Mike

I think Galen and johniam, between the two of them, have nailed what we were taught rightly on this topic, while it’s also true that we went off into some tangents on this in later years. Galen, above, has explained that the details of one person’s receiving of revelation, as in how God works with that one individual, should never be taught as doctrine. In an earlier post johniam explained that personal experiences should never be used to establish doctrine above what is written. IF there is a conflict between the written Word and some personal experience, then the experience must line up to fit with the Word, and not vice versa as is done in many cases, like the Norman Vincent Peale account johniam reminded us was in the AC. If personal experiences do line up with the written Word, then they are fine for that individual. From all this we can see why Dr’s personal experience in 1942 was always acceptable in ministry circles, because prior to 1942 there was no authoritative written Word available.

dmiller, As I've stated several times before (but seemingly out our your earshot) tapes are fine for ministry history. It's sometimes good to untangle the events of the past, and tapes can help there a lot. If it's written in one of VPW's books or magazine articles then we're talking more than ministry history, but the final end-product of the teaching. If you can't remember this simple distinction between history and doctrine, don't worry, I'll remind you again. *** So, once again, does anyone remember ANY details about where "all nine" came from? Was it an AC item? How about Intermediate class? Unless we can go back to the record all we have are our flimsy fleeting memories to go on, and that's not good enough for me.

Allan, That may very well be how it started out: “Be READY, to OPERATE all nine all the time.” If we could pinpoint better exactly where it was taught then background like your suggestion here may clarify it better. If we can find it on tapes or in print then it can be discussed much more intelligently than if everyone merely gives their memory’s worth of impressions.

Does anyone know from where in our LARGE SET of TWI experiences this “all nine all the time” idea was taught to us?

Does anyone know WHERE this was taught? It may very well be in print or on a tape, but I don't know which one. Can anyone track where this phrase came from? Was it actually part of Dr's teaching or was it a product of some other teachers or departments?

What the Hey, You got it right. There is no simple sound bite that answers the question of why believe the Bible. It takes deep diving into the Bible for a long time for a person to well formulate this belief. The “something special” of the Bible can only be seen by having a relationship with it for a while, and hopefully with a good, enlightened start in that relationship. Likewise, I’ve asserted all along that the “something special” of written PFAL can only be seen by having a close relationship with the material, and all of the material. *** Doojable, it seems you are describing (in post #874) some of the aspects of a relationship your had with your Bible, and one that had a good, enlightened start, having the teaching of PFAL to guide you. I think this is generally the same thing as My3Cents was describing when he wrote what I reported in my post # 872: “Me, it made me wonder why I even thought the bible was ever was "the word". And I realized it was because some guy from Ohio (now dead) had told me it was.” I too arrived at my belief in the Bible from what I learned in PFAL. It took years, and the material was considerably longer than a treatise. I’m not expecting that any treatise of mine will convince anyone of what only a relationship can convince. For those spiritually already convinced, drawn by the Father, a treatise may help in getting started as well as in comparing notes later on. The idea of a newsletter addressed at the already convinced may be what I turn to next.

T-Bone, When time permits, I’d like to work what you said here with what you said in the opening of your thread titled “What is Your Thinking on Interpretation of the Bible?” On that thread you wrote: “I think some people have the idea that understanding the Bible is simply plugging in these keys and mindlessly unlocking the meaning of any Scripture.” I remember when I was one of those “some people” you write of. It was a discouraging shock to me to find out rather late in the game (mid 80’s) that the unlocking you speak of took much more.

T-Bone, Oops, I meant to post this on the PFAL thread, in response to you there. Sorry.

Sorry to ask and run, folks. The weather is like summer here and I'm off to work... to be back soon.

