet you treated them like scripture, digging for hidden treasure, as if God Himself approved the orderly fashion in which they appeared on each page.”
Yes, God placed hidden treasure in an earthen vessel, as He is known to do.
First of all, it makes no difference between book and magazine, both got edited.
Yes, the materials were edited. I’ve handled this many times here. God worked not only with Dr on His project, but with Dr’s editors. I’ve often posted that it was a TEAM that produced the written materials, and God worked with the whole team, not just with Dr. Dr coordinated it.
["Handled", in this case, meaning "ignored the people on staff
whenever they disagreed with my premise that the magazine
articles were edited with a Divine Hand guiding it."]
***
Ex10,
You’re not a “cop out” in my eyes. I’m just not thinking that way. We all ran out of steam, me included.
All I know is that SOMETHING went well a long time ago, and I finally identified that something.
None of the bs that sprung up and choked us is in written PFAL.
[i wouldn't call "the LAW of believing" "NOTHING". It's the basis
for Session I, which is the basis for the following sessions.]
(snip)
[bTW, just so you don't think I'm ignoring it,
I'm giving you a temporary pass on the supposed 22 items.
That's because you claimed the list WTH posted was deficient
and non-representative. So, for now, I'll give you time to post
one or more WITH the supposed background and rationale
before commenting. If you NEVER get around to that,
however, it will appear that this claim was just a smokescreen
Of course PFAL doesn't have to be god-breathed, a new issuing of "God's Word", and as a result perfect in every way, one way or another. And if he'd declared that in session one in a way that everyone would have clearly understood I doubt I would felt compelled to accept it over time. VPW never clearly stated that. That's reinventing history and it places a burden on it that it was never meant to bear IMO. VPW may have even very well wanted to believe that it was - if a person wants to invent that kind of mythology around it fine, but that doesn't make it so.
are you saying that in these statements Dr says "thus saith the Lord..." of that this is implied? I no longer have my books so I am not able to look them up - but from the few little snips some of them seem a bit academic with no need for the "thus saith..." preface. Besides, I never remember Dr saying, "thus saith..." at all, much less that they are in the collaterals. I think you will have to write out ONE of these quotes that you say is a "Thus saith" statement in its entirety without commentary.
You make mention of the the whole "not necessarily all..." - but that actually implies what you have yet to admit - that Dr said Some of the words he wrote MIGHT be God-breathed. But the very same statement say the same could be true of other Men of God. I also implies that NOT ALL these written words would be God breathed. Yet you have embarked on the unlike assumption that ALL of VPW's writings were to be treated like scripture. This seems very illogical.
BTW just because something is God-breathed doesn't make it scripture. "All scripture is God-breathed" does NOT equal "All God breathed communications are scripture."
Heck, on some level SIT could be construed as being God-breathed...
Again, Paul wrote many many letters - but not all were scripture.
Like I said I'm just not getting this whole line of thinking -
You wrote: “...from the standpoint of VPW and The Way Inc. the PFAL class, as offered and taught, was a "done deal". In PFAL VPW didn't teach 12 sessions in the first series and leave ot open to further discussion on the doctrinal points. He was teaching a it "as is" - here's what the bible says, here's what it means. If he was able to clarify, confirm or enhance what was in PFAL - yes, perhaps. He might look at that. To change the teaching or the conclusions - no.”
Yes, I remember that. It was assumed to be correct. As I’ve reported before, we never attached the “God-breathed” label to it, but for all practical purposes it was “thus saith the lord.”
You also wrote: “As far as the atmosphere of the "grads" of that period being accepting of the god-breathed status of what PFAL taught, I wouldn't agree, not by my experience, the people I knew (and I knew quite a few) or the things I participated in.”
Me neither. It often occurred to us that Dr could speak by revelation, and often it was the practice to assume that he was speaking by revelation if it was a teaching with a microphone on. But, I never heard anyone attach the label “God-breathed” to his writings.
He flat out stated on the a 1972 tape that the Way Tree was a revelation, which would dove-tail well with what you reported about your discussion with Dr about it not being fully documented as happening in Acts. I remember the theme of each Rock was supposed to be done by revelation. I also remember most major strategies and events of the ministry were touted to be by revelation. On some of the very early SNS tapes Dr can be heard saying that “Father says I can share this...” or something like “Father says stop” at a certain point, and other things like that.
Dr would OFTEN claim that even though he had no ancient manuscript to back him up (yet) on a certain point, he knew by revelation that the originals had it his way... AND WE ACCEPTED THIS. I remember gagging on this last point at times, and it took me many years to fully understand it, but I never spoke up against it in the face of all others’ acceptance of it.
***
It seems to me that Dr tapered off in his overt claims of receiving revelation after several such claims appeared in print in the very early 70’s, including his interview with Elena printed in “The Way – Living In Love.” But Dr’s authority to teach us what God taught him (his “thus saith the lord” attitude) was in the air EVERYWHERE in those earlier 70’s. It’s just that nobody ever flashed on the idea that, in addition to the God-given ability to speak by revelation to us, Dr could also put a revelation into written form.
The reason we never flashed on it is Dr kept us too busy moving the Word and he wanted to keep the idea of his writing of revelation RELATIVELY under wraps. I explain this open “secret” in the 22 “thus saith” statements already posted.
***
Later you wrote: “The class itself never changed, was never edited for any reasons, regardless of what they might have been.”
Yes, this was in keeping with the passage in Elena’s book where Dr was praying in 1942 that he was going to quit the ministry if God didn’t give him some answers he’d “never have to back up on.” As you wrote, PFAL and especially the written portion, was never backed up on.
You wrote: “Mike, why is it so important to you that PFAL be ‘God breathed?’ And that VPW himself considered it to be ‘God breathed?’”
We very much need something that is God-breathed in order to fully fellowship with our heavenly Father.
Everything we read in Bible versions is subject to “further research” and our “favorite doctrines” can conceivable be proved wrong at any time by some scholar. We must rely on such scholars if we want to know God, as they are so necessary to tell us which ancient fragments are to be trusted, and how they are to be translated. These scholars are necessary middlemen if we want to go to the ancient scriptures, like academic priests, who feed us God’s Word in English.
Complicating matters greatly is the sad fact that equally brilliant scholars will often disagree with each other as to what a particular passage actually says.
So, in our attempts to know and trust God’s Word and will, we must also trust our “favorite” scholars to intercede for us, and we must trusty our own ability to choose such scholars, and then once chosen, we must sometimes pick and choose from within each individual scholar’s writings what is to be fully accepted.
We need SOMETHING that is authoritative.
Everything in the theological world of versions is riddled with academic opinons.
I see PFAL is the only viable candidate to be that which we NEED.
God supplied a great need with PFAL.
***
Now for the second part of your questions to me. You wrote:
“Mike, why is it so important to you that ... VPW himself considered it to be ‘God breathed?’”
If I can show that Dr did claim this, then it is the case that many here who debate with me will see that they did not fully absorb all that Dr taught us, especially his written teaching. Most of my opponents here claim that I mis-represent Dr, but if I can show that Dr did claim this, then it is proved that my opponents here missed something in those days.
Many here claim that PFAL failed them; that they gave it a good honest try, but it failed them. My claim is that none of us fully received PFAL and that there is much treasure awaiting us when we come back to it... back to the written material, not back to TWI.
Many grads here and elsewhere feel that they had mastered PFAL, and that Dr’s final teaching(s) urging us to master PFAL was a mere commercial directed only to new people. I claim that we did NOT master PFAL, that Dr’s urging us to master it was a very needed piece of advice, and that obeying it will help us all.
***
As I unearth these “thus saith the lord” statements of Dr’s , each such statement carries two pieces of information for our consideration.
First, we didn't pay as good attention to Dr's teaching as we thought we did, especially as he got older. We didn't sufficiently study, and we didn't MASTER the material we were given. If we had studied, we'd have seen and remembered these many times when Dr asserted that he was teaching authoritatively. Our assignment to master the material that Dr gave us with his dying last words was a NEEDED assignment, even for top leadership, ESPECIALLY for top leadership.
Second, these statements give us a chance to believe, or not, that Dr was working for the True God. Even more, they force us to decide "yes" or "no" to Dr's teaching authority because they leave no gray area between.
Now I know that just because Dr said so, that doesn't make it true. Whether these claims of his are accurate is one subject worthy of much discussion, but besides that, just seeing these many statements is convincing proof that (1) we didn't catch all that taught to us, and (2) Dr went way out on a limb.
What I mean by "out on a limb" is that if he claimed authority as God's spokesman many times and wasn't, then that rules out all the gray areas of how we should regard Dr and his teachings.
Moderates and middle-of-the-roaders, people who think Dr’s material was in the gray area between good and evil, should be challenged by Dr’s extreme assertions to get off the fence and decide which extreme he is in. His claims prove that he was either extremely right or extremely right.
Yes, there's no gray area the way Dr put it there. We can either accept his assertion of being God's appointed spokesman or reject it, but we can't logically and honestly seek out any gray area in between.
I was struck by this same stark-option challenge to accept or reject when I first sat through the class in Session One. When Dr got to the section about healing that man's withered arm in India I realized that there were no gray areas about Dr and his message: either he lied or told the truth about that healing. Closely following was: Ditto for the rest of his teaching.
I was electrified when HCW recounted hearing Mrs. Wierwille's commentary to him personally as they both looked through old photos of that healed man and the train station.
You wrote that I: “...ignored the people on staff whenever they disagreed with my premise that the magazine articles were edited with a Divine Hand guiding it.”
I paid much attention to all of Dr’s staff editors when I spoke to them. I opened up my discussions with them by recalling how many times we’ve all (or most of us) at some time helped someone far beyond our own sense knowledge capacities without even knowing it. Many of us have taught a fellowship, or brought forth a message from God in manifestation, and then later had someone come up to us praising God that we hit the nail right on the head in helping them. We often would bless people more than we were aware of.
In the Old Testament Samuel heard God’s voice calling him and twice mistook it for Eli’s voice. Balaam was once trying to curse Israel when he brought forth a beautiful prophesy of the coming of Christ.
We all have deeply pondered the difficulty in telling the difference between God’s voice and our own senses. Sometimes we think something is revelation and it’s just a senses hunch, while at other times we think we’re just doing some normal thinking but God slips in a revelation to bless us.
When any of Dr’s editors told me in recent years that they didn’t regard their editing of Dr's writings to be in the revelation category I find this assertion of theirs to be easy to step aside from. I know that the adversary has had over 20, and 30 years to talk them out of thinking that those efforts had any of God’s revelation behind them. I also know that when they were on staff back then, that nearly everything they did was with the heart of being open to God’s revelation. So, it was easy for me to say to them, “I believe you got more revelation than you remember or are willing to believe now.” When I did this they were usually very silent and contemplative.
