Mike

Raf, If you'd read me better, I said that others DO have a right to dodge or ignore, HOWEVER the question that should be raised is if a particular dodge is a RIGHTEOUS one. If people dodge to deceive or to cover over a mistake that should be dealt with differently, then it’s an unrighteous dodge. It’s like anger. Jesus got angry when it was the right reaction for the situation, AND he didn’t go overboard with it. There is righteous anger and unrighteous anger. You were all hot and bothered when I’d righteously dodge people trying to tear me down as I was trying to help them with needed information. Then you turned right around and was one of the first to invoke the Ignore feature on me. THAT’S hypocrisy! Hey, maybe you even invoked that dodge on me for a valid reason, like your mental health, but the hypocrisy of condemning me for what you felt was ok for yourself was not so valid, and now it’s compounded by calling me a hypocrite AND you mislabeling my pedagogical question asking for dodging. You got some housecleaning to do buddy! *** Now, some of you are asking yourselves, “Why is Mike taking time to discuss dodging when he could be working his stated higher priorities of PFAL.” Well folks, I must admit that’s a good question, and I think I perceive some of you are asking it from an innocent position of wanting to know, as opposed to wanting to thwart and tear down. So, I will reward the innocent askers with the answer, and give great grace to the not so innocent ones lying in wait to catch me. In the AC’s “16 Keys to Walking in the Spirit” we see that Key # 8 reads: “Do not tell all you know. Receive Word of Wisdom.” This is a valuable key, and I am convinced that Dr utilized it in the teaching of the film class and in the production of the book. I long ago perceived this in how Dr goes through such complicated hand-stands to teach that soul is not exactly synonymous with spirit, when all the time he COULD have simply quoted Hebrews 4:12, “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” I saw Dr holding back on other things, dodging in a sense, and applying this Key #8 to some of his teachings. It bothered me at first, until I took the AC in 1975 and came to understand Key #8 a little. Then, for all you perpetual skeptics, if you don’t want to accept my perceptions of Dr’s applying this key, he came right out and said so at the beginning of CF&S that he didn’t teach us all he knew in PFAL because if he had, so he said, then we’d not come back for more. *** Sorry folks, that’s all the time I have right now. Consider this a dodge of all the other recent posts, but don’t get all shook. It’s only a trivial scheduling priority dodge. I have an appointment, but I’ll be back.

templelady, Thank you for working with this topic. I agree with you here, but I think we need to better understand what earth means and what air means and the clouds too. I do not believe those words are supposed to convey to us the normal five senses understanding. The word “earth” is often used to mean the earthly realm, the real of the five senses. The word “air” also has a spiritual meaning far greater than an oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide mix. We were given the verse and the PFAL teaching to, if we are immersed in PFAL mastery, associate “air” with what comes out of God’s breath, the God-breathed air of His revelation in written form. Also, the word “cloud” has a special scriptural use in the cloud of witnesses, those believers in the God-breathed that serve as our examples in troubled times. *************************************************************************** *************************************************************************** *************************************************************************** *************************************************************************** dmiller, You wrote: “Mike -- thanks for post #295. __ You finally answered a question! (Keep it up!).” You’re welcome. I’ve been waiting for the right time to bring up the editors. It still blows my mind that not only did I stumble into the fellowship I did in 1998, but that God had prepared me for it with meeting and bonding with all those very interesting people. This preparation was very extensive, and I’ve only scratched the surface of it here. This preparation has helped be believe a lot of things I’d have otherwise rejected, even more vehemently than most posters here reject it. I almost brought Post #295’s information to WW’s attention when he blew his horn on that topic a few days ago, but I remembered all too well how numb he can be to actual data, and it just would have been lost. Still, it’s interesting to see how fast he and others buried #295 with no comments of substance. I noticed the same thing with my 22 “Thus saith the Lord” statements. Oakspear looked at them a bit, but no one else did bite. But actually I do answer some questions, like your question about Dr knowing about “The Joy of Serving” being his last time to teach us, and the syllabus caveat you discovered. I actually also do answer many more questions, just not the way the askers want me to. Often they want me to stumble and fumble, and when I ask a question as a pedagogical device, they are disappointed that I didn’t walk into their trap. Still I’m eager to answer many of them. If you want to see me lead the way with well designed questions to answers others have asked of me, just play their role sans the trap-intention. For instance I’m sure there are many grads who know little about the critical Greek texts, just like T-Bone, and they can always (if meek and wanting to learn and not entrap) fill in for T-Bone on taking my invited stroll through the morass those texts conjure. Same with the Mark 16 issue, and same with the identity problems of seeing Jesus. *** You wrote: “You DON'T call the shots here, and neither do we -- Public Forum -- remember??” But you misread my post there, JUST LIKE most of the nation misread General Alexander Haig’s famous line that I quoted. When President Reagan was shot and there was relative pandemonium in many circles of government, Haig took the bull by the horns and stated that he was in charge, then paused, and then added the word “here” to clear up any confusion that might have resulted in misinterpreting his remark. Haig was only taking charge of what was appropriate for him to command at that time, i.e., the White House, and NOT the entire nation. Because many distrusted Haig they didn’t hear the word “here” that he had supplied just for their comfort. Instead they thought the worst and thought he was staging a military coup. It amazed me how many people, even to this day, refuse to hear the word “here.” I am in charge of the immediate context in which my comment came up. I am in charge of whom I deal with in an intimate way, such as supplying books. *** You wrote: “When you respond, things go MUCH SMOOTHER.” But YOU started it! You were the one who brought the topic off of me and onto the more important matters. I felt that was an important thing to reward. When others here get their egos turned on to stand-by mode and cozy up to my well designed questions things will go smoother too. You wrote: “...if folks take the time to ask, decency requires that you answer...” Sure, assuming that there’s some decency in their asking and some decency in their looking at my FORM of answer, even if it’s a preliminary question designed to get them pointed in the right direction in order to be able to hear the eventual full answer. You might notice that’s what happened to our conversation last night. I tried to dismiss the topic and you insisted I not, AND you did it not with an insult to me, but with a stating your reasons why you thought it was important. That showed me that you were working with a standard publishing model where an editor has power over the author. You just weren’t aware that in THIS case Dr was ALSO the publisher. That gave me reason enough to unload all I knew. I often hold onto what I know if I’m convinced the immediate recipient will not understand or appreciate me giving them what they demand. I encourage you to continue focusing not on me but on the important things. I want to cooperate, but there’s a certain dance that sometimes is involved in some of these very complex matters. I need to see what steps a person knows to proceed with the rest of the show. Sometimes questions are needed and NOT a dodge. I still reserve the right to righteously dodge. Everyone does it. WW is doing it right now with his theory of the “Joy of Serving” not being Dr’s last, and with his concocted story of the PFAL editors posting here that I and Dr are full of baloney. EVERYBODY dodges, it’s just a matter of whether it’s righteous or not. Jesus dodged his trap-layers. Anyone who uses the “Ignore” feature here or the PM block here is dodging. Dodging is not evil or reprehensible in itself. It can sometimes be the best and most efficient way of dealing with opponents. Those who want to learn, who want to hear what they forgot or never absorbed in PFAL are the ones I never want to dodge. I am eager to serve the meek, the coachable. Those who want to only thwart me are in for any trick in the book I think is useful in thwarting them right back. Tom Strange complains here that I mistreat people. Yeah, SURE! I drag them onto this thread, prevent them from leaving, and then slap them around. No, Tom, here’s the real picture. I come here, not to inflict harm but to serve. People with intent to block my efforts come running at me, but are surprised when I am ready for them and not only occasionally dodge them, but sometimes I head butt them into a stupor where they can’t tell left from right. Tom, I see you this way when you post what you recently did: You run crying and screaming to complain, “MOMMY, all I tried to do is hit Mike and he HURT me! Mommy, make him stop!” *** Well, we have some much more interesting items to discuss. Has anyone EVER noticed that the counterfeit Christ can look all physically bright and glowing and Hollywood handsome, just like the genuine? Has anyone EVER noticed that the counterfeit Christ can physically raise people off the ground like he did Jesus in the desert? Has anyone EVER noticed that the counterfeit Christ can make it look just like some long lost loved one was just raised from the dead? Has anyone EVER noticed that the counterfeit Christ can counterfeit the simplistic, five senses view of the Gathering Together we have been holding onto for years? Has anyone noticed that we were told to grow up to deal with this “slight” problem of Christ’s credentials by mastering some special instructions, some special revelation God has supplied to us in English? Has anyone EVER noticed that the world as we once knew it is OVER, and that IT’S TIME to rise up and meet the Lord in the air? A few have.

