Mike

I'm extremely reluctant to get involved in another thread for many reasons, but here goes. Outin88, Yes, that IS very interesting what you just posted. To it can be added the revelation given to Baalam, as well as to David and Solomon. We are stuck in time and see it one instance at a time. God sees the whole timeline at once. We think that if someone repents, then they can qualify for revelation, but God can see their FUTURE sins and still decides to give the revelations. God's ways are not our ways. The revelation is not a reward for being good, but light that men disparately need. God saw David's sin before he did it, yet gave him revelation. God saw Solomon's sin ahead of time yet still gave him wisdom and knowledge in abundance. *** Earlier in this thread you wrote: "By the way, regarding Wierwilles heavy revy on his selection of Martindale, you used Saul as an example, but if you read I Samuel chapter 8, you'll see where God had Samuel warn the Israelites about the bad things their king would do. I don't recall any such warning regarding Martindale." I'm just wondering how hard you tried to recall any such warning. Without beeing TOO facetious, may I ask you did you sit up straight and push your short term memory button, or did you heave-ho hard with your long term memory crank? Or did you merely spit out your latest emotional feelings on the subject? Please forgive my harsh tone. I'm not in a good mood. I feel all three methods above to be inadequate if accuracy is the goal. I check the record. Actually, I believe he did warn us, and in many ways, but as usual by 1980-82, we weren't paying much attention. My dim memory has a lot of Saul references popping up in SNS tapes prior to Craig's installation, but I haven't had the time to check that record yet. I feel I don't a need to, though, because of all the other evidence I did find. If anyone is inclined to do this I have a very complete scripture index of all those tapes. My best recollection is that it was during those years that I first learned of Saul. I do know from scripture that God warned, via Samuel, against the whole kingly thing, not just Saul but all kings. So we had some warning in the scriptures, and (I think) in SNS tapes, and maybe even Mag articles. More warnings came at Craig's installation. On that SNS tape Dr didn't install him as the spiritual leader, only as the leader of the 5-senses corporation, with the hope that Craig WOULD rise up... maybe. He also made 6 or 7 warnings that unbelief was rampant then at Craig's installation. He also included a note that Craig may need to be removed if he didn't rise up spiritually. He also seemed to indicate that the choice for Craig was a 5-senses BOT decision, not revelation. All of this information was posted in a thread I did here that survived the pruning of several not long ago, here: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...1&st=&p=entry Then one month later, in his very next SNS after Craig's installation, Dr surely did teach on Saul. Then, in one of his last SNS teachings Dr warned that the WOW Auditorium COULD someday soon, in five or ten years were his words, be closed to grads. He brought up the possibility the day before it opened, I think. Then on his last trip to see Geer, Dr warned many people individually. Dr's grand warning is embedded in the POP warned of the coming doom. I have a thorough essay on why we can trust Geer to have gotten Dr's quotes right (and that's about all we can trust Geer on) that I posted on the latest Innie website that's now gone. I saved the files though and can re-post them if anyone wants. Dr also warned about Geer WITHIN the POP. Geer didn't get it and dutifully echoed these interesting words. Dr also warned about Geer in his very last recorded words, at the end of "The Joy of Serving," his last/lost teaching. Outin88, I seem to detect a note of objectivity still left in you, so this might not apply to you as much as to others. I'm getting more and more frazzled with posting to people who are so far gone they can't even hear it. There's just so much information lacking in those who think they are being thorough. No one seems willing to go back and look. Everyone seems to be totally satisfied with inaccurate, partial, and fading memories, and are willingly altering their own memory and impressions on a daily basis. I always wondered how could the first century church have POSSIBLY fallen from such a high and mighty position, but no more. People are as willing to jump on the bandwagon and vigorously deprogram themselves en masse, as they were to take PFAL and jump on that bandwagon.