So, WW, I only ignored a tiny bit of what they told me.
***
You wrote: “I'm giving you a temporary pass on the supposed 22 items. That's because you claimed the list WTH posted was deficient and non-representative. So, for now, I'll give you time to post one or more WITH the supposed background and rationale before commenting.”
I appreciate this courtesy you’ve extended to me here. However, you may was well have at it as is. I can supply the missing points as we go on a better timetable than I can re-vamp the whole thing.
You wrote (with my spelling correction) : “are you saying that in these statements Dr says "thus saith the Lord..." or that this is implied?”
Yes, the “thus saith” is implied (in varying strengths) in those 22 statements.
Here are the first two statements in that 22. On page 34 of TNDC he writes (with my bold fonts):
“Change what you put in your mind. To change the food you are sending to your mind is to “renew your mind.” Think those things which are true, honest, just, pure, lovely and of good report. __ If you by your free will accept Christ as your Savior and renew your mind according to The Word, you will find that every word I have written to you is true. I challenge you to stand upon the Word of God, declare your authority in Christ and claim your rights.”
In Dr’s vocabulary, “true” is bigger than “factually accurate.” Truth is spiritual, facts are man-made. Dr often taught this.
On page 116 of TNDC he writes:
“Paul in I Thessalonians 2:13, thanked God that ‘when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God.’ You too must follow God’s truth as told in the Word of God. But if you think this is just Victor Paul Wierwille writing or speaking to you, you will never receive. If you know that what I am saying to you are words which the Holy Ghost has spoken and is speaking to you by me, then you too will manifest the greatness of the power of God. If you will literally do what I ask you, then you can manifest the fullness of the abundance of God, the wonderful power of God.”
With these two statements Dr’s “thus saith the lord” is strongly stated, hardly implied. In most of the other 20 statements it is implied, and only very subtly in some.
***
You wrote: “...I never remember Dr saying, ‘thus saith...’ at all, much less that they are in the collaterals.”
I don’t think I ever heard him label anything he taught with the exact words “thus saith the lord” either. In talking with Uncle Harry, though, he told me that in BOT meetings, there were times when they’d fight over some crucial matter with no agreement in sight. Harry told me that on those occasions Dr would sometimes say “thus saith the lord” and the argument was settled.
***
You wrote: “You make mention of the the whole "not necessarily all..." - but that actually implies what you have yet to admit - that Dr said Some of the words he wrote MIGHT be God-breathed. But the very same statement say the same could be true of other Men of God. I also implies that NOT ALL these written words would be God breathed. Yet you have embarked on the unlike assumption that ALL of VPW's writings were to be treated like scripture. This seems very illogical.”
I assume you’re referring to PFAL page 83 here.
Yes, I agree with you, and so did Dr agree. There were times when Dr would put something in writing and it was God-breathed, like when he wrote to US, his students. As he claimed in my TNDC p.34 quote above, every word he wrote to US, his PFAL students, was true. Then there were also times when he wrote something and it was NOT God-breathed, but just his flesh understanding, whether correct of incorrect.
That passage on PFAL p. 83 troubles a lot of people. He’s just saying there that man’s word is untrustworthy, but God’s IS trustworthy. He says that, compared to God’s Word, man’s is faulty, every man’s, even great religious leaders’ words. He then goes one step farther and says (in effect) that even a man (himself) who is appointed as a spokesman for God, by God, has faulty words when he is not speaking (or writing) exactly what God commissions.
So, all of written PFAL, what Dr told us to master, is worthy of mastery because THOSE writings are God-breathed. God inspired them and supervised them being printed and handed to us grads.
***
You wrote: “BTW just because something is God-breathed doesn't make it scripture. ‘All scripture is God-breathed’ does NOT equal ‘All God breathed communications are scripture.’
This is a very profound point you are making here, and it’s the second time you made it. In my lengthy response to you after the holidays I marveled at this point. I want to bring that section up here just to pursue this as much as possible.
Before the holidays you wrote: “Now God gives lots of revelation to lots of people so even if we will take the "Evil Kneival-sized" leap of faith that God gave VPW revelation regarding PFAL, that doesn't make it scripture.”
I’m not nearly as sure as you that lots of revelation gets given. Leaving that aside, though, it is an interesting point that you bring up here. I’ve hardly addressed this myself.
So what do you think the essential qualitative difference is between the ancient scriptures and something written today by revelation? Most of us (I think) believe that revelation can be given in modern times, so what if God not only honors a believer’s operation of the revelation manifestations with a cookie, but He also tells the recipient to write it down? Is that any different than what He did to get the ancient scriptures written? Is God forbidden to commission modern written revelation? If He is allowed, is it any different than the ancient scriptures in their original manuscript, language, and understanding?
The best I can see they differ is TO WHOM they are addressed. I can see that PFAL is addressed TO GRADS ONLY (and to students before they graduate), while the ancient scriptures were addressed to “...Jew, Gentile, and the Church of God.”
This point of PFAL possibly being God-breathed word addressed ONLY to a new group of people (grads) is a point that some of Dr's editor's deeply considered and even partially, temporarily mentally assented to in my many hours of phone and e-mail discussions with them.
But, I do recognize that the ancient scriptures are quite special. Without them PFAL would rest on nothing substantial.
***
You wrote: “Heck, on some level SIT could be construed as being God-breathed...”
I agree. You’re onto something here.
***
You wrote: “Again, Paul wrote many many letters - but not all were scripture.”
If you want my trust and respect you must earn it.
One of the most detestable things I saw in the ministry was Corps people who demanded respect without earning it. To the degree that a leaders was an extension of Dr’s ministry in the old days, I’d give that leader great respect, but all that died over 20 years ago.
The situation of Corps demanding too much respect was so rampant that it occupies a small portion of Dr's very last teaching, only to have been botched up in the magazine editing. Someone, a transcriber or an editor, accidentally lost a few sentences of this part of the teaching and the article reads quite bizarre at that spot. The tape is clear.
Trust and respect must be earned, CM.
You can’t talk like a mystic and write poetic lines and expect that to earn the kind of respect you seem to want. It takes a lot of hard work to generate that kind of respect, and if you have done that kind of work with some people, then maybe they can respect you to the point of listening to your doctrine.
No one here, JUST NO ONE, has earned the kind of respect from me that Dr has earned. He helped me when I needed it most, and he helped thousands the same way, showing them and me that God is love, and in many ways.
Go ahead and insult me, demand respect of me, talk like a mystic, and wear a robe, sandals, and beard. None of that is going to grow one shred of respect from me. It’s SERVICE that inspires respect, not playing a role.
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
ex10
yeah, socks, and the precedent was set in the first century.
Plenty of people died for their faith.
Just makes me think what my problem is when the Lord opens a door and I'm too much of a weeny to say anything cause I'm scared of what others might think.
Nobody is gonna stone me, probably, so what am I afraid of? Ya know?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
What The Hey
OK ... YOU ASKED FOR IT ... YOU GOT IT!
The 22 THUS SAITH THE LORD statements:
[These posts are mostly MIKE's and were taken from the PT thread from the old message board.]
WARNING ... This post is lengthy. If you don't have a couple hours to read, then come back later.
These were original posts that were posted over a couple months time which I compiled here all into one.
======================================================
Mike posted on: 7/15/05:
Ok, topic #1 being Dr's many, many (and hidden) "Thus saith the Lord" statements.
I'd love to spend lots of time here. There are three such statements on which I've posted often: TNDC p. 34, TNDC p. 116, and PFAL p.83, and these three constitute the bulk of the overt claims Dr made in writing. Many others remain hidden, and I'd love to make them a major topic here.
=====================================================
Posted July 24, 2005 15:39
Here's another of the many well hidden "Thus saith the Lord" statements we can find in Dr's teachings. This one has never been in my previous posts here at GSC. It's from the Sep/Oct 1983 Way Magazine where Dr's article focuses on a short list of vocabulary words that need to be sharply understood.
The list of words he handles in that article is: religion, Christianity, fact, truth, faith, believing, formed, made, created, body, soul, and spirit.
The title of the article is "The Importance of Words in God's Word."
The words "fact" and "Christianity" do NOT appear in the Young's Concordance or in the KJV, but they DO occur in the PFAL writings... a lot.
=====================================================
Posted July 26, 2005 11:37
There is a passage in OMSW that will serve here in two ways. First, it illustrates another "Thus saith the Lord" statement, and second it will help calm those who are enraged at my above post on the new birth.
The passage is on page 124 and reads (with my bold fonts):
"It’s a remarkable thing that God put His promise in the past tense—“I have already given to you”—and He still does this today. Many, many times He puts in the past tense what still is the future for us."
I haven't the time to get into any more detail on this, but this passage in Dr's last book to us needs to be carefully pondered.
=====================================================
Posted August 15, 2005 11:47
I'm thinking of doing more to eventually post that list of 90 "Thus saith the Lord" statements.
Each such statement carries two pieces of information for our consideration. First, we didn't pay good attention to Dr's teaching, especially as he got older. We didn't study, and especially we didn't MASTER the material we were given. If we had studied, we'd have seen and remembered these many times when Dr asserted that he was teaching authoritatively. Our assignment to master the material that Dr gave us with his dying last words was a NEEDED assignment, even for leadership.
Second, these statements give us a chance to believe, or not, that Dr was working for the True God. Even more, they force us to decide "yes" or "no" to Dr's teaching authority because they leave no gray area between.
***
A tally might be in order. Remember, all of the far out exotic claims I have made are contingent on written PFAL being the authoritative, given in English, written Word of God. If PFAL isn't this kind of 2000 years special, then I'll have to admit all my evidence of the changeover of administrations in our time is illusory.
But if written PFAL truly IS what Dr claimed it some 90 times over, then the new administration becomes obviously called for, and many other things line up in a marvelously "new" way.
***
So, let's tally a little:
1. TNDC 34 - every word true
2. TNDC 116 - not VPW but Holy Spirit
3. PFAL 83 - God-breathed... necessarily
4. BTMS - Preface
5. TNDC - Preface
6. WWAY - Preface
7. GMWD - Preface
8. OMSW 124 - many, many times... today
Hardly anyone even knows about #1. Most grads think that #2 only applies to leading us into tongues, but the context contains two words which dash that hypothesis to pieces. For #3 I've spent hours debating with posters who want this passage to say the opposite of what it does. Two of Dr's editors agree with me, though, that #3 is a very significant claim. The prefaces are hardly ever read by anyone, and some have even claimed that we should EXPECT to find no teaching in them. Lastly, #8 has hardly ever been seen by grads.
So, I'm almost ten percent done with my list. Until others come back posting here, or until this thread dies due to the planned software changeover, I'll continue with this list, just hoping that someone is reading it.