templelady, Well I though I’d stop in on my way to the airport and see what's happening. I’ll look much closer at your notes on the Return later, when I have more time. You wrote: “As with all posters , it is possible to contact me through e-mail by use of the settings available when clicking on my name. Mike has not yet made use of this opportunity.” I tried twice today to send you a PM. This is the message the system returned to me: This member has chosen not to be contactable by the board Messenger This personal message has not been sent Did you forget that you blocked me or are you deliberately lying about this situation? You CAN forget about the books and all cooperation from me. I will absolutely NOT send them as long as your respect for me and my message and my attempts to help you are in the gutter. No books; that deal is off. Quoting a famous General: “I am in control... here.” It is YOU who are trying to “change the goalposts” so I refuse to play. You can explain yourself in a PM to me and I will give you the chance to earn back some respect. Right now your account is pretty drained.

No, T-Bone. Not true. I want to discuss my questions to you and further items they lead to even if you cut and run. Anyone here can participate and I invite them to. ************************************************************ ************************************************************ ************************************************************ ************************************************************ Folks, you'll have to excuse me for a while. I have work to do and a grad friend is arriving at the airport in a few hours. He's one of the noble Berean grads who listens intently to my message and searches the scriptures (and PFAL books) daily whether those things are so. He never posts here. I'll look forward to seeing you ALL you folks doing some discussion while I'm gone on the critical Greek texts, as well as some detailed thinking through of our Hope.

Tom, I am trying to get you (and readers) to think through the details of our Hope. There was once a thread on this and people enthusiastically participated. I saved a copy and may post parts. How will, or how CAN we know it's really him when he appears? Will he look like his Renaissance portraits, and if so WHICH ONES? Will he look like his movie depictions, and again, which ones? How will we know he’s not the anti-Christ, the counterfeit Christ? Will it be the way he glows in the dark? Satan can do that, come as an angel of light. Will it be the altitude at which we meet? Satan can do that too; he did it with Jesus. Think it through a little. How will we know it’s REALLY him?

Tom, Surely you can ponder that question and come up with more than what you have so far. And the same goes for the large set of questions in Post #6. You’re not cooperating. You remind me of an insolent teenager trying to get away with as much as possible with a substitute teacher. T-Bone, That’s a good start for a review, but you forgot my set of questions. I eagerly await your dealing with them too. And cyber space rent gets cheaper every year. It’s pictures and audio and video that hog up a lot of hard drive real estate, not text. Blocks of text being posted and re-posted is like spitting in the ocean now. Otherwise someone would have come down on WordWolf long ago for his repetitions of text blocks. Want me to re-post the question set to complete the review or do you want the honor?

T-Bone, There are many things hidden in PFAL that only serious students can see. Casual students drawing from 20 year old memories have no idea what I'm talking about. I try daily to bring these things out into the open and known, but people want to keep their eyes closed to PFAL and to my expositions of it. BTW, I too was shown these things; I'm just the messenger. You all would be very blessed to hear my teacher. I'm still itching to get on with much more of my answer to your post to me that led to the critical Greek text questions. Whenever you want to deal with them we can proceed with more of my answer. ********************************************************************** ********************************************************************** ********************************************************************** ********************************************************************** Tom, the same goes for you. I'd LOVE to get into Jesus Christ, PFAL, and his return. My chosen introduction to your badgering questions on these related topics is to pose you the questions I did. They await your serious consideration so that we can proceed. ********************************************************************** ********************************************************************** ********************************************************************** ********************************************************************** templelady, Sure you were calm. You were so calm you were mixing up left and right! My offer still stands. You need to understand that you are not in charge here. I am the one with the information and I call the shots. I will discuss it with you in PMs or not at all.