Garth, I think I'm pretty accurate most of the time when I detect a tone of great hostility and a complete unwillingness to listen but to only twist and distort what I say. I get that from you almost all the time. ****** Back to you, Oakspear, This is something I posted on the recent Innie website: As for the objection that was raised about the legitimacy of Victor Paul Wierwille's doctorate degree, a post was made by Research Geek at GSC years ago (and then repeated by me) that dispels this common rumor. However, since the facts do not fit in with the agenda of the objectors, these posts were ignored. I'll repeat that post here, only to have it ignored again by those who want to see only negatives, but for those of us who are weary of rumor mill speculations and gossip this re-post should prove refreshing. originally posted by Research Geek October 04, 2002: "I'm not trying to defend vpw, but I do think that the facts need to be made straight. vpw did get a masters at Princeton which is not too shabby and he did go to Pikes Peak Seminary. I saw the home moves of his graduation. There were a number of people in his class. My wife and I searched for the place and found it when we visited Colorado. We drove up to it on a hill and were looking at the building when the owner of the house came out. We said hi and explained what we were doing and he invited us in and showed us around. The owner said that indeed the Seminary operated out of that building and even showed us a picture of the place years ago taken from across the valley. It was in a frame and mounted on the wall. The owner said that it was a condition of the house purchase agreement that the picture remain with the building. We took photos and showed them to vpw. He remembered the picture on the wall. "The main problem was that Pikes Peak Seminary utilized an "experimental" kind of education method. Because of that, its coursework was not accepted by many other institutions. vpw did put in the time and did get a doctors degree. But few institutions recognized it. Later the seminary fell into disrepute and its degree granting authority was abused and became a place where you could write in and get a degree, similar to what you can now do on the Internet. That fact made his degree even more difficult to legitimize. I think that he kept the title obstinately, in spite of the criticism because he had done the work and put in the time. Unfortunately for him, he chose the wrong institution for the effort. "So it was not a lie. He believed that he had earned the title. Perhaps his decision to go was unwise. I think that if I was going to put in the effort, I would have chosen an institution with better credentials." I might distance myself from a few of the opinions expressed at the end of the above post, but the bulk of it is quite noteworthy. I urge the objectors to dig deeper than just listening to what's in the wind, and not base crucial life decisions on the lies of people who didn't bother to get informed. Dr not only earned his doctorate, but he performed far beyond what any PhD has ever done for anyone. He brought us God's light like it hasn't been seen in 2000 years. In my book that earns him credit far beyond a doctorate.

Hi Oak, Raf doesn't have it right about me, as usual. I am still in the process of switching my mind from a life long focus on tapes and videos of what any TWI leadership said on tape... to only what Dr wrote to us grads in the PFAL books and magazine articles. This has not been an easy shift. I became convinced I needed to do it after several years in the fellowship I attend. That was some 4 years ago now, and I'm still making the transition. That's how I see DOCTRINE is to be learned. Now, competing with that process is HISTORY. From 1987 to 1998 I was totally focused on figuring out how so many wonderful, kind, loving leaders in the ministry transformed into ignorant foot holes and in a very short time. I wanted to know what went wrong. I found many clues in the tape record, but none of them fit together into a complete picture until Dr's last teaching, which is a tape and not a book or magazine article prepared by Dr, was shown to me. When I obeyed the instructions in that last teaching and came back to the printed record of Dr's I started seeing how far the TVTs had drifted from what was in print. Most of my activity here at GreaseSpot is to point out the history, the accurate history of what happened to us from the combination of the tape record and the print record. I crave the opportunity to shift to the print record with other grads, but most here are stuck in history, and very inaccurate history at that. No one seems willing to check any records. Many seem totally willing to alter their memory of what happened, or what's left of it. I can understand people like Raf getting it all wrong where my position is, but they never ask civil questions, of me, or hardly ever. Thank you, once again, Oakspear, for having the objectivity to be able to ask a simple question and hear the simple answer. P.S. I find that typing out "Dr" with no period is far easier and faster than any other way of referring to him. For me he did earn that degree, and I might remind you of Research Geek's post here on how he investigated that deal by going to Pikes Peak and checking out the record. He's one of the very few GreaseSpotters that seem to have done this kind of thing, not shoot from the hip, but investigate objectively. Others here will dig for dirt, but miss the gold.

