Mike

dmiller, I’m encouraged greatly to see someone returning to the originals. Keep up the good work. In the paragraph you quoted Dr is referring to PFAL when he says God’s Word. I’ll explain soon. *** The twice issued instructions that we (especially top leadership) were to master PFAL came not in the magazine articles, but in his last spoken teaching, which was taped. This last teaching was lost, or misplaced for years. Most grads never knew about it. I posted a thread on it, including the entire transcript of the tape here in the first days of my posting. It’s titled “Dr's Last Teaching - LOST for 17 Years!” You can find this Last/Lost Teaching at: http://gscafe.com/groupee/forums?a=tpc&s=9...42&m=3516027781 *** In many other places Dr instructs us to master PFAL, and in many other places he shows us that PFAL is the Word of God. I’ve posted several of each of these frequently here over the months. God commissioned Dr to receive His Word by the process of spiritual revelation (along with a lot of 5-senses research work) like it had not been known since the first century if he would teach it to others. Dr did this in the PFAL writings, and so they are the reissued, differently formatted written Word. This why he told us many times to master them. God is allowed to alter the format of His own Word, and we know He did so in switching from the format of His Word written in the stars to the more “down to earth” writings in stone, papyrus, parchment, and paper, starting in Moses' time. While we certainly have no authority to do this, and the closing lines of the Book of Revelation say so, God is allowed to alter and adapt His own Word any way He pleases. Dr taught us this in the “Introduction to the Appendixes” in the back of RHST. Few saw it. One of the reasons Dr often told us we must master PFAL was that we acted a lot like Eve and got sloppy about our study of the class materials. We missed a lot of the revelation that was written. *** When Dr refers to the Word of God, or God’s Word, he’s ultimately talking about the perfect spiritual understanding of God’s mind, heart and will that comes only from a relationship with God, and whereby He teaches directly to our minds. However our minds must be prepared for this. One of the first critical steps to arriving at this relationship is study in the 5-senses realm of the written Word. In order to “constantly go to God’s Word” as you have quoted him we must FIRST constantly read the accurate written Word with our 5-senses, and then we will able to constantly go to the revelation God’s Word He gives us directly. The King James Version of the Bible, is not the Bible, and we were taught this early in the class and in the PFAL book. It’s only approximately God’s Word. A translation and a version are the works of scholars, men who attempt to re-construct what they THINK the original said in modern English. Unfortunately, there are no authoritative translators from the original languages, and even worse, there are no original manuscripts from which translations can be made. All we have of the original manuscripts are copies (fragments at that) made by a reprobate church that had fallen and rejected God, much like Israel did over and over again in the Old Testament. It’s part of the human condition to follow in the footsteps of Adam. It’s our sin nature. We can see how Adam fell by following Eve outright. We can see how Eve went wrong by getting sloppy with the accurate Word she was given as she added one word, subtracted one word, and changed one word. This approximate Word she held may have been sufficient for many of life’s situations, but not when she came face to face with the devil. She may have had the doctrine approximately correct, but approximate wont cut it when the power is needed the most. Being face to face with the devil, she needed the power of the accurate Word of God, but she didn’t have it. Because of this great weakness she succumbed to the devil’s deceit. She got tricked. Dr is telling us in that paragraph you quoted to constantly come to God’s accurate Word, not an approximation, so that we may not make the same mistake Eve made and allow it to get slightly altered in our minds. Anything in our minds that is not refreshed by the original stimulation will slowly corrupt. It’s the way brains work. This is one of the very few things that brain scientists pretty well understand. Scientists who have mimicked brain circuits to produce artificial neural nets are able to train them up to perform very impressive tasks that regular computer programming can never accomplish. However, these artificial brains “forget” just like ours if stimulation other than the original training is regularly presented to them. In the course of simply being alive, our 5-senses flood our brains with new stimulation constantly, literally ploughing over earlier training slowly but surely. In simple terms, if you put God’s Word in your mind on Monday, some small amount of it has leaked out or changed by Friday. One year later a substantial amount has leaked out or changed. The only way to overcome this is to constantly refresh our minds with God’s Word in it’s accurate form, which is the written form of PFAL. It’s actually a good thing that God made our minds “leaky” this way, because otherwise there’d be no way to have painful memories diminish. Painful memories can and should leak out, and this is part of the healing process. If painful memories are constantly refreshed, like the way people who were hurt in the ministry are constantly talking about them here and being reminded of them by others here, then these memories will not leak out and they will stick around indefinitely. If the descriptions used to describe these memories get many different descriptions and angles, then the pain is enriched and distorted way out of proportion, instead of diminishing and vanishing. I mourn for the people here who are constantly refreshing and enhancing and exaggerating the memories of people like excathedra and encouraging her to participate in the process. Though some think it’s loving to do this, they are hurting her, themselves, and many others in the process. We can constantly come back to God’s Word in it’s accurate form as presented in PFAL and we will see this process produce a rich, deep, and everlasting grasp of truth and love. Or we can try the devil’s counterfeit of this process and constantly come back to the pains of the past to allow them to get a rich, deep, and everlasting grip on our hearts. We decide which way to go, the way of life or the way of death. I wish more people would come back to the originals like you did with the magazine. As we constantly come back to God’s Word in PFAL we’re going to see the same kinds of things we saw when we were first exposed to these writings, and this time we there is no Corps to spoil it with forced spirituality and boring marketing techniques. I think in this thread I just brought together the three threads I’ve been visiting lately. I just touched on pjroberge’s “Witnessing Jesus Christ vs. TWI or Piffle” an just before that I touched on Oakspear’s “Wierwille's Actions vs. His Words: Starting Over.” Maybe I can take a little break as I’ve been constantly posting for days now.

