A post I just put up on the pfal thread is aprpos here:
My problem with pfal is that the focus was turned from 'the Word' to 'the rightly divided word', and from Jesus to 'the teacher'.
Why do I have a problem with these things?
The bible clearly and repeatedly states that Jesus is the Word. PFAL leads one away from the Word and into worshiping the bible itself as a false idol.
The bible clearly and repeatedly states that Jesus is the Teacher. PFAL leads one away from Jesus and into following a false teacher.
I fully believe that the moral character of the teacher of pfal is the root of this leading away unto a false idol and a false teacher.
Did vpw mean to do that? I dunno. I do know that, having his moral character, he could not have led people to anything else...could not possibly have led people to the Word and the Teacher...because that was not in his moral makeup...as is evidenced by his fruit.
Does anybody's moral character make the truth a lie?
I can only answer that with what the bible says:
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. Romans 1:25 (KJV)
Ricky, in answere to your questions, yes I have taken pfal numerous times and others here have taken wap.
My question to YOU is....have you ever lived near/had personal contact with the leaders of twi?
There is a huge difference in what you are taught in those classes and what is praticed by those who are currently in charge as well as those who were in the past.
You are talking with people here who have personally witnessed the evil practiced and justification used for doing so...by the top leaders in twi.
Please, familiarize yourself with that which you defend...at the very least tuck these nuggets away so that when things don`t add up in the future...you can make an educated decision for yourself.
I have lived close to the top leadership most of my life until my family chose to leave. So yes I have. And to CW my point is the way we get to know Jesus is reading the Word. The Word of God has a subject from the start to the end. It is Jesus. How else should I get to know him. That was my point. He is sitting at the right hand of God. He isn't next door you know. He has not yet come back to establish his Kingdom. He has to come get me before that. I guess I could go to church and clear my head and beg and plead for Jesus to come in my life. But I never read doing that in the Word. If trying to look to God through his Word is idolatry well I guess I need to look at my definition of idolatry. Its his WOrd that tells me of the victory and it His Word that tells me I can SIT and have fellwoship. Where would I be without the Word? This will be my last post in this topic since I fear that I have derailed it severly. Soryy Belle. Im still a newbie and I will try to do better
I have lived close to the top leadership most of my life until my family chose to leave. So yes I have. And to CW my point is the way we get to know Jesus is reading the Word. The Word of God has a subject from the start to the end. It is Jesus. How else should I get to know him. That was my point. He is sitting at the right hand of God. He isn't next door you know. He has not yet come back to establish his Kingdom. He has to come get me before that. I guess I could go to church and clear my head and beg and plead for Jesus to come in my life. But I never read doing that in the Word. If trying to look to God through his Word is idolatry well I guess I need to look at my definition of idolatry. Its his WOrd that tells me of the victory and it His Word that tells me I can SIT and have fellwoship. Where would I be without the Word? This will be my last post in this topic since I fear that I have derailed it severly. Soryy Belle. Im still a newbie and I will try to do better
So you were planning an attack...
You didn't ask the question to find an answer, but to tell me off.
As I said before, a person with such moral character as vpw cannot lead to Jesus.
Does anybody's moral character make the truth a lie?
I can only answer that with what the bible says:
QUOTE
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. Romans 1:25 (KJV)
Cool
This verse does not say that anybody's moral character makes truth a lie. If you look at the word changed (metallasso) you will see that it is properly rendered exchanged this is a different word than changed in the next verse. It does not mean that truth was made a lie, truth was still truth ,but was exchanged for a lie. If I exchange a dollar for a hamburger it does not make the dollar no longer a dollar. It is still a dollar (not changed) ,but I traded it for something else a hamburger. In this verse what God said was still true but it was exchanged (traded away) for a lie. Moral character does not change truth.
Here it is in the
Revised Std. Version
Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct.
OM takes issue with templelady's notions about righteousness, seemingly claiming that it is impossible for someone who is saved to also be unrighteous.
In "Fellowship is the Secret," as I recall, Wierwille treated 1 John chapter 1 as dealing with those already saved confessing sins to restore broken fellowship. If so, then 1 John 1:9 ("If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.") seems to indicate that those who have been saved can still be, at least in part, unrighteous. Otherwise, they couldn't be cleansed "from all unrighteousness."
So, it seems to me, oldiesman's position on this thread is contrary to Wierwille's position (not that either is authoritive or anything).
Ck, Ricky and even Dove, I am curious....do you hold the same opinion of Jim Jones and David Koresche?
Did they not also teach the *the word* to the best of their abilities as well?