Doojable, Yesterday, in post #859 I wrote to you of proof and persuasion regarding our belief in the original ancient scriptures. I noticed something today on the board by another poster, one not participating on this thread, that illustrates something we’ve discussed. I had written in this thread: “I have no intention of ever trying to prove such a thesis as "PFAL is God-breathed." “Remember, my quoting Dr on his claims was not to prove the validity of those claims, it was just to prove our lack of paying sufficient attention to him. “I believe God will personally give abundant proof that they are on the right track to those OLGs who decide to obey and start mastering the PFAL material.” What I saw this morning is in the “About the Way” forum in the thread titled “The famous clergy meeting..., ...who was actually there?” This is what My3Cents wrote in Post #47 of that thread: “Me, it made me wonder why I even thought the bible was ever was "the word". And I realized it was because some guy from Ohio (now dead) had told me it was. Other than that I had no evidence of same. So I decided to go back to my original (un)belief and reject the bible until I got more evidence. [update - to this day I never have].” I’d like to hear what you, doojable say about this, as well as Tom Strange, What the Hey, dmiller, CM, Raf and a any others posting here lately. Just where do you get the idea that “the bible was ever was ‘the word’” to put it in My3Cents’ words. Got any evidence? I think it’s good to think things like this through. I enjoyed an amazingly fortunate set of circumstances to have thought this all through around 1978. There was no ministry crisis raging when I did my thinking, like the one that WAS raging when My3Cents had to think it through, and unsuccessfully I might add. But, there’s no crisis raging now. It should be possible to get real clear on WHY you all believe the scriptures, approximate as they be. Or DO you all believe? You folks can get a much better view of what goes on in my thinking the deeper you try to answer this challenging question. Why believe the Bible?

Tom, I forgot to ask you some time back: What makes you think I've not already contacted some of them? Actualy I have, a few of the older ones.

Tom, What's in it for you? Why are you concerned about my message? If you DID have any genuine concern it would translate to you getting your books open. What do I have to lose? Time. What do I stand to gain by staying here? One or two or three new OLG friends to meet here. Why don't YOU go over there to MySpace and ask the young TWI people if they (or their parents) know anything about Dr's last teaching and it's getting lost? Show me the interest I'm missing.

Todd, It matters to me, but for entertainment purposes only. It's my perception from reading the standard KJV that most people most of the time are turned AWAY from the True God and are totally distracted like this BECAUSE OF the many, many other things going on out there. I tend to think that if something is getting a lot of attention in the world it's often because it's quite opposite to God's position.

Yes, Hey, I see that too, that most of our compatriots have whimped out and gone back to join the system. It seems that all most Boomers think about these days is retirement and health insurance. To get the ball rolling in PFAL mastery, though, it shouldn't take a large number of people. With the Internet, and unlimited long distance phone calling, we could do a lot with just ten people working those pages.

Tom, As you get your books open and begin mastering them I'll count on you to help me convince others to do the same.

doojable, You wrote: “BTW if you would like to answer my question from several pages back I would still like to read it - either here or in a pm.” Yes, I’m re-reading what I missed in back pages. *** You wrote: “I highly suggest you do put the time into a research paper. You could do it in stages - "Pfal is Godbreathed" could be you first thesis in a grander scale piece.” Can you imagine the difficulties in doing a similar research paper on “The Original Biblical Manuscripts Are God-breathed” ? I’ve often brought this idea up, why do we believe the originals are God-breathed, but never get any takers. It is a staggeringly difficult subject to approach, isn’t it? Where would you begin in such a research paper. Forget the research paper, how would you teach just one person, one willing meek person? Suppose they gave you all the time and attention needed, how would you prove such a thesis to them that the originals of the KJV is God-breathed? *** I have no intention of ever trying to prove such a thesis as "PFAL is God-breathed." Remember, my quoting Dr on his claims was not to prove the validity of those claims, it was just to prove our lack of paying sufficient attention to him. I believe God will personally give abundant proof that they are on the right track to those OLGs who decide to obey and start mastering the PFAL material.