Tom, Thank you! I didn't see templelady's address at all there to the left. I looked to the right and saw nothing. I thought the small print to the left was some saying or motto, never thinking that anyone would put an address there. I owe you here. *** I’m still not interested in your critiques of my styles and decisions which to implement and when. I want to get into the important stuff. If you post your usual paste jobs I will post a paste of the Post #6 questions. Why are you so afraid to deal with those questions? You absolutely MUST deal with them if you want any more from me on the subject. Those questions were designed to lead us into deeper discussion what you have been demanding of me, not to dodge it as you may suppose. You want me to answer you, but then you object to the way I start out answering, and you thereby interrupt the answering process. Think about the questions I posed you, and then say something about them that reflects an intelligent processing of them. Play along with me by considering them. Then I can respond more to you. I offered the same style of answering T-Bone’s questions with questions of my own, questions designed to lead him towards more of my answer. He refused to follow me in my style of answering him and he now is not getting any more. Just like you have demanded I consider your questions, WHICH I DID IN DESIGNING MY QUESTIONS, I demand you consider my questions. I gave you the beginnings of the answers (in question format) and you rejected them. If you want me to resume answering you then you MUST deal with my pedagogical style. *** Now, here is a new teaching/question I have for you: What is it about Jesus Christ’s DNA and fingerprints that forces you to clam up and change the subject? Why is that such a taboo subject?

templelady, Please calm down. I didn’t attack your character. I said I suspected (and for good reasons) that the primary mode of operation you were in (maximum social interactions and minimum study) was not efficient for your learning the text. There’s no question that you missed much and demonstrated it richly in public here. I think the mode you are in right now is also not efficient for learning. I’m sorry, I missed the words you just highlighted in red. I apologize for my haste in reading. Please give me more reasons to read your posts more carefully by calming down and focusing on the more important matters at hand... like THE WORD, for instance. If I wrongly characterized you, then I’ll be happy to see you prove me wrong by your actions in re-reading and re-learning the wonderful contents of PFAL. God says, I think in Proverbs, that a wise person loves reproof. God says in one of Peter’s epistles that if we are reproved wrongly it’s no big deal, AND it gives us an opportunity to relate to Jesus as to how he took savagely unjust criticism, bodily. Defending our ego is a small matter. I take in and blow off MUCH more baloney than I shove back. It’s a good skill to learn. *** I didn’t see your e-mail address, and I still don’t. It’s not on my screen to the right as you described. I read your post too hastily, and you did likewise. That’s why I ask you to calmly switch subjects away from you and me and onto more important matters. I had asked you to PM your e-mail address to me BECAUSE posting your e-mail address in public is not a good thing to do unless you are prepared for it being found by anyone, including spambots. But now, since you brought up your distaste to PM with me, might I AGAIN remind you that it’s better, if you have a beef with someone, to deal with it privately? You once blew it in wrongly reproving me in public when it could have been done much more efficiently in private. I went to you by PM to show you were wrong FOR YOUR SAKE, and I urged you to remember Jesus’ advice to treat such matters privately FIRST if possible. This was an instance of where you seemed unaware of even KJV text in addition to many PFAL text items. Your learning in the past has been inefficient. I want to help you learn the Word better. Calm down, and we will discuss in PMs which books and when I will provide you. I absolutely INSIST on this being done privately or not at all. This is the LAST I will discuss it with you in public, understand? If you can’t trust me in PM, I can’t entrust to you the books. That’s final.

dmiller, You're a good man, and I'm VERY happy to see you operating in this mode again. You wrote: “The reason I *care*, is because the editors had *ultimate* control over what was, and what was NOT printed. Since you value the *written work* of docvic so highly, and then say some editors were *less major* -- that indicates to me that there is a hierarchy there.” The ultimate control was in God’s hands. Dr oversaw things very closely, and by revelation. I’ll explain more. The major and minor designations I invented simply refer to how much text they worked on. The most text, by far I’m told, was worked on by Karen Martin, Dr’s daughter. She did most of the magazine articles, and many of the book chapters. David Craley, the magazine’s editor from around 1974 to 1982 (with some breaks) told me this. He worked on some of Dr’s Our Times articles. He and I are very good friends and have kept in touch all these years. I was a fan of David’s SNS teachings from 1972, especially “The Masterpiece of You Life,” which was also a favorite of many grads and a high-volume back-order teaching tape when I worked in Tape Duplicating at HQ. (note the theme “master” as it has coursed through my life) I met David at HQ in 1976 and watched him at a distance as he wrote his book because I wanted to become a writer someday. I am the only grad he has kept in touch with in the last 15 or so years. He lived in San Diego in the late 80’s near Pamsandiego’s house at the beach and we all got together at times. He has come to agree a little more these days with my thesis that PFAL is God-breathed. We often talk about Dr’s inspiration and the editing process, and David teaches straight out of RHST in his fellowship to this day. The co-editors of the PFAL book were Karen Martin and J. Fred Wilson. I lived with J. Fred and his family in New Knoxville for two years, from 1976 to 1978, and I kept in touch with him OFTEN for all the time after that until his death a little over one year ago. He was one of my best friends in the whole wide world. I talked with him for MANY hours about the editing process he and Karen went through. We discussed it in the 70's, in the 80’s, in the 90’s and in recent years after I started posting on GSC. J. Fred did a small amount of posting here before I registered, but not on any heavy topics. He read lots of my posting and we often discussed it for hours at a time, right up to the last days before he died. He confirmed my analysis of the grammar of PFAL page 83 several times, as did David Craley. They both gave me permission to use their names but I refrained for the most part until now. I also talked to Karen by phone and e-mail. We disagreed a bunch, but I’ve been told she inherited that kind of stubbornness from her dad. STILL she said some VERY enlightening things to me, one of which I want to someday ask her permission to post. It corresponds greatly with an idea doojable has twice brought up and I sent up fireworks celebrating each time. Our conversations were terminated around the time Karen's brother got very ill. I’ve also talked by phone and e-mail with SEVERAL other editors of Dr’s, each on several occasions, all confirming the general proceedures of what I am about to tell you. Karen and J. Fred started the editing of the PFAL book with Dr’s describing what he wanted them to do in preliminary meetings. Actually, Dr first spent MANY years prior to that editing time both teaching and training Karen and J. Fred and watching them closely as they matured in the Word, in his teachings. Then they got an exact film transcript, and worked some pages according to Dr’s instructions, both general and specific. They then submitted the pages to Dr for his inspection and he read them with God’s oversight and supervision. Dr then redlined what he (and God) didn’t like, adding, subtracting and changing portions and accepting some portions intact. Karen and J. Fred would then again work the suggestions and changes Dr gave them, and then re-submitted the pages for Dr’s approval. God worked with Karen and J.Fred too, giving them revelation at times as Dr asserts at the end of the Preface to RHST. J.Fred OFTEN told me that those months were the spiritual highpoint of his whole life.