rascal, Of course YOU are immune to great evil! How'd you do it? Where did you get such a great handle over the adversary? How is it that you avoided the more subltle deadlier sins, like pride?

chwester, I see your point better now, and fully agree. I didn’t take it personally, but I thank you for your polite example to others here in mentioning it. Let’s remember now, that the definition of love from God’s point of view may differ from that definition we may pick up via our five senses. We need SOME doctrine to know how to get love right in our mind before it can come out in our actions. I think there is enough accuracy of God’s Word out there beyond PFAL for SOME to get it right some of the time. That love does cover a multitude of errors in doctrine and hence the blessings can flow much better. It’s in this area that I fully agree with you. The power, the FULL power, is something few have even sought over the centuries, let alone achieved. This is because those details of doctrine concerning our power to defeat the adversary at his every turn were the details he most vociferously attacked in the first century and in the first copies of scripture, as well as in the evolution of languages and culture and mass religious perspectives. It’s in this area that Dr was given the job of correcting. The love issue is indeed important. In the crucial 1974 SNS teaching I’ve often cited here titled “Christ Formed In You” Dr brings out many of these same points. I posted the entire teaching on page 14 of the “Ubiquitous” thread and it can be clicked up with: http://gscafe.com/groupee/forums?q=Y&a=tpc...3656073772&p=14 In that teaching Dr says (among many other things about our relationship with Jesus Christ… are you listening UncleHairey?…) about this love situation: “God so loved, according to John, remember, 3:16. God so loved that He what? Gave. All love is giving.” and: “We walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us. He who knew no sin became sin so you and I might become what? The righteousness of God in Him, imagine that. God so loved that He gave. Jesus Christ so loved that he gave, and you and I must so love that we have to give. I have to love to the point where people learn to love because of the love that I share with them. That’s what I mean when I say in classes you have to learn to let people walk on your feet until they learn to walk on their own. You have to be the hands of people until they learn to use their own hands. You have to be the heart of people until people learn to use their heart and extend it out to the lives of other people. We have to be broken bread for people until they learn to break their own bread of life. God so loved, Christ loved, and we have to so love because he has given himself for us an offering, a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour, and that’s better than Chanel No. 5! And the Word says that we are to God a sweet smell. When this Christ is formed within us to the end that we love with the love wherewith he loved, and people it is possible, it is possible to love the unlovable, in spite of. It is possible to so renew your mind that there is absolutely nothing that any other Christian believer does but that you still love them and don’t criticize them and find fault with them.” and: “You see, we’ve got to go to the Word and love with the love wherewith Christ Jesus loved and you’re never going to get to that place unless you commit yourself to the integrity of God and His Word and let this Word be built in you, and the building of the Word takes time, people. It’s not something you take a class on Power for Abundant Living in two weeks and walk away and say, ‘Well, now I got it. For the rest of my life, I can fool around.’ That’s just the bare foundation. It gives you all the principles upon which to build. That I know. But the building takes time. Like building this Biblical Research Center takes time. If we were going to manufacture a piano, you could have all the things to put in a piano, it still takes time to put it together. And in that process of learning and growing, where people move from hearing the Word to building the Word within their life takes time, and that takes a lot of love. __ Well, think of the love God had in Christ Jesus to make salvation available to us, to make it possible for us to be born again of God’s spirit, to be filled with the holy spirit, to have a knowledge of His Word so