All three men taught the bible passionately...all three men found ways scripturally to excuse their *sin* to their followers...
All three men took what was not theirs in God`s name......all three left a swath of destruction and destroyed lives, in God`s name.
Are they considered *good men* in your opinions as well? Can you tell me why you might consider wierwille any better then them? Can you explain wht wierwilles sins are any less heinous or excusable?
Does anybody's moral character make the truth a lie?
I can only answer that with what the bible says:
QUOTE
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. Romans 1:25 (KJV)
Who changed the truth of God into a lie? vp did........come into my motor coach and let me bless you. Yep that is what some here said he said to them.
and worshipped and served the creature more than the creator? vp did.....vp was of the flesh not the spirit. He would do almost anything to save his name. He was a very sick man who cared only for himself and his needs.
Who changed the truth of God into a lie? vp did........come into my motor coach and let me bless you. Yep that is what some here said he said to them.
and worshipped and served the creature more than the creator? vp did.....vp was of the flesh not the spirit. He would do almost anything to save his name. He was a very sick man who cared only for himself and his needs.
WD that verse points out vp very nice.
Yeah if you close your eyes and ignore what the word means,I guess justloafing one can say it says anything you would want it to. Then again most respected people in the biblical field might not agree with your translation to prove my point. Just a thought!!!
Ck, Ricky and even Dove, I am curious....do you hold the same opinion of Jim Jones and David Koresche?
Did they not also teach the *the word* to the best of their abilities as well?
All three men taught the bible passionately...all three men found ways scripturally to excuse their *sin* to their followers...
All three men took what was not theirs in God`s name......all three left a swath of destruction and destroyed lives, in God`s name.
Are they considered *good men* in your opinions as well? Can you tell me why you might consider wierwille any better then them? Can you explain wht wierwilles sins are any less heinous or excusable?
Rascal this is simple if one speaks truth then it is truth. It is not dependent on anything I, you or anyone else can do, it does not change truth. It does not make one a good or bad person, thats another issue. Nor does being a good or bad person change truth. Truth is a constant, like gravity it is not susceptible to change by mans actions. You can have a good person speaking truth or a bad person speaking truth,a dog could speak truth if he could talk.......
Rascal this is simple if one speaks truth then it is truth. It is not dependent on anything I, you or anyone else can do, it does not change truth. It does not make one a good or bad person, thats another issue. Nor does being a good or bad person change truth. Truth is a constant, like gravity it is not susceptible to change by mans actions. You can have a good person speaking truth or a bad person speaking truth,a dog could speak truth if he could talk.......
Well then I guess from the way you are saying this, the devil is okay because he speaks truth too.
I guess it is okay to speak some truth no matter what the motive is? Yeah I know truth is truth but when spoken with a forked tounge that is okay with you too.
OM takes issue with templelady's notions about righteousness, seemingly claiming that it is impossible for someone who is saved to also be unrighteous.
In "Fellowship is the Secret," as I recall, Wierwille treated 1 John chapter 1 as dealing with those already saved confessing sins to restore broken fellowship. If so, then 1 John 1:9 ("If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.") seems to indicate that those who have been saved can still be, at least in part, unrighteous. Otherwise, they couldn't be cleansed "from all unrighteousness."
That's an interesting point.
Then is it possible we can be righteous and unrighteous at the same time?
I think so. But I think we are talking about two kinds of righteousness.
What we are in Christ Jesus, the new man, God imputing unto us, making us righteous, no matter what we do in the flesh, is one kind of righteousness. It is the new man, the new creation, righteous, because of what Christ did for us. It is our legal position in Christ.
But then we are unrighteous when we sin. Our flesh, which is carnal, is unrighteous or at least prone to it, because we are carnal. God promises to cleanse us when we confess our sin.
What we are given at the time of our new birth is not, shall we say, 'for this world'. It is held for us against that day.
Everything up until that day is a mess of unrighteousness that takes constant vigilance, constant care to manage, to kill off (as in 'crucified with Christ').
And the only way...that I have seen...the bible shows us as to how anybody knows if we or anybody else is pressing towards that high mark is the fruit of the spirit.
It is this fruit that helps us know the difference between the sheep and the wolves...and a whole lot of other things...
Well then I guess from the way you are saying this, the devil is okay because he speaks truth too.
I guess it is okay to speak some truth no matter what the motive is? Yeah I know truth is truth but when spoken with a forked tounge that is okay with you too.