dmiller, No, excuse ME! AGAIN: Why do you care? I’m trying to dismiss the issue, and I deliberately used that nomenclature, as I mentioned, to make it sound more respectful as the topic of telling who from who is dismissed. Why do you want to go there? The important stuff is not the editors, not even Dr, but what is written. *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** Tom, You forget the history of how I was treated here from my first days of posting and then for many, many months afterward. I remember that you were not in that initial lynch mob, but you joined right in with them later. You are constantly focusing on me. Switch to PFAL and we can talk. I’m not interested in reading long posts on boring subjects. Sure I realize I’m not being symmetrical here. I do post long posts, and they are full of detailed information that people need. No one needs long posts filled with complaints to me or criticisms of me. Don't even expect me to read your long boring posts focused on me as the topic, ok? If I do I may come at you in ways you don't like. Switch topics and we can talk civilly. Keep on talking about me and I’ll deal with you in whatever way I feel is right at the time. I don’t answer to you about any tone or techniques I use to deal with your interruptions. Are you ABLE to talk about the contents of PFAL? Do you WANT to? I asked you some questions, some PFAL and Word content questions, in Post #6 on this thread. I repeated them just recently. What is your response to those questions?

templelady, You wrote: "Okay MIke you're on, my address is to the right. Send me those books and I'll reread them. I'll post direct quotes from them to your points as well as other posters questions." Don’t you think it would be better to READ the books first. If you approach the books with the intent of tearing them apart (or me with them as ammunition) you’ll not learn anything. I offered the books in an attempt to get you to see what you missed. They should be an adventure enjoyed between you and God, not ammo for fighting me. I wasn’t attacking your character, merely pointing out that in the past you missed learning many things because you weren’t PRIMARILY in a learning mode. The result was missing many elementary items that could bless your life. Please think of getting into a NEW mode, one of PRIMARILY learning and you’ll see the books are wonderful. To use them the way you just stated will mean you miss a lot again. I don’t see your e-mail address, but it’s probably better for you to PM it to me.

dmiller, I want to thank you for posting on topic. I really mean that. YES! Those are the ones. Here is the film class transcript corresponding to page 19: “Now, I want to take you a step further. Not only must you know what's available, how to receive and what to do with it; but if you're going to tap into the resources for the more abundant life you must get your need and your want parallel. The need and want must be parallel. Many times there are people who have tremendous needs but they only want their need filled thus far. They'll never get this prayer answered. Because if you're going to manifest the more abundant life there's one basic requirement: and that is that the need and the want must be parallel.” And here is the Book version: “If we are going to tap the resources for the more abundant life, we must not only know what is available, how to receive it, and what to do with it; but we must also get our needs and wants parallel. If our needs are light and our wants are heavy, we are not balanced. If our wants are light and our needs are heavy, we will never get an answer. When we believe, we get results in prayer if our needs and our wants are equal.” Notice that the book ALSO uses the word equal. So parallel, balanced, and equal all fit together. In the film class he uses hand motions to illustrate parallel with the Word, but that can’t be seen in the book version, so a wider variety of words are used instead. Also, the film class version goes on for a few more paragraphs than I’ve posted here with no corresponding book text. This section of the film class is pretty much a repetition of what was already spoken. In the book a reader can re-read the text to get the same repetition. *** Quite a bit later in the class Dr summarizes the several things needed to know to receive anything from God and it goes like this: “If we are going to tap the resources for the more abundant life; in this class on Power For Abundant Living we are going to go to the Word. We're going to find out what is available, we're going to find out how to receive these things and we're going to find out what to do with it after we've got it. And we're going to keep our need and our want parallel recognizing that God is not only able but God is willing to perform every promise that He has set in His Word.” The book also much later has this corresponding summary: “If we are going to tap the resources for the more abundant life, we have to go to The Word to find out what is available, how to receive, and what to do with it after we have it. We are going to keep our needs and our wants in balance, recognizing that God is not only able but willing to perform every promise set forth in His Word.” *** I had written: “Still on the editors issue, did you see the correction of one of your points that someone (I think it was Linda Z) brought up? I didn’t regard him to be an editor, even though I think he did say once that he had to cut out some sentences to make something fit on the page.” And you responded with: “Sooooo --- some *editors* are *walking*, and others are just *talking*, eh??? __ How do you decide which is which??” Why do you need to? Let’s describe them as major and minor editors. It sounds more respectful. Or less major editors might sound even better. Even to have worked the graphics for the articles was a very big deal spiritually. There’s an Out Times article where Dr explicitly states this, how there was divine design in the graphics layout of the magazine. It’s an extreme honor to have been entrusted by Dr and God to work with Dr in the final output of the Word. I was absolutely enthralled with HCW’s testimony, so much so I held greatly back debating with him on points where we differed. We can easily see from his posts that he had a great respect for Dr, in spite of Dr’s flesh, and I’m sure Dr had great respect for HCW as well, and for all the other editors who worked on the texts. For Dr to mention at the end of the Preface of RHST that his helpers had both Biblical AND spiritual abilities in their assisting him means that God was inspiring them all. I have spent many, many hours discussing the editing process with many of Dr’s editors, and I’ve found that it doesn't matter who did what to which texts. It was a team effort and God was supervising it from the top, and Dr supervised it on the flesh level. This is one reason I’m confident that Dr’s flesh was sufficiently stripped out of all that was printed. I can’t say that for the tapes andfilm class, but they too are still pretty darn enlightening. When the microphone was on Dr was on, for the most part.

Hi doojable, I wasn't in a bad mood but I was angry. AND it was good anger. I am fed up with constant droning talk about me and how I post. The contents of PFAL and God's will should be paramount in our discussions. If you want to have PFAL content discussion I'm ready, willing, and able. It just double irked me that, in addition to focusing on me and how I post, you always ignore the lousy behavior of the others. Go back and read it to see what I mean. I am as right to fiercely oppose that kind of hard heartedness of posters there as Jesus Christ was angry and fiercely opposed the phony religionists of his time. All people want to do is catch me in an error, and God is of no use to them. *** ...they wanted to accuse Jesus! They were not interested in whether the man got delivered or not. They were only interested in one thing--catching Jesus. Mark 3:5a: And when he had looked round about on them [with compassion, ah no, no, no. It says when he had looked round about on them] with anger, Jesus looked round about on them, the people there in the synagogue. He looked round about on them with what? Anger. That's a tremendous lesson? You know we've always been taught that if a person is a real Christian the only thing he ever does is love. Well don't you think Jesus Christ loved? Wasn't he all love? Yet, here it says he looked round about on those synagogue leaders, the leaders, he looked round about on them with anger. He got real teed off. This idea that just because you're a Christian believer, and a man of God, you go around patting everybody on the back all the time! Somebody once said, they need to pat down a foot lower. You see Jesus looked round about on them with anger. He got real teed off. And sometimes men of God have to take a stand. You don't allow people to push you around all over and every other place. Jesus loved this man. He loved all the people, but yet these who were obstructing the power of God, he looked round about on them with anger. Mark 3:5: --- being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, --- That's why he was angry, for the hardness of their hearts; that they were not able to accept the greatness of God's Word and refused to accept it.