we could rightly divide it and operate manifestations decently and in order that all of God’s people can be edified, built up by way of exhortation and comfort, to hear from God Almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth.” and: “What a record. God so loved, Jesus Christ so loved, Paul and Silas so loved, that even though they had laid many stripes upon them, cast them into prison, they sang hymns, they praised the Lord, they prayed, and when this thing occurred, the jailor said, ‘Fellas, I want that stuff you got. I want to tap into the same thing you got. What must I do’ to be what? Saved! Right.” and: “God at work within us. Spiritually, He’s at work within us, that we may will and do his good pleasure. Now to know what is God’s pleasure, you must know God’s Word, and one of the things that is God’s pleasure is certainly to love with the love wherewith He loved, the tenderness with which He was tender, the joy with which He joyed, the blessings with which He blessed, the thanksgiving with which He lived. It is God at work within us, to will and to do what? His good pleasure. You see, God is building His love-life in you, His righteousness, His strength, His perfection, His goodness, His justice, His forgiveness. God is at work within you to build that within you so that you can share it with others.” and most poignantly: “Grow in grace. The word “grace” literally could be translated “love’s gifts.” Grace is always God, who is love, at work. Love at work is grace. It says “grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” It doesn’t say “grow in the knowledge of scripture.” The Way Ministry’s loaded with that stuff at times, but no love. We’ve got grads of the class on Power for Abundant Living, I wish I’d never taught them. All they do is prance around showing how much knowledge of the scriptures they have and make everybody else that hasn’t got that knowledge feel badly, if they can. Why my goodness, what did I ever teach them God’s Word for? It breaks my heart. It’s not the knowledge of the scripture you know, but the extent to which you know Him and walk in the love wherewith He loved. Nothing wrong with knowledge of the scripture, but it looks to me you haven’t got enough knowledge if you don’t apply it, and you ought to read a few verses that tell you how to put it on, how to love with the love wherewith He loved, how to forgive with the forgiveness for which He forgives, how to keep your tongue under control so you don’t go blabbing everything all the time. It’s an unruly evil, remember? The tongue. No man can tame it, so quit trying to tame it, let God tame it. He’s the only one that can do it, otherwise you’re always gonna have the running off of the tongue.”

Doctrinal correctness is most imortant for the power to rise above all forms of darkness. The first century church was very right on, but it still went down the tubes. Israel was God's chosen people, blessed repeatedly by God, yet, they repeatedly went down the tubes. God sends His rain on the just and the unjust alike when and where they operate sound principles. God's blessings on them does not mean the people you cite are correct in every doctrinal matter. The fact that they can't do ALL the things Jesus Christ did indicates doctrinal deficiencies. There's a big difference between a few blessings and all power.

Jesus also says where that power came from. It was from his Father and not himself. He said of myself I can do nothing. We were taught plenty of how Jesus was not actually present at the creation or in the beginning any more than there were written scriptures existent back then. Both forms of the Word [logos], both written and flesh, were WITH God in the beginning and at the creation, but in His foreknowledge. We, as members of the Body of Christ were “with” God back then, but we certainly are not God, even as members of his Body. When we speak the Word then we are the Word made flesh, but we are not God. We speak with the same authority of God, as did Jesus, when we are accurate, but we are not God. HEY! This is headed to the Doctrinal forum. We’re getting far off the original topic. Out of respect we should either get back on topic or move the doctrinal discussion there. I, for one, am done with the trinity vs. One God discussion, though. I suggest, Cynic, that you read the CES book on the topic, and then start your own Doctrinal thread and try and refute all their points.