***
Entry #9 can be seen at the end of RHST's Introduction, where Dr claims Jesus Christ appointed him a spokesman. It's in the italic print.
Entry #10 can be seen in RHST's "Introduction to the Appendices" way in the back of the book. Can anyone see the TWO "Thus saith the Lord" statements that appear in this one short set of paragraphs?
=====================================================
Posted August 15, 2005 12:20
"Thus saith the Lord" statement #12
Here is one that I think is real special. This one is in the Preface (where else?) to "Receiving The Holy Spirit Today" page x in the 7th edition.
There we read:
"If you are a Christian believer, I sincerely encourage you to study this book. Do not allow your past teachings or feelings to discourage you from going on to receive God’s best. If you need power and ability to face up to the snares of this life, you may find your answer while reading this book. It is my prayer that you may be edified, exhorted and comforted."
***
Let's look at this paragraph closely, sentence by sentence. I'm stunned, even now after seeing it many times in the past. There's so much in here.
"If you are a Christian believer, I sincerely encourage you to study this book."
This exhortation applies to us now as much as it did back then. We were often told by Dr to master the class materials. This is just one more place. Here he used the word "study" which is used in II Timothy 2:15, our point of departure (pfal p.115).
"Do not allow your past teachings or feelings to discourage you from going on to receive God’s best."
This encouragement applies to us now MORE than it did back then. Connecting this sentence with the previous one leads to two possible understandings: either "this book" IS God's best, or/and "this book" is instrumental to receiving "God's best." Looks like both are true to me.
"If you need power and ability to face up to the snares of this life, you may find your answer while reading this book."
There it is again: This book is God's answer to the how of the power, just like the above sentence. God's answer is God's Word. God's Word is the power of God. Twice establishes it. We may find our answer while reading "this book." Or how about MASTERING it?
"It is my prayer that you may be edified, exhorted and comforted."
WOW!!! That's what prophecy does! This book, RHST, is prophecy! Hey! I didn't write the book! It's been sitting there all that time, unnoticed. Think how many other treasures await us, hidden there by God.
=====================================================
Posted August 16, 2005 1:48
Let's go back to "Thus saith" #3, PFAL page 83, for a moment.
Often I posted on this page, and often others tried to deny it outright. After many rounds, I evolved a concise way of putting it all.
Here is what is actually written on that page 83 of PFAL:
"The Bible was written so that you as a believer need not be blown about by every wind of doctrine
or theory or ideology. This Word of God does not change. Men change, ideologies change, opinions
change; but this Word of God lives and abides forever. It endures, it stands. Let’s see this from John 5:39.
“Search the scriptures ....” It does not say search Shakespeare or Kant or Plato or Aristotle or V.P.
Wierwille’s writings or the writings of a denomination. No, it says, “Search the scriptures ....” because
all Scripture is God-breathed. Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; not what
Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures – they are God-breathed."
The key sentence is the last one. It's taken nearly word-for-word exactly from the '67 film class, so everyone was exposed to this sentence a maximum number of times. Here's how we heard it in the film class:
"'Search the scriptures.' It doesn't say search Shakespeare or Kant or Plato or Aristotle or V.P. Wierwille's writings or the writings of my denomination, no. It's says, 'search the scriptures!' Why search the
scriptures? Because all scripture is God-breathed. But not all that V.P. Wierwille would write would of necessity be God-breathed, nor what Shakespeare said nor Kant nor Plato not Aristotle or Freud. But the scriptures; they are God-breathed. All scripture, all of it."
How many times were we exposed to this sentence? Many. Yet it eludes us to this day. Why? What many posters tried to assert was that this key sentence in Dr's teaching to us was equivalent to the following sentence of their own composition: "Not what Wierwille writes will be God-breathed; not what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures – they are God-breathed."
But that's not at all the choice of words Dr used. What Dr said and wrote says the exact opposite of the above sentence. It’s the addition of just a few words, “not all” and “necessarily” that make the big difference.
The ACTUAL sentence reads (with my bold fonts): "Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; not what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures – they are God-breathed."
The phrase "not all" implies "some." If I eat NOT ALL of a pizza pie, then that means there's SOME left for you.
This means Dr's statement on PFAL page 83 asserts that ... SOME some of what Wierwille writes will OF NECESSITY be God-breathed.
I have verified my grammar and logic on this one sentence with two of Dr's editors, one of whom worked on the PFAL book and remembered well that one key sentence. The other was a long time editor of the magazine.
=====================================================
Posted August 16, 2005 12:42
"Thus saith the Lord" statements #10 and #11
Way in the back of in the book "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today" can be found an isolated "hidden" set of passages that, when I first came upon them a few years ago, the only thing I could think was "What is this doing all the way back HERE?" I could remember seeing it many years prior, in my first reading, but in those days EVERYTHING seemed so cosmic and amazing that it blended into the background in no time. But lately, when I came back to PFAL, this set of paragraphs totally astounded me in how oddly they seemed to be hidden in the back of the book.
If you were specially attentive, you might have noticed that in the middle of "How the Word Works" Dr hints to us that doing word studies in the PFAL writings would be a useful thing to do. I don't mean normal word studies with the KV and a concordance. That would be a "Bible" word study. I mean a PFAL word study: looking at previous usages (in PFAL, not in the Bible) of a word for deeper meaning.
For me to track down "Masters of the Word" to see Dr's previous usage of the word "master" and thus better understand his use of that word in his final instructions to us is an example of a PFAL word study, only partially completed.
Dr will again hint to the profit of doing PFAL word studies in this set of paragraphs tucked away in the back of RHST. Watch close for the word studies issue to come up in the middle of all this, because there is a lot of action here.
***
Let's look at the "Introduction to Appendixes" in RHST to see these TWO ways that Dr says, in essence, "Thus saith the Lord." One point to keep in consideration is that the first such appendix, right on the next pages, is titled "The Word Receive" and is on dechomai and lombano.
First I'll reprint the entire passage before I work on a line by line commentary. This is From "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today" page 223 in the 7th edition 1982 (p.257 6th ed. 1972). Hold on to your hats, this gets intense:
"If we believe that throughout the Scriptures we have the words of God and not man, many difficulties will disappear. We must allow the Divine Author the rights and privileges claimed and operated by every human author -- that He may quote, adapt, or repeat in varied forms His own previously written or spoken words. God could have used other forms had He chosen to do so, but it has pleased Him to repeat His own word or words, introducing them in different contexts, with new applications and connotations. Thus it obligates us
to study the context, the paragraph, and the section where the same word appears, and where it was used previously, to see it is used in a different sense or not.
"The greatest satisfaction of any Biblical scholar is to fathom what can be searched out from God's Word and to quietly accept that which is untraceable and cannot be explored or found out.
"Ephesians 3:8 - anexichniastos -- unsearchable, untraceable, cannot be explored or found out.
"Romans 11:33 uses this same word translated 'past finding out.'
"Romans 11:33 - anexerunetos - translated 'un-searchable' simply means inscrutable or incomprehensible, that which can be apprehended but not comprehended.
"These appendixes have been added to this volume for those who desire to search out and explore the deeper reason for the way in which God has set truth in perfect order in His Word."
I noted above that often we seem to be finding things that were hidden in Dr's books, and that this is a prime example, being tucked away in the very back of the Holy Spirit Book. Interestingly, the very topic of this passage centers on the hidden element in God's Word.
Also above, I made brief mention that the first appendix following this introduction deals with dechomai and lombano. In PFAL'77 (and I think also in the Advanced Class) Dr explained how God started revealing to him the teaching on dechomai and lombano. Dr was reading a text that was open to a place that had both dechomai and lombano on the same page. God made the printed letters of those two words stand out high above all the other words on the page to get Dr's attention.
God used many means to deliver His Word to Dr "like it has not been known since the first century." God gave Dr revelation as to WHO's other research he should spend any time on, checking it out, and who's research should be avoided altogether. God also gave him revelation as to WHICH PARTS of an other researcher's material was to be accepted by Dr, and which to reject, and God's ownership of these revelations superceded all human copyright questions. God gave Dr phenomena like the heightened block letters of dechomai and lombano. And God gave Dr what he often described as a spiritual awareness. You know, the stuff we THINK we have at times too.
In this "Introduction to the Appendixes" of the Holy Spirit book, Dr points out that a person can get some facts from 5-senses tracking, but some truths can ONLY come by direct revelation. What he's really getting to, and introducing here is the Appendix on dechomai and lombano and the revelations God gave him on that subject.
***
Now let's examine the opening lines closely.
"If we believe that throughout the Scriptures we have the words of God and not man, many difficulties will disappear."
This is just as true with Dr's books as with the ancient scriptures. In fact, it's MORE true with Dr's books, because we don't really HAVE original scriptures to work with, just mis-copies, translations, and versions. At best we only have man's translations, or versions like the KJV.
If we had believed that Dr's books were of God, we would have obeyed his final instructions to master them, and the ministry would have straightened out, instead careening into the big meltdown. But we did NOT do this and as a result many difficulties appeared. I believe as we return to a meek receiving of the PFAL books "MANY DIFFICULTIES WILL DISAPPEAR."
"We must allow the Divine Author the rights and privileges claimed and operated by every human author -- that He may quote, adapt, or repeat in varied forms His own previously written or spoken words. God could have used other forms had He chosen to do so, but it has pleased Him to repeat His own word or words, introducing them in different con-texts, with new applications and connotations."
How many traditionalists want to confine God to the KJV or some other version, and forbid Him to re-issue, improve the surviving remnants, and further clarify to our culture HIS OWN original words?
Many to most is the answer. Many to most people DO FORBID God these options. That's why we have "many difficulties." As a body we pretty much have all forbidden God the above liberties we would easily grant any human author. Tradition hates to admit the above. Tradition is a prison. The above sentences are talking about Dr's books, NOT the ancient scriptures and their derivatives. How do I know that? Next sentences (WITH MY CAPS):
"Thus it obligates us to study the context, the PARAGRAPH, and the SECTION where the same word appears, and where it was used previously, to see it is used in a different sense or not."
How many of people have Bible versions that are organized into paragraphs and sections? Not too many. How about none? Traditional Bibles are organized into books, chapters, and verses. Look in the table of contents of your Holy Spirit book. It's organized into chapters and SECTIONS and, or course, PARAGRAPHS.
How many times have you ever heard anybody refer to a "paragraph" or a "section" in the Bible? These words are primarily talking about the very book they appear in, "Receiving The Holy Spirit Today." Can they also apply to a Bible version? Yes, as long as it's rightly divided via the PFAL guidance that started in 1942. These words can also apply to the other PFAL collateral books which are organized into "parts."
This passage mentioning "PARAGRAPH" and "SECTION" are telling us that doing word studies within this very book, "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today," is a worth while thing to do. This is hidden "Thus saith the Lord" statement #10.