WordWolf, It's so refreshing to see a conversationally short post from you in my viscinity. I noticed another occurrence of this on the Gear thread, but didn’t have the time or the desire to keep that thread on my “watch list” any longer. If you could point to where you discussed the two issues I brought up to you that would same us both time. Or if you would paste it in here I’d appreciate it. With spring cleaning arriving I am just entering a very busy season in my business, so yes, discussing these two issues will take away from my already scarce time in dealing with other matters here. These two issues, however, are far more important in my opinion than the rather petty swiping that’s going on right now here. *** On the editors issue, I am aware of your bringing up HCW’s testimony on several occasions, and I have gone over HCW’s stories pretty carefully. I do have a reading problem with your long posts in that they include way too many topics for my non-multi-tasking mind, and I just don’t have the time to deal with all points you bring up. Consequently, I often can’t read them in their entirety and it’s easy for me to lose track of what you say. I’d be much more inclined to engage you if you’d limit your discourse to the more salient issues. Still on the editors issue, did you see the correction of one of your points that someone (I think it was Linda Z) brought up? I didn’t regard him to be an editor, even though I think he did say once that he had to cut out some sentences to make something fit on the page. It’s entirely within my paradigm that Dr’s selection and supervision of staff that HCW was guided by God in that move he described here. If it were not by inspiration and it excluded something crucial, I’m convinced someone else on staff, or Dr himself, would have interrupted it. *** On the “Joy of Serving” issue, I am quite sure it was his last public teaching. It, however, there is some huge glitch in my research there, correcting it would not subvert my message, only one mere selling point of it. In my investigations of these matters I have always sought a thorough collection of the facts, so if you have some added information on this issue I definitely want to include it in the mix, even if it means making extensive corrections to my sales pitch.

For those impatient and dying to see the word “balanced” and seem outraged that I haven’t gotten there yet, all I can say is “Harrumph to you.” What I posted so far on the red drapes issue was only coincidently overlapping with a few lines on “needs and wants parallel” and it didn’t include the part where “balance” is used. I might ask why the ones who are demanding that I produce the “balance” text haven’t taken up a PFAL book and looked for it themselves. Have ALL of you tossed your copies? For those who are sans PFAL books and genuinely interested in the subject matter, why haven’t talked among yourselves to see who might have one? Everyone here, I should think, is aware of the e-versions of Dr’s books that are floating around, so if paper copies aren’t available why haven’t searches for the e-copies been undertaken? I can only conclude that those demanding me to do this simple homework for them by posting the text are NOT interested in the text, but only interested in perceiving me as over a barrel of sorts. This conclusion is hardly a profound deduction. Well, I like to segregate issues if possible, and I just haven’t had time to the “balance” one yet. Has anyone any idea if it’s possible for me to reproduce my split screen text here? I’d really like to do it that way because later in it will help illustrate other issues where comparing book chapters with Magazine articles become quite illuminating. For those with copies of the PFAL book, “balanced” occurs on page 19 and “balance” occurs on page 24, both in the context of the "needs and wants" teaching.

doojable, You are ignoring all the civil conversation I have with a few, AND ignoring all the baloney that's thrown in my direction by some others. How can I take your advice seriously if you have on double blinders? I think that the ones I am harsh with deserve it, need it, and other more thorough observers need to learn from it in dealing with the baloney thrown at them. We're to be loving, but not doormats. I take my example from how Jesus was that man of steel and velvet. He took no baloney, had anger, and shoved hate back in the faces of some. He was also tolerant at times. I reject totally your advice because you seem to have these thick blinders on. Take them off and address the far greater doses of baloney that’s thrown at me and you can get my attention. Otherwise you fit into the role of the “good cop” working with the riff raff here who play the role of the “bad cop.” Do you get it? It's a good cop, bad cop team against my message being presented and your on the cops side. I am on the side of challenging the established order. You're with them and you can't fool me. I just don’t buy your one sided approach. If I saw you gently scolding WordWolf, Tom Strange, and a few others for their reprehensible behavior towards me you would have some credibility with me, but you’ve totally blown it by often showing your bias and blindness. I’m not here to satisfy your stated intentions of wanting to see the children on the playground all getting along, while your actions are all calculated to thwart my message as much as and in unison with the others who want to see PFAL rejected. Get it? I don’t buy your gentle approach to me at all. If you were to get back to addressing the meat of what I’m posting about instead of the manner in which I bring things up, then I’d let you get away with your bias, but when you try to trick me with some appeal to love I see through it and it offends me. I won't tolerate it. Quit talking about me and get on track with the message and we can have a conversation, but I will not tolerate your trying to mold me into your wishes all the while rejecting and trying to subvert a very important mission I have.

