T-Bone

Thanks for the reminder, Rocky! I remember that bad-a$$ from your post on another thread …You know, instead of the overused I’ma get medieval on you’re a$$ …maybe we could coin a new warning I’ma get honey badger on you

The Bible, in contrast, teaches that God's will determines the answer to our prayers: God, as a loving heavenly Father, gives us what is best for us, and only he is capable of determining that. Countless faithful Christians have prayed for healing from illness or disability yet remain unhealed. On the other hand, many Word of Faith preachers who claim healing is only a prayer away wear eyeglasses and go to the dentist and doctor. This error is dangerous because it leads followers to a false understanding of God's sovereign nature and a faith that is unstable. When our faith is not built on the solid foundation of God's truth it will easily crumble and fail. Error #2: God's Favor Results in Riches Financial abundance is a common thread among Word of Faith preachers, causing some to call this the "prosperity gospel" or "health and wealth gospel." Supporters claim that God is eager to shower worshipers with money, promotions, large homes, and new cars, citing such verses as Malachi 3:10: But the Bible abounds with passages that warn of pursuing money instead of God, such as 1 Timothy 6:9-11: Hebrews 13:5 cautions us not to always be wanting more and more: Wealth is not a sign of favor from God. Many drug dealers, corrupt businessmen, and pornographers are wealthy. Conversely, millions of hardworking, honest Christians are poor. This error is dangerous because it leads followers into a life of self-centered and selfish pursuits, disillusionment with God, and at worst, the sin of idolatry. Error #3: Humans Are Little Gods Human beings are created in the image of God and are "little gods," claim some Word of Faith leaders. They imply that people are capable of controlling a "faith force" and have the power to bring their desires into being. They cite John 10:34 as their proof text: This Word of Faith teaching is blatant idolatry. Jesus Christ was quoting Psalm 82, which referred to judges as "gods"; Jesus was stating that he was above judges as the Son of God. Christians believe there is one God only, in three Persons. Believers are indwelt by the Holy Spirit but are not little gods. God is a creator; humans are his creations. To attribute any type of divine power to humans is unbiblical. Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of the Word of Faith movement is its power to deceive and entice people away from biblical truth. Since the days of the Garden of Eden, Satan has been effectively twisting the truth as a weapon against God's people. The believer's best defense against this cunning enemy is to know the truth through diligent and consistent Bible study. WordWolf, thanks for posting all that stuff! good info to have on hand Charity, I have a related incident of two cults passing in the night…actually it was daytime . In the early 80s I was working for a security company that won the bid to install a security system in Copeland’s recording studio, located at their 33-acre property. Kenneth Copeland Ministries is located in Fort Worth, Texas, on a 33-acre (13 ha) property valued in 2008 at $554,160 (equivalent to $697,454 in 2021) by Tarrant Appraisal District. The site includes the Eagle Mountain International Church, television and radio production facilities, warehouse and distribution facilities, residences for the Copeland family, and Kenneth Copeland Airport. From: Kenneth Copeland - Wikipedia Anyway…here’s a little background – which I now feel is odd and creepy in so many ways…By this time I was already very active in TWI, running a fellowship, assisting in running classes, in a TWI-believer band playing at coffee houses that doubled as Public EXs, and helping to promote and coordinate advances. Around this time my wife and I were deciding to go into the Family Corps. I was the lead tech on the Copeland installation. I met with Mr. Copeland several times over the layout and features he wanted and areas he was concerned about. Let me say upfront he was very personable and seemed approachable – not only observing my own interactions but with those of his staff. He didn’t seem to give off any weird vibe to me – not like wierwille or LCM who I always felt carried themselves with an air of royalty. Anyway, he gave our installation crew the grand tour of the recording studio and seemed to know what he was talking about when he explained every detail, right down to the dedicated circuits with an isolated ground for recording gear, amplifiers and musical instruments. Wiring up all the security equipment and making tech notes for the panels in the communications room took me about ¾ of the day. Mr. Copeland would pass by occasionally with a friendly check-in, saying how he was always fascinated by electronics and how stuff like that is put together. Before anyone’s imagination runs amuck – let me just say nothing weird happened while I was there. I’ve reflected on that installation a few times and I find it strange and sad to remember where my mind was at and can only imagine what Mr. Copeland thought. Job poaching is a common thing – especially in highly skilled technical services – so as cordial as Mr. Copeland was in showing off his studio I’ve wondered if he had me in mind to work there in some technical capacity.... I’m loyal to a fault when it comes to any company I’ve worked for – but I think my attitude of spiritual superiority thinking TWI is the only ministry rightly dividing the Word and company allegiance may have been double insulating – don’t know for sure but that may have come off like giving him the cold shoulder to his warm welcome....I'll never know..I just like sharing my stories of when cults collide - I've shared before about witnessing to a Moonie when I was a WOW...what a small world. what are the odds? How ironic for me in my cult thinking I was better off than following his cult…what a precarious way to determine if some group is a cult, by seeing how they stack up to ‘my’ biblical research, teaching and fellowship ministry of TWI.

thanks OldSkool, I really appreciate that !

and some who are misled are looking forward to the Raptor before the tribulation period. Don't know if I've punctuated that correctly. Maybe it means some who are misled are looking forward to the Raptor before the tribulation. ...like it's not debatable...maybe should use an exclamation point instead...ah heck shingles doesn't care...raptors don't give a damn.

