doojable

Ok, Ok i'll give in I can't seem to find all the things you all are talking about because I lack the patience and the time to go through all the muck and mire but here sre two things I dont' recall seeing: 1. Get needs and wants parallel ( My pet peeve as I will discuss later.) 2. Act. Act on the Word. The man with the withered hand acted on the promise. Granted this is PFAL speak. I believe that there is much more and yet much less to "believing than this. How do you define and formulate a deep heart issue? This all seems rather Pharisee-like to me. While in residence, D^ve B*d^rd said something that made sense. He said that God's ideas were man's ideals. A man might NEED a car but he WANTS a Porsche ( yea, and I want a million dollars and a flat stomach!) Now I realize that Dr said that each man must determine his need in his own heart with the renewed mind ( This came from a quote supplied to me in a PM.) This really sets my teeth on edge. Just how did vpw get it into his RENEWED MIND that he NEEDED and WANTED young Corps girls. You can't justify this from the Word - but yet if a person is so dishonest with himself that he fools himself into believing that he has a real need and that this is a renewed mind effort - well all sorts of sin get justified. Too many holes, not enough GOD. I may not have been as coherent as I can be - I'm in the middle of a really busy time. I probably shouldn't have posted - but ...well - sue me. Oh and Mike - yes ist was a reverend that did all that stuff I mentioned - and more. He was a "favorite son" of sorts to vpw and he had learned well how to get people to doo all the work while he got all the glory and collected the abs he used to buy land and horses for his kids - now tell me THAT was a need! ( Along with the marriages he ruined and the women he defiled and the lies he told.) He learned that behavior and he was allowed to practice it. Previous to leaving twi he had done these things as a limb coordinator - twi just moved him to another state and demoted him to twig leader then branch leader. Sounds like the way priests get moved around... OK I'm done venting for now..I better go take a nap.

"Rent" ???

Um Ckmckeon - your research skills are a bit rusty. When studying a scripture all scripture pertaining to the subject must be evaluated. Even what is considered that of another dispensation is looked at because it gives context. When handling the subject of Jesus Christ and the trinity, vpw himself used scripture from the gospels as well as the epistles. Technically, Rom 10:9,10 don't say "claim God is not three" it says to confess Jesus is Lord and believe God raised him from the dead. If I'm not mistaken (correct me if I'm wrong Mark, ) that doesn't go against any Trinitarian doctrine. Also, a lot of Trinitarians would argue that the only way to claim JC as Lord would be if he WAS God. (Right, Mark?) As to the study of Revelation, well once again vpw himself said that if you're going to pick and choose which parts of the Bible you're going to keep and which you're going to throw out - well eventually you have no Bible at all. Now I have left the teachings of vpw somewhat - but I use these quotes to illustrate that perhaps you don't know what you are defending as well as you think you do. not trying to pick a fight here - or pretend to be a prophetess or anything - just some friendly advice from one who has had time to be 19 at least twice :)

"Movies" or " A Night at the Movies" ? seems like there's not much there

I am in favor of forgiving a person - any person - regardless of whether or not they ask for it. I see the forgiveness as something that releases me and frees me. If the other person repents and/or asks for forgiveness - well then that's a benefit to them. This is how I get to live out grace and mercy - and extend it to others. Now that is not to say that I TRUST a person even though I've forgiven them. Trust has to be earned and the more heinious the offense the harder a person has to work back to trust - forgiven or not. So I forgive but I don't forget - that's God's category he casts the offense as far as the east is form the west. Me, I have to remember the offense: 1so that I don't get fooled again, and 2 because forgiveness can be an ongoing thing. We always think of forgiveness as a final thing - but I think of it in layers. We might forgive stuff then realize that there's more to it - then we have to work through that forgiveness. It's a process. Ex10 - To be fair Jonny wasn't saying that women were going around tepmting these scumbags. He as saying that HE was tempted to give in to that certain someone who tempted HIM. Breathe, breathe... cleansing breath....now release....

My main objection to the "law of believing" way of thinking was tht people began to think that God was just some puppet on a string that they could manipulate by getting needs and wants parallel and invoking the name of Jesus Christ. As I recall, TWI absolutely hated the phrase, "God is in Control." WTH, I am a bit disappointed - your logic has some holes in it - mainly because you have chosen to pick and choose verses while ignoring other verses that do not support your whole idea on the "law of Believing." You have forgotten to include the time when the disciples asked Jesus to "increase their faith." ( same greek word as "grow" in the Book of Acts) That is when Jesus responds that the only believing that is necessary is that of a grain of mustard. ( It's late so I'm going on memory of lots of past word studies Plwase forgive me.) This seems to contradict your "great faith" scenario. Now I am sure that it can be reconciled - but I wish you had at least mentioned it. I do not believe that "great faith" has anything to do with an amount or size. I believe it has to do with faith regardless of how dire the circumstances - especially since many of those Jesus used this term with were not those of Israel. It is so important that we get beyond PFAL and see the word as it is nto just mindlessly regurgitate words that we heard for years and years. Mike, you had that quote from Dr regarding mastering PFAL.. I will repeat again that when I heard that I was one of those that hit the books HARD. I knew each teaching and could teach PFAL with my eyes closed - I studied the written not the tape as I did not have the tapes. I am sure that I am not the only one who did that - yet I am not convinced that Dr had the inside track on truth. By the way... what is a TVT?

