waysider

Certainly. When people ask you simple questions that require simple answers, answer them in an appropriate fashion.

But, what if it's a "Thus said The Lord." statement? There could be a hidden message in there that none of us has seen.

No! You can't give up. What about that session where Wierwille tells us we have to "STAND!" no matter what?

Who knew answering a yes or no question could be so complicated?

WOW! You really HAVE mastered the PFAL material..."Answer a question with a question."

Life is just a bowl of oat bran. You wake up every morning and it's there. Are you all sitting comfybold two square on your botty? Then I'll begin....HERE

Wierwille never claimed it. You're seeing something that just isn't there. Wierwille was skilled at using ambiguity whenever and wherever it suited his agenda. That's what con men do. They gain your confidence.They make you believe they are telling you the truth. Even Wierwille, himself, stressed this in one session of PFAL when he used an example of a guy who successfully sold a toothbrush though it had only one bristle. You might have missed the meaning of that lesson. Lots of older grads never saw it in its fullness..

Mike, there is nothing in the premise referenced in your most recent post to suggest PFAL is divinely inspired. Wierwille used some common words that can also be found quite easily in the Bible. What does that mean? Absolutely nothing. I hope you catch your golden pony. He's pretty elusive.

OMG! I guy says "read my book" and, just like that, he's like Moses on the mountaintop. How could I have missed it all these years?

It's flawed because it is a false equivalence. "A common way for this fallacy to be perpetuated is one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result.[2] False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors. The pattern of the fallacy is often as such: "If A is the set of c and d, and B is the set of d and e, then since they both contain d, A and B are equal". d is not required to exist in both sets; only a passing similarity is required to cause this fallacy to be used."....SOURCE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ According to the scriptures, Paul "wrote" Ephesians as he was moved by the Holy Spirit. There was no intermediary source. VPW "wrote" PFAL through a process of consolidating the works of other writers. There were several intermediary sources. Apples are fruit. Bananas are fruit. Therefore, apples are bananas.

This is horribly flawed logic. Do I really need to explain why?

Except, ya know, he didn't really "write" PFAL. He simply plagiarized works that were already written and pawned them off as his own. Even you have conceded he "compiled" existing works.

You sound more and more like Professor Irwin Corey with each response you post.

If you will recall, I offered you, personally, an opportunity to cite examples of how the "God Breathed" PFAL has benefited your life. As of this moment, you have not responded. May I propose that I confine my activities in the Doctrinal Forum? It's not a doctrinal matter. You have proposed the idea that PFAL is God Breathed. That's not a doctrine, it's an opinion. Thus far, you have done absolutely nothing to logically argue that point without circuitous reasoning. You just keep insisting people must believe it because you say so. Edit: My dad was fond of saying "Poop or get off the potty chair."

"the Pure Evil model of VPW that has become the central element of Greasespot Correctness." You have grossly and intentionally misrepresented the purpose of this site. An apology might be in order. "With the plagiarism charge, everything in PFAL is described as coming from good, holy, respected teachers. But then I bring out some of the PFAL material here and those same ideas suddenly become tainted by the Pure Evil model." Once again, you fail to grasp the gravity of plagiarism. Furthermore, no one has offered the premise you erroneously attribute to GSC posters in the above statement. You are free to offer any opinion of your own as long as you attribute it to yourself. Please stop misrepresenting the opinions of other posters.

HERE is Tic, working at his part time job as Wierwille's valet.

Quick question, Mike. Forgive me if it seems off-topic. What tangible benefits have you gleaned from PFAL?

I'm going to write a book about it. I think I'll call it The daVeePee Code

Wait! Here's another Sledgehammer.

Suppose I told you that in session #3 I saw VPW scratch the right side of his nose 3 times in the first 3 minutes. Right side (side of blessing), 3 times 3 times 3 (completely complete) Bingo! Praise God! It's revelation! (Or maybe it's a sledgehammer. The choice is yours.)

Absolute nonsense. Wierwille being "totally into" something doesn't prove anything.There're not sledgehammer statements. What the heck is a sledgehammer statement anyway?

How in the world did you ever conclude that these phrases are divinely inspired? I don't care how long and intently you squint, there is nothing there to suggest what you are implying. It's your OPINION. Okay, we all have opinions.Just say it's your opinion. Problem solved. If you want to say your opinion is TRUE, however, you have to provide some sort of evidence , not some cyclical exercise in reasoning.

You're quite welcome. I probably should have posted THIS one instead. Heh!

The wheels on the bus go 'round and 'round...

Let's dance!