This is one of Mike’s classic moves. I think it’s so funny how Mike complains about me and WordWolf making long posts – yet he will indulge in long word salads of nonsensical proportions with an apparent trollish delight – which I suppose he hopes it will confuse Grease Spotters and force them to capitulate on some off-the-wall point of his. He’s done this innumerable times – most recently on the Jump to Concussions, The Absent Christ?, and NT Canon threads. I think this is one of his favorite tactics – it’s the conversational equivalent of the quick-change money scam. In an earlier post > here I made reference to the 1973 film Paper Moon During the Great Depression, a con man finds himself saddled with a young girl who may or may not be his daughter, and the two forge an unlikely partnership…My post related their con of delivering Bibles to still-grieving widows – under the pretext that their recently deceased husband ordered it for them…Another con they used several times in the film was the quick-change scam. This con is alive and well to this day – here is an October 2018 article describing the con: the mechanics of the scam An example of a quick-change con typically begins with paying for a small item with a large bill, such as buying a beverage costing $1.20 with a $100 bill. While the cashier is counting the change, the con distracts the cashier by chatting about a random subject. Then, the con changes his mind and asks to pay for the item with a smaller bill. He hands the cashier a $5 bill and asks for the $100 bill back. The cashier forgets that he's already made change for the $100 and hands the original $100 bill back to the con artist. He then makes change for the $5 bill. The thief pockets the $98.20 in change from the first transaction as well as the $3.80 in change from the second transaction. He has paid for the beverage two times but only used the store's money. From: How to Spot Quick-Change Scams | Bizfluent In defense of my long posts first off, I apologize for my verbosity - - I’m still working on paring that down and have difficulty with determining what is non-essential - - if you could see my rough drafts it would look like the editing room of a movie studio – there’s a lot of stuff I cut out sitting on the floor. But for the most part I think they’re pretty straight forward – because I’m not trying to confuse the reader or manipulate the reader – I just want to lay out the evidence for my case. Most of the time the length is due to me citing commentaries, online articles, and research tools. Another reason for the length is that analyzing wierwille ideology often necessitates picking apart the logical fallacies, Scripture twisting and other spurious moves. The mesmerizing ‘beauty’ of wierwille’s con is how innocent and harmless it appears – after all, what’s so terrifying about a class on the Bible? The three standard frame rates for film and TV (broadcast television) are 24, 30, and 60 frames per second. Most people can visually follow frame rates of 24 to 60fps. From: What are Frame per Second Differences among 24fps, 30fps and 60fps - Rene.E Laboratory (reneelab.com) In the casino industry, security departments typically employ HD cameras and network video recorders with Variable Frame Rate, or VFR as it is more commonly known, or Varispeed - high-end professional cameras and NVRs, DVRs, Digital Tape, widely used within the film and security industries for exceptional image quality and manipulative features like slow-motion or speed ramping. Casinos use the slo-mo feature to catch card sharks...For more on frame rate see Frame rate - Wikipedia Similarly, that’s one way to catch wierwille’s con. Slowing it down – it takes time to observe each deviation from common sense, each buildup of logical fallacy, each slight-of-hand trick of Scripture twisting. That's one way to catch quick-change money scammers. As far as Mike's long posts, I couldn't care less...Shingles doesn't care either. When Mike starts cranking out the long posts, I'm aware he usually has some scam going to confuse and wear down Grease Spotters probably hoping someone will 'surrender' to his nonsense. that's all for now, folks

Mike, you make this too hard. It's not. The law of believing taught in PFAL is utter nonsense! there's nothing to absorb and understand - it's magical thinking dressed up to sound like Christian faith. You need to come clean on specific instances of success with "understanding the Bible's teaching on believing via the class, and in (2) applying it to my life." BUT - save your typing fingers - cuz you've lost all credibility with me...If we're going to use anecdotal evidence I've got more experiences to prove PFAL was a total waste of time and full of nonsense to have any practical value. Unlike you - I will be honest - I'm not trying to sell PFAL. Mike, you're parroting the same fanatical bull$hit that wierwille promoted in the class. "It’s the Word, even if it never comes to pass" - what does that even mean? The Bible is the redemptive story of God sending His Son Jesus Christ into the world to save schmoes like you and me! That's already come to pass! Jesus Christ said He will be with us always! What didn't come to pass? What the hell are you waiting to come to pass? Mike, what the hell are you doing?!?! You're definitely backpedaling, moving the goal posts, trying to negotiate over nonsense, and doing a bunch of double-talk. I'm not lowering my normal common-sense standards to find common ground with you. I'm calling bull$hit! here's a quick def. of hyperbole from my first hit online: exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally: "he vowed revenge with oaths and hyperboles" · "you can't accuse us of hyperbole" SIMILAR: exaggeration overstatement magnification amplification embroidery embellishment overplaying excess overkill In other words, YOU MIKE have just admitted PFAL isn't about the Bible or truth or facts. PFAL is hype about PFAL...just like the secret decoder ring message in The Christmas Story film "drink more Ovaltine"...take PFAL again and again and again and again. it's no surprise you are stubborn and persistent in sticking to your nonsense. Oh my God! The only great enigma is how your mind can confuse the hell out of itself. You're a real piece of work, Mike. okay - right here you're showing your contradictory ideology. For a guy who claims to be scientific minded and familiar with atom smashing - you now vacillate over wierwille's "the Word fits with a mathematical exactness and scientific precision." Shame on you Mike. Do you keep track of the things you've said over the years? Your latest tact is to quibble and fudge over what wierwille has clearly stated in his works. He didn't use hyperboles to teach the law of believing or the inerrant Bible. He said what he meant and meant what he said...I bet you're probably the only grad to believe otherwise. You have every right to believe what you want about wierwille and PFAL. But don't try to sell me on your pi$$-a$$ poor sub-standard intellectual criteria. Go sell stupid somewhere else. you mean what shyster wierwille said resonated with you. uh oh cult-leaders create their own jargon and misconceptions...grads become cult-followers when they absorb the cult-leader's jargon and misconceptions. Change of topic: Mike, you need to look into "rightly dividing the word of truth" in II Timothy 2:15. I've shared on this elsewhere - but YOU need to do the homework YOURSELF. It generally speaks to correctly handling the word of truth so others may see the clear and straight path of walking in a Jesus Christ honoring lifestyle...and it definitely shouldn't be applied to "rightly dividing" PFAL...if anything needs 'rightly dividing'- part of my mission on Grease Spot Cafe is to correct the bull$hit taught in PFAL so others - if they choose to be honest with God and want to free themselves of toxic doctrine - may see the clear and straight path of walking in a Jesus Christ honoring lifestyle - instead of following a pseudo-Christian cult-leader and high priest impersonator like wierwille. Geez Mike, TWI is still pulling the wool over your eyes. They continue to be a pseudo-Christian harmful and controlling cult. naw - it's just a new tactic to be evasive enough with the hyperbole crap - you're overselling the bull$hit - no one is interested - move on, please well, obviously you can't explain $hit - because the Bible doesn't interpret itself - you've set up stubborn mental roadblocks in your head - for whatever reason - so you can cling to wierwille's foolish concepts. Get over Mike - bite the bullet - get over your pride...adoration of wierwille / PFAL or whatever the stubborn mental roadblocks in your head are - and finish Penworks' book! And reflect on the info for a while. Take off the PFAL-filter in your head. Doesn't surprise me. You change more frequently than the weather. In the 17 years of coming to Grease Spot Cafe I've noticed how most people change and outgrow the ideological box TWI had them confined to. I even started a thread about it: Concerning the Bible...confessions of a former fundamentalist - got great input from a lot of Grease Spotters - sharing the new directions in their journey...and folks were honest...no one tried to sell anyone else on their beliefs...it's a very inspirational thread - and love to ruminate on the various worldviews of others...there's so much to learn...so much to consider...no one has it all figured out...and it's nice to talk with others on life's journey. I don't get that from you...I feel like you're always trying to sell me on something.