InvisibleDan, It’s a nice coincidence that you brought up what you just did, quoting sky4it, on being challenged to think for ourselves. The questions I’ve been posing in these recent posts are to inspire the same. One of the terrible things about mob mentality is that members of that mob feel they don’t have to think things through, because someone else in the mob already did that for them. Interestingly enough, in Dr’s very last written words to us, in his last Way Magazine articles he TWICE challenged us to think things through for ourselves. Of course that thinking is understood to be from within the protective walls of God’s Word. In the July/August 1985 issue both in his article “Our Only Rule of Faith and Practice – Part Two” AND in his "Our Times" editorial he issues these challenges. On page 17 he writes: “You have to honestly come to the place that you’re willing to keep asking yourself ‘Where did I learn what I believe? How did I get to the place of believing what I believe today?’ For the most part, men believe what they have received from tradition and not directly from reading the Word of God.” On page 12 he writes: “We must honestly come to the place of asking ourselves: Where did I learn this? How did I get to the place of believing this? Who taught me this? The counterfeit is so much like the genuine, you have to know the accuracy of the Word to separate truth from error.” Did anyone notice this repetition back then? Does anyone remember either one of these statements? Probably not. Like in his last verbal teaching where he twice instructs us to master the PFAL writings, here in his last written words to us he twice instructs us to think for ourselves, and in a detailed fashion. Why did he twice instruct us (most specifically upper leadership) with his dying last words to master the writings? Because we hadn’t done it and it was hurting us. Why did he twice instruct us with his last written words to think everything through and the sources of our beliefs? Because we hadn’t done so. We (especially leaders) were just mindlessly mouthing a bunch of TVT that was from all sorts of disparate sources, and it was hurting us very badly. The hurt is mentioned twice also, once in each article, using the phrase "dark clouds" hanging over us to describe it.

Cynic, God cannot be tempted to go against His own will. Jesus obeyed the Father Who was greater than him. As it says in Timothy, there is one God and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus. If you trace through all the functions of you "god-man" in scripture you'll see that it's only the man part that ever does anything, even after the resurrection, and after the Ascension and at the very end in I Cor. 15:28 where the Son himself is subject to God. The god part withers and dies under the heat of the light from the scriptures.

dmiller You wrote: “Mike --I first heard it from docvic himself…” Heard WHAT from docvic himself? What EXACTLY, word for word? You didn’t fully answer here. If you can find WHERE he said that, instead of dredging it up from old memory, you’ll see that he didn’t take the credit you now think he did. If we can’t locate these things in the record, then we should keep quiet until we do. Many errors can be avoided this way. *** You wrote: “To be sure, vpw (in all fairness), did mention the fact that he had gleaned info from other folks, however -- it was made to sound like he had re-worked, and refined it himself -- to the point where it was "suitable for teaching".” I’m grateful for your inclusion of the first part of the lines I just quoted, and that was fair of you. However in the second part, “it was made to sound like,” you revert to your memory again. I agree he re-worked it and refined it, but not by himself. This is where the 1942 promise kicked in and God HIMSELF taught him the refinements and the reworkings. Dr gave the glory to God. If you had gone back to the source of your memory you’d have seen this crucial aspect that’s been forgotten. Dr often said that he couldn’t do it himself. He was ready to throw in the towel in 1942 because he couldn’t do it himself. He OFTEN said that his ministry was by grace (and mercy) and that he was unworthy of the job he was given to bring forth God’s Word again. This is not only the case in this “copyrighteousness” area, but also in the area of personal deportment. *** You wrote: “The fine folks running his classes, also glossed over the fact that he took so much from others -- preferring to mention more about vpw's "hard work at researching the truth", than they did about where his sources of "said truth" came from. If you want to call 8th corps "neophites", they were the last one's running a class (offered by twi) that I was ever at attendence in. __ They were most adament that doc was able to "ferret out the truth", from all of these various doctrines, and teach us what really mattered. Upshot of it is -- while others were noted as having made "contributions", docvic got the praise and glory for making it "worthy" of belief.” Yes, at a certain point I would include any 8th Corps grad as if they were neophytes, because most of us older leader grads (remember OLGs?) had started regressing as the years went by. By “in the know” I mean someone who knows what they are talking about, someone who was accurately reflecting the original information, and not someone who was regurgitating a rotten memory adulterated with their own know-nothing theology. I should have included another question in my post of question, and that is WHEN did you hear it. I did included this, but it was hidden at the end of the first question. We have to WATCH OUR TIMES! *** You wrote: “Any more questions?” Just the one additional question on time. Plus there are still missing specifics in your answers so far such as which tape, which book, which magazine article that I think you should answer. Although you have partially answered me, I’d like to address everyone again and challenge them to think all these through. Here’s a re-write of the questions: Who told you? When did they tell you? Was it on tape, in print, or in person? Was it from someone in the know, or from a neophyte? Or was your "being told" a general feeling that developed over a span of time, in a casual and undisciplined manner? Why didn't you listen to Dr when he told us many times (I can cite references) that he got much of it from many sources?