The phrase "...the same word appears, and where it was used previously, to see it is used in a different sense or not." refers to the process of doing a word study.
***
Next lines:
"The greatest satisfaction of any Biblical scholar is to fathom what can be searched out from God's Word and to quietly accept that which is untraceable and cannot be explored or found out."
How many people can find a passage in the Bible that talks about "free will"? What Dr taught us about "free will" and "foreknowledge" and many other subjects cannot be easily traced in the Bible. Dr got those things by revelation, not by tracking them in the Bible. There are many other items like this that I may someday write a post about, but here I will mention one more untrackable item. It's about what is coming in the NEXT two pages in the Holy Spirit book. The passage we're examining is the "Introduction to the Appendixes" and two pages later is Appendix I "The word Receive" on dechomai and lombano.
Several paragraphs above I mentioned a little of how Dr got what he got on dechomai and lombano. He did not track down all of this information via his 5-senses; he got some by revelation. This information can't be totally figured out by scholars or by 5-senses methods. Scholars who are meek can read this book on "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today" and then they can "quietly accept that which is untraceable and cannot be explored or found out."
We can quietly accept the PFAL revelations on dechomai and lombano because they are from God. This is hidden "Thus saith the Lord" statement #11.
***
"These appendixes have been added to this volume for those who desire to search out and explore the deeper reason for the way in which God has set truth in perfect order in His Word."
We desire this deeper, spiritual understanding of God's Word. A 5-senses understanding is too limited to defeat the adversary, who has run the 5-senses realm for many centuries. By meekly searching out and systematically mastering the treasure God has provided in English for us in PFAL we will see "many difficulties disappear." We have the pure Word of God.
=====================================================
Posted August 17, 2005 2:44
Here's the latest tally:
1. TNDC p.34 - every word true
2. TNDC p.116 - not VPW but Holy Spirit
3. PFAL p.83 - God-breathed... necessarily
4. BTMS - Preface
5. TNDC - Preface
6. WWAY - Preface
7. GMWD - Preface
8. OMSW p.124 - many, many times... today
9. JCNG Introduction p.9 - spokesman
10. RHST Introduction to Appendixes - trackable
11. RHST Introduction to Appendixes - untrackable
12. RHST Preface p.x prophecy
=====================================================
Posted August 17, 2005 13:44
"Thus saith the Lord" statement #13 - fact
On page 3 of this thread (July 24, 2005 15:39 PST) I mentioned a "thus saith" but it was never assigned a number. Here's a repeat of what I posted there.
In the Sept/Oct 1983 Way Magazine Dr's article focuses on a short list of vocabulary words that need to be sharply understood.
The list of words he handles in that article is: religion, Christianity, fact, truth, faith, believing, formed, made, created, body, soul, and spirit.
The title of the article is "The Importance of Words in God's Word."
The words "fact" and "Christianity" do NOT appear in the Young's Concordance or in the KJV, but they DO occur in the PFAL writings... a lot.
This again is pretty subtle.
=====================================================
Posted August 17, 2005 16:45
This next "thus saith" statement has already appeared in this thread, but I purposely avoided distracting myself by pointing it out. I'd like to know if anyone saw this already. If not, we can consider it a little hidden, can we not?
This is the text from the last Session of the class, just before we were led into tongues. This time I'll bold font only that section for this statement #14
***
In that segment 66 of the '67 film class Dr says:
"And, in my classes on Power For Abundant Living, nobody ever gets missed, because, if you're in this class, you've heard the Word, you've believed God's Word, God is always faithful. And nobody ever misses, if you'll do exactly what I tell you to do, right down to the minute detail.
"It's like, in I Thessalonians, chapter 2, verse 13. Remember where the Apostle Paul said: 'I thank my God, that, when you received the Word of God which you heard of us, you received it not as the word of man, but as it is in truth, the Word of God.'
"Now, if you'll be as honest with God as that Word of God says, you too can walk into the greatness of the manifestation of the power of God. But, if you think this is just V.P. Wierwille talking, you'll never get it."
***
So this statement #14 is right in there with #2. We all heard it a maximum number of times.
=====================================================
Posted August 17, 2005 17:09
"Thus saith the Lord" statement #15
Interestingly enough, the preceeding use of I Thess 2:13 in the film class was the THIRD such usage. Dr had already introduced the class to this verse and Paul's authoritative teaching being "like" his own God-given authority.
Here's the first such occurrence of I Thess 2:13 in the film class.
This is segment 11:
"You see very few of us have gone back to the Word, we have gone back to men. And we have said well what did Kant say, what did Plato say, what did Aristotle say, what did this theologian say, what did this man say, what did this other person say? Class, back to the Word! The Word and nothing but the Word! For it's this Word which is the Will of God! That's right, bless your heart.
"Look at I Thessalonians, I Thessalonians chapter two; Acts, Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, I Thessalonians; the same trouble tonight I had before, this India paper is just a little to thin to find all these scriptures so quickly; but they're in here. I Thessalonians 2:13 listen to this: 'For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us,...'
"You see they received the Word of God which they heard of Paul it was Paul's vocabulary but what he was speaking was God's Word. But to the senses ears the people could have said, "well that's Paul talking, that's just Paul, yeah that's just Paul." Like they say, "oh, that's just Dr. Wierwille, yeah..." I've heard that, no, no, no. ..thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually [which effectually] worketh also in you that [do one thing--go to church every Sunday morning, sit in the front pew and shout glory hallelujah, believe in all the social action programs; no a thousand times no. Works effectually in those who do one thing. What?] believe [believe].
That is "Thus saith the Lord" statement #15
=====================================================
Posted August 17, 2005 17:14
This next occurrence of I Thess 2:13 is longer, more spread out, and more subtle. It's in in segment 13, near the end:
"Let me show you something from I Thessalonians two thirteen, listen to this: I Thessalonians 2:13: 'For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.'
"You know, you may have the Word of God, you may know the Word of God but it does not work effectually in people. It does not work effectively with power until we do one thing. Believe. You believe that Word and lo and behold you speak that Word and it produces the same results today that it has produced at any time in the history of civilization since that Word has been given.
"You know, the Bible says that we are to abide in the Word. We are to abide in the Word and we're to let this Word abide in you. To the end that we abide in the Word this Word takes the Master's place in our lives through our renewed mind and then it becomes our vocabulary but it is God's Word. We speak, this is our vocabulary, we speak the Word but as we speak the Word it is God's Word. 'I thank my God that when ye received the Word which ye heard of us ye received it not as the word of man,' sounds like it, 'but as the Word of God which worketh effectually in those that believe.'
"This Word of God cannot be broken, that's right. Just cannot be broken, not one iota of it can be broken, for what God promised He is not only able but willing to perform and that whole Word fits like a hand in a glove.
"You see it is this Word of God that really thrills a man. In Luke chapter twenty-four. Matthew, Mark, Luke, let me just check this with you. Luke twenty-four listen to verse thirty-two:Luke 24:32: 'And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?'
"This was speaking about Jesus on the road to Emmaus after the ressurection as he spoke to these men. He opened unto them the scriptures. You see how their hearts thrilled, how their hearts burned within them because he opened to them the scriptures.
"I've never seen a man or a woman or a boy or a girl in these classes on Power for Abundant Living whose soul just has not thrilled with an effervescence and with an abundance and with a glow when this Word of God started to unfold, started to fit like a hand in a glove. It made sense and how their hearts burned within them. How they thrilled at the greatness of God's Word!"
***
That was "Thus saith the Lord" statements #16. Seen alone, this one is extremely subtle. Seen with the other two, this one glows!
***
Since I'm doing Dr's "Thus saith the Lord" statements, why not include his accounts of the 1942 promise. Here is one such account from that piece titled "Light Began to Dawn" which Ana Fontana posted in an earlier thread. Actually, that's not it's original title, as this was taken from within the announcements on an old SNS tape #214, from October 17, 1965.
=====================================================
Posted August 20, 2005 11:58
"Thus saith the Lord" statement #17
...
"And so, all of this stuff began to build. And so finally, as I kept praying, I just said to the Father, I said 'Father, teach me the Word––teach me the Word.' And one night, something happened, which to me is the greatest thing I don’t––I see only one experience that perhaps is greater than this in the Bible, and that’s the Apostle Paul’s experience on the road to Damascus. Outside of that, I see nothing in the Word that equals how God revealed Himself to me and talked to me and told me as plain as day: 'That if I would study the Word, He would teach me the Word like He had not been able to teach it to anybody since the first generation.' And of course at that time I thought, 'Now that’s a dandy!' 'Boy, if I learned this Word of God, everybody’ll listen to me, the whole church will be blessed. My denomination will grow by leaps and bounds because we’ll have the Word of God.'
"And I thought that was terrific! But during the process of that revelation––and I can’t tell it all to you because we’re already closing off; but during the process of it, I said: 'Father, how will I know that this is You and that You’ll really teach it to me?' Because I had worked the Word in commentaries and the rest of it and I couldn’t understand it––couldn’t get it to fit. It happened to be bright sunshine like today––like it’s been today and yesterday––what we people refer to, I guess as 'Indian Summer'––beautiful day. And the sun was shining brightly; it was in the Fall of the year––gorgeous! And there wasn’t a cloud in the sky. And just on the inside of me it seemed to say, 'Well, just say to the Father, Well, if––if it’ll just snow––right now, you’ll just know that this is God talking to you.' But, you see I’d never had much experience with God talking to me, and this business of He saying to me, just as audibly as I’m speaking to you, that He’d teach me the Word if I’d teach it, sort of shook me.
"I’d been expecting to hear from heaven for a long time, but I hadn’t heard that way before, you know. Ah, my ears were perhaps clogged up, since that time I’ve heard a lot of things––from Him. But, then I said, 'Lord, if this is really true, I’d like to see it snow.' And I opened my eyes––must not have been over three seconds, and I was sitting in front of the window looking East, the sun was––ah, West. The sun was in the West and there wasn’t a cloud in the sky ‘cause I could see the whole area. I closed my eyes when God said to me that He would teach me the Word if I’d teach it. And I said, 'Lord, to know that this is true, I’d like to see it snow.' And I opened my eyes and it was pitch––almost pitch black outside and the snow was falling so thick, I have never seen it fall that thick since that day. And I sat in that little office and I cried like a baby, because I guess it was about my time to cry, because I’d grown up but didn’t know the Word.
"And from that day on and He’d promised to teach me the Word, I have tried with all my heart, from time to time––all along, to learn this Word. One of the reasons there are sections of the Word perhaps that I––I don’t know, because I do too much cement pouring and a few other items that have to be done and that have to be taken care of. But I am absolutely confident that there is no portion of God’s Word that God would not teach me and unfold to me if I studied the Word to show myself approved unto Him by rightly dividing it.