I think you’re the one having trouble understanding wierwille’s law of believing is absolute bull-$hit. I’m sorry for the long post but I have a good reason for the length. In my opinion the topic of commonplace believing versus religious faith is one of the most obfuscated subjects for seasoned grads of PFAL - and you Mike certainly muddy it up even more! I had to lay some detailed groundwork so readers can unravel the nonsense that wierwille piled on to overcomplicate and mystify 2 simple ideas that even a child could understand - there’s little old you and there’s God Almighty. To expand on those 2 ideas: God is not your puppet. God is not your personal genie in a lamp. Do you need God in your life? I did NOT ask you if you need more material abundance. I did NOT ask you if you want shortcuts or success formulas to fame, fortune, power, or pleasure. What is the attraction of Christianity? All I can say is what appeals to me - Jesus Christ. He gives my life meaning and hope. I tend to be a creep and an a$$-hole. I’m slowly managing to be less of an A$$-hole to my family and others…and therein is meaning and hope. There’s little old me - warts and all - and Jesus Christ loves me anyway - and that inspires me to want to be more like Him. Developing patience, compassion and noble stuff like that is partly under my own power - and there’s times I’ve surprised myself by going the extra mile and got off on it - no sweat! That’s got to be the Holy Spirit….no big whoop - no hype over “manifestations “. PFAL is to the Bible what toxic chemicals are to a pristine mountain stream. wierwille didn’t hold a candle to the Wright Brothers. wierwille was a lazy con artist. Little old humans can accomplish great things all by themselves. One of my favorite books is Ecclesiastes - it nags me with the question “is this all there is?” That’s where faith comes in. I’m not looking for money or power or any of the other sales gimmicks used in PFAL. The class never focused on Jesus Christ. that’s who I really wanted - but wierwille did a bait-and-switch on me. Jesus Christ was in the storefront display window - but the store inventory only had books and classes of wierwille’s pseudo-Christianty magical thinking musings. But now - since I’m a tripped out grad , I’ve got my own personal curriculum - Holy Spirit driven! Interesting thread - and I try not to be stubborn and close minded - like you seem to be… A lot of my beliefs are usually in a state of flux. I’m okay with that. When I got away from the authoritarian parenting style of TWI - I “recovered” and learned to think like an adult…and to be clear my state of flux is not like your constantly changing bull-$hit. I believe in the basic tenets of Christianity - but stuff like speaking in tongues, the Trinity, the rapture - I tentatively go all over the place Growing up - my parents weren’t even like that. I learned the importance of honesty from them. Discernment…judgement is the ability to distinguish truth from lies and fact from fiction. I’m sorry to say Mike that your agenda seems to lack that ability.

Not only backpedaling - but pulling a whole other bull-Shonta built for two out of your …shaving cream stay nice and clean.

