Mike

Yes. I paraphrased it. Hope he doesn't sue me for plagiarism.

This is not a proof. Let’s call it a mini-proof. I think lots of these can be strung together. 1. Mike’s thesis is regarded by all as totally his alone. 2. This is illustrated by “VPW is turning in his grave over Mike’s thesis” comments on Mike’s thesis. 3. Mike posts 22 VPW quotes showing that VPW definitely claimed that some of his PFAL written words were God-breathed. 4. The 22 quotes are here on GreaseSpot, buried deep within this thread: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/topic/9131-the-official-the-ultimate-the-amazing-pfal-thread/ *** Now that doesn’t look like much of a proof until it’s examined a little. VPW was clever enough to place in the record this claim in such a way that no one saw it, including me. I was very much toying with the idea (and so were many others) that some of the audio soundtrack to the PFAL film was God-breathed or “straight prophesy,” but I never made the jump to the written forms. I was shown a few of these claims in 1998, then remembered another, and then found MANY more as I was studying the collaterals again. They were easy to find. Why were they easy for me to find in 1998 after a tip-off, when no one saw them for decades in the books and tapes? Answer: God. *** On old SNS tapes VPW makes many claims to be SPEAKING directly for God. They have never been hidden. But the reason God had VPW hide these claims of written God-breathed PFAL was because it had to be a secret in order for the books to be distributed far and wide, and around the world. If I had known VPW had a plan to get his God-breathed written documents published I would have quit in either disgust or bewilderment or even fear. That’s pretty much the reaction to the idea here all the time. I would have been no different. The only reason I have seen this idea is because I had a gentle and timely tip, ten years after I was out of TWI, and when all the fight in me was depleted. I also had all kinds of set-up, like my friendships with so many of VPW’s editors. So I see the Divine Hand of Camouflage working in how VPW placed those 22 “Thus saith the Lord” statements. Actually I saw 90 of them since returning to PFAL, but only documented 22. Remember how often VPW would teach that when God wants something to be a secret it STAYS a secret. I think one of the main qualifications VPW had to function in this role was that he was able to keep this a secret for over 40 years. He wrote it in such a way that it would be undetected until the time was right to be revealed. VPW often talked about how God would only tell His secrets to those whom He could trust to keep them. So the successfully secret set of 22 “Thus saith the Lord” statements testifies to the super intelligence of the REAL author of the final wording. *** I find great persuasion in the unanimity here of NOT believing and totally rejecting the VPW thesis that I latched onto, and thinking it was mine. The unanimous blindness to the 22 statements tells me that the objections to the thesis are also blind. Not proof, but lots of comfort for me in my lonely stand. Still more persuasion I gain from this is by asking how many OTHER things were buried in there that we all are still blind to? BTW, the dance in that old thread I linked strongly mirrors this current discussion, in that I was constantly being goaded and challenged to post the 22 statements, but I was in no hurry to write them up into readable form. I eventually did in a Private Topic forum, then they were prematurely leaked to the thread by one of the private readers, and then I posted my final, more polished version of the 22 statements. Word Wolf, it’s funny (like Steve Martin’s baloney) to see you complaining over and over on that old thread that I will never produce the 22 promised statements.

Yes. Does it work both ways or does my thesis nullify reciprocity? Like maybe we can get farther into my "proof" if you'd stop throwing stones?

I'm intrigues by this, but I need to slightly re-format it for my own sake. IF our attention and focus is genuinely on or for the things of God (which axiomatically excludes selfishness), then how much energy and effort do you suppose would go into wondering or determining whether or not thoughts in our mind are really thoughts from, of, or as the Lord himself? That’s a big “if.” The context of my comment was in essence: How can our natural man mind get its focus and attention genuinely on the things of God, when the things of God are foolishness to it? *** … would it be a strange or surprising thing to you… if I said that I (now) primarily think that God probably does His greatest and best work in Christians that probably don't give much actual time or thought to whether (or how) God works within them? No, it would not seem strange. I think the “how” of God working within us is like the “how” of electricity in the wall circuits. All we need to know is where the switch is. I think this talk about PFAL and Christ formed goes into the category of “documenting where the switch is” and hopefull will not be needed to be thunk by anyone any more. *** But, maybe this just doesn't make as sense to you, or certain others here. Your writing is complex, but I think I understood it. Please correct me if I’m wrong. I am a bit baffled by the last phrase above.

