waysider

David Blaine breaks world record for holding breath. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...b=Entertainment I'll bet even he wouldn't be foolish enough to think he could hold his breath until he got a logical answer here.

"Prayer" and "Memoriam" (Between Archives and Connecting) Only visible when logged in.

Would that include VP Wierwille? Would that include VP Wierwille?

For starters, I am not the one here who has claimed that PFAL is the only rule of faith and practice. Since it was you who made that claim, the burden is on you to prove it. Using your methodology, feel free to demonstrate why Wierwille was not in error when he stated on page 77 of Volume III, Studies In Abundant Living: "When Israel disobeyed and married Cain's progeny, they brought disaster to themselves." As Ham has pointed out,Cain's progeny was wiped out in the flood. Wierwille also stated, "And Ahab, Jeroboam's' son..." Again, as Ham has pointed out, Ahab was the son of Omri, not Jeroboam. I really doubt there are many places in the entire PFAL series that these names are even mentioned. There is no trick. Simply use your methodology to demonstrate why this is not erroneous. If it is erroneous, it certainly can't be considered a reliable source as our only rule of faith and practice.

Well, that's what VPW taught in PFAL but, as we have seen, the expressions "spirit in" and "spirit on" are used in both the NT and the OT. To assume that no one during the Gospel period could observe anything outside a senses point of view seems a bit too restrictive in my opinion. I propose that If God had wanted to reveal something to people during the Gospel period, it would certainly have been within his power, as defined in the OT.

Based on the above stated method, let's consider all the instances in PFAL of the genealogy conundrum and see if we can perform an analysis. If, indeed, PFAL is our only rule of faith and practice, this should be fairly simple.

Reference?

Sounds like a good description of an info-mmercial. "Operators are standing by!"

It's circular reasoning. Q. How do you know God exists? A. He said so. And on and on----- All men are liars----and that's the truth!------Nick Lowe (who happens to be a man.)

I dunno Looks more like a Dashiki to me. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dashiki

Hmmmm----I think this helps me understand why I was on "cruise control" my last 10 years.

Isn't this a bit like using Psalm 14: 1 to prove or disprove the existence of God? Psalm 14:1 "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." All men are liars--------- and that's the truth!----Nick Lowe

"Advanced Christ"???? You mean there's a version that's more complete than the completely, completely, complete version? Who'd a thunk it?

Here's one that might best be described as conflicting rather than blatant error. You be the judge. In session # 9, on the introduction page, there is a chart that shows God, The Giver, who is Holy Spirit, giving the gift of holy spirit, which is God in Christ in you, which is power from on high. It then shows that there are nine Manifestations in the Senses World. These nine manifestations are depicted in a fan shape that visually implies they are of equal importance. Page 49 further reinforces this concept of co-equality as such. "INTRODUCTION: The manifestations of the gift from the HOLY Spirit, which is power from on high, are nine in number. No more. No less. They are not set in order, but simply listed in I Corinthians 12: 8-10." The chart appears again on page 3 of Interpretation Of Tongues And Prophesy (1971). Page 15, in contrast, shows a pyramid shaped chart with Kinds Of Tongues being the foundation upon which the rest of the pyramid is built.The implication is that that the others can't be accessed without first forming a base by speaking in tongues. This is further enforced on page 10 of the Advanced Class syllabus where we read: Keys To Walking By The Spirit, key # 3. "Speaking in tongues daily is prerequisite to revelation. II Corinthians 4: 16." In addition, we are told on page 61 of the PFAL syllabus, item 4. "It (SIT in private prayer life) is to be edified. I Corinthians 14: 4." The implication here is that this scripture is telling us SIT is some kind of spiritual "mashed potatoes" that with help the inner spirit gain addition strength so the other manifestations may be operated. How can someone make the inner spirit stronger when it says in Colossians 2:9,10 "For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him".? There is even a chapter in The Bible Tells Me So titled "Complete In Him", that "examines" this particular passage.This chapter begins with this statement: "We are complete in Christ then we are truly complete." Conflicting messages throughout the whole PFAL series regardless of one's personal theological leanings. Error is error whether it's a book about the Bible or a book about carburetors.

I found my old ADAN book. It says it was copyrighted by The Devin-Adair Co. in 1971. The copyright was then assigned to The Way International in 1973. Published 1971. My copy is First Edition. Third Impression 1976.

I stand corrected. He did say Satan could not counterfeit it, not that it couldn't be faked. But that brings us back to this: "Speaking in tongues is the believer's external manifestation in the senses world of the internal reality and presence of the holy spirit." On that particular occasion when he faked speaking in tongues, it was not an external manifestation in the senses world of the internal reality and presence of the holy spirit. It was an external manifestation of his ability to fake it. What else did he fake?

Was it this? George Aar post Jan 17 2009, 01:25 AM Post #9 (Blatant errors thread) QUOTE (George Aar @ Jan 17 2009, 02:25 AM) * As I've mentioned several times in the past, I think the most OBVIOUS of errors that Mr. Wierwille made in "The Class" is stating that the Council of Nicea was in FRANCE! Nice, Nicea, I guess anybody could make that mistake... Mark Clarke replied: Didn't they fix that one in later editions of JCNG?

Well, there ya go! What other things did he proclaim that were proven erroneous? The guy had the credibility of a Chia Pet.

Welcome, eagle 709 errrrr, I mean Trapper. Pull up a folding chair and we'll pour you some stretched coffee.

He said it could NOT be faked. But, admitted that he, himself, had occasion to fake it by repeating Greek words. So which is it? Did he lie when he said it couldn't be faked or lie when he said he faked it or just lie to those present about what he was actually doing? ******************** Page 60---PFAL syllabus. 4. it is not a gift of languages. a. That you could speak in a desired tongue at will, for instance Greek.

In addition, Wierwille claimed that "tongues" could not be counterfeited yet he states, in PFAL, that, on at least one occasion, he faked tongues by repeating Greek words.

Blatant Error "Speaking in tongues is the believer's external manifestation in the senses world of the internal reality and presence of the holy spirit." Fact Speaking in tongues is an activity that is practiced by both Christians and Non-Christians. ************************************* http://www.speaking-in-tongues.net/ History of Speaking in Tongues Throughout recorded history there have been many occasions where people have spoken in unknown tongues which are also known as ecstatic tongues. Note most of these accounts predate Pentecost and were of non-Christian origin. Christians therefore can not say with confidence that every occurrence of glossolalia must be an expression of the will of God even though many do subscribe to this view. Those practicing speaking in tongues today portray Pentecost as the supreme example of supernatural tongues; however, the recorded cases of glossolalia go back as far as 1100 B.C. On that occasion a young Amen worshiper attracted historical infamy when he became possessed by a god and began to make sounds in a strange ecstatic tongue. ************************ In addition, Wierwille claimed that "tongues" could not be counterfeited yet he states, in PFAL, that, on at least one occasion, he faked tongues by repeating Greek words.

Mike said: So how DO we end this? Call a cease fire, or someone put forth the definitive argument? Definitive argument PFAL was riddled with error, both doctrinal and scholastic. These errors can clearly be demonstrated using conventional rules of logic and reason as well as the methods set forth by Mike, himself. Therefore, it is not reliable as ANY rule of faith and practice, much less the ONLY rule of faith and practice.

Mike Using the methods you have outlined, can you demonstrate how you used those methods to arrive at your conclusion regarding the apparent genealogy errors?( ie: used before, in light of previous usage within PFAL, understood according to PFAL definition, etc.)

What will the national currency be?