oh here it comes…nap time zzzzZZZZZZZZZzzzzzz OldSkool, So_crates, WordWolf, Waysider, Chockfull, Nathan_Jr, and Charity touched on some interesting points. I’d like to add to this part of the discussion on faith / believing / manifestation of faith – some of this I’ve posted elsewhere – but that’s never stopped me from posting it again – bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha. And I’d like to lead with OldSkool starting a thoughtful thread in doctrinal, titled The Law of Believing and he began it with a link to a downloadable paper he wrote on “The Word of Faith”; the following excerpts from OldSkool’s paper were quite riveting: “For anyone unfamiliar with this doctrine, I am talking about The Law of Believing. This belief system is very formulaic and can be stated as “confession of belief yields receipt of confession” or in plain English – What you believe for or expect in this life you receive. The Law of Believing is supposed to be a universal law that works for saint and sinner alike; where positive thoughts bring positive results, and negative thoughts bring negative results… …It was E.W. Kenyon who first presented to the church the idea of 'now faith'; that faith 'is a confession'; that 'what I confess, I possess'; and that we create reality with the words of our mouths - 'Faith's confessions create realities'. Kenyon also taught the basic principles that make Positive Confession possible: that man is a little god 'in God's class and therefore can utilize the same universal forces that God does and which are available to Christian and non-Christian alike.” End of excerpts from OldSkool’s paper ~ ~ ~ ~ I've looked at life from both sides now, from win and lose and still somehow It's life's illu - - oops…sorry that’s the wrong misnomer or wrong plagiarism or something…What I meant to say is I’ve looked at faith / believing / manifestation of faith from both sides: my cultic-mindset viewpoint as a dedicated follower of TWI for 12 years and post-TWI some 37 years and counting of unpacking and reevaluating wierwille’s eclectic spellbinding pseudo-Christian theology. It’s been pointed out many times on Grease Spot Café that wierwille’s law of believing goes by another term for those who prefer not to dignify stubbornly holding onto nonsensical thoughts – it’s called magical thinking. One common definition of magical thinking is “the belief that unrelated events are causally connected despite the absence of any plausible causal link between them, particularly as a result of supernatural effects.” from: Wikipedia - magical thinking . The word “particularly” in that definition expresses a variable – in other words, magical thinking does not ALWAYS involve a belief in the supernatural. In the Power For Abundant Living foundational class the law of believing is described as a power that works for saint and sinner alike - which to me sounds like someone is describing The Force in "Star Wars". Basically, the concept takes God out of the picture. Sometimes people want to argue that God made the law of believing or they try to shoehorn Him into the equation by saying He’s actually the one doing the miracles - which implies God is our puppet. The essence of magical thinking is the disconnect from the real world of cause and effect – which is exactly the opposite of what the scientific method is all about – which is a lot of experimentation and observation - there isn't a whole lot of guesswork involved. ~ ~ ~ ~ TWI heavily promoted the law of believing - the idea that one can influence the outcome of specific events by doing something that has no bearing on the circumstances or similarly that personal thoughts can influence the external world without acting on them. This idea is also common in children…That brings to mind an old Saturday Night Live episode of Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey – if a kid asks where the rain comes from you could tell him or her “God is crying – probably because of something you did.” Referring to it as “the law of believing” is misleading in two ways: Deception # 1: calling it the “law of believing” as if it was an unvarying principle : a general or basic truth on which other truths or theories can be based – such as scientific principles …We speak of the laws of physics that are facts which have been deduced by empirical observations – these are principles – physical laws of matter, energy and the fundamental forces of nature that GOVERN matter and its motion through space and time, along with related concepts such as energy and force. To govern is to exercise continuous sovereign authority over something or someone…Basically, to say that you’re operating the law of believing makes YOU the governing authority. Even if you want to keep up supposedly biblical appearances by mentioning “God”, it still implies God is compelled to accommodate anyone who knows how to use that power. The concept reduces God to functioning like a genie in a lamp who is obligated to do our bidding. In other words, you have more power and authority than God Almighty! Deception #2: calling it the “law of believing” as if it was the ultimate rule: like a binding custom or practice that should be obeyed within a certain territory. This also assumes that anyone who uses the law of believing is deputized as a substitute for God’s authority – in effect you assume you have some of the power and authority of God. In Acts 8 there is an interesting anomaly during the early days of evangelism. Simon a sorcerer who had amazed the people of Samaria was revered as powerful and God-like but when the Gospel came to his city he also believed and was baptized. As we follow the story, it seems Simon was more interested in the great acts of power that accompanied the preaching of Philip, Peter, and John - rather than learning more about the Messiah or allowing Jesus Christ to truly reign as lord over his life. When he offered the apostles money for that power, Peter said to Simon “May your money be destroyed with you for thinking God’s gift can be bought!” Salvation, signs, miracles, and wonders are from God ! They're not something we can dole out - because they are not ours to give - or use as parlor tricks for entertainment or as sales promotions for the Gospel…It’s not something that is distributed to the masses through PFAL classes on DVDs , streaming on YouTube, delivered by Door Dash or carrier pigeon. ~ ~ ~ ~ A concise definition of magical thinking is given in an article by James R. Beck, Ph.D., a licensed clinical psychologist and a professor and the chair of the counseling department at Denver Seminary – in the book Baker Encyclopedia of Psychology and Counseling, 2nd Edition published by Baker Academic , on page 708: "Magical thinking is present when a person views an internal thought as having external significance and power. A thought, although private and unobservable, becomes a substitute for action. The logic of magical thinking says that thoughts are powerful, and therefore thinking certain thoughts will cause various consequences to occur in the outside world. Magical thinking is not confined by normal barriers between thought and actions, between private thinking and public knowledge, between what is internal and what is external. Nor is it limited by the logical connections that normal thinking posits between ideas. The best-known example of magical thinking is the young child who, when angry, will close his or her eyes with the thought of making the disciplining parent disappear. The logic in this childish behavior is: If I can’t see, I can’t be seen. Magical thinking is common and considered normal in young children…Magical thinking is considered pathological when it persists beyond the age of its normal occurrence…Primary process thought patterns, including magical thinking, are thought to dominate the unconscious thought of neurotics…Obsessive-compulsives also indulge in magical thinking when they feel their thoughts can cause harm to others. The defense mechanism of undoing is predicated on magical thoughts, since wishing something makes it so…For example, the child who first hits an adult and then kisses the same person is convinced that the second behavior will undo the first; hence it is magical thinking." End of excerpts ~ ~ ~ ~ Edwin Wallace, IV, M.D. is Professor of Psychiatry and Research Professor of Bioethics and Vice Chairman of the Department of Psychiatry and Health Behavior at the Medical College of Georgia. On page 984 of Dictionary of Pastoral Care and Counseling , Wallace’s article titled PSYCHOANALYSIS AND RELIGION , makes a correlation with magical thinking: The omnipotence of thoughts, a mechanism particularly favored by obsessive-compulsives…is the unconscious presupposition that the wish is equivalent to the deed and therefore that wishing alone can effect changes in one’s environment independently of any realistic or practical action. Freud believed that in the animistic-magical stage of cultural history, human beings ascribed omnipotence to themselves, while in the religious stage they transferred it to a deity and yet retained the idea that they could influence the god, through prayer and ritual, according to their wishes... End of excerpts ~ ~ ~ ~ Magical thinking is a misplaced faith – I’ve heard it said many times in TWI that we have to believe in our believing. I have no problem with the simple faith mentioned in the Bible – a faith that has complete trust in God. And God should be the object of our faith - rather than whatever it is that you’re “believing for” . I think true faith is a trust in God – that He is sovereign and hears our prayers – and answers them as He sees fit – and maybe not always as we expect. Ephesians 3:20 should relieve us of any concerns that God is limited by our believing – for He is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all that we could ask or think! The sovereignty of God is a staggering concept to try and fathom. There is no other being that can overpower God – and yet He created beings like angels and humans with the power of self-determination. Even though God is superior He does not cling to His right to exert absolute control over His created beings but gives them room to flourish. Maybe in some ways it is like a divine/human partnership. I think that is what faith is about – a divine/human collaboration. We trust in God, we rely on Him to orchestrate how things play out - according to His purpose. 26 In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans. 27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God. 28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who i have been called according to his purpose. 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters…Romans 8:26 - 29 It says God orchestrates all things for the good of those who love Him. It doesn’t say God works everything thing out for the convenience of those who love Him. It doesn't say God always gives us what we want or ask for - but God always answers our prayers in regarding what's best for us. This is looking at the bigger picture of your life. God orchestrates – He arranges or directs all the elements of a situation to produce a desired effect – which is to be conformed to the image of his Son (verse 29). There’s going to be ups and downs…successes and failures…the Christian lifestyle is just like any other lifelong endeavor – there’s a learning curve . While in TWI I was misled to think this section was talking about speaking in tongues, and I could ‘operate’ that manifestation being confident that it was perfect intercession always in harmony with God’s wishes, and thus making God work for me. That is all wrong. The first thing to notice is the Spirit himself intercedes for us (verse 26). wierwille taught a misconception of God is spirit and can only give what He is, which is spirit – thus you have your own little spirit – like a car battery to power all nine manifestations. Wrong! That is flat out interpolation on wierwille’s part – and shame on me for ignoring The Holy Spirit as the one who intercedes for me…furthermore it can’t be about speaking in tongues - Verse 26 also says wordless groans. Tain’t no words in thare, pawdna…don’t balk at what I’m saying! Take off the PFAL-filter and reread verse 26 again...It's not talking about your words or your little old 'spirit' (FYI "spirit" and "soul" are often used interchangeably in the Bible) - it's The Holy Spirit! ~ ~ ~ ~ The fact that “the law of believing” caught on so easily in TWI as well as some other health and wealth “ministries” makes me think the idea wasn’t totally foreign to our minds…There are some similarities between commonplace believing and religious faith. Please excuse my clunky terms to differentiate