See there is where you error, you assume things I did not say. I never said that speaking truth made anyone ok or that it did not. I said when and where truth is spoken it remains true despite, independent of, regardless of any of man's actions. If you change it you do not have truth. I know you get this, the very fact that you admit that the devil speaks truth tells you that it must be possible to speak truth and not have moral values change it. I also never said that just because a source of truth exists that, one would necessarily want to use that source. That said it still does not make what they said untrue.
WhiteDove, I've asked you this before and you ignored me...and so I'm going to ask it again...and maybe you will answer it.
Why is all that stuff about how a person handling holy scripture should behave him/herself even in the bible?
Actually Cool I did not ignore you I answered your question on the PFAL thread at.......
Mar 24 2006, 07:35 AM Post #133
QUOTE(CoolWaters @ Mar 24 2006, 06:29 AM)
So, WD, why does the bible make such a big deal about character, then? Especially the character of those who have/take authority over God's people?
Because it is what we should strive for in our life. BUT it does not define truth as Oak recognized, it is a seperate issue.
Wierwille was not immune from being right, despite his moral failings.
I never said character was not an issue to consider but regardless of how good or bad that may be it does not change or alter that which is true. For instance when in PFAL VPW shared this truth from
Isaiah 49:16
Behold, I have graven you on the palms of my hands; your walls are continually before me.
He wrote God is trying to illustrate how much He Cares for us by saying "Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hand." He is saying that he has taken a most delicate,a most sensitive part of His being,and there he has tattooed our names. In reality He is saying, " I love so much I don't want my love to be hidden underneath the garments, to be covered so that it can not be seen"......
Whatever VPW did or did not do does not change the truth of this and other truths, his morals do not affect truth. You can accept that which is true independent of his actions.
See there is where you error, you assume things I did not say. I never said that speaking truth made anyone ok or that it did not. I said when and where truth is spoken it remains true despite, independent of, regardless of any of man's actions. If you change it you do not have truth. I know you get this, the very fact that you admit that the devil speaks truth tells you that it must be possible to speak truth and not have moral values change it. I also never said that just because a source of truth exists that, one would necessarily want to use that source. That said it still does not make what they said untrue.
As you would note. I did say truth was truth. Why do you give the credit to vp for speaking the truth and hold him in reverence?. Why not just quote the bible since that is the ultimate truth?
Do you think he did anything wrong wd? If so can you list what he taught that was wrong or the things he did wrong? If half the things that I have read about how he wronged people are true. I think almost if not all of them are true. If someone is a liar and a known liar. Why should we believe anything that came out of vp's mouth?
WD, yes truth is truth but lets give credit where credit is due and it is not from vp. There are many other places to look for the truth. Look at what he did with the truth.
OK, White Dove, I found your 'answer'...and I didn't know it was an answer...'cause it came across as flippant and more akin something you said to make your point...and it didn't include any explanation.
I'm going to say something I've been hesitant to say because you tend to stop reading once it is said...but here goes anyway...
On the face of things, no, truth is not made 'untruth' by the character of who is speaking.
BUT (now please keep reading...OK?...it makes for a better conversation, imo)...
Truth is made into a lie by the character of who is speaking.
Hold on before you stop reading and fly into a rebuttal...OK?
The truth is made into a lie by weaving it with lies, by changing the focus of the truth to the lie, by using the truth to perpetrate and perpetuate a lie, by...and you should be familiar with this concept...adding a word, changing a word, deleting a word, etc.
So that what you have in the end is no longer the truth, but a pack of lies made somewhat believable with a smattering of half-truths here and there.
And the result is always death...of some sort.
Which is the fruit of pfal.
Which means that, because of his character, vpw turned the truth into a lie.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
15
30
20
14
Popular Days
Mar 23
42
Mar 21
33
Mar 30
27
Mar 22
19
Top Posters In This Topic
rascal 15 posts
oldiesman 30 posts
CoolWaters 20 posts
templelady 14 posts
Popular Days
Mar 23 2006
42 posts
Mar 21 2006
33 posts
Mar 30 2006
27 posts
Mar 22 2006
19 posts
CoolWaters
A post I just put up on the pfal thread is aprpos here:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rickyg
If the Bible says that Jesus is the teacher how do we learn from him? Just asking not attacking.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Ricky, in answere to your questions, yes I have taken pfal numerous times and others here have taken wap.
My question to YOU is....have you ever lived near/had personal contact with the leaders of twi?
There is a huge difference in what you are taught in those classes and what is praticed by those who are currently in charge as well as those who were in the past.
You are talking with people here who have personally witnessed the evil practiced and justification used for doing so...by the top leaders in twi.