"And that began the ministry that has cost me, sense-knowledge, more than anybody will ever realize––except those of us who’ve gone through it. It gives ya’ a whole set of new friends. It caused people, heads of my denomination, through various times when I appeared teaching, like in India, even to write letters against me that I was not a member of the denomination at all––and I’d been born in the lousy place. Isn’t that something? And I have them on file––have them in my files, you ought to see ‘em, I got a sheet this big.
"These are prices you pay. Then you say, well, why don’t I reciprocate? Because, people, you can’t fight and work the Word too. You can’t be fighting all the time and trying to defend yourself against the unbelievers, because the unbelievers are many more than the believers. And we’ve got only one job to do, as far as my life is concerned, and that is to teach the Word. Whether anybody believes it or not, that’s not my responsibility. But to teach it is my responsibility, because He said He’d teach me the Word if I would do one thing––teach it.
"Now in order to teach it, I have to study the Word; and when I study it, He shows it to me, then I can teach it."
=====================================================
Posted August 20, 2005 12:42
"Thus saith the Lord" statement #18
About 6 years later, Dr again explained his 1942 experience to Elena Whiteside and she quoted him in her book "The Way - Living in Love." The following is from pages 178-181
***
"Then Rosalind left. It was the fall of the year. Kids were back in school already. It must have been September. I was sitting in my office, an old dentist's office just around the corner from the church where I served — I'll show you that too when we get there. I bet you it's still there, though I haven't been back here since I left.
"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.
"Well, I couldn't believe that God talked to me right then. You see, God's right here. He always has been here. He is still here. And God is willing and able to reveal everything to anyone or everyone. But we are just unable to receive it. We don’t believe it. It's like, you can't pour a gallon of water in a teacup. It's just not big enough to receive it, take it all in. You have to make the cup bigger first. You build up the container, and then you fill it little by little. He fills us a little bit at a time as we can take it. He knows how much we can take because God knows everything. God doesn't waste His revelation on people who cannot believe it.
"Paul had to be tremendously built up to believe —receive — the mystery that had been hidden since before the foundations of the world. John, too, had to be built up to receive the revelation set forth in the book of Revelation. It's taken many years and a lot of trips and searching to build my believing to this point also. But God knows our hearts.
"Well, on the day God spoke to me, I couldn't believe it. But then I came to the point by the next day where I said to myself — maybe it's true. So the next day I talked to God again. I said, 'Lord, if it's really true what you said to me yesterday, if that was really you talking to me, you've got to give me a sign so that I really know, so that I can believe.'
"The sky was crystal blue and clear. Not a cloud in sight. It was a beautiful early autumn day. I said, 'If that was really you, and you meant what you said, give me a sign. Let me see it snow.’ My eyes were tightly shut as I prayed. And then I opened them.
"The sky was so white and thick with snow, I couldn't see the tanks at the filling station on the corner not 75 feet away." Doctor relates this phenomenon in a joyous voice. The car swerves off the highway, onto a narrow black-top road, and the sign with the arrow reads: "Payne, 2 miles." The overcast sky turns restlessly over our heads, and the sparse sprinkling of snowflakes thickens on the windshield. Doctor laughs aloud.
"It reminds me of that day in 1942. It reminds me of that other time it snowed." We pull into a sleepy, small midwestern town. Around two corners, we're by a one-story building, the front of which is a many-paned display window.
"That's the old dentist's office that was my office," Doctor remarks. By now, the snow is swirling around us. At the corner stands the Marathon Gas Station. Doctor shakes his head from side to side. His face breaks into a ready smile. His eyes are blue, laughing or crying. "It reminds me of the day..." he trails off. "That's where I was sitting when I prayed to God to teach me the Word and show me how. And when I opened my eyes, it was snowing so hard I couldn't see those gas pumps right there." He points to the pumps a dozen yards or more from the window. A car has just pulled in. The dentist's office is deserted now, empty through the window."
=====================================================
Posted August 20, 2005 12:49
Here's the latest tally:
1. TNDC p.34 - every word true
2. TNDC p.116 - not VPW but Holy Spirit
3. PFAL p.83 - God-breathed... necessarily
4. BTMS - Preface
5. TNDC - Preface
6. WWAY - Preface
7. GMWD - Preface
8. OMSW p.124 - many, many times... today
9. JCNG Introduction p.9 - spokesman
10. RHST Introduction to Appendixes - trackable
11. RHST Introduction to Appendixes - untrackable
12. RHST Preface p.x prophecy
13. Magazine Sept/Oct 1983 - fact
14. 1967 Film Class - seg. 66 I Thess 2:13
15. 1967 Film Class - seg. 11 I Thess 2:13
16. 1967 Film Class - seg. 13 I Thess 2:13
17. Light Began to Dawn - SNS tape #214
18. "The Way - Living in Love" - pps. 178-181
=====================================================
Posted August 20, 2005 13:22
In the 1979 Advanced Class, Segment #5, Dr says the following:
"I have set for our people, and it’s set in the book on 'Receiving the Holy Spirit Today,' and people, when you reach the Advanced Class, you ought to be able almost to quote this line for line. You should have mastered this book by the time you get to the Advanced Class. If you haven’t, you better get busy and do it - work it to where you understand the Word of God in every facet, in every way of it’s utilization regarding the holy spirit field - all of them, you must know this book, in and out. But I’ve discovered as I’ve worked among my people, and even all the grads of the Advanced Class, there still are areas where we got to push ourselves."
This urging to the AC students was some 6 years prior to Dr's final instructions to us, yet has some striking similarities. In this 1979 statement he says outright that NONE of the top leadership (all AC grads) had done what they (we) needed to do. In 1985 he says, specially addressing top leadership, that there was a lot of the wrong kind of mastering going on, and none of the right kind.
That Dr would, in 1979, demand such rigorous RHST mastery of all his AC students can only mean that he thought such a book was WORTH mastering, and that it was NECESSARY to master if the Word of God was to be known. Such a worthy book could only come from God. That's why I count this !979 AC segment #5 as "Thus saith the Lord" statement #19.
***
The same thing holds for Dr's set of final instructions in 1985. Books we were told to master had to be worthy of such mastery, and had to be of God.
"Thus saith the Lord" statement #20 is "The Joy of Serving" Dr's Last/Lost Teaching
=====================================================
Posted August 20, 2005 13:25
Here's the latest tally:
1. TNDC p.34 - every word true
2. TNDC p.116 - not VPW but Holy Spirit
3. PFAL p.83 - God-breathed... necessarily
4. BTMS - Preface
5. TNDC - Preface
6. WWAY - Preface
7. GMWD - Preface
8. OMSW p.124 - many, many times... today
9. JCNG Introduction p.9 - spokesman
10. RHST Introduction to Appendixes - trackable
11. RHST Introduction to Appendixes - untrackable
12. RHST Preface p.x prophecy
13. Magazine Sept/Oct 1983 - fact
14. 1967 Film Class - seg. 66 I Thess 2:13
15. 1967 Film Class - seg. 11 I Thess 2:13
16. 1967 Film Class - seg. 13 I Thess 2:13
17. Light Began to Dawn - SNS tape #214
18. "The Way - Living in Love" - pps. 178-181
19. 1979 AC Segment #5 - master RHST
20. "The Joy of Serving" - master written PFAL
=====================================================
Posted August 22, 2005 2:31
"Thus saith the Lord" Statement #21
Reconstructing past events is no where near as accurate as printed records or tapes, but some things can be brought out by memory and partial print/tape records, especially if it's multiple witness testimony.
An interesting example of such a reconstruction came to me by e-mail.
Several years ago I posted a small announcement on the http://www.eph320.com website about finding Dr's last teaching,"The Joy of Serving." It was posted there for about a year and I received about 40 inquiries, which then led to many other contacts. In this way (and others) I conducted an informal poll where the results showed that a staggering 99% of all non-Corps grads were completely unaware of Dr's last teaching.
Nearly all of the respondents to the "eph320" announcement were unaware of this last teaching so I sent them copies. Like in my posting here, I also offered them other e-documents of VPW's material. A number of these people developed into pen pals over time. Reproduced below is a letter I received from one such person regarding Dr's last teaching at Emporia. Your going to see a pattern developing.
Dear Mike,
Yes, we certainly would like more. Hey! My name is MB. I used to be MS and I was in the 15th Corps. I was wondering if you were in the Corps too or if by chance I might have met you? I just wanted you to know I certainly did enjoy reading "The Joy of Service" again.
The year that Dr. Wierwille died, I was in residence at the Way College of Emporia. I will never forget the last 10:30 Fellowship we had with him up in the Ambassador Room.
He said,
Kids, the Word is not going to go over the world unless you and I take the collaterals and master them to the point you can teach them at the drop of a hat to someone you happen to run into.
He said, Its not in how many classes you run, its in how much of The Word of God you know and are able to teach on the spur of the moment.
He said, You've got to master it. And what I mean by mastering it is you don't turn to the next page until you completely understand and have committed to memory the first.
I have never forgotten those words and have shared them many times with believers that I know and with our fellowship that W and I ran for 9 years before we moved to XY. So it really blessed me to read your e-mail and see that someone else really caught on to the greatness of what Dr. was saying. God is great. We love you our brother and we will be anticipating more.
God Bless You,
MB
I keep in mind that this "record" of Dr's at Emporia is anecdotal, from an attendee's memory, and not a tape or published transcript. However, stacked with the accumulating mountain of hard evidence, this soft evidence can be appreciated since it fits well with that mountain. It in no way contradicts it, and adds more supporting data. I feel confident in placing this in the category of secondary confirmation of the theme that Dr wanted us to master the PFAL books, and NOT merely some of the principles in them. We aren't qualified to say what ALL those principles ARE until we've finished mastering everything.
Just to enrich your appreciation of these Emporia words, let's look again at these near-quotes of Dr:
1. Kids, the Word is not going to go over the world unless you and I take the collaterals and master them to the point you can teach them at the drop of a hat to someone you happen to run into.
2. Its not in how many classes you run, its in how much of The Word of God you know and are able to teach on the spur of the moment.
3. You've got to master it. And what I mean by mastering it is you don't turn to the next page until you completely understand and have committed to memory the first.
In the first paragraph (1) he instructs us to master the collaterals
...................to the degree of total impromptu teaching adeptness.
In the second paragraph (2) he instructs us to know "The Word of God"
...................to the degree of total impromptu teaching adeptness.
Does this seem to imply something? Did Dr say by implication that the collaterals are or reveal or give us The Word of God here?
It would seem, to a casual observer, that he was talking in paragraph (2) about KJV Bible mastery. Then similarly paragraph (3) would also refer to traditional Bible mastery, BUT that would be an impossible task.
However, if he was talking about the collaterals in all three paragraphs, then it's a totally do-able mastery task for us all, and everything fits consistently here, as well as with the other hard evidence we have.