between the two – just using those terms to clarify the distinction. Commonplace believing is something familiar to many – probably since the beginning of the human race. To accomplish something, one must believe in themselves that they can do it. In a similar vein is that “can-do attitude” - a belief that one can tackle whatever comes their way – and a willingness to do it. Think of all the times in your life that you had a conviction that something could be done once you’ve set your mind to it. I think it’s more than just mere optimism. It’s a belief combined with a motivation to work on accomplishing the goal or completing the task. It doesn’t mean we will accomplish it immediately. We usually assume that if we stay committed to a REALISTIC goal – by giving it the appropriate time, energy, and effort – we should attain it. Think about what it takes to learn to ride a bike, learn to play a musical instrument, learn another language, or learn a skill set for a totally new job. Believing is a normal everyday function of our minds – if it wasn’t, we would accomplish very little. In the PFAL class the law of believing is stated as an equation - believing equals receiving. It is presented as a mathematical or logical sounding statement – that seems to hold promise…some may see it as an effective equivalency formula for success. But the more I thought about it - it seems like an incomplete formula. It speaks of a relationship between believing and receiving – but it does not specify HOW the two are connected or WHY they have the same value. It seems like there’s something missing. I find myself asking “believing WHAT equals receiving WHAT?” Many people are familiar with Einstein's formula E=mc2 which describes the relationship between mass and energy. It expresses the fact that mass and energy have enough commonality that it gives them a transposable feature. Energy and matter are two sides of the same coin. E=mc2 means that, from the standpoint of physics, energy and mass are interchangeable. It follows that mass and energy are both but different manifestations of the same thing. In the equation E is equal to mc2, in which energy is put equal to mass, multiplied by the square of the velocity of light, showed that very small amounts of mass may be converted into a very large amount of energy and vice versa. One cannot leave out or alter any of the parameters and still have a viable formula. For simple examples of matter and energy being interchangeable, think about what happens when one starts an internal combustion engine like in a 1964 Dodge Coupe. Turning the ignition key completes a small circuit to the car battery, the material (matter) in the car battery uses a chemical reaction to release electrical energy to the starter solenoid. The solenoid ramps up the power to activate the small starter motor to engage the flywheel and rotates the crankshaft which moves the pistons at enough speed in the cylinders so that it sucks fuel and air (matter) into the cylinders and compresses it. Inside the cylinders the expansion of the high-temperature and high-pressure gases are timed to combust by sparkplugs – the energy released applies direct force to the pistons, which move the crankshaft to propel the vehicle. Again, take note of the conversion of matter into energy - gasoline and oxygen are transformed into thermal energy in the cylinders which in turn becomes mechanical energy – moving the pistons and ultimately moving the car. All these operations require specific parameters - measurable factors that set the condition for proper operation. One doesn’t need to be a physicist and understand E=mc2 or even an ace mechanic to drive a car. But to ensure continued use of the 1964 Dodge Coupe one must consider the specific requirements listed by the manufacturer. What if I thought “fuel is fuel” and decide to put diesel fuel in this gasoline powered car? Though they are both derived from crude oil - gasoline and diesel have different physical properties. Gasoline is much thinner. Diesel fuel has a thicker state of fluidity, almost like a lightweight oil. These physical differences come into play when diesel fuel attempts to make its way through a gasoline vehicle's fuel system and engine components. Since diesel fuel is thicker and denser than gasoline, the fuel pump will struggle to move the diesel mixture through the system. Also, diesel fuel will not be able to easily pass through the fuel filter. Instead, it will clog up the fuel filter. And whatever amount of diesel that makes its way to the engine will clog the fuel injectors, making them inoperable. This will result in the engine gumming up and seizing. The point is if you deviate from the specifications of an internal combustion engine, you may risk losing functionality. Believing diesel fuel is just as good as gasoline for powering a 1964 Dodge Coupe does NOT make it so. Believing does NOT equal receiving. Another thing that bugs me about the diminutive formula of believing equals receiving is that “receiving” sounds so passive. I get the idea all I need to do is be prepared to catch whatever it is that should come my way. How about we revise it to - “believing equals achieving”. Now it doesn’t sound like I’m so lazy or have a sense of entitlement – but rather conveys the idea that if one is armed with the right attitude one can successfully accomplish something…notice also the catchy phrase is starting to sound like an abbreviated version of the success formula attributed to Napoleon Hill: what the mind of man can conceive and believe he can achieve. I wouldn’t be surprised if wierwille got it from Napoleon Hill. But regardless of that – I think there is something to Hill’s formula – even though it still seems to lack a certain specificity for a reality check…Reality check – what’s that? That’s something which clarifies or serves as a reminder to correct misconceptions and check tangible reference points…it never hurts to remind ourselves of how things actually work in the real world. It’s not like Hill invented commonplace believing any more than Einstein invented the flexibility of matter and energy. They’ve just articulated how certain things work. If I imagine I could fly (unaided by anything) – just like the comic book character Superman – and act on that belief, by jumping from the top of a 102-story building – do you think I will achieve flight just like Superman? Of course not! But there have been some who imagined flying was possible with some technical assistance – like the Wright Brothers. They did some exploring to find out the state of aeronautical knowledge of their time. They read about the works of others and corresponded with some concerning their own ideas. They recognized that control of the flying aircraft would be the most crucial problem to solve. The Wright Brothers spent a great deal of time observing birds in flight. They noticed that birds soared into the wind and that the air flowing over the curved surface of their wings created lift. Birds change the shape of their wings to turn and maneuver. They conducted parametric studies with nearly 200 different miniature metal wing foils in their wind tunnel. Based on this data they determined the most efficient shape or configuration to create the most lift with the least drag. Compiling their efforts and revisiting Napoleon Hill’s “success formula” by plugging in and expanding upon what the Wright Brothers did we find that: 1. The Wright Brothers conceived…imagined…planned…they developed and kept revising an action plan designed to guide their way to accomplishing their goals. 2. and believed…they acted on their plan …through research, observation, and experimentation (the scientific method). 3. they achieved - in 1903 the Wright brothers achieved the first powered, sustained, and controlled airplane flight; they surpassed their own milestone two years later when they built and flew the first fully practical airplane. ~ ~ ~ ~ What is the difference between commonplace believing and religious faith? While there are similarities, I think the biggest distinction is that faith is about transcending the self – in other words, moving beyond a fixation of the self and becoming preoccupied with another person – God! In the previous example - the “believing” of the Wright Brothers was a state of mind through which their aims, desires, plans, and purposes were translated into their physical equivalence – giving birth to something others could see and use – a flying machine. All those “self” things were their greatest assets – self-control, self-reliance, self-determination, self-confidence, etc. - for that embraces everything that they control: mind and body. It is self-empowered. In religious faith we become God-oriented – concerns revolve around the character of God, what He does, His strength, His love, and what pleases Him. It relies on God’s power. An exhaustive biblical definition of faith is beyond the scope of my post – but I will touch briefly on the variety of usages in the Bible: there are simple acts of faith, the abiding disposition or habit of faith that distinguishes one as a believer, the subjective stance – the faith by which one believes, the content or object of faith which is the faith that is believed, and in I Corinthians 12:9 there’s a special faith which my Biblical Theology Study Bible says is “trusting God with an inexplicable confidence in a specific situation for a specific outcome for which there is no divine promise.” When in faith we commit ourselves to trust in God, we are basically putting everything in God’s hands. Earlier I got into the commonplace believing of the Wright Brothers – they did all the work to achieve controlled flight. When we exercise our faith – we trust that someone else – God - will do the work for us – like a passenger on a modern-day commercial airline we can kick back and just enjoy the flight. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology says of “faith” that it’s the Greek verb pisteuo and “…is a key word in the New Testament being the term regularly used to denote the many-sided religious relationship into which the gospel calls men and women – that of trust in God through Christ…the most common, characteristic, and original NT usage…conveying the thought of a movement of trust going out to, and laying hold of, the object of confidence…The nature of faith, according to the NT, is to live by the truth it receives… …The frequency with which the epistles depict faith as knowing, believing, and obeying “the truth” (Titus 1:1; II Thess. 2:13; I Pet. 1:22, etc.) show that the authors regarded orthodoxy as faith’s fundamental ingredient (cf. Gal. 1:8-9)…The NT regards the self-despairing hope, world-renouncing obedience, and heroic tenacity by which OT believers manifested their faith as a pattern which Christians must reproduce (Rom. 4:11-25; Heb. 10:39 – 12:2)…The Reformers restored biblical perspectives by insisting that faith is more than orthodoxy – not fides merely, but fiducia, personal trust and confidence in God’s mercy through Christ… …that it is not a meritorious work, one facet of human righteousness, nut rather an appropriating instrument, an empty hand outstretched to receive the free gift of God’s righteousness in Christ…that faith is God-given, and is itself the animating principle from which love and good works spontaneously spring; and that communion with God means, not an exotic rapture of mystical ecstasy, but just faith’s everyday commerce with the Savior.” ~ ~ ~ ~ Here’s a few other eye-opening books and articles if you’re interested in understanding the relationship of faith and reason: Beyond Seduction: A Return to Biblical Christianity by Dave Hunt The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism by Timothy Keller Intellectuals Don't Need God and Other Modern Myths by Alister McGrath Love Your God with All Your Mind: The Role of Reason in the Life of the Soul by JP Moreland Smart Faith: Loving Your God with All Your Mind by JP Moreland & Mark Matlock The Trivialization of God: The Dangerous Illusion of a Manageable Deity by Donald McCullough Faith & reason: Searching for a rational faith by Ronald Nash Faith And Rationality: Reason and Belief in God, editors Alvin Plantinga & Nicholas Wolterstorff Knowledge and Christian Belief by Alvin Plantinga Psychology Today: Faith and Reason - Is faith a virtue? By Massimo Pigliucci Psychology Today: Faith and Reason: They Don't Need to Conflict by Thomas G. Plante Psychology Today: Why Faith Is Important by Arthur Dobrin Psychology Today: Faith: What Is It and Who Has It? By Jeremy E. Sherman Faith and Reason – Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy That’s all for now, folks I'm all through...nap time is over