Please, familiarize yourself with that which you defend...at the very least tuck these nuggets away so that when things don`t add up in the future...you can make an educated decision for yourself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
rickyg,
That's a whole thread unto itself...a lifetime of threads!
The short answer is get to know Jesus.
But there's sooooo much more to it all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rickyg
I have lived close to the top leadership most of my life until my family chose to leave. So yes I have. And to CW my point is the way we get to know Jesus is reading the Word. The Word of God has a subject from the start to the end. It is Jesus. How else should I get to know him. That was my point. He is sitting at the right hand of God. He isn't next door you know. He has not yet come back to establish his Kingdom. He has to come get me before that. I guess I could go to church and clear my head and beg and plead for Jesus to come in my life. But I never read doing that in the Word. If trying to look to God through his Word is idolatry well I guess I need to look at my definition of idolatry. Its his WOrd that tells me of the victory and it His Word that tells me I can SIT and have fellwoship. Where would I be without the Word? This will be my last post in this topic since I fear that I have derailed it severly. Soryy Belle. Im still a newbie and I will try to do better
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
So you were planning an attack...
You didn't ask the question to find an answer, but to tell me off.
As I said before, a person with such moral character as vpw cannot lead to Jesus.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ckmkeon
VPW did lead he was a good man he did the best of his ability to teach the word.
CK
Edited by ckmkeonLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
someday maybe your eyes will be opened ck... someday... for your sake, hopefully soon...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Does anybody's moral character make the truth a lie?
I can only answer that with what the bible says:
QUOTE
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. Romans 1:25 (KJV)
Cool
This verse does not say that anybody's moral character makes truth a lie. If you look at the word changed (metallasso) you will see that it is properly rendered exchanged this is a different word than changed in the next verse. It does not mean that truth was made a lie, truth was still truth ,but was exchanged for a lie. If I exchange a dollar for a hamburger it does not make the dollar no longer a dollar. It is still a dollar (not changed) ,but I traded it for something else a hamburger. In this verse what God said was still true but it was exchanged (traded away) for a lie. Moral character does not change truth.
Here it is in the
Revised Std. Version
Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LG
OM takes issue with templelady's notions about righteousness, seemingly claiming that it is impossible for someone who is saved to also be unrighteous.
In "Fellowship is the Secret," as I recall, Wierwille treated 1 John chapter 1 as dealing with those already saved confessing sins to restore broken fellowship. If so, then 1 John 1:9 ("If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.") seems to indicate that those who have been saved can still be, at least in part, unrighteous. Otherwise, they couldn't be cleansed "from all unrighteousness."
So, it seems to me, oldiesman's position on this thread is contrary to Wierwille's position (not that either is authoritive or anything).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Ck, Ricky and even Dove, I am curious....do you hold the same opinion of Jim Jones and David Koresche?
Did they not also teach the *the word* to the best of their abilities as well?
All three men taught the bible passionately...all three men found ways scripturally to excuse their *sin* to their followers...
All three men took what was not theirs in God`s name......all three left a swath of destruction and destroyed lives, in God`s name.
Are they considered *good men* in your opinions as well? Can you tell me why you might consider wierwille any better then them? Can you explain wht wierwilles sins are any less heinous or excusable?
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
justloafing
Who changed the truth of God into a lie? vp did........come into my motor coach and let me bless you. Yep that is what some here said he said to them.
and worshipped and served the creature more than the creator? vp did.....vp was of the flesh not the spirit. He would do almost anything to save his name. He was a very sick man who cared only for himself and his needs.
WD that verse points out vp very nice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Yeah if you close your eyes and ignore what the word means,I guess justloafing one can say it says anything you would want it to. Then again most respected people in the biblical field might not agree with your translation to prove my point. Just a thought!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Rascal this is simple if one speaks truth then it is truth. It is not dependent on anything I, you or anyone else can do, it does not change truth. It does not make one a good or bad person, thats another issue. Nor does being a good or bad person change truth. Truth is a constant, like gravity it is not susceptible to change by mans actions. You can have a good person speaking truth or a bad person speaking truth,a dog could speak truth if he could talk.......
Link to comment
Share on other sites
justloafing
Well then I guess from the way you are saying this, the devil is okay because he speaks truth too.
I guess it is okay to speak some truth no matter what the motive is? Yeah I know truth is truth but when spoken with a forked tounge that is okay with you too.
Edited by justloafingLink to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
WhiteDove, I've asked you this before and you ignored me...and so I'm going to ask it again...and maybe you will answer it.