Hi Oak, You wrote: "Doesn't Wierwille in PFAL specify there that believing works for saint and sinner alike, without 'clarifying" that it's "believing the Word of God'?" He points out that for the KJV we need to collect together all the verses on a given topic to see the whole story on that topic, and not just run with one verse. The same holds for PFAL. If you don't see that clarification right there on the same page, it's elsewhere. We must look for the whole picture. In many, many places he tells us that the proper application is to "find the promise of God" that we need in our life and believe IT. Otherwise we're operating the law of believing in the dark and it's sure to fall apart on us sooner or later. For devilish people it's often later, even much later, because they don't have an adversary, or as much of one. *** I'm pretty convinced that when he uses that phrase "saint and sinner" he's using it NOT in the Biblical sense but in the classical Western religion sense. He was reaching out to a lot of people stuck in religion. Later on he brings up what a biblical "saint" is, a set apart one, and that it's different from the classical definition. When he talks about saint and sinner he pointing out we don't have to FIRST get totally pure, like a saint in the classical sense, in our walk for believing to work. We can apply it NOW and get results. The results help us in our walk to apply it even more efficiently the next time. It's similar with SIT. We don't FIRST become spiritual and then qualify for SIT. The SIT helps us to GET TO that spirituality. Religion teaches that God can only work with us if we first fix ourselves, but unfortunately we can't fix ourselves. God MUST work with sinners or there'll be no fixing at all. SIT helps us get to a state of higher perfection, as opposed to being a reward to us for getting there all by ourselves. Believing and SIT are highly related, as What the Hay pointed out earlier. Speaking and believing go hand in hand. SIT is spiritual speaking. God honors believing in sinners and that's good thing because we're ALL sinners. Religion teaches us that there are goodie goodies out there who don't sin and that believing only works for them. Dr's teaching on believing working for sinners is to negate that religious training many of us got. It liberated me from my religious training and inspired me to want to sin less, so I could apply the law of believing more efficiently. Sinners can believe a promise of God without even knowing it's a promise. God is against sickness and death. Without knowing any of the Bible a sinner can believe for protection from death and healing from disease and God can honor that. If they do know the Bible and focus on it they are MUCH more likely to hang in there with believing and get the results without being talked out of it. Like I mentioned to dmiller above and again yesterday, all these things get fine tuned more and more when we fully grasp the difference between senses understanding and spiritual understanding. On the other hand, if we stay in the senses understanding they get muddied with time. That's what many here are experiencing as time goes by. I am determined to move in the opposite direction. *** You wrote: "Don't you normally reject non-PFAL statements of Wierwille when they differ from PFAL?" I don't know what you mean here. What's a non-PFAL statement of Dr's?

templelady, You have a point. I may do that. I'm not sure it will make a difference anymore, though. I get the impression that minds have been made up from the total rejection of what I HAVE documented and quoted. I'm definitely not going to do it tonight. I have to remember that "a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still." I'm seeing it here. I wonder what documentation will do, other than waste my time. I already spent 4 hours two weeks ago documenting one tiny point for dmiller on the latest innie website and it seemed to not even make a dent. ****** dmiller, I've calmed down now. There are things about Dr's teaching on the law of believing that I don't yet understand well enough to post much on ...yet. So I won't right now. I did post something yesterday on this thread about the spiritual application of that law versus the senses application of it. Much of what many have criticized about Dr's teaching, including a few items in your most recent post, I see being totally resolved as we grasp this spiritual/senses dichotomy. Now let's go back to the "tid-bit" you claimed Dr NEVER taught on. In many, many places in Dr's teachings he DID teach that we should find the promise of God in His Word and believe THAT. The TVTs were where this item turns up missing. Most people never went back to the books to clear this up. I hear criticism of Dr's teaching lacking this item all the time and it's bogus. The TVTs lack it and people confuse the TVTs with Dr's teaching. In many, many places in Dr's teachings he is crystal clear on how the power comes from God. God energizes the power in believing. The power comes from God. The credit goes to God. The glory goes to God. Dr taught this over and over. We drifted from it and constructed TVTs that lacked it. The books don't lack it. Period.

Groucho, Regardless of the traits of my personality, documentation is documentation. If this were a personality contest, I'd quit. When the personality contest quits, the one you embrace, you'll be high and dry. Those who can't see past the flesh shouldn't call themselves spiritual leaders. Those who can't see the documentation shouldn't call themselves objective.