Tom Strange, You wrote: “...IF all of this stuff is God-breathed, then it wouldn't be limited to OLGs. I think that's a limit you're putting on it. I think those young folks would probably be highly receptive to your work. And if here is where you'll bring out the 'to whom addressed' argument, how do you know that veepee's edict to "master PFAL" wasn't addressed to ALL grads? Just like the epistles are (allegedly) written to those of the grace administration yet we were taught they were addressed "to us" even though we weren't alive then... Wouldn't it make sense that vepee's edict was addressed to ALL grads... those alive at the time and those to come? IF it's God-breathed that's the only way it makes sense...You're limiting God's audience... these new kids could use some learnin'!” I think it’s God who limited Himself to a small audience, and the reason for that is to get a job done. This is not uncommon for Him to do something like this. The MySpace kids have not taken the PFAL class, and have no built-in reason to do so and then even less a reason to master the written PFAL materials. I aim at older grads because that’s the only group that has the possible motivation to finally obey Dr’s directives to focus strongly on the books and magazine articles. We older grads should have a sense of unfinished business with the ministry ending the way it did. Those of us who want better closure than “who did who” have chance to see what really went wrong in the ministry we had dedicated our lives to. It’s only to this group, us older grads, that the loss of Dr’s last teaching can have any meaningful impact. It’s only us who had seen Dr’s ministry working well at one time, and it’s only us OLGs who gradually dropped the ball on studying the books, some less than others. I’d love to see exceptions to this general rule, but in a practical sense I don’t expect many. The traditional tug of the KJV and other conventional versions is so strong even most OLGs faint at the thought of finding God’s Word outside the approval of the denominations. I don’t expect to find much courage to “buck the system” in the MySpace kids.

Tom Strange, You forget, though, it's generally OLGs that I'm aimed at. There don't look to be too many OLGs there. The MySpace grads are grads of another class. *** doojable, I'd like to get into the dicotomy of the Natural-Factual versus the Spiritual-Divine in written PFAL. You're so right about putting out fires. I've thought of retiring and putting out an OLG Newsletter, compete with AARP maybe.

The discrediting you refer to is illusory. My thesis has hardly been presented in total. What has been presented has hardly been paid attention to. I spend most of my time here responding to issues about me or ministry history. I’d prefer the latter but rather most of all prefer to get into the texts. There’s some of that doojable commented on regarding BTMS’s Preface, so MY interests draw me in that direction.

Yes, Raf, if there is something said in private that fits in with the public printed record, I’d accept it. If it contradicts then I must decide which takes precedence and the vote goes to the public printed record. SOMETHING has to take precedence, and it’s GOT to be the public printed record. My policy of not leaning on private conversations with Dr is well thought through and firm. One of the reasons it is in place is because in private Dr should have been allowed the freedom to brainstorm, and think things through with a little company. He should also be allowed to the freedom to be wrong, to have a bad day. It’s entirely within the realm of expectations of normal humans that they have self doubts and question the track they are on. I would expect that there were days when Dr was discouraged with the progress of the ministry or with his own spiritual growth. On such an occasion he could easily say out loud that he thought some genuine revelation was less merely senses reasoning. He’d be dead wrong, but anyone in earshot might be sore pressed to believe him if they weren’t locked onto what had been already put in print. *** dojable, the idea of me doing a manifesto has come up several times. I’d rather just get into the contents of the books, though. Most of the posting here is still focused on me.

On that same thread as dmiller's HCW link was this eventual response by me. Mike Feb 17 2005, 07:47 PM Post #210 HCW, As a preparation for our discussion, could I ask you to think through the setting in which Dr's comments occurred? I'm not only interested in the EXACT words he said that you paraphrased, but also anything he said just prior and just following your reported words. I also want to know exactly what you said in that conversation. I even would find it helpful to know a few of the other topics that were discussed that day, as well as any similar topics that came up in previous days. In other words, I'm seeking exact wording he used AND the EXTREMELY exact context in which the whole conversation occurred. I'm mentioning this up-front to give you time to think it through now, instead of surprising you with such a challenge deep into a debate. You mentioned that you had a photographic memory, and I am hoping that the auditory components of your memory may be of similar sharpness. I know that this may possibly not be the case, since the human brain has far more space devoted to visual information than to auditory, but whatever you can remember an then bring to the table would be extremely helpful in a thorough discussion.

CM, I've been over this with you many times already. Step A is the 5-senses mastery of the physical collaterals for senses understanding. Step B is the spiritual understanding Father gives us as we work Step A to the best of our ability. If you want to skip around step A then you will be deceiced by the spirit of error. I want nothing of your error, so I am not meek to you at all. I hear none of your warnings nor instructions. I don't want to hear of your methods. You have not earned my respect.

CM, Most posters here can't face the collaterals. I can and found it enjoyable.

George, Rationality has it's limitations too. It presumes a lot.

Oh, George, you're obviously are arguing with this boy right now, just not daring to face me. To place another thing above board that you might like to keep under, your criteria for discussion buddies excludes Moses, Jesus, and Paul, to name a few. No pain, no gain.