Great article, Bolshevik ! Thanks - some really cool & relevant info! excerpts from the article: Champions of the Lost Cause Obsession, defiance, grit: The line between indomitable genius and hopeless holdout is blurred. We all have the capacity to chase unlikely dreams, but for some people, the pursuit becomes its own reward. By Kat McGowan... ...In truth, it's not easy to predict who will turn out to be a visionary and who a crank, says psychologist Angela Duckworth of the University of Pennsylvania, who studies the traits that lead to success. Geniuses and catastrophic failures share many of the same characteristics, including determination, intense concentration, passion, and a disregard for conventional wisdom. "And both are willing to persist when everyone else thinks it's a ridiculously low-probability idea," she adds. Sometimes, the passion is fueled by pathological stubbornness or tragic obsession. A man who stands up to an exploding mountain is obviously taking grit a little too far. Other people get caught in narrow spirals of compulsion: Alcoholics and gamblers, for example, become fixed on self-destruction. Obsessive-compulsives and anorexics drive themselves relentlessly toward their idea of perfection—an impossible goal.... ...Researchers who study the physiology of love distinguish between the first, passionate stages and the later, more settled and companionable forms of love, and they find that the first phases of love—the same ones that come on line during a crush—really do addle the brain. Early-stage love activates many of the same regions as do addictive drugs. Serotonin activity changes, fueling anxiety ("he didn't call me today!") and obsession ("I can't get her out of my mind!"). People in the first stages of love may have serotonin levels that are estimated to be as low as those with unmedicated obsessive-compulsive disorder. Cortisol, the stress-related hormone that is activated to help the body prepare for challenges, also increases, finds Italian researcher Donatella Marazziti of the University of Pisa. Forming new bonds is stressful, and in a circular effect, these moderate levels of stress also drive attachment. Once formed, the attachment then eases the stress and anxiety. Intense, passionate new love mellows and ripens into comfortable partnership. But that transition never happens for the obsessive suitor, who is denied the soothing effects of mature affection. Trapped in a neurochemical loop that reinforces the obsessive behavior, the lover is increasingly miserable and devoted to his or her goal. This is the scenario of "frustration attraction," as described by the anthropologist Helen Fisher of Rutgers University. High levels of dopamine urge all lovers toward their expected reward: connection with the beloved. But for unrequited lovers, dopamine-producing neurons continue their elevated activity. Expectation rises, and the lover redoubles his efforts. For a few people—perhaps those who already have low serotonin—this neurochemical barrage turns ugly: Low serotonin is associated with impulsive violence. Many people have suffered from unrequited love, but only a few resort to stalking. The most persistent suitors may get stuck in a kind of chemical overdrive where others collapse into defeat and despair, suggests Fisher collaborator Lucy Brown, a neuroscientist at the Albert Einstein School of Medicine.