No Thomas, a broken record has the same lines repeating over and over and NOTHING else. When I see repeated lies I repeatedly want (and sometimes do) face up to them. Jesus repeatedly obeyed his Father's will, so wold you call HIM a broken record. And don't give me the "You're not Jesus, Mike" usual line of baloney. I have VOLUMES I've already posted on how stupid the plagiarism charges are in light of the MANY, MANY admissions Dr gave us that he collected from many sources. He gave names, and he even had some of their material in the Way Bookstore. He simply didn't use footnotes, and I'm GLAD he didn't clutter God's Word with them. God gets the credit for the written PFAL, not Dr and not the men who helped him with blocks of text at times. For you to insist on scholarly formalities in the MANNER he cited his sources when he was dealing with a FAMILY setting (albeit very large in later years) is ludicrous. The reason we have this thread here is because for almost 20 years people who want to discredit the GOOD work Dr did have been beating a frenzied drum to trump up false charges of plagiarism. If you want to get sucked into that frenzy go ahead. I will resist it at every turn, regardless of your name calling. I've been called MUCH worse here, so give up.

dmiller, You wrote: "Docvic never did teach that little tidbit of info, although it is found many times in the scripture." Oh PLEEEEEASE! Do you want to keep that sentence up? Do you know how I could tear that to shreds? Does my memory serve correctly that you are a newspaper reporter (or is that def59?)? Even if you are not, is this a responsible thing to say: "...never did teach..."? Are we to suppose that you went through all the tapes, all the books, all the magazine articles before you wrote that? Or did you simply pull it out of your butt because you knew most critics of Dr would think it smelled like a rose? Is you memory THAT good that you could say "never" ? If I were to show you oooodles of places where Dr DID most certainly teach that "little tidbit of info" would you repent of your attitudes and start re-examining OTHER inclinations of yours that are loosely based on faulty memory. Or would you act just like JAL did when I brought to his face ten instances of where he was dead wrong and just shrug it off? (please read my previous post here) If you are a newspaper man, do you think a responsible editor would keep you on the job if you wrote like that for a paper that wants to have a reputation for unbiased reporting? I'll delete this post if you delete your seriously erronious sentence. Otherwise I MAY spend the time to find the ten proofs that you have some serious memory and integrity problems.

WOW! CoolWaters, I'm impressed at all the work you've already been doing in this line. I will forward all of this to Eddie. BTW, Eddie is not one of my "diciples" at all in the PFAL stuff, just a grad. I was engaged in a heated debate with him by e-mail after meeting him on another grad site JUST DAYS before Katrina struck. We were just getting around to seeing each other's sides a bit, and cooling down the debate when he saw the sudden need to evacuate. Ever since then it's been mostly prayer with lots of cell phone disconnects and long blackouts. He stayed in a tent with his 80 year old mother on the front lawn of some gracious inland residents for weeks, but now is getting an apartment. His house was flooded, but may escape demolition. Lots of mold and everything ruined. It's been an interesting and totally unexpected connection for me, and the news reports have been something I can relate to more than I ever dreamed possible with his first hand insights getting through once in a while. He's looking to God and accepting the great challenges. I've been only able to help him in prayer, a tiny bit of money, encoraging words, and now I'm looking for ways to help with the collapse of his whole social structure. CoolWaters, thank you for your help greatly. I haven't had a chance to see if anything like my grandiose idea for a website is in the collection you linked me to, but time will tell. Thanks again.

