waysider

Yes...and no.

Their ABC's

All men are liars...and that's the truth. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heNLjW4o5XE

Considering his propensity for falsehoods and misrepresentation, why should we believe anything at all that he says about himself, including his supposed time as a pilot and his retirement income?

I see a lot of cherry picked scripture references supposedly supporting a man-made concept. What I don't see is something showing me the Bible has been sub divided into neat little compartments. But, hey, if that's what you need to make it all fit like a hand in a sock, more power to you.

So there you have it. A guy comes in here under false pretenses, admittedly plays a bunch of deceptive head games and then expects us to grant him some sort of award for his unwavering integrity. Yeah...not so much. A hypocrite in all his might, So wrong in that he thinks he's right. Still he hears not Still he sees not. Will he?

Well, yeah, but really what I'm saying is that there is another facet to it. We've probably all heard some variation of the idea that for every rat you see in the open, there's a bunch more hiding in the dark.When someone comes here over an extended period of time professing that the PFAL book replaces the Bible, you can be pretty sure there's a good chance they've ALREADY created a support system .

Festinger stated that five conditions must be present if someone is to become a more fervent believer after a failure or disconfirmation: A belief must be held with deep conviction and it must have some relevance to action, that is, to what the believer does or how he or she behaves. The person holding the belief must have committed himself to it; that is, for the sake of his belief, he must have taken some important action that is difficult to undo. In general, the more important such actions are, and the more difficult they are to undo, the greater is the individual's commitment to the belief. The belief must be sufficiently specific and sufficiently concerned with the real world so that events may unequivocally refute the belief. Such undeniable disconfirmatory evidence must occur and must be recognized by the individual holding the belief. The individual believer must have social support. It is unlikely that one isolated believer could withstand the kind of disconfirming evidence that has been specified. If, however, the believer is a member of a group of convinced persons who can support one another, the belief may be maintained and the believers may attempt to proselytize or persuade nonmembers that the belief is correct. source:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Prophecy_Fails The section I bolded is the scary part. It not too likely anyone goes 20 years believing PFAL is God-Breathed without a support system to solidify their belief.

I clicked on your website. It now presents the following message: Hello World.I can be found at GSC. Are you the world? More importantly why do you need to remind yourself where you are? Please tell me you're not one of those lizard people. Those dudes can be scary.

Awww. How sweet. Thank you for being so worried about us.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, there's a pretty good chance it's a duck.

Final judgement?? Wow! That sounds so final and, well, judgmental. You say you created the website for your own private use while you are on the road. What kind of person creates a website to be used exclusively by themself? I ain't buying it. But, wait, there's more. I see the site now encourages the visitor to refer to GSC. What's up with that? Will you need to remind yourself, next time you're on the road?

We don't know who or what you are? Well, for starters, we know you're someone who came to this site and deceptively misrepresented yourself. How am I doing?

OOPS!

How do we know Jesus didn't speak in tongues? Speaking in tongues predates the time of Christ.

"Nobody held a gun to your head." Ahhh. The old gun to the head trick. Because there is really no way to control people other than holding a gun to their head. /s

Exactly.

Deleted by poster.

Aren't you the same guy who questioned why VPW and The Way seem to so often find their way into these discussions? Have you ever questioned whether using those *keys* in PFAL is even a valid approach to understanding the Bible? Hint: It's not. Edit: Sorry, WW. I didn't see you had posted. You said it better than I could.

rrobs What methodology or system do you use when you read the Bible? Do you simply read it and take it at face value or do you use some sort of protocol?

Why not try to convey it in your own words?

Sometimes the journey is more important than the destination.

There is nothing in that verse that even remotely suggests the bible is divided into separate compartments. Without going into further detail, i might suggest some other discussions that have taken place of that very same word that has been translated as dispensation in that verse. I'm not very good at searches but there is a search window at the top.

Maybe I've failed to convey the significance of adhering to dispensations/administrations. Dispensationalism is a concept that promotes the idea of different sections of the bible being walled off from other sections. That's the essence of saying "Such and such a directive doesn't apply to me because it was addressed to a different administration." It's quite handy in explaining why the Old Testament seems to contradict the New Testament. The problem, of course, is that it has no basis in scripture. If it does, could you be so kind as to show it to me?