The collaterals CAN mastered. That's not an impossible task at all. Mastering the KJV/etc is not humanly possible. Just "Figures of Speech" can fully occupy a full-time scholar's entire life span.
If at Emporia Dr meant collaterals in paragraphs (3) and (2) then this last Emporia address would then be in complete harmony with "The Joy of Serving" where collateral mastery is explicitly mentioned.
From that 1979 Advanced Class quote I posted, until his death in 1985, Dr explicitly hammered away at our need to master the collaterals. I understand now why he did this, after having worked on this mastery for over 7 years now. There's lots of surprises hidden in them. Lots of confirmation that it's the right track back to what we used to have, and more. Lots of apparent contradictions in the get cleared up as we go.
***
And now, just for further insight, let's compare these Emporia paragraphs with the "Masters of the Word" that I posted earlier and discussed in detail. There are several sentences in "Masters of the Word" that I'd like to point out.
These sentences of Dr's are:
1. We can only recondition ourselves to this as we ourselves become masters of the Word.
2. And if you want to know about the head of the Body, you've got to go to God's Word and read it.
3. This is why we have to be masters of the Word, we have to gain a knowledge of God, and we have to get our minds at peace with the Word so that our minds are no longer warring against it.
4. You've got to get to that point that you quit disputing with God's Word; just start believing it and then master it.
5. We just have to master the Word and let the Word have mastery in our lives.
6. Mastery of God's Word is not just my pleasure and responsibility because I am a preacher or a teacher.
It is as much yours as it is mine...
7. Let's become masters of God's Word and let it reign supreme in our lives.
We see that in all of these sentences from that article, whenever Dr refers to God's Word he doesn't mean the KJV, he means the collaterals. The KJV is for beginners, but not for mastery. We have something much better in them and straight from God.
I count Dr's last Emporia teaching as "Thus saith the Lord" number twenty-one.
=====================================================
Posted August 22, 2005 3:15
I had turned of my computer and was all ready for bed when the urge to post one more "thus saith" hit me strong. Here goes.
Earlier on this thread I posted my analysis of "Masters of the Word" in conjunction with "How the Word Works." In that Part 4 (of 4) post I quoted from OMSW where hundreds of miners had daily walked over top of a huge vein of silver ore as they trudged off to mine relatively much smaller areas. I compared these miners with us grads as we "mined" our KJVs while right under our noses God was re-issuing His Word in modern English for us to see Him bigger than ever before. This was on pages 23 and 24 of OMSW.
On page 26 of OMSW there is an interesting passage for our inspection. There we read (with my bold fonts):
"Blind chance was not the author of life. Explore the mineral kingdom; explore the animal kingdom; explore the vegetable kingdom. From the lowest to the highest, there are marks that specifically call our attention to the superbly conceived reality of that which we observe. Some great design, some great intelligence confronts us everywhere we look in the realm of creation. We can always see an intelligent purpose behind this realm, which was brought about by some type of consistent power.
"Take a microscope, even a low-powered one. Focus under its lens an eyeglass, for example. You would see some imperfections in the glass, although perhaps only a few. Next, focus a high-powered microscope on the same eyeglass. You will find that the more high-powered the microscope, the greater the imperfections that will be seen in the glass. There are imperfections in anything man-made.
"This example of the eyeglass demonstrates a principle. The more high-powered the microscope used to observe the works of man the more imperfect the object appears. On the other hand, the more high-powered the microscope used to look upon something that God formed or made, the more perfect and orderly it appears. The closer the scrutiny of God’s Word, the more obvious become its beauty and perfection. It is only a man who uses a poor microscope who never sees the greatness of God’s Word. He does not observe it to see its perfection."
Now here we have an interesting situation. In Dr's last years and months, when this book, "Order My Steps in Thy Word," was being written he was also challenging grads left and right to master the collaterals.
Do you get it?
In those final months of Dr's life this book is released. There he writes that a microscope will reveal imperfections in man's work, but great beauty, perfection, and intelligent design in God's Word. He was telling us to look MUCH closer at PFAL, like with a microscope, to see its great beauty, perfection, and intelligent design... that it is the Word of God.
I count this as "Thus saith the Lord" statement #22.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
lol...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
there's 415 in the King James "thus saith the Lord"
879 "saith the Lord"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
219 "the Lord said"
46 "God said"
4 "God saith"
then you have the Spirit talking too
might want to quit worshiping idols
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
What the Hey,
Well thank you for giving my credibility a boost here, but I think you also gave me some homework tasks to do.
I had been working (very slowly) on the same text to refine it in lots of ways.
As posted here, and testified to by dmiller, it was meant for the consumption of a largely sympathetic AND a more knowledgeable audience. I took liberties with them, such as abbreviating some back-up and supporting paragraphs, that I wouldn’t take with the GSC audience at large, including silent lurkers. I can beef them back up later.
Because I’ve been working that text off and on for weeks, I noticed there’s also some missing material. What is posted above is a highly edited version of entire text of that PT, and unfortunately a little too much was edited out. I can supply that later too.
So, it should be kept in mind by everyone that the posted 22 text, so far, is a preliminary draft.
***
dmiller,
You wrote: “Like I said (somewhere else), those way rag articles were EDITED, yet you treated them like scripture, digging for hidden treasure, as if God Himself approved the orderly fashion in which they appeared on each page.”
Yes, God placed hidden treasure in an earthen vessel, as He is known to do.
First of all, it makes no difference between book and magazine, both got edited.
Yes, the materials were edited. I’ve handled this many times here. God worked not only with Dr on His project, but with Dr’s editors. I’ve often posted that it was a TEAM that produced the written materials, and God worked with the whole team, not just with Dr. Dr coordinated it.
***
Ex10,
You’re not a “cop out” in my eyes. I’m just not thinking that way. We all ran out of steam, me included.
All I know is that SOMETHING went well a long time ago, and I finally identified that something.
None of the bs that sprung up and choked us is in written PFAL.
***
Oakspear,
It’s definitely a great secret that written PFAL is God-breathed.
I’d say it even qualifies as the greatest secret in the whole world of OLGs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Mike
They were done twice
1. Sept. 10 1974 - June 3 1975
2. Sept 9 1981 - June 2 1982
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Thanks White Dove.
I just wanted to sharpen my data.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Mike here is the breakdown on the notes for 73 -87 what was covered I think they did Acts those first years but not sure the others I have so I know that they are correct.
Corps Notes
1971 - (Unconfirmed but I think they did Acts)
1972 -(Unconfirmed but I think they did Acts)
1973 Timothy (Sept.1973 -through Aug. 1974)
1974 Timothy (through Aug. 1974)
Ephesians (Sept.1974-June 1975)
1975 Acts (Sept. through Jan 1977)
1976 Acts (Sept. through Jan 1977)
1977 Acts (Sept. through Jan 1977)
I & II Thessalonians (Feb.1977 - Feb 1978)
1978 I & II Thessalonians (Feb.1977 - Feb 1978)
Romans (Sept. 1978 - July 1980
1979 Romans (Sept. 1978 - July 1980
1980 Romans (Sept. 1978 - July 1980
1981 Ephesians (Sept.1981- through May.1982)
1982 Ephesians (Sept.1981- through May.1982)
I Corinthians (Sept. 1982)
1983 I I Corinthians (June 1983)
Galations (Sept.1983 through Nov. 1983)
1984 Philippians ( Jan.1984 through March 1984)
Colossians ( May1984 through June 1984)
Timothy ( Sept. 1984 through June. 1985 )
1985 Timothy & Titus ( Sept. 1984 through June. 1985 )
1986 Galations- ( Sept. 1986 through April 1987)
1987 Galations- (through April 1987)
Edited by WhiteDoveLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
socks,
You wrote (with my bold fonts) :
“...the basic doctrinal points taught in the PFAL 3 part series were done deals, and assumed to be correct as is. Some nuancing would be possible in certain records but from a "principle" standpoint the doctrinal messages were considered complete. Further "tweaking" would only clarify the details. That would be how I'd view the "early years", after PFAL was put on film the second time, in the version most of us took.”
It’s this that I refer to when I say there was an assumed atmosphere in the early 70’s that Dr spoke for God.
All my 22 ‘thus saith” statements take on greater intensity when it’s known how they appeared in this assumed atmosphere as a background or context.
**********************************************************************
**********************************************************************
**********************************************************************
**********************************************************************
WordWolf,
In an earlier post you quoted my criticism of Raf’s method.
I had said to Raf:
“In your method, finding a seemingly solid error is the end of the process, followed only by uncorking the Champagne.
You retorted with:
“Don't you get tired of repeating this vicious lie? Raf's method BEGINS when an error is found. Then discussion and consideration begins. Research is done. Concepts are considered and exchanged. Knowledge grows. Then an error is either shown to be substantial, or it is shown to not be one. Action is then taken accordingly.
Ok, WW, let’s unmask this “vicious lie” of mine for the mere mis-comunication that it is.
You missed one phrase in my quote above. The phrase is “seemingly solid.”
I used an alliteration to abbreviate the process you describe above.
Here’s the expanded form of my quote:
“In your method, after you’ve found an item that looks like an error at first sight, after discussion and consideration, research done, concepts are considered and exchanged, knowledge grows, and the error is either shown to be substantial, action is then taken accordingly. That action would be uncorking the Champagne while posting this now seemingly solid error.”
That’s what I meant by “seemingly solid.”
Now, MY method would differ in that more PFAL page references would be considered, the process would go much slower, and at a lower priority level compared to my reading of PFAL for fellowship with my heavenly Father. I’d employ a lot of differing techniques in my method too numerous to mention here.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Raf,
You asked me a question earlier.
You wrote:
“There he goes changing the subject again. Mike, for the umpteenth time, if you want to start a thread on whether the BIBLE is God-breathed, have at it. This thread is about PFAL. Stop trying to change the subject. __ Just out of curiosity, why does your exaltation of PFAL require you to attack the integrity of God's Word (The Bible is the Word of God: according to PFAL)?”
I think you mistook a rhetorical device for an attack.
I often do challenge people here to produce their “proof” for believing the ancient scriptures (the originals) are God-breathed.
I’m not attacking the integrity of those originals, though. I believe in them myself. I know why I believe in them, but I think many don’t know why THEY do.
There are some very close parallels between the ancient scriptures and PFAL. I’m not changing the subject when I bring up these parallels, nor am I attacking the scriptures that PFAL rests on and refers to constantly.
Instead of using my usual rhetorical device, which is interrogative, let me state it explicitly:
I say that the methods by which the ancient scriptures become to be believed to be God-breathed by many are VERY SIMILAR to the methods by which I came to believe PFAL to be God-breathed.