I agree with TheEvan and Raf about this quote from Raf: "Evan put it best: it's what and whom we believe that makes it work." *** In my response to WTH there was also agreement with Evan's comments on context where I posted "in those verses." I was going to bold font that phrase but forgot. We were taught that we need to see ALL the verses on a particular topic to see the whole picture, not just "those verses." *** The real key to the power of believing resides in God and His word. Our mental operation of believing is like simply turning on a faucet. The water supply, it's pressure, and it's purity do NOT come from the operation of turning the faucet. For me to take credit for the abundance of water, it's pressure, and it's purity simply because I turned the faucet is stupid... yet that's what a lot of us did... regarding the power of believing... in the TVTs we built and swallowed. *** When JAL blew into town in 1988 with the stunning news that we were taught wrongly he used similar ways of explaining what I just did. He accurately pointed out that we had forgotten that it was THE WORD that we had to believe, not just our desire for any old thing like many of us were doing by then. He accurately pointed out that we were acting pretty stupid (like my example above) by failing to give the credit for the power to God and we were getting pretty big headed about it, even to the point of drifting into witchcraft. But THEN he laid the blame on VPW and PFAL. I tended to agree with him at that time, but something nagged at the back of my mind. I kind of remembered Dr teaching it rightly long ago in the film class. I went back to the bootleg copy of the film class I had found were proliferating in great abundance back then and found at least ten places where Dr taught it totally accurate, both on WHAT we had to believe and WHO was to get the credit. This was the first time I got an inkling that there was a TVT, a Twi Verbal Tradition that we had been immersed in for years that had drifted far from what was actually in PFAL. It took ten years for this observation to jell, but I could see right away that SOMETHING was wrong. The next year when JAL returned I gave him my discoveries, documenting the segment number and how many minutes into the segment Dr had taught it right. He totally ignored it. That helped me to see that the top leadership had drifted even farther from God's heart than we peons had. For the next ten years I saw one head honcho after another fall from my respect as their extreme ignorance and arrogance slipped out while I interrogated them. By the time I was shown Dr's Last/Lost teaching in 1998 I knew instantly that it was one last desperate attempt he made to get his top leadership to see that they were far from what he had taught them. .

templelady, It occurred to me that I forgot to mention that in the "other" forum that may come to pass by the grace of Pawtucket I'd rather not have any authority to exclude ruffians or to police it in any way. Maybe just having a friendly border would be best? I'd like to come into other forums and post too. I've refrained from bothering Paw about it so soon from the move, but if you are in contact with him already I wanted to include these thoughts As for your stated dilemmas, maybe you accidently have the "ignore" feature turned on for Raf and/or for YOURSELF. The minute I saw the "ignore" feature in MY OWN profile I froze! "Gosh" I wondered. "What would happen if I licked it?" ****** What the Hay, You are right about the prominence of speaking in those verses. We were taught about positive confession in the books, but in the evolving TVTs (Twi Verbal Traditions) it got lost. We were ALSO taught that believing implies ACTION, and speaking is a highly likely action in many cases, but even that got less and less explicit in the TVTs. In the film class Dr teaches about how Jesus SPOKE to the fig tree, and didn't beat around the bush. I don't know if that made it into WAP class or not.

dmiller, Remember John 1:1 that says the Word (Christ) was with Him in the beginning, in His foreknowledge. God foreknew that the immediate implementation of His plan for spiritual fellowship in the Garden wouldn't work because of man's disobedience, but that His ultimate plan in Christ Jesus WOULD WORK because of his perfect obedience.

This is TOO wierd. Raf is taunting me from underneath temple lady's skirt and I can't get back at him! I need a drink. :wacko:

The potential users of such a site could also include regular (or not so regular) visitors to New Orleans who are disconected with many people.

Hi Allan, I started out with your position of believing in only the partial inspiration of PFAL. What put me over the top was my obedience to Dr's Last/Lost Teaching. When I put aside all of my secular reading material and carefully read only PFAL texts for a while I was astounded. It also helped having a teacher who had done the same several years before me. I NEVER would have believed what I do now if it weren't for all that I saw in the text that I had forgotten or that had slipped by me unawares.

Taking off my usual hat I'm bringing up a very new kind of topic. I just got off the phone with a poster here, not a heavy poster, but he told me he posted a little at the old site, and he gave me permission to mention his name here. His name is Eddie Morales and he is from a suburb of New Orleans, evacuated for now, but just beginning to slowly re-enter. He told me that there are so many people that are not moving back into the area that the permanent disconnect with neighborhood friends is going to be massive. I suggested to him that we could look around for a website that might help in this area of need. Does anyone know of such a website? Would anyone like to put such a website together if one is not available now? I can envision a board with a forum for every town and community, subdivided down with users placing threads for every neighborhood, every school, every bar and tavern, every coffee shop, and every hangout. This way friends and acquaintances can find each other. My vision is not complete, and I can also see plenty of room for abuses, but is there any such site already in existence? Or is there any computer forum geek that can see how it might be done? It occurred to me that something might even be done here, but the potentially gigantic number of users might make it impractical to continue with normal GSC business. Any ideas?