You had quoted me as gloating in the bold fonted text below. "It’s so funny and ironic the way modcat5 slapped you down. Ten years ago he was in your role as prosecutor here. I mocked that approach then, and had a lot of fun with it." *** Excuse me, but my use of "funny" here is synonymous with "odd" and NOT at all in the sense of jeering. An example of these two usages in one sentence is: Famous funny man Steve Martin says that when he wants to feel funny he puts a piece of baloney in one of his shoes. I was commenting on the odd irony that Raf was there. In no way was that a "laughing at" gloat. It was reflective. Oh, yes, I did gloat, mock and jeer 10 years ago, and I did have fun with that. I gave it up though. It was counterproductive here, even though it was some good comedy practice for me. There were more bold fonts in your criticism of me, but they too were off target. Do you think maybe you projected that "will to gloat" into me from yourself?

Strange, I don't recall gloating. Did you know the reason for smiley faces and emojis is because it's so easy for humans to mis-write and mis-read emotions into a text that are not intended to be there. If you can point out a massive context of mine that supports this impression of yours, then I'd seriously consider re-writing it due to my accidentally writing it in a way that suggests gloating. You might also re-think how you read that same context to see if you are injecting that gloating in that I can't remember doing. Part of the love of God is to assume a miscommunication took place before jumping on the sin possibility.

I will read this later for detail. But need to go to work for a while. I'm laughing at how my response (maybe in purple funny fonts) will make this post look to future cyber archeologists when the find it 5,000 years from now. It will be pretty difficult to decode IMO. LoL

Hi Twinky. When you give up your Perry Mason approach maybe we can talk a little. It’s so funny and ironic the way modcat5 slapped you down. Ten years ago he was in your role as prosecutor here. I mocked that approach then, and had a lot of fun with it. I would spin courtroom skit dialogs to drag us into, and I loved it. But it was too draining for us all and I had to quit. I’m not at all interested in any reprise performances. But the irony was thick the other day as the judge came in and shut down your thread. It was too much for me to comment on; just savored it. My respect for Raf rose in the later days of our encounters 10 years ago, and then it rose again as I returned here and we talked a bit. But this latest intervention of his was astounding! It inspired me to want to aspire to higher standards of discourse myself. I can relate better to how the rules in the Senate are noble. I see the atmosphere here as VASTLY improved over the mudfight it used to be 10 years ago. Pawtucket was stellar in how he managed it and eventually calmed it, and now I see others filling those shoes. I commend them for helping these VERY difficult topics get a fair airing. So, if you play lawyer then I get tempted to play stand-up comic. I think the trial of the Chicago 8 should be mandatory Perry Mason material for lawyers and judges to know what boundaries are where, even for officialdom. If you still want to play lawyer, remember that in this courtroom I have comparatively unlimited ability to dodge and confound your questioning, AND I have nearly unlimited ability to introduce any evidence I want. Also remember, I am not charged with a crime, just an outrageously unusual thesis. I actually have been bringing up “one thing” at a time (low key) that anyone in an inquisitive, friendly mode can see, but like ethics and morality, it’s totally invisible to the lawyer-mode that can only see the manipulation of words for jury influence. Hint: Christ formed. It’s a big deal.

I can only prove a few simple things. I proved here that VPW knew or strongly believed his Gartmore teaching was going to be his last. I did it with his words in the POP. I realized the proof's result was pretty trivial, and the premise to trust the POP was a little shakey, but I admitted them up front. It was a nice tight proof. Big deal! I can describe some of the personal proofs I have enjoyed, but that requires huge set ups. I can describe some neat pointers that say "Definite maybe, and worth investing in." Again, set ups. The strongest demonstration would be to try it out via "experimental believing" but few are willing or practiced at such zen like exercises. Doing this for very extended periods of time are like a Hail Mary pass. If it all works, it's a strong personal proof, and inspires another round. I think you mentioned similar things on how people like a story. If it works they do it again. But experience is no guarantee for truth, so additional measures should also be in place.

Yes, I have seen those letters. I wish you had payed attention when we discussed PFAL p.83. On that page VPW states: "Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed."

If you were paying better attention to the content of my posts you'd have realized by now that I have placed ONE THING on that thread. It's the "Christ formed" conversation I'm having with TLC there. I prefer to derail this one because I don't like your Church Lady tactics. Your TWI hem is showing.

We only had one person from the House of Acts. He was only there for part of the time, was only 17 years old, and was total jerk. No one liked him and he left. It was white hot and it revolved around PFAL. You are totally CORRECT about the bureaucracy cooling things down.