Why is all that stuff about how a person handling holy scripture should behave him/herself even in the bible?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
That's an interesting point.
Then is it possible we can be righteous and unrighteous at the same time?
I think so. But I think we are talking about two kinds of righteousness.
What we are in Christ Jesus, the new man, God imputing unto us, making us righteous, no matter what we do in the flesh, is one kind of righteousness. It is the new man, the new creation, righteous, because of what Christ did for us. It is our legal position in Christ.
But then we are unrighteous when we sin. Our flesh, which is carnal, is unrighteous or at least prone to it, because we are carnal. God promises to cleanse us when we confess our sin.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
OM! You've got it!!!! :D :D :D
What we are given at the time of our new birth is not, shall we say, 'for this world'. It is held for us against that day.
Everything up until that day is a mess of unrighteousness that takes constant vigilance, constant care to manage, to kill off (as in 'crucified with Christ').
And the only way...that I have seen...the bible shows us as to how anybody knows if we or anybody else is pressing towards that high mark is the fruit of the spirit.
It is this fruit that helps us know the difference between the sheep and the wolves...and a whole lot of other things...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
See there is where you error, you assume things I did not say. I never said that speaking truth made anyone ok or that it did not. I said when and where truth is spoken it remains true despite, independent of, regardless of any of man's actions. If you change it you do not have truth. I know you get this, the very fact that you admit that the devil speaks truth tells you that it must be possible to speak truth and not have moral values change it. I also never said that just because a source of truth exists that, one would necessarily want to use that source. That said it still does not make what they said untrue.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Actually Cool I did not ignore you I answered your question on the PFAL thread at.......
Mar 24 2006, 07:35 AM Post #133
QUOTE(CoolWaters @ Mar 24 2006, 06:29 AM)
So, WD, why does the bible make such a big deal about character, then? Especially the character of those who have/take authority over God's people?
Because it is what we should strive for in our life. BUT it does not define truth as Oak recognized, it is a seperate issue.
I never said character was not an issue to consider but regardless of how good or bad that may be it does not change or alter that which is true. For instance when in PFAL VPW shared this truth from
Isaiah 49:16
Behold, I have graven you on the palms of my hands; your walls are continually before me.
He wrote God is trying to illustrate how much He Cares for us by saying "Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hand." He is saying that he has taken a most delicate,a most sensitive part of His being,and there he has tattooed our names. In reality He is saying, " I love so much I don't want my love to be hidden underneath the garments, to be covered so that it can not be seen"......
Whatever VPW did or did not do does not change the truth of this and other truths, his morals do not affect truth. You can accept that which is true independent of his actions.
Edited by WhiteDoveLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Acts 16:16-18. (KJV)
"And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a
spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying:
The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of
the most high God, which show unto us the way of salvation.
And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit,
I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out
the same hour."
====
Luke 4:9-11. (KJV)
"And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple,
and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence:
For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee:
And in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot
against a stone."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
justloafing
As you would note. I did say truth was truth. Why do you give the credit to vp for speaking the truth and hold him in reverence?. Why not just quote the bible since that is the ultimate truth?
Do you think he did anything wrong wd? If so can you list what he taught that was wrong or the things he did wrong? If half the things that I have read about how he wronged people are true. I think almost if not all of them are true. If someone is a liar and a known liar. Why should we believe anything that came out of vp's mouth?
WD, yes truth is truth but lets give credit where credit is due and it is not from vp. There are many other places to look for the truth. Look at what he did with the truth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolchef1248 @adelphia.net
cukoo have completly lost it
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
OK, White Dove, I found your 'answer'...and I didn't know it was an answer...'cause it came across as flippant and more akin something you said to make your point...and it didn't include any explanation.
I'm going to say something I've been hesitant to say because you tend to stop reading once it is said...but here goes anyway...
On the face of things, no, truth is not made 'untruth' by the character of who is speaking.
BUT (now please keep reading...OK?...it makes for a better conversation, imo)...
Truth is made into a lie by the character of who is speaking.
Hold on before you stop reading and fly into a rebuttal...OK?
The truth is made into a lie by weaving it with lies, by changing the focus of the truth to the lie, by using the truth to perpetrate and perpetuate a lie, by...and you should be familiar with this concept...adding a word, changing a word, deleting a word, etc.
So that what you have in the end is no longer the truth, but a pack of lies made somewhat believable with a smattering of half-truths here and there.
And the result is always death...of some sort.
Which is the fruit of pfal.
Which means that, because of his character, vpw turned the truth into a lie.
His fruit proves that out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.