More interesting stuff Bolshevik! Thanks! Your post got me thinking sideways - so I Googled “fear of losing yourself in a relationship” and all the hits I got were about a one-to-one relationship – i.e., couples…But your post got my processor going toward a wider application – comparing involvement in unhealthy groups (harmful and controlling cults, toxic work environments, etc.) with participation in healthy groups (any group that is beneficial to all - no one is exploited or subjugated )… ...I found this one article in Psychology Today, How We Lose Ourselves in Relationships - We can lose ourselves in the name of love or peace, but pay the highest price - posted October 3, 2020 by Darlene Lancer, JD, MFT, licensed marriage and family therapist and an expert and author on relationships and codependency… I found some of this stuff resonates with my cult experience – when Lancer speaks of romance, I thought of the love-bombing and honeymoon phase of my early years with TWI…and how I sacrificed my personal and professional goals for TWI’s priorities…and when she gets into healthy relationships, boundaries are stated openly, without hinting, manipulation, or assuming our partner will read our mind. Neither security nor autonomy is threatened by closeness…anyway I thought it was a good article – here are some excerpts from it – enjoy: Whether you feel lost in a relationship or are afraid to start one, we can easily sacrifice our individuality in relationships with narcissists and abusers. They usually insist on dominating, that their needs come first and that they are right. Women especially tend to lose themselves in relationships due to cultural conditioning. In fact, even in good relationships, we may do this out of love, not fear. We compromise ourselves slowly often in imperceptible ways, unaware that losing our Self risks our greatest despair. After a breakup, it’s devastating, because we are lost. If we stay, we risk becoming empty shells, feeling powerless and anxious or depressed. Often there are power struggles, characterized by repeated, unresolved arguments, either about a single recurring issue or numerous trivial things. Many of them boil down to the question of who has control, whose needs will be met, or how intimate they will be… How We Lose Ourselves We lose ourselves incrementally in small ways. It can start with romance, when it’s normal to want to please our loved one and spend much of our time together. However, emotionally mature adults don’t drop their activities, give up their lives (they have a life), or overlook improper behavior of their partner, despite strong physical attraction. Neither are they desperate to have or maintain a relationship… Stages of Losing Ourselves Many people do fine on their own, but once in a relationship, they start losing their autonomy, not make waves, and be with and please their partner. When there is “chemistry,” they overlook negative indicators that might be a warning not to get involved. Feel-good chemicals in our brain start to alleviate our emptiness, so that we want more of that drug. We don’t want to lose these happy feelings. If we're unhappy being alone, we're more vulnerable to hold on. Hence, we become increasingly preoccupied with and dependent upon our loved ones. We see less of our friends and may drop our routine to spend time together. For women more than men, often our work and professional goals take second place to the relationship. The desire to please can lead to obsession. Our need for connection can create denial about our partner’s behavior and makes us doubt our own perceptions. Boundaries become blurred so that we start to accept our partner's point of view. If our partner is abusive, our self-doubt grows and our self-esteem shrinks. We don’t say “no” or set limits on what we’re willing to do or what we’re willing to accept from our partner. Not only that, but confusion also arises between what our partner feels and our own feelings. We feel responsible for their feelings, too, especially if we're being blamed. If he’s sad, then I’m sad, too–as the Barry Manilow song goes. If she’s disappointed or angry, it must be my fault… …Healthy Relationships Healthy relationships are interdependent. There is give and take, respect for each other’s needs and feelings, and are able to settle conflict through authentic communication. Decisions and problem-solving are collaborative. Assertiveness is key. Negotiations are not a zero-sum game. Boundaries are expressed directly, without hinting, manipulation, or assuming our partner will read our mind. Neither security nor autonomy is threatened by closeness. Vulnerability actually makes us stronger, not weaker. In fact, we can be more intimate and vulnerable when our autonomy and boundaries are intact and respected. Both partners feel secure. They want to maintain their relationship and allow for each other’s separateness and independence, and aren’t threatened by their partner’s autonomy. Thus the relationship supports our independence and gives us more courage to explore our talents and growth. Recovery Fortunately, we can recover our lost self. We can escape a narcissist-codependent trap. First, stop focusing on changing your partner. Change begins within. We can waste years lost in this denial. Yet, when we change, often our partner changes in response to our new behavior. Either way, we will feel better and stronger because we've grown in self-respect… Excerpts from : How We Lose Ourselves in Relationships | Psychology Today