Hap - my hubby tells of this scene in a courtroom: A man was in the courtroom with his cowboy hat on. The judge told him to remove it. He says, "Sir, I only remove my hat for God and my Momma." This was of course followed by an order with the threat of contempt of court.....Most judges feel like they are God in their own courtrooms... Whenever someone tells me I "have got to do something" I just reply with, "Says who?" I used to tell my kids that if no one says you can't then you can. The only problem I have is that I have come to hate the metality that states, " its easier to ask forgiveness than permission." It seems to be way to passive aggressive for my tastes and can border on the manipulative. (Not always but sometimes..)

Half a brain is better than no brain at all! Seriously - we use both halves all the time - unless you've had severe brain damage ( being in TWI notwithstanding) Ex10 - my hubby was in the military and he hates to see hats on heads inside any building. I gotta admit i'm not fond of it either. he really gets bent out of shape though. Cooking can be formulaic or fun. I guess as long as it tastes good it really doesn't matter - I do suspect that chefs are initially improvisers tht take their newfound creations and then write down the formula for someone else to follow. Vive La difference!

"The Hall of the Mountain King" by Emerson, Lake and Palmer? (ELP)

I have recently read a bunch of Carson Mc Culler's books. Clock Without Hands, The Heart is a Lonely Hunter, and I am now in the middle of re-reading since High School, Member of the Wedding. She's a great writer and she makes you think. I also like Edith Wharton, CS Lewis, and quite a few science fiction writers. Hubby has read a LOT of Russian authors. (My kids take ballet with two teachers who are from Russia.) Tolstoy (he even actually read the unabridged version of War and Peace. Dostoyevsky and now he is reading Gulag Archipelago by Solzhnetsen.

I met a guy about 13 years ago who was a Messianic jew who had transalted a chunk of Matthew from Aramaic. We told him that we had been involved with TWI. He was familiar with them and the work on the Pes hitta text and was impressed. i dont remember if he was familiar with Lamsa's work though. I believe that those 3 psalms do point to Jesus's life. God did not have to forsake Jesus for him to make that quote. The way I heard it - those 3 psalms were known and sung constantly - like a Beetles tune. The "forsake" quote was about David - but when Jesus started with that line the rest of those songs were "sung" in everyone's minds - and they SAW them living (and dying) before their eyes. Perhaps many of these in the crowd ended up believing in later years.

Especially If we demand the "good" refreshments - not just the water and cookies. hey - how did you guys get to keep your green cards? In my day the cards were collected and used to contact "Babes in the Word - wink wink -)

Ex10 - I bet you're a "right brain" kind of gal married to a "left brain" kind of guy. it's like me and my hubby - although he's learned that I always make the recipe the way it is stated at least once - then I start tweeking and improvising - but then I'm a bit of aamateur gourmet - ( at least I was until my picky kids started whining!) Right brain - improvise, intuition, creativity left brain - recipes, formulas, logic Hey maybe that was what was wrong with TWi - too manyl eft-ies running the show, making formulas for us to live by....

Other than what I've said I have nothing to add. Nice joining this thread tho - Happy praying, Dove! dooj

White Dove - I hear you. Apparently the big deal to others is that they get to move and raise holy hands - and they believe that they are backed up by scripture. My husband is in your court - I'm somewhere in between. For me it is NOT a big deal at all. I would close my eyes during the worship service and pray so I didnt' see all the shennanigans that upset hubby so. OTHO - we no longet attend that church because hubby could not abide by that style of worship. I firmly believe that it is more important THAT one worships God than how he or she worshops God. We used to have mnifestations all the time - I'm not sure that made the worhip experience better - but it was what we did and we were proud to be doing it.. You may not see the point - but there are others that do. ( I don't worship that way so I am not defending that style of worship.)

Dove - just for the record - I usually see raising of hands in worship - and yes I do think that it is a trend - maybe a backlash to the nonemotional trend before it. Actually I see very little of it now as we attend a Baptist church... And wasn't it David who got chided for "dancing naked before the Lord."? My only point is that the feeling must be genuine. It is not a requirement. I think we all do lots of things that aren't necessary - Now the uncontrollable actions - the "taken over by the spirit actions" those are a different story and not a good story in my book...

I feel like I could say the same as you just did but with a different POV. Since Jesus said that he KNEW that at any time he could ask for legions of angels to rescue him - well that still puts him here on a voluntary basis.... As I said I lean towards the POV I've stated - but I toy with both ideas.