Templelady, You wrote: “If it's not in Written PFAL, per your instructions it can be ignored.” Has it occurred to you that you may not have my instructions quite accurate? It should. If I really mean we should ignore the film class, they why would I post it and violate my own instructions? I urge you to think things through and not behave like an insolent teenager, trying to show off for the mob with feigned cooperation with me, all the while deliberately giving me a hard time. Remember, your responses are going down in irretrievable history and the whole world is watching! Another poorly thought through item here is if I advocate ignoring the film class, then why would I bother with even more scrutiny of the film class in wanting to figure out how to post my split screen comparison of film to book? Your failure to have thought this testifies to either a lack of mental acuity or a lack of cooperation and acting skills. Still another point: why would I undertake the mammoth project of the split screen comparison for myself if the film is to be ignored. Do you see? You got my instructions wrong. Should I be surprised? The film class is an introduction to the book. The red drapes story is useful for new students, but not needed in the final focus of the book. For people like you the introduction phase is clearly not yet over. *** You wrote: “Second I do not find the use of the word ‘balance’ either in the written PFAL or the Taped PFAL you quoted so I can see no answer regarding my previous questions on this subject regarding how from written PFAL we are to differentiate when to use which. Please supply direct quotes from VPW's books that explain this.” Well, if you look more closely I only included 33 words from the book, and they are in bold font at the beginning of that green section. I mention this but you missed it, just like you missed many things in the class as demonstrated here, and just like you missed the meaning of my "instructions" that the printed material takes precedence over the spoken in demanding our focus and mastery. I know your reading skills are sufficient to understand English from your ability to write competent English grammar, but you seem to be allocating precious little time and/or attention to the subjects at hand. I noticed weeks ago that your retention of the class was abnormally low many respects as well. You seem to focus well on the soap opera here, and I suspect that when you were in the ministry it was social situations you only focused on, and the class material was a mere background for you. The same is probably happening in your Mormon church, because I know how serious my Mormon friends and customers are about doctrine and they'd NEVER waste as much time on a non-Mormon discussion board as you do. In other words, YOU"RE BUSTED! You are a social butterfly! You use the Mormon church as a social setting for to flit about, just like you use GSC, and just like you used TWI and the PFAL class as a place to play social games, only playing along with doctrinal matters. I see right through you. Don't feel too bad, though, you have plenty of company. MANY grads were more focused on the social matters in TWI and not the deep matters of the class. A lot of them ended up here in this rich social setting as evidenced by their poor grasp on the doctrine of PFAL and strong susceptibility and compliance with TVTs. Even many leaders were only in for the social salaams and the future abundant sharing or ministry paycheck. *** I only included only 33 words from the book and they happen to deal with needs and wants. There are MANY more and if I get some split screen help I'll post them along with their corresponding words in the film class. *** For people like you, non-serious students of the class material and bandwagon joy riders, it is ESPECIALLY the case that if you come back to written PFAL and FINALLY get serious about the subject matter, just you and God (no social distractions), then the wealth of wonderful light you will discover will be truly astounding to you! You have hardly scratched the surface of PFAL, and my offer to get you the books stands. It will literally change your life in a most profound and positive way. You have NO IDEA what you missed back then, and you are almost totally oblivious to what your are on the verge of turning down from me as you favor the fleeting camaraderie of a low brow crowd of “Mike Opposition.” I suggest you think about it a little bit before you waste your second grand opportunity to see the True God.

Wafer Not, I accept your decision and thank you for your civil converasation. If you should someday find your present path wanting, please remember that there is a huge unturned stone you left behind here. I think you'll find, should you someday decide to make your search more thorough, is that looking into written PFAL will prove to be THE safe path God has lovingly provided for us grads. ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** Raf and templelady, Gee wiz! You two should be ashamed of yourselves. I’m amazed at how much speculation you and others do here from defective human memory, shooting from the hip, without referring back to the original! Here is the red drape passage from the film class. In bold print is all that that made it into the book, almost word-for-word, on page 21. The rest is entirely absent. If we have our need and our want parallel we ask anything according to His will; how can it be His Will if we don't know His Word? His Word is His Will that gets our need and our want parallel. If we know His Word we can parallel it off. And once we get our need and want parallel, whatsoever we ask, we get. Many years ago when I was first questing in the integrity and accuracy of God's Word and doing Biblical research, just starting in the field, there were some things in the Word of God that we believed and that we understood and were practicing in our prayer life. And we were really concerned about learning more about God's Word. We had a letter from one of our radio audience from Cincinnati. And this good lady stipulated in that letter stating the following: she said, "now on Thursday night when you have your prayer group meeting and you meet with your people; I'd like for you to pray for an apartment for me. Because I have to find this apartment and I would like for this apartment to be within walking distance, two or three blocks from where I am employed." And she said, "It has to be a furnished apartment because I do not have my own furniture," and she said, "while your praying for this apartment within this area of where I am gainfully employed will you please ask God that in this furnished apartment there will be red drapes on the living room windows." My, oh my. That shook me. I thought to myself well good lord, if I'm going to pray for her for an apartment and she gets that apartment she ought to be thankful. What difference does if make if its got pink drapes or yellow drapes or orange drapes on the living room window? But she had stipulated in her letter please pray that there be red drapes on the window. Well I don't know who did the believing, I helped in the praying but I want to tell you something that night spiritually I hadn't gone this far; I believed for the apartment this I could believe for, it was a need I understood this. So I believed that she'd have an apartment but I can't imagine and I know that I did not believe anything about drapes at all. But we prayed that evening and within fifteen minutes of the time when we had prayed for this situation this lady in Cincinnati many, many, many miles away had a telephone call from an entire stranger who said to her "a friend of yours told me that you have need of an apartment, is this right?" And she said, "yes." And she said, "well where's it located?" He said, "well such and such a place." Within two blocks of where she was employed. So she said to him, "May I come and see it in the morning?" He said, "You certainly may." They made an appointment. She went next morning and looked at this apartment. And when she walked into the living room what do you think the color of those drapes were on those living room windows? Green, oh no they weren't. They were fire engine red. That's right. People, she must have had her need and her want parallel. Look at this. All right! She rented a furnished apartment and it had to have drapes on the window, right? Does it make God any difference whether the drapes are green or red or pink? No, but she had a need, that need was that they might as well have red drapes on, that's what she wanted. She got her need and her want parallel. She not only got that apartment but she got the red drapes on the windows. You talk about the accuracy of God's Word when He said He'll supply all of our need according to His riches in glory. Doesn't say He'll supply our greed but He'll supply our need according to His riches in glory. That's true. It's wonderful. So not only must you know what's available, and how to receive it and what to do with it after you've got it but you've got to get your need and want parallel if you want to tap into the resources for the more abundant life. I’d like to reproduce here some of the split screen work I’ve done on the use of “parallel” versus “balanced” for those interested in a better discussion than blind speculation Can anyone tell me if and how I can post a .doc file (or an .RTF file) with table cell formatting intact? I didn’t use column formatting, but tables.