dmiller, I wanted to come back to this. The most important things in the immediate is one thing, but ultimately it can be quite different. There were times when very little was available and protection was the immediate need. But God's ultimate plan is to have GREAT fellowship with us and that is being able to commune spiritually, to communicate spiritually. When I talk about us entering into the new administration, this is what I mean. Once the PFAL writings were completed the steps to be taken towards spiritually understanding those writings became the most important thing. *** Also, please pay very close attention to the sentence I bold fonted regarding I Cor. 12:3b in the previous post I did addressed to you. I reprinted it in purple. Understanding that verse and Dr's teaching on it is one of the most important things I've ever posted here. I'd also highly recommend reviewing Dr's teaching on that verse in RHST. I know that it doesn't look all that big a deal now, but it has GREAT meaning and application later.

Sometimes I read one poster's tone into another's and it looks like I did that with you, templelady. I apologize. Like I said, this idea of yours is somewhat in the works already. I can only take so much of these battles myself.

With WordWolf around, the ignore feature is useless on me. B)

Hi dmiller, Getting a 5-senses message across is all He can do most of the time, but what He REALLY WANTS, what God ultimately and intimately wants is fellowship on His level, which is spiritual. This is foolishness to a Christian with a natural man's mind which can't comprehend spiritual matters. While there was a hefty 5-senses message in PFAL to us when were young spiritually, the ultimate message is spiritual. Both are simultaneously in PFAL. There are many places in there where the 5-senses message is somewhat fitting to the 5-senses reality we experience, but not totally. This is the reason we "bought it" at first, because we could see the 5-senses correlation, but then later rejected it when we saw discrepancies. All along God set up PFAL to work for us totally in the spiritual realm, which he knew would become available today. To look NOW at the Great Principle from the 5-senses is outside God's plan. Back then we could see that there was some kind of barrier to communication between God and man and it somewhat fit. Now we should look at that Great Principle and see that it is SPIRITUAL communication on GOD'S level that is impossible without man having spirit. *** Remember when Dr taught us about I Cor. 12:3b which reads in the KJV as: "...and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost."? This verse looks just as "bogus" as Jbarrax thinks Dr's Great Principle is. I can get a parrot to say "Jesus is the Lord" by feeding him crackers. I can get a spiritless man to say "Jesus is the Lord" by offering him money. Why did Paul say it that way? For the same reason Dr states the Great Principle the way he does. Paul was saying no man can REALLY say "Jesus is the Lord" unless he has spirit to understand what he is saying. Paul was talking spiritually. No man can SPIRITUALLY say "Jesus is the Lord" but by holy spirit. This is one of the most crucial things to know about PFAL. Oddly enough, didn't someone just say the word "ubiquitous" on this thread? Getting this natural/factual separated from the spiritual/divine is ubiquitously taught in PFAL, yet, because we still had natural man minds then (and most still do) we were blind to it. If we come back to PFAL with meekness and start mastering it then God can start showing us what he REALLY had Dr teach in those books and magazine articles. *** I'm not surprised that my explanation doesn't fit with your cat situation. ;) It was only an analogy I offered and it has to break down SOMEWHERE! You might look at CSBP the same way as this Great Principle. Five senses wise, there is SOME correlation between giving and receiving back abundance. I've seen the principle of tithing held forth in lots of self-help books and "How to Make Million$" types of books, and it's there because GENERALLY it works. But look at that same law SPIRITUALLY and it always works. Ditto for the Law of Believing. When we learn to see PFAL with spiritual eyes then we will see much farther than ever before. I expect to be taken as foolish or even insane by those grads who refuse to see it this way. The Word guarantees that the natural man's mind will think that way. Feeding that mind God-breathed soul food will solve their problem. Since you can't find real God-breathed writings anywhere since their loss in the first century (only man-breathed attempts to reconstruct them) God had to step in in 1942 and fix this dilemma for us.

Jbarrax, I know you can't be having any fellowship with anyone but PFAL rejectors because ALL grads have rejected it except for a very small few who have come back. Some may SAY they haven't rejected it, but they have. They have all rejected looking at it the way The Teacher told them to look at it, by mastering it's written forms. templelady, You are practicing the same principles of LCM as you accuse me of. You just cant stand to see anyone EFFECTIVELY oppose the anti-PFAL stance you embrace. Just for your information I have already discussed your idea with Pawtucket months ago and he is very positive about it. I have not brought it up much with him lately because I figured there's still a lot of move related work for him. Tell me, would you ban me from all discussion on threads in your sight even though I have shown total restraint in only posting on a very small number of threads here for over two years now? I saw your brand of itellectual inbreeding before in TWI and especially in the Corps. It looks like you brought that attitude with you.