I say that the methods used to deal with AEs in PFAL should be VERY SIMILAR to the methods you, Raf, use to deal with AEs in the Bible texts available to you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Mike - ex10
Okay, let's begin...
Well, yes and no. I'd state it as such - that the basic doctrinal points taught in the PFAL 3 part series were done deals, and assumed to be correct as is. Some nuancing would be possible in certain records but from a "principle" standpoint the doctrinal messages were considered complete. Further "tweaking" would only clarify the details. That would be how I'd view the "early years", after PFAL was put on film the second time, in the version most of us took.
-----------------
What I meant was different from what you're saying. I meant that from the standpoint of VPW and The Way Inc. the PFAL class, as offered and taught, was a "done deal". In PFAL VPW didn't teach 12 sessions in the first series and leave ot open to further discussion on the doctrinal points. He was teaching a it "as is" - here's what the bible says, here's what it means. If he was able to clarify, confirm or enhance what was in PFAL - yes, perhaps. He might look at that. To change the teaching or the conclusions - no.
So if someone came and had different ideas on the major points - no dice.
As far as the atmosphere of the "grads" of that period being accepting of the god-breathed status of what PFAL taught, I wouldn't agree, not by my experience, the people I knew (and I knew quite a few) or the things I participated in.
Remember - if we take the statements of VPW that no one - no one, ever - had "mastered" PFAL, ever, to the point of "true mastery", including the books, then people at any period of time in the Way must have not done the "work" that VPW felt was necessary to do so. That certainly allows for some reservations of a sort, on the part of the people he's talking about. Not in all, and not to everything taught. But it's reasonable I thnk to factor into the reasons for such a statement by VPW that this idea of PFAL's "god-breath"edness may not have been fully embraced since I would say (and others have too) that it was never stated as such by VPW, and that if he inferred it or made statements to that effect, it didn't register to the point people accepted it.
And in fact, I would say it wasn't, along the lines of what most people here, including some from that early period, have said their understanding was. Some people have said that it was a very good class teaching the bible and "abundant life" topics that opened up new territory to many people that had never heard it before but - that there wasn't a conscious decision to embrace PFAL itself as "god-breathed", out of the mouth of God.
Again - PFAL could be attended and some, all, a little or a lot of that teaching from the bible accepted as correct, without any belief that the media itself was "god-breathed".
So to clarify - the "done deal"edness I'm referring to was on the part of PFAL and VPW. This atmosphere you're referring to may have included some people thinking PFAL was god-breathed. I certainly knew people who probably felt the very dust on the tape it played on was worth investigation, who had kind of a neurotic fascination with the trappings of PFAL and who probably felt there was learning to be had by the number of times VPW blinked everytime he said the word "pie". I don't know. But there were a few people who went off on tangents like that at times. They usually seemed to be that way about other things too.
It's easy to misunderstand what someone says or writes though. I just wanted to clarify what I meant. I thought it was clear in the post, but I guess not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
I was always under the (mistaken) impression that as more "research" was done on certain topics, that the teaching could be tweaked some.
As I stated before, I was young and naive. And the teaching on some subjects did change over time. A great examle is Eph. 6 and how the imagery changed from a soldier to an athlete. If the original PFAL was considered "God breathed" even by VPW himself, how and why could he have changed it over time?
VP also would ask certain people to look into certain subjects and then he would evaluate the results. Of couse, as long as PFAL wasn't directly challenged, every thing was hunky dory.
Mike, why is it so important to you that PFAL be "God breathed?" And that VPW himself considered it to be "God breathed?"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
ex10, I agree. That sums it up for me too. I hope it clarifies for Mike what I (we) meant.
I have no special view into what VPW was thinking or planning while he put PFAL together. I wasn't there, and was young like you when I first took it. I would just say that within a couple years or so it was clear to me that he felt PFAL was enough as it was. Between the class itself, the good o' collaterals and the RTHST book he offered we got the basic nuts and bolts of the Way's theology. The class itself never changed, was never edited for any reasons, regardless of what they might have been.
RTHST went through revisions and reprints. Whatever changes occured never changed the basic teaching on the "gift", the manifestations, their operation, lambano/dechomai, any of that. The collaterals were compiled into books. The PFAL class transferral to video from the original was handled by 3rd Corps, under VPW's direction. The video versions that were then offered were as close to identical copies as they could be. No changes to that material were ever announced or recognized publically by VPW. Any changes that might have occured were negligible to those who retook it. We saw the first showing of it at the Way Nash after it was completed.
Of course PFAL doesn't have to be god-breathed, a new issuing of "God's Word", and as a result perfect in every way, one way or another. And if he'd declared that in session one in a way that everyone would have clearly understood I doubt I would felt compelled to accept it over time. VPW never clearly stated that. That's reinventing history and it places a burden on it that it was never meant to bear IMO. VPW may have even very well wanted to believe that it was - if a person wants to invent that kind of mythology around it fine, but that doesn't make it so.
Edited by socksLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
["Handled", in this case, meaning "ignored the people on staff
whenever they disagreed with my premise that the magazine
articles were edited with a Divine Hand guiding it."]
Edited by WordWolfLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Nice, very nice!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Ok - so Mike these 22 items....
I don't get it.
are you saying that in these statements Dr says "thus saith the Lord..." of that this is implied? I no longer have my books so I am not able to look them up - but from the few little snips some of them seem a bit academic with no need for the "thus saith..." preface. Besides, I never remember Dr saying, "thus saith..." at all, much less that they are in the collaterals. I think you will have to write out ONE of these quotes that you say is a "Thus saith" statement in its entirety without commentary.
You make mention of the the whole "not necessarily all..." - but that actually implies what you have yet to admit - that Dr said Some of the words he wrote MIGHT be God-breathed. But the very same statement say the same could be true of other Men of God. I also implies that NOT ALL these written words would be God breathed. Yet you have embarked on the unlike assumption that ALL of VPW's writings were to be treated like scripture. This seems very illogical.
BTW just because something is God-breathed doesn't make it scripture. "All scripture is God-breathed" does NOT equal "All God breathed communications are scripture."
Heck, on some level SIT could be construed as being God-breathed...
Again, Paul wrote many many letters - but not all were scripture.
Like I said I'm just not getting this whole line of thinking -
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
CM,
You wrote: “you are not doing pfal __ you are doing something very different”
You’re right, I’m not doing pfal AS YOU REMEMBER IT.
I’m doing PFAL as it is written, and that is something very different than what you have of pfal in memory.
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
socks,
You wrote: “...from the standpoint of VPW and The Way Inc. the PFAL class, as offered and taught, was a "done deal". In PFAL VPW didn't teach 12 sessions in the first series and leave ot open to further discussion on the doctrinal points. He was teaching a it "as is" - here's what the bible says, here's what it means. If he was able to clarify, confirm or enhance what was in PFAL - yes, perhaps. He might look at that. To change the teaching or the conclusions - no.”
Yes, I remember that. It was assumed to be correct. As I’ve reported before, we never attached the “God-breathed” label to it, but for all practical purposes it was “thus saith the lord.”
You also wrote: “As far as the atmosphere of the "grads" of that period being accepting of the god-breathed status of what PFAL taught, I wouldn't agree, not by my experience, the people I knew (and I knew quite a few) or the things I participated in.”
Me neither. It often occurred to us that Dr could speak by revelation, and often it was the practice to assume that he was speaking by revelation if it was a teaching with a microphone on. But, I never heard anyone attach the label “God-breathed” to his writings.
He flat out stated on the a 1972 tape that the Way Tree was a revelation, which would dove-tail well with what you reported about your discussion with Dr about it not being fully documented as happening in Acts. I remember the theme of each Rock was supposed to be done by revelation. I also remember most major strategies and events of the ministry were touted to be by revelation. On some of the very early SNS tapes Dr can be heard saying that “Father says I can share this...” or something like “Father says stop” at a certain point, and other things like that.
Dr would OFTEN claim that even though he had no ancient manuscript to back him up (yet) on a certain point, he knew by revelation that the originals had it his way... AND WE ACCEPTED THIS. I remember gagging on this last point at times, and it took me many years to fully understand it, but I never spoke up against it in the face of all others’ acceptance of it.
***
It seems to me that Dr tapered off in his overt claims of receiving revelation after several such claims appeared in print in the very early 70’s, including his interview with Elena printed in “The Way – Living In Love.” But Dr’s authority to teach us what God taught him (his “thus saith the lord” attitude) was in the air EVERYWHERE in those earlier 70’s. It’s just that nobody ever flashed on the idea that, in addition to the God-given ability to speak by revelation to us, Dr could also put a revelation into written form.
The reason we never flashed on it is Dr kept us too busy moving the Word and he wanted to keep the idea of his writing of revelation RELATIVELY under wraps. I explain this open “secret” in the 22 “thus saith” statements already posted.
***
Later you wrote: “The class itself never changed, was never edited for any reasons, regardless of what they might have been.”
Yes, this was in keeping with the passage in Elena’s book where Dr was praying in 1942 that he was going to quit the ministry if God didn’t give him some answers he’d “never have to back up on.” As you wrote, PFAL and especially the written portion, was never backed up on.
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
ex10,
You wrote: “Mike, why is it so important to you that PFAL be ‘God breathed?’ And that VPW himself considered it to be ‘God breathed?’”
We very much need something that is God-breathed in order to fully fellowship with our heavenly Father.
Everything we read in Bible versions is subject to “further research” and our “favorite doctrines” can conceivable be proved wrong at any time by some scholar. We must rely on such scholars if we want to know God, as they are so necessary to tell us which ancient fragments are to be trusted, and how they are to be translated. These scholars are necessary middlemen if we want to go to the ancient scriptures, like academic priests, who feed us God’s Word in English.
Complicating matters greatly is the sad fact that equally brilliant scholars will often disagree with each other as to what a particular passage actually says.
So, in our attempts to know and trust God’s Word and will, we must also trust our “favorite” scholars to intercede for us, and we must trusty our own ability to choose such scholars, and then once chosen, we must sometimes pick and choose from within each individual scholar’s writings what is to be fully accepted.
We need SOMETHING that is authoritative.
Everything in the theological world of versions is riddled with academic opinons.
I see PFAL is the only viable candidate to be that which we NEED.
God supplied a great need with PFAL.
***
Now for the second part of your questions to me. You wrote:
“Mike, why is it so important to you that ... VPW himself considered it to be ‘God breathed?’”
If I can show that Dr did claim this, then it is the case that many here who debate with me will see that they did not fully absorb all that Dr taught us, especially his written teaching. Most of my opponents here claim that I mis-represent Dr, but if I can show that Dr did claim this, then it is proved that my opponents here missed something in those days.
Many here claim that PFAL failed them; that they gave it a good honest try, but it failed them. My claim is that none of us fully received PFAL and that there is much treasure awaiting us when we come back to it... back to the written material, not back to TWI.