JustThinking, You wrote: “You wonder if I asked these questions then before I can respond take me to task for not asking? You, sir, are impatient and inconsiderate and therefore undeserving of further response.” I apologize for that. I think you have a legitimate beef here. It was very at night late when I posted that, and I thought my bold fonting and capitalization of the word “ANY” would be sufficient to express my thoughts. I now see it wasn’t, so I edited my post to clarify. Even if you continue to refuse a response, I still think WE ALL should ask ourselves the questions I posed there, and to the degree of detail I suggested.

pjroberge, You wrote at the end of the previous page: "My thought is that Jesus Christ is our God, not THE God. Moses was God to Aaron etc. The example of this type of relationship is in the old testament. __ Also, Thomas said: My Lord and MY God. He and Jesus obviously prayed to THE God who was ultimately superior." I am happy to agree almost 100% with you on this issue as you just stated it. :)--> I would only add to your statements Jesus’ words to Mary Magdalene after the resurrection in John 20:17 which reads: “Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.” Interestingly, this verse is in the same chapter as the verse you just cited regarding Thomas, only 11 verses prior. Also interestingly, most trinitarians totally exclude verse 17 from their thoughts, and they put forth Thomas’ verse 28 quote “My lord and my God” as one of their ultimate “proofs” of Jesus’ supreme “godhood.” I once asked a trinitarian, after his quoting of Thomas’ verse 28 words from memory, if he also knew Jesus’ words to Mary Magdalene in the same chapter. He promptly and proudly spouted verse 17, but he OMITTED THE ENDING “and to my God, and your God.” When I opened the Bible and showed him how the verse ended our conversation abruptly ended too. *** Another way of looking at these same things as you stated them is: God’s Word is as much God as God is God. Jesus Christ is the Word made flesh. Therefore Jesus Christ is as much God in the flesh as God Himself. This is the same case as what we were taught regarding Peter standing before Cornelius’ household with all the authority of God Almighty because he was speaking God’s Word and only God’s Word. RHST p.113 (7th ed.) with my bold fonts: “What a tremendous statement Cornelius made when he told Peter that this group of kinsmen and near friends whom he had collected together were present before God. They had assembled themselves together just the same as if God Almighty had stood there. And Cornelius said to Peter, ‘Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God.’ Cornelius was not interested in theology, he was not interested in what people said, he was not interested in ‘apple-polishing,’ nor in any fanfare. The only thing Cornelius wanted to hear was that which God had com-manded Peter to speak. In other words, he wanted to hear only the Word of God—’all things that are commanded thee of God” *** There is still another instance of this principle in OMSW. In Chapter Nine “Choose You This Day” Dr cites Joshua 24:1, which is: And Joshua gathered all the tribes of Israel to Shechem, and called for the elders of Israel, and for their heads, and for their judges, and for their officers; and they presented themselves before God. On page 176 Dr writes: “The people 'presented themselves before God' at Shechem. This means that they presented themselves before God’s spokesman and prophet, Joshua. Joshua then had the challenge of presenting God’s Word to the people of Israel. God had done many great things for those people as they were led out of Egypt into the Promised Land, and Joshua reminded them of this.”