WordWolf, Do you have documentation for me yet on those two glaring issues you brought up? I asked you about the editors (plural) that showed up here and posted what you claimed they posted. I have some contrary information in the wings, but I though I’d give you the chance to back up your claim first. I also asked you to name names of the people who told you (and you gullibly believed?) that “The Joy of Serving” was not really Dr’s last recorded teaching. I supplied text documentation and offered audio documentation that you and they are dead wrong. *** On this second issue I will qualify thusly: “The Joy of Serving” teaching may very well have been, even probably was, PREPARED by Dr for teaching before he delivered “The Hope.” I say this because I have become aware of the fact that Dr toured the country in his last months teaching much the same material that ended up in that VERY last recorded and public teaching in Scotland we now call “The Joy of Serving.” You, WW, may have confused what those people said with this fact of the earlier preparation of “The Joy of Serving.” Dr urged mastery of the written portions of PFAL in his last Emporia teaching, as I’ve posted here many times, he did it at his last Limb Meeting (I think it was Kentucky), and I've heard that he did it privately in Connecticut and Massachusetts as he was traveling towards that very last public teaching in Scotland. *** I’ve heard unsubstantiated reports that Dr's very last dying last words of his whole life, addressed to Mrs. Wierwille, were something to the effect of “Well, honey, at least we got it all down in writing.” I throw this totally unsubstantiated item out in public to try and solicit it’s verification or refutation from someone who was there. It was many years ago that this came to my attention, and I apologize for not even remembering from whom I heard it. I vaguely remember it to be Ralph D or someone who was present at his meeting with San Diego grads in the summer, around July, of 1987.

T-Bone, As for your second post, I have been mulling that over in my mind. I have several possible approaches in mind. First things first, though. Did you notice my earlier post on revvel? There’s a lot of hints there to one approach I’m contemplating. In Post #6 of this thread you can find some questions I had asked Tom Strange as he pressed me for some comment on an issue remarkable similar to templelady’s quested item #3 (my numbering system) in Post #233 of this thread. In that Post #6 of this thread I did a recap of the previous “Round 1” thread in the series in which this thread is “Round 2.” Reiterating my recap there, and reproducing it’s original color scheme I said this: RECAPPING THE PREVIOUS THREAD On the Round One thread of this PFAL series titled “The Official, the Ultimate, the Amazing PFAL Thread, Come Back to PFAL, but watch for the land mines” in Post #1009, just before it reached such a large size that it was locked down (probably to prevent slowing down the server’s hard drive from the weight), Tom Strange had asked me a question after pasting in some lines where he quoted me. That thread’s last page can be found here: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...00entry228278 Tom Strange wrote over there in that thread’s Post #1009 the following: So then you're talking "spiritually" here??? Mike 2/2/04, 12:17am. "When you see Christ in his glory he will be holding a PFAL book in his hand and teaching you from it." Mike 2/3/04 5:22am. "Jesus Christ appointed Dr his spokesman. Jesus Christ is VERY interested in PFAL. He told me so." Vickles 2/3/04, 7:51pm. "So, Mike, you weren't kidding about JC coming with a PFAL book in his hand." Mike, 2/3/04, 7:53pm. "Totally serious. I've already seen him this way more than once." ...you haven't actually physically seen him? just spiritually???” Then I responded to Tom in that thread’s last Post #1011 with: What do you mean by “...just spiritually”??? Is that like “merely spiritually”? Is there something lacking with spiritually? Is there something less than “actual” with spiritually? I think we got a lot of background work to do. *** Let me ask YOU some questions to get you prepared for some answers. When you see Jesus, how will you know FOR SURE that it’s him, the REAL him and not a counterfeit? You wouldn’t want to bend the knee and swear loyalty to the wrong god accidentally. Have you ever thought this through deeply? I used to do this all the time in the 60’s. I saw all kinds of things then. From those experiences I would say the counterfeit is much more possible than most people think. This is related to your questions to me, because how are you going to tell if what I saw was counterfeit or not? What criteria can be used to discern the real Jesus? Finger prints? Iris scan? DNA? One guy I know used touching the holes in his hands feet and the gash in his side to tell, but he got scolded for that. How much thought have you put into things like this? I’m serious. Before I’m allowed to bring you on a tour of the limits of the universe, I have to make sure you can take it. It’s a liability issue. My hands are tied by insurance regulations. You have to be fit to survive the ride, doncha know. *** Ok, T-Bone, I’m back with you now. This set of questions I asked of Tom Strange, he and others here strangely avoided dealing with, dodging them like I have always asserted we all do at times. (WW, did you notice this dodge?) Well, anyway T-Bone, I posed these questions to him in much the same way I posed questions to you: to use the responses as a springboard to my ultimate grand thesis here, right in line with your second post to me last night. I’m giving you a hint to one of the approaches I contemplated in responding to you. There’s another hint in my post on revvel not many days ago. That post of mine too was relatively ignored here, totally ignored if WW didn’t include it in his profuse blatherings that I don’t have the time or stomach to thoroughly read. I noticed long ago here at GSC that whenever I got down to some specifics on the Return of Christ it’s almost totally ignored by the usual suspects. Maybe their muses are troubled by the imminence of it. So, T-Bone, why don’t you try your hand at answering the questions I posed in Post #6 to Tom to get the ball rolling on my response to your second post to me last night? It will help me to get to the short, simple, succinct sentences you requested. Work with me on this, why don’t you? I show up here for a dialog, not to hop-to-it, write a bunch of essays before short deadlines pass, and meet the demands of posters to produce whatever whims waft through them. I may go ahead with this or any of the other approaches to your request even if you decline me the conversation mode of exploration of such. You got me intrigued with just how much I should reveal.

Wafer Not, PFAL unfolds the Bible versions we have that are closed on many issues. Where are you going to find "the mechanics of speech" explained in a version? I mentioned to templelady above how I've distanced myself from the charge of claiming that PFAL 'replaces" the bible. Did you see it? PFAL has Bible verses on nearly every page. I think PFAL is like a necessary supplement to the Bible versions we have. The Bible is addressed to “Jew, Gentile, or the church of God.” PFAL is addressed to grads. Have you noticed that different Bible versions can contradict each other in some ways, or cast confusion or uncertainty on each other a times? I think the QUALITY of PFAL is superior to the modern Bible versions we have in that it settles issues the come up when comparing Bible verses. I think that the quality of PFAL is equivalent to the quality of the first apostle supervised copies of the originals. There are some very minor errors in printed PFAL due to proofreader and printer mistakes. I think that the quality of the revelations Dr and his editors and his teachers got that ended up becoming printed PFAL... the quality of those revelations is IDENTICAL to the quality of the revelations to the original Bible writers. I think all these "think" items are not merely my opinions, but the absolute truth, or otherwise I wouldn' think them, much less post them, much MUCH less bet my life on them. They are truth and that's why I'm embraced them, and not vice versa.