Very insightful Bolshevik! The ultimate Egocentrism experience.

What a shame. What a hopeless view of humanity No deposit no return

How about a reality check! The only reason magic is extremely effective against Superman is because the writers at DC comics allow it.

Following up with some more of Martha Stout’s The Sociopath Next Door: She mentions other psychiatric diagnoses - including narcissism - involve some amount of personal pain or misery for the individuals who suffer from them. Sociopathy stands alone as a “disease” that causes no ‘dis-ease’ for the person who has it. Stout says sociopaths are often quite satisfied with themselves and their lives. Singular in its ability to unnerve even seasoned professionals, the concept of sociopathy comes perilously close to our notions of the soul, of evil versus good - and this association makes the topic difficult to think about clearly. Another thing Stout addresses is the idea that sociopaths may believe they have an advantage. More than one sociopath has implied that conscience is simply a psychological corral for the masses. Most of us have had experiences in which someone unscrupulous has won, and having integrity begins to feel like we are playing the fool. When someone makes a truly unconscionable choice, all we can come up with are explanations that come nowhere near the truth…what is possibly the single most meaningful characteristic that divides the human species- the presence or absence of conscience - we remain effectively oblivious. And even after we have learned the label for it, being devoid of a conscience is impossible for most human beings to imagine - probably no other experience so eludes empathy. We can imagine total blindness (we have all been lost in the dark), clinical depression (we’ve all experienced some great loss). But NOT to care at all about the impact of our actions on society, friends, family - our children - what on earth would that be like? We have no past experiences to inform us - no reference point we can relate to. Absolute guiltlessness defies the imagination. End of my notes from the book

first let’s review what Mike said: Mike said: Do you forget him saying that the law of believing SHOULD work much better for a saint who knows and rightly divides God's Word and promises? ~ ~ ~ ~ Mike posits there ought to be improved functioning of the law of believing for a saint who understands and correctly interprets the Bible. However – I disagreed because I remembered what wierwille said in the blue book The Bible Tells Me So, chapter five, The Law of Believing, on page 44, wierwille says: The law of believing works equally effectively for both the sinner and the saint; however, the believer, because of the spirit from God within him, may bring forth more abundantly. ~ ~ ~ ~ There is NOTHING in wierwille’s statement that suggests “the law of believing SHOULD work much better for a saint who knows and rightly divides God's Word and promises”. Also noteworthy is the fact that neither wierwille nor Mike cite Scripture to back up those speculations…However, strictly from a salesperson’s point of view, Mike’s theory might sucker some young and naïve person into PFAL to reap all the alleged ‘benefits’ from the mind of a plagiarizing pathological liar and deluded person like wierwille. As far as I'm concerned this is all a hot mess anyway - since there is no law of believing

That's a lame excuse! You just shifted your position yet again. A person using confirmation bias would say something like that - and citing yourself - a well-known super-duper fan of wierwille doesn't sell the bull-$hit any better.

That’s not what wierwille said

Thinking more about wierwille’s unscrupulous ways gave me another angle on the thread title - being right or wrong doesn’t matter to a sociopath. In The Sociopath Next Door author Martha Stout Ph.D. talks about other psychiatric diagnoses - including narcissism - involve some amount of personal pain or misery for the individuals who suffer from them. Sociopathy stands alone as a “disease” that causes no ‘dis-ease’ for the person who has it. Stout says sociopaths are often quite satisfied with themselves and their lives. Singular in its ability to unnerve even seasoned professionals, the concept of sociopathy comes perilously close to our notions of the soul, of evil versus good - and this association makes the topic difficult to think about clearly. Another thing Stout addresses is the idea that the sociopaths may believe they have an advantage. More than one sociopath has implied that conscience is simply a psychological corral for the masses. Most of us have had experiences in which someone unscrupulous has won, and having integrity begins to feel like playing the fool. When someone makes a truly unconscionable choice, all we can come up with are explanations that come nowhere near the truth…what is possibly the single most meaningful characteristic that divides the human species- the presence or absence of conscience - we remain effectively oblivious. And even after we have learned the label for it, being devoid of a conscience is impossible for most human beings to imagine - probably no other experience so eludes empathy. We can imagine total blindness (we have all been lost in the dark), clinical depression (we’ve all experienced some great loss). But NOT to care at all about the consequences of our actions on society, friends, family - our children - what on earth would that be like? We have no past experiences to inform us - no reference we can liken it to. Absolute guiltlessness defies the imagination. end of stuff I got from the book - take that you Plagiarist Police - now I don’t feel so guilty for quoting from the book

Window washing - brainwashing, what’s the diff?

Free advertising promotes sales = which ultimately means money to the manufacturer/ seller / provider of service / product. how many PFAL grads knew of the original sources of the material? And of that group - how many then purchased the works of those authors? also of that group - how many realized that wierwille was hiding his plagiarism in plain sight by having them in TWI’s bookstore - or that wierwille was making money at retail prices selling other authors’ work in his “store”. I watched the movie Paper Moon the other day. One of the cons of Moses Pray and his young accomplice Addie was to buy cheap Bibles - check obituaries in little towns ; they had a lettering stamp and would put the widows name on it ; go to the recent widows home to deliver the special Bible the recently deceased had ordered for her…Moses the Bible sales rep does this fake act of grief “so sorry for your loss” schtick and sometimes he would say “well, I would collect the money (price varied on what they figured the mark could afford - maybe $12 - this is during the Depression) but I just can’t now - so here you just keep the Bible since your name is on it “ this would touch the widow and she’d insist on him taking the $12… in one scene young Addie notices the jewelry and nice things in the home of the widow and Addie chimes in and says the Bible cost $25…and the widow paid it and gave Addie another $5 for being so helpful. my point in sharing about the film is to explain in any con there has to be some “investment” of time, money and effort by the perpetrators. wierwille probably got a good deal on books of Bullinger, Kenyon, etc. - especially buying in bulk. and furthermore- also of that group of PFAL grads how many had their mental boundaries moved of what’s right and what’s wrong ? And without realizing they were being fooled? It’s ridiculous to believe someone who is incapable of telling right from wrong and distinguishing truth from lies and fact from fiction ! Absurdity to the Nth degree!

So , three squared ? that would be an ennead - en·ne·ad /ˈenēˌad/ noun RARE a group or set of nine so technically I have all nine all the time

I’m picturing Waysider with one of those Hot-Air Raid Warning helmets blowing the whistle

He claims he was a standup comic for - what- 5 years ? - I can’t imagine a venue actually paying him for his schtick…maybe he didn’t get paid …maybe it was open-Mike night. Ba dum bum dish. I mean if his material and delivery was anything like it is here then I can under - - oh wait a minute…material and delivery - - well I’ll be doggone ! It must be open-Mike night here too…at least this joint doesn’t have a cover charge.

on mentioning the graphic - I have a vague memory of seeing wierwille in a class standing in front of a chart pointing out the obvious- the triangle and saying something like “we do believe in the Trinity - it’s God in Christ in you.”