For two years it was only one fellowship with mostly teenagers. Two brothers and their mother started the fellowship and none of them had any religious background. Most had never read a book. They were clean slates almost. I was RC and had zero going for me spiritually before PFAL. The class was all we had to fuel us. It did. There was absolutely zero influence by other churches or movements there when I was there.

There are two other odd taped comments of VPW that seem to fit in with Gal 4:19 Christ formed. One is the first SNS tape VPW did after LCM's inaug in 1982. Oddity #1 King Saul's downfall was in the teaching. At the end VPW talks about all his disappointments and about all the things that can and do go wrong. At the end he says he is able to OVERSHADOW all his frustrations "...because I saw him who is like Jesus Christ." My take is VPW once saw a vision of the first grad to believe PFAL all the way and have Christ formed within the soul. The other is in Living Victoriously in Hope. On that tape VPW talks about Abraham and how he turned his hope into believing. VPW then goes on to apply this hope-to-believing thing to OUR hope! He pulls a fast one and then buries the whole passage. I've never met a grad yet who heard what I just reported, neither live nor on tape. It's on the tape now, but no one knows about it but me and the people I told... I think. I could be wrong, but there it is, on tape, turning hope to believing, and WHOOSH! it's gone from everyone's memory. My take on it is that the Christ Formed thing was becoming available for the first time.

What about that 1971-73 genuine white hot Christianity on Long Island we both saw? That was 100% PFAL fueled for most of the participants in Suffolk Co. and I think for Nassau Co. as well. The foundational class was at the center of it all. That was before blue forms.

Do you think I'm being passive aggressive on the other let's-push-mike-around thread?

Wait more. I don't like being pushed around. Do you?

There's too many things to "just do" so I'll have to choose one by one in the best sequence I can.

You're forgetting that men wrote the scriptures also. It's not whose pen did the writing, it's which God did the inspiring, in both cases.

The complications are more than just our lack of understanding IMO. Three more notable points: (1) VPW points out clearly in the earlier of his tapes that this "Christ in" is not the same as "Christ in you the hope of glory" or the spirit category. This Galatians type of Christ FORMED within is in the soul/mind category. (2) In the Preface to OMSW the triplet "made, formed, and created" is in a different order than the "body, soul, spirit" triplet a few sentences later.WHY? VPW made special efforts in a Way Mag article about these triplets and their order. Yet he changes that order for "made, formed, and created." (3) The earlier tape of VPW seems to have an odd mirroring between the ministry in the 70s and Paul's Galatians church. Both VPW and Paul are pulling their hair out, working very hard to get Christ formed in top leadership, but failing totally. The tape has this odd negativity about it and ends that way. It seems to say that Christ formed within just wasn't possible...yet... just like it wasn't happening for Paul with the Galatians. Putting all three of these together I'm looking at Christ FORMED in the minds of students being not quite available for Paul nor for VPW in the early 70s. The goal of getting all of PFAL into written form is what happened next. That made it finally available with OMSW and the finishing of PFAL. The reason I look at it this way is the GREAT need. We were given a perfect spirit, but it does not affect the mind. When we read the Word with our natural man mind it's just not possible for the nature of that mind to change itself. It cannot. The things of God are foolishness to it. Once Christ is formed within, then it can be renewed according to the Word. Having a natural man mind automatically change into the mind of Christ sounds impossible to me. I see the first purpose of PFAL is to get us walking with spirit, and THEN the next step is to get that new Christ formed within. I think that's what PFAL was designed (by God) to do when we stick with it. So, in answer to your question, I think Christ's thoughts CANNOT become our thoughts as long as we are stuck with a natural man mind.

It sounds like you are focusing on the law of believing here. I agree that lots of work needs to be done there, but I think it's in our understanding. But what about the other things PFAL promises? I received good when it comes to God being loving and forgiving. I found out how to read the Bible. I learned to SIT and serve others. Seeing that the dead are dead was a major benefit. I see most of those areas as very successful, even when we don't fully understand them. ...but believing needs some work.

I think I was confusing you with skyrider there. Sorry. I've been reading his thread on TWI-2.

I'm interested in the fact that written PFAL does not bring up that verse but in one scant place. I have found an edited article from an old SNS tape that looks like it was going to be a Way Magazine article. VPW did one more SNS on the verse, and Walter did one SNS on it. It looks like it was on the cutting edge of things. What can you tell me of it?