:blink:

Mike here are the two sttements that you say are "bad grammar" without the separation. Then I will add comments. The sentences are: 1) "I know the contents of Volume I of Studies in Abundant Living will not only open up more of God's Word for you, but will also uplift you - mentally and physically and spiritually." (2) "Let us put God's Word in our hearts and minds for it alone can give us complete deliverance from the darkness of this world." I might just be dull but I see no bad grammar here. Dr prays for the word to be opened through volume one then prays for the natural results of the Word being opened up: 1. uplifting mentally, spiritually, physically and, 2. the complete deliverance from darkness. I see this as one of Bullingers ABAB structures: A Pray for God's Word to be opened B Result of God's Word - Uplifting... A Invitation to put God's Word in our hearts( The Word that was opened) B Result of God's Word - Deliverance No bad grammar from my point of view. Are you sure that you're not looking for a meaning that isn't there? Ok you guys... Ex10, help me out here - am I clueless, crazy? I simply do not see any bad grammar - and my husband's an English major - I feel pretty comfortable that I understand good grammar.

Mark < I see what you're saying, of course. - But i'm trying to say that Jesus as a man - the only begotten son of God - could go into the crucifixion with the trepidation and fear and reluctance that we read about in the Gospels - even though he KNEW this would be necessary and he knew he would be raised again. i find it very difficult to imagine this same state of mind if Jesus Christ is God. Now I am not so arrogant as to say conclusively that I am right - just that I find it difficult to see things another way...

White Dove, I think the point you make is valid as is Ex10's and Allan's. Jesus didn't say that it was NECESSARY to raise hands when praying - but neither did he say it was wrong. There are Chirstians out there that really look at youlike you're a weirdo if you don't raise hands, genuflect and get all emotional. I went to a church like taht for a couple of years - never felt really comfortable with the outward stuff - but the teaching was great and that's what mattered - the main problem was it was just too far. I did see how after a while the main thing could easily become the emotion - in a sense it felt like it was possible to weigh the spritual experience by the emotion of the service. That I do not feel right about. But there are thos who can raise their hands and they do it out of some deep need to do so. As long as they dont' tell me I HAVE to do it - well vive la difference! Consider that Jesus would not have to say anything about the matter because it is already mentioned in the Old Testament and by not mentioning it he did not change anything -

"Dr had to believe to move his message around the world" Mike - if it was revelation it wasn't his message - it was God's. Are you sure he found it by revelation? I mean he was in the ministry and looking - if you look for something you find it. Putting stuff together doesn't necessarily take revelation. I know cuz I do it all the time - I believe that God guides me to help kids learn to draw - that in no way means that my class on drawing is revelation and should stand as God-breathed scripture. And... About the last "thus saith" quotes - whenever that Word of God is TAUGHT healing results and darkness is cast out - like in Nehemiah. The collateral itself does not have to BE revelation for the healing to be accomplished. Can't this just be a series of quotes that are in effect saying just that? That the book is designed to be uplifting (OK) and that God's Word will cast out darkness ( presumably the Word that is taught in the book) These do not have to be equal statements to be true. The "God's word" that is to be put into our minds is the Word that is taught in the book - not that the Book has become the Word of God. (Reminds me of transsubstantiation-sp? Sorry to Mark if I got this concept wrong.) This seems like circular reasoning to me.....but that is MHO

Mike, Some points I have found in your most recent posts. You wrote: "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." But God insired and supervised SOMEONE ELSE to write these words - the men who wrote them first - Kenyon, Bullinger, Stiles etc. These were the men with this revelation - Dr only repeated the revelation he found (assuming it is revelation) when he wrote all these collaterals. Later, to CM you wrote: "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." While this was true - many of them learned their habit from the men above them - Dr included. Some the things DR taught was reprehensible behaviour. And because he allowed it (this habit of demanding respect not earned) to continue he actually sanctioned the very behaviour you detest so much. Heck Dr rewarded some of these guys with ordination! And then later you wrote: "If Dr taught by revelation then that revelation must be in total harmony with Jesus’ lordship." And suppose he didn't teach by revelation? Suppose he repeated what someone else received by revelation. I know I keep making the same point over and over. But it seems to me that the point needs to be made. It is the weak link in the chain. If I repeat Romans 10:9, 10 to someone and they get born again - was that MY revelation - or me repeating the direction God directed Paul to put in writing? ( Big rhetorical question here) Stiles taught Dr how to speak in tongues - this was I believe Dr's 3rd try. Surely by then he learned what worked and didn't work - that doesn't take revelation. In fact the person who led me into tongues used the exact same technique as Dr - and I used the same words later with friends and later my daughters. Now here was revelation: On the day I ended up SIT-ing I was walking uptown in Manhattan, NYC and I was praying. I silently said to God that I wanted desperately to pray perfectly. Later that evening, after a Branch meeting, One young man came up to me and told me that God just told him I was ready to speak in tongues. Within 15 minutes I was "lo-shanta-ing" with the best of them! Of course there was a little flack because by that time (early "79) the control freak thing had already started and someone said that although they were thrilled for me that they were discouraging people learning to SIT before they took the class. WTF????? This was truly a control and fear driven policy. the thinking was that if a person knew how to SIT they would see no need for the class. Ahem - Paul rejoiced when people learned to SIT! Anyway - you're right we do differ on how often people get revelation - I believe that God wants us to hear from Him and so He speaks to us - in whatever way possible.

Am I out of fellowship? - or will I be M&Aed? ( Tongue placed squarely in cheek) What if I just "tinkle?"

Wait.. Huh? Oh yeah..... where is everybody.