Many grads here and elsewhere feel that they had mastered PFAL, and that Dr’s final teaching(s) urging us to master PFAL was a mere commercial directed only to new people. I claim that we did NOT master PFAL, that Dr’s urging us to master it was a very needed piece of advice, and that obeying it will help us all.
***
As I unearth these “thus saith the lord” statements of Dr’s , each such statement carries two pieces of information for our consideration.
First, we didn't pay as good attention to Dr's teaching as we thought we did, especially as he got older. We didn't sufficiently study, and we didn't MASTER the material we were given. If we had studied, we'd have seen and remembered these many times when Dr asserted that he was teaching authoritatively. Our assignment to master the material that Dr gave us with his dying last words was a NEEDED assignment, even for top leadership, ESPECIALLY for top leadership.
Second, these statements give us a chance to believe, or not, that Dr was working for the True God. Even more, they force us to decide "yes" or "no" to Dr's teaching authority because they leave no gray area between.
Now I know that just because Dr said so, that doesn't make it true. Whether these claims of his are accurate is one subject worthy of much discussion, but besides that, just seeing these many statements is convincing proof that (1) we didn't catch all that taught to us, and (2) Dr went way out on a limb.
What I mean by "out on a limb" is that if he claimed authority as God's spokesman many times and wasn't, then that rules out all the gray areas of how we should regard Dr and his teachings.
Moderates and middle-of-the-roaders, people who think Dr’s material was in the gray area between good and evil, should be challenged by Dr’s extreme assertions to get off the fence and decide which extreme he is in. His claims prove that he was either extremely right or extremely right.
Yes, there's no gray area the way Dr put it there. We can either accept his assertion of being God's appointed spokesman or reject it, but we can't logically and honestly seek out any gray area in between.
I was struck by this same stark-option challenge to accept or reject when I first sat through the class in Session One. When Dr got to the section about healing that man's withered arm in India I realized that there were no gray areas about Dr and his message: either he lied or told the truth about that healing. Closely following was: Ditto for the rest of his teaching.
I was electrified when HCW recounted hearing Mrs. Wierwille's commentary to him personally as they both looked through old photos of that healed man and the train station.
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
WordWolf,
You wrote that I: “...ignored the people on staff whenever they disagreed with my premise that the magazine articles were edited with a Divine Hand guiding it.”
I paid much attention to all of Dr’s staff editors when I spoke to them. I opened up my discussions with them by recalling how many times we’ve all (or most of us) at some time helped someone far beyond our own sense knowledge capacities without even knowing it. Many of us have taught a fellowship, or brought forth a message from God in manifestation, and then later had someone come up to us praising God that we hit the nail right on the head in helping them. We often would bless people more than we were aware of.
In the Old Testament Samuel heard God’s voice calling him and twice mistook it for Eli’s voice. Balaam was once trying to curse Israel when he brought forth a beautiful prophesy of the coming of Christ.
We all have deeply pondered the difficulty in telling the difference between God’s voice and our own senses. Sometimes we think something is revelation and it’s just a senses hunch, while at other times we think we’re just doing some normal thinking but God slips in a revelation to bless us.
When any of Dr’s editors told me in recent years that they didn’t regard their editing of Dr's writings to be in the revelation category I find this assertion of theirs to be easy to step aside from. I know that the adversary has had over 20, and 30 years to talk them out of thinking that those efforts had any of God’s revelation behind them. I also know that when they were on staff back then, that nearly everything they did was with the heart of being open to God’s revelation. So, it was easy for me to say to them, “I believe you got more revelation than you remember or are willing to believe now.” When I did this they were usually very silent and contemplative.
So, WW, I only ignored a tiny bit of what they told me.
***
You wrote: “I'm giving you a temporary pass on the supposed 22 items. That's because you claimed the list WTH posted was deficient and non-representative. So, for now, I'll give you time to post one or more WITH the supposed background and rationale before commenting.”
I appreciate this courtesy you’ve extended to me here. However, you may was well have at it as is. I can supply the missing points as we go on a better timetable than I can re-vamp the whole thing.
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
doojable,
You wrote (with my spelling correction) : “are you saying that in these statements Dr says "thus saith the Lord..." or that this is implied?”
Yes, the “thus saith” is implied (in varying strengths) in those 22 statements.
Here are the first two statements in that 22. On page 34 of TNDC he writes (with my bold fonts):
“Change what you put in your mind. To change the food you are sending to your mind is to “renew your mind.” Think those things which are true, honest, just, pure, lovely and of good report. __ If you by your free will accept Christ as your Savior and renew your mind according to The Word, you will find that every word I have written to you is true. I challenge you to stand upon the Word of God, declare your authority in Christ and claim your rights.”
In Dr’s vocabulary, “true” is bigger than “factually accurate.” Truth is spiritual, facts are man-made. Dr often taught this.
On page 116 of TNDC he writes:
“Paul in I Thessalonians 2:13, thanked God that ‘when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God.’ You too must follow God’s truth as told in the Word of God. But if you think this is just Victor Paul Wierwille writing or speaking to you, you will never receive. If you know that what I am saying to you are words which the Holy Ghost has spoken and is speaking to you by me, then you too will manifest the greatness of the power of God. If you will literally do what I ask you, then you can manifest the fullness of the abundance of God, the wonderful power of God.”
With these two statements Dr’s “thus saith the lord” is strongly stated, hardly implied. In most of the other 20 statements it is implied, and only very subtly in some.
***
You wrote: “...I never remember Dr saying, ‘thus saith...’ at all, much less that they are in the collaterals.”
I don’t think I ever heard him label anything he taught with the exact words “thus saith the lord” either. In talking with Uncle Harry, though, he told me that in BOT meetings, there were times when they’d fight over some crucial matter with no agreement in sight. Harry told me that on those occasions Dr would sometimes say “thus saith the lord” and the argument was settled.
***
You wrote: “You make mention of the the whole "not necessarily all..." - but that actually implies what you have yet to admit - that Dr said Some of the words he wrote MIGHT be God-breathed. But the very same statement say the same could be true of other Men of God. I also implies that NOT ALL these written words would be God breathed. Yet you have embarked on the unlike assumption that ALL of VPW's writings were to be treated like scripture. This seems very illogical.”
I assume you’re referring to PFAL page 83 here.
Yes, I agree with you, and so did Dr agree. There were times when Dr would put something in writing and it was God-breathed, like when he wrote to US, his students. As he claimed in my TNDC p.34 quote above, every word he wrote to US, his PFAL students, was true. Then there were also times when he wrote something and it was NOT God-breathed, but just his flesh understanding, whether correct of incorrect.
That passage on PFAL p. 83 troubles a lot of people. He’s just saying there that man’s word is untrustworthy, but God’s IS trustworthy. He says that, compared to God’s Word, man’s is faulty, every man’s, even great religious leaders’ words. He then goes one step farther and says (in effect) that even a man (himself) who is appointed as a spokesman for God, by God, has faulty words when he is not speaking (or writing) exactly what God commissions.
So, all of written PFAL, what Dr told us to master, is worthy of mastery because THOSE writings are God-breathed. God inspired them and supervised them being printed and handed to us grads.
***
You wrote: “BTW just because something is God-breathed doesn't make it scripture. ‘All scripture is God-breathed’ does NOT equal ‘All God breathed communications are scripture.’
This is a very profound point you are making here, and it’s the second time you made it. In my lengthy response to you after the holidays I marveled at this point. I want to bring that section up here just to pursue this as much as possible.
Before the holidays you wrote: “Now God gives lots of revelation to lots of people so even if we will take the "Evil Kneival-sized" leap of faith that God gave VPW revelation regarding PFAL, that doesn't make it scripture.”
I’m not nearly as sure as you that lots of revelation gets given. Leaving that aside, though, it is an interesting point that you bring up here. I’ve hardly addressed this myself.
So what do you think the essential qualitative difference is between the ancient scriptures and something written today by revelation? Most of us (I think) believe that revelation can be given in modern times, so what if God not only honors a believer’s operation of the revelation manifestations with a cookie, but He also tells the recipient to write it down? Is that any different than what He did to get the ancient scriptures written? Is God forbidden to commission modern written revelation? If He is allowed, is it any different than the ancient scriptures in their original manuscript, language, and understanding?
The best I can see they differ is TO WHOM they are addressed. I can see that PFAL is addressed TO GRADS ONLY (and to students before they graduate), while the ancient scriptures were addressed to “...Jew, Gentile, and the Church of God.”
This point of PFAL possibly being God-breathed word addressed ONLY to a new group of people (grads) is a point that some of Dr's editor's deeply considered and even partially, temporarily mentally assented to in my many hours of phone and e-mail discussions with them.
But, I do recognize that the ancient scriptures are quite special. Without them PFAL would rest on nothing substantial.
***
You wrote: “Heck, on some level SIT could be construed as being God-breathed...”
I agree. You’re onto something here.
***
You wrote: “Again, Paul wrote many many letters - but not all were scripture.”
I agree.
This area needs some work.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
CM
you don't know nothing about what i remember you dumbass
pfffttt, act like you know people you don't know
you don't know nothing
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Well CM, why don't you start a thread on what you do know?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
already have a few times
you don't want to know what i know
that's for sure
nor do you want the truth
and that's the truth
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
CM,
If you want my trust and respect you must earn it.
One of the most detestable things I saw in the ministry was Corps people who demanded respect without earning it. To the degree that a leaders was an extension of Dr’s ministry in the old days, I’d give that leader great respect, but all that died over 20 years ago.
The situation of Corps demanding too much respect was so rampant that it occupies a small portion of Dr's very last teaching, only to have been botched up in the magazine editing. Someone, a transcriber or an editor, accidentally lost a few sentences of this part of the teaching and the article reads quite bizarre at that spot. The tape is clear.
Trust and respect must be earned, CM.
You can’t talk like a mystic and write poetic lines and expect that to earn the kind of respect you seem to want. It takes a lot of hard work to generate that kind of respect, and if you have done that kind of work with some people, then maybe they can respect you to the point of listening to your doctrine.
No one here, JUST NO ONE, has earned the kind of respect from me that Dr has earned. He helped me when I needed it most, and he helped thousands the same way, showing them and me that God is love, and in many ways.
Go ahead and insult me, demand respect of me, talk like a mystic, and wear a robe, sandals, and beard. None of that is going to grow one shred of respect from me. It’s SERVICE that inspires respect, not playing a role.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
not interested in you respecting me or trusting me
there is only one to trust and respect
and that is who you should fear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
Take note that you will not escape his wrath or
His mercy Love and grace....
You promote lies as if they were the truth and try
to catch people to use them for your own means
it will not last and you will see it again....
and i'll talk anyway i see fit to talk
thank you very much
Edited by CMLink to comment
Share on other sites