Jbarrax, Your discourse on The Great Principle got my attention. I used to wrestle with this for years. I used to worry about a PFAL contradiction on this with the handwriting on the wall incident at Bellchazer's party. I'm not prepared to fully discuss it right now, but I have a ton of notes on it. Maybe some day we can, but it would have to be a discussion from within PFAL, not externally to it. I'm sure you know of the principle I just stated. When Bible scholars don't believe that the scriptures are (or were) God's Word, when they are rank unbelievers, then many things are invisible to them. When they reason from outside the scriptures they are able to see contradictions, while when we look at them and reason meekly from within their authority we see things fit. The same holds for PFAL. *** I will throw this out for consideration. If you have a pet, like a cat or a dog, you can talk to them. To a very limited degree they can "understand" short sentences and phrases, and their name, and a few other things. But if you wanted to have a deep conversation with them, if you wanted to REALLY talk to them and with them where they really got what deep things you were saying, you'd fail. You could NOT discuss with them the human condition and things deep in your heart. It's just not possible. My impression of Dr's teaching on this Great Principle is that for those with no spirit and no spiritually prepared mind, for God to talk to them is like us talking to our pets. Sure, something gets communicated between pets and their owners but it's so constricted that to compare a dog's understanding of a deep conversation with us to that of a human's understanding is ludicrous. Because I think within PFAL I don't see a contradiction there. We can communicate on a very constricted level with animals, but we can't talk to them on OUR level. God can "talk" to people with no spiritual mind but He can't talk to them on HIS level, which is what He craves to do. You've been hanging out with PFAL rejectors for so long that you don't get much information like this. I've seen a general tendency in grads, both in the good old days and now too, to practice intellectual inbreeding. If you had more respectful conversations with me you could see a whole new world.

outin88, I'm just doing my best to accurately deal with what we were given IN WRITTEN FORM. I can see that this is where we grads missed it in many ways. Most here are prone to think that we grads did nothing wrong and that all the bad came from someone else. I see that when it comes to crooked handlebars, what most grads have in their heads of the PFAL teaching is NOT from the written record of PFAL but from the verbal traditions that grew up ove time, and that drifted far from PFAL. ****** Thanks, oldiesman! I'm so glad to see that we can disagree on some things, yet you see that I am on track with the same Father and Son. I think many minds here are clouded with emotion. I admit that what I post is very much against culture and tradition, and that can bother people. I used to think that all PFAL grads were tough as nails when it came to tradition, but I can see many now have retreated into the comfort zone that world provides. And now, with posters finding the "ignore" feature, people like you and me can discuss our differences (AND agreements) here with less distraction. *** I've wondered from the start of this new board how many would hit the ignore feature for me. Actually, I think it's a more honest way for my critics to proceed, because at least half of what I say is ignored most of my critics anyway in their determined effort to merely discredit me. I say to them (even though they can't hear me): good riddance. Plus, I can comment on what they say without then coming back after I'm done and re-opening a subject I'm content to leave as done. Maybe this way I can have more peace and less distractions in posting, and the more open GreaseSpotters and visitors here will see less of the criticizing distractions to what I'm trying to get across. I've been getting pretty fed up with the same mindless criticisms appearing over and over no matter how many times I deal with them. I had to retreat to PTs for the last two months of the old board I was so unhappy with all the ragging on me. But I wonder how many of will be tempted to undo the ignore feature on me when they see a hot discussion where I'm quoted in posts. It may be amusing. When Raf and Belle jump into the fray we'll all know they succumbed to the temptation! :D ****** Jbarrax, You still got it wrong. It is a fact that I "invade" a very small minority of threads here. I most often REFRAIN from posting when a topic hot to me is being discussed. A few others have seen this, but not you yet. Take notes and jot down numbers and you will see that your impression of me on many threads where these topics are being discussed is subjective on your part and inaccurate.