T-Bone, You wrote: “Mike - how is it you can't give me a short synopsis of your main beliefs but you awkwardly ATTEMPT to prove your assertion about the inaccessibility to ancient scriptures?” How IS it? Well, did you read what I wrote? I said I was tired. Did you look at the time stamp on my post? It was 1:38 am PST. I do light manual labor for a living and I'm almost 57 years old. When I get home I'm tired. I then spent many hours in the evening writing to templelady and then to you. Writing can take more energy than light manual labor. I gave you the best I could at that late hour in a state of great fatigue. If you can’t show some gratitude, I’ll easily relagate you to the cold theologian and/or riff raff category and end conversation with you. You decide. Have you ever dealt with MANY hostile posters with MANY words shot at you before? If so, show me where. I came back this morning with fresh thoughts regarding your two posts to me. Don’t blow it and brush me off so cavalierly, PLEASE! Anyone can misbehave like that; it doesn’t take much searching in this world to find inspiration to act like an jerk’s ..... Regarding your first post last night to me, have you ever looked at Mark 16:9-20? Which side of that controversy would you be willing to bet your life on? Do you know of that controversy to which I refer? Look those verses up in a NIV and it's in plain print. Do you have some answers for me on my questions posed in preliminary answer to your first post where I mentioned the critical Greek texts? Have you read the Introduction to your Interlinear? Have you Googled “critical Greek texts”? Do you even WANT me to deal with this first post of yours to me any more beyond my late night attempt to get it started? You decide. *** You wrote: “And you still have NOT given me any specific evidence to support your claim!" Have you ANY patience and human understanding? This is a very childish and impatient demand of yours here? Did you notice in my paragraphs above that I did supply some specific evidence in my question about Mark 16, or did you blow off those paragraphs like you did my late night post? If you want to dish out tough talk to me you're going to have to be able to take it too! Kabish? *** You wrote: “Please re-read your own quote in the above text [in bold red] - do I have to diagram the sentence for you? Do I have to define each word YOU used? You're the one making these sweeping claims - I shouldn't have to do the work for you to prove your point!” E-gads man! Want me to change your diapers for you? I’m trying to have a dialog with you and you are acting like a two-year-old temper tantrum artist. *** You wrote: “You are the one that chose those particular words and phrases. Surely you're not just throwing them out there with no basis or reason! Do you understand the meaning of the words in your sentence? Are these your ideas? Can you cite specific instances that led you to conclude this?” I cited the abundance of footnotes at the bottom of every page of the Interlinear as specific proof. I then asked you some questions to see if you had enough understanding of how an Interlinear works to recognize the significance of my highly abbreviated yet potent specific citation. If you cannot answer those several questions, my plan this morning was, after getting some few hours of rest, to get more specific. I was going to “add water” to the concentrated footnote answer if you needed me to. Now, after your marching with the mob mentality here I’m not sure if I want to bother. If you want me to work with you like I have worked with some of the much more civil ladies here in recent days, just say so. If you want civil discussion I suggest you work on some answers to the questions I posed. If you can’t answer them, don’t be ashamed. Just say so. Hardly any grads can answer them, but I though maybe you could, seeing some of the intelligent posts you've made before here. I’m not going to bite your head off and refuse you more discussion if you can’t answer the questions; I’ll help supply answers, so that we can proceed. Please answer my questions from last night (1:38 am late) as well as my more recent Mark 16 question.

T-Bone, You asked for some quick synopsis of my position. Can you ask me that again someday? I’m tired and need to sleep soon. It would require more than I have right now. However, I can somewhat answer your earlier post in my sleep because I’ve done it so many, many times before. I had written: “The ancient scriptures are not accessible, and the modern man-made reconstructions of them are FAR from definitive, shifting about constantly by the latest theological fads in translation and manuscript rating.” You wrote: “Mike, do you have documentation for your bold assertion?” Yes, just look at how many footnotes are on every page of any good Interlinear. That should be documentation enough if you understand the Interlinear and what the critical Greek texts are. I’ll explain a little. Do you know what the critical Greek texts are? Do you know when they were written? Do you know why they were written? Do you know why they are called “critical.”? Many grads think that critical Greek texts are very ancient and they are most critically important and reliable texts available, and that they are the definitive “last say” on what the originals said, and that all they need be is accurately translated. They are none of these things. Do you know why they are none of these things? Do you need more of an explanation? If you can accurately answer the above questions you should be able to see my documentation for that bold assertion. Have you ever read the introduction to a good Interlinear like “THE ENGLISHMAN’S GREEK New Testament”? It’s about 12 pages long. I suggest you read it. If I have time tomorrow I’ll elaborate. If it gets lost in the shuffle please PM me. I may try to scan it and send it to you if you can’t find it in a library or bookstore. You could probably read it standing up and not have to buy the book.

Wordwolf, You’re really losing it. You wrote: “Those who actually interacted with vpw in his last few months said "THE HOPE" was the last teaching he covered for people, and that came AFTER "the Joy of Serving", which is the one Mike is quoting.” Name names here. No one has EVER contested “The Joy of Serving” being his last teaching until you just spouted this. Look at the Sep/Oct 1986 Way Mag and it will tell you “The Joy of Serving” was his last teaching. I can supply a .jpg image of it for anyone who wants to see how innacurate you are. Listen to the weekly Corps tape from the Wednesday about two days after Dr died. Craig played clips from both “The Hope” and “The Joy of Serving” and notes the latter is his last. I can supply an .mp3 of this Corps tape. Listen to tapes of both teachings and you can hear Dr to be very, very weak on “The Joy of Serving” compared to “The Hope.” I can supply .mp3 files for both. Look at the text of the POP posted here. Near the end Geer walks with Dr to the teaching that was to become the “The Joy of Serving.” Track the dates. “The Hope” was recorded on April 21, 1985. “The Joy of Serving” was recorded on May 12, 1985. The Way Magazine reports both of these dates, as well as a catalog prepared by Jim Stutz of CA in the late 90’s. How incredibly irresponsible of you. So who are the “who actually interacted with vpw in his last few months” you referred to? Name names for us and you will not be alone in this huge error. Who are they and where did they say this? How many other huge errors plague your mind? This is one reason I find your posts repulsive. Are you deliberately lying or just monumentally sloppy?