You guys are so predisposed to get me wrong that you do it very well. WW, you are continually trying to make me the subject of discussion here. I could deal with it but why bother. When I explain portions of my life it's to help those who want to know the deeper truths of PFAL, not to give the definitive, complete description of my life. I'm not going to bother to fine tune your understanding of me and my history. You'll just take it wrong in your determined effort to discredit what I say about PFAL. Sometimes I will fine tune subjects regarding PFAL that you botch, though. I regard PFAL as BOTH a set of keys to understand the riddles of the ancient scriptures AND revelation itself in written form. You seem to think that God cannot engage in the process of giving us keys. You seem to think that if there is a set of keys to the scriptures, those keys cannot be authoritative themselves. PFAL is God pointing out to us grads what's right and what's not in the scriptures antiquity has given to and translated for us, and much more. I'm amazed how dense an intelligent man like you can be, but you are just determined to keep those blinders tightly in place. You're unable to get the heart of what I say because of your bias. Yo are not seeking the truth, you are seeking to present yourself as an analyst of the truth. ****** Groucho, I woke up this morning with a thought. Last hight I had a sentence as I wrote my post to you, but was too tired to run with it so I deleted it from my word processor before I finally posted it all. But now I feel better about posing it. I'll admit, this special person stuff is a bit on my frontier of knowledge, so bear with me. I am a little surprised, though, that this stuff isn't well known by others. Here's the line I deleted, but now feel better about. Jesus Christ was NOT one of those special people. He had to learn about God just like the rest of us normal people, from the scriptures. I know this doesn't sit well with many. The reason for this is our culture is so saturated with mental images of Jesus being God that we still think that way, even though we've purged ourselves of the sentence "Jesus is God" and become comfortable with the sentence "Jesus Christ is NOT God." This is another case of getting the wording correct, but not the idea. WW seems to be an expert at this. Jesus did not bring forth God's written Word, he obeyed it. He loved it from an early age and learned to become it, especially when he finally got spirit at age 30. The scriptures were his guide. The special people I've been talking about had to bring it forth, from scratch. The kind of specialness I have been describing is related to the phrase I put in bold fonts from BTMS above where these special people were NOT schooled to revere the knowledge that comes via the 5-senses. Somehow these people are disconnected from the extreme reliance on senses input and human reasoning, and were able to accept God's point of view even when it clashed with the world surrounding them. Somehow they are willing to go along with God's direct revelation in spite of the usual biological and social inhibitions. How that works I don't know. How John the Baptist got spirit in the womb, I don't know. How Baalam prophesied FOR Israel when he was being paid to prophesy against them I don't know. But then again, we don't need to know. All we need to do is read God's written Word, in spite of how much it goes against cultural grains, and learn to accept it. Here's how Dr described these special people who bring forth God's Word. This is from the The May/June 1983 issue of the Way Magazine in an article titled "Peace and Revelation" : "Prophets have never been particularly popular. For example, Jesus Christ observed, as recorded in Matthew 13, “A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.” Prophets are men who dare never shrink from danger and men who hardly ever swim with the stream, the current of the times. Their path is seldom smooth or easy. "The world never looks upon these men as being successful. They never win the competition as the most outstanding citizen of the community or the most popular one. But the true measure of a prophet’s success, class, is the measure of his faithfulness before God as God’s spokesman. A prophet’s success is never measured by how graciously his testimony of speaking God’s Word is received. He neither fears man nor seeks the praise of men. A prophet is a man of God who reverences and respects God first, last, only, and always. He seeks only God’s praise and blessing." Like I said before, this is my frontier of knowledge. I've said what I know best in my best way. If anyone wants to pick it apart for contradictions, go for it. I won't bother listening to the criticism unless it's based on the written forms of PFAL, which I know few here are even close to accomplishing at this time. I'm thinking out lout here in these posts to help myself and to help those who want to know. Those who want to dwell on this area are wasting their time, but they won't be able to waste mine. I'm done with it until I learn more on it from God.

CM, Yes, I've heard that, and act on it whenever I chose to dodge. I also like to teach truth, even to some who don't want to hear it, because who knows who's listening in. I'm sorry to hear of your problem as you attempt to project it on me. I'll pray for you, but it won't do you any good unless you obey the man of God and come back to PFAL. God put a treasure in there for you.