dmiller and JustThinking, Who told you and when? Cite your sources please. Was it on tape, in print, or in person? Was it from someone in the know, or from a neophyte? Or was your "being told" a general feeling that developed over a span of time, in a casual and undisciplined manner? Why didn't you listen to Dr when he told us many times (I can cite references) that he got much of it from many sources? *** Have ANY other posters here ever asked yourselves questions like this? SHAME ON YOU if you haven't! Not asking these kinds of questions, shooting off at the mouth, and running with mob feelings help religion to be very stinky! . . . . . . At JustThinking’s prompting I edited this to more clearly express my thoughts. I added three asterisks to separate the post into two separate parts. I also added some words in the second part to more clearly address it in general and not specifically at JustThinking and dmiller.

Raf, You’re thinking in the flesh realm, where seated next-to or face-to-face means mouth close to ears. The reason I sound ridiculous is because it’s very new to you and anti-traditional. Anything very new and anti-traditional sounds like folly. Ask Fulton. I put it out there so that new thought paths can be considered. *** Plus I didn't propose that God might send Jesus to the future just to read PFAL, but also to TEACH it to us. The Gathering! The harpazo teaching. Dr taught us the 5-senses perspective of PFAL; Jesus Christ teaches us the spiritual perspective of PFAL.

Raf, You excluded anther possibility. I do not call the accusers liars (although everyone lies somewhere sometime), but I do deny focus and public discussion on “what he did (wrong)” to be my highest priority in life or anywhere near it. I will say that all his accusers have their priorities wrong, and are ignoring the tremendous good that he helped God bring forth, in favor of some much smaller (BY COMPARISON) set of hurts. Remember too, that I have some of those hurts, but I’ve learned to de-prioritize them.

rascal, You just wrote about: "writing about what a waste of time our writing is..." I'd be scolding you for crossing the line right now, until I realized I wrote about you writing about writing about... I'm getting dizzy!

Hi WTH, I agree. Let's quit the debate on Dr and concentrate on the Word that God taught him and that he put into writing for us.

Time is part of the creation, and not a limitation on God. With God there is no time. Jesus Christ sat down on the right hand of God 2000 years ago by our reckoning of time. But we are instructed in II Cor.5:16 to no longer know Christ after the flesh, the 5-senses realm, the natural realm, which includes time. How Jesus Christ fares in time seated next to the Creator of time I can not fathom very deeply since so much of my knowledge is still 5-senses. Here’s just ONE possibility to consider: At the Ascension God propelled Jesus through time into the future, to the time of his return. In that scenario Jesus did NOT have the 2000 years of learning you assume. Just some thoughts.

Dang! :(--> If only I had used "since" instead of "if" !!! I'm going to have to learn from this defeat.

waterbuffalo, No, CES is not serving warmed up PFAL, it’s more like stripped down and adulterated PFAL. Same with TWI, and same with CFF, and same with GRR. No I’m not a part of CES, although I’ve talked by phone with JS for several hours and I attended all of JALs visits to San Diego from 1988 to 1998. Why would you equate my thinking JAL is smart with following him? He’s got a brilliant mind, but he saturated it with revenge lust and used grads as ammunition in his grudges with the TWI Board of Trustees.

Oldiesman, I can agree that lots of evil got mixed in. If PFAL was given by revelation, then it’s only logical that it would be a high priority target of the devil. WordWolf, Nathan and Jeremiah and the other prophets were told by revelation to confront those sins. And look at how long it took for God to issue that confrontive revelation to David. If Nathan had been operating by his 5-senses he might have confronted David well before Uriah’s murder. Focus on sin, like it’s focused on here, should never be a high priority. Light dispels darkness, and it looks like God tolerates a lot of darkness before He starts putting handwriting on walls.

Oldiesman is right. The “Jesus” that the churches promote is a counterfeit. Some, like the RC Jesus, are crude and medieval, some are modern and gentle-like hippie. Even after 30 years of accepting the sentence “Jesus Christ Is Not God” I’ve detected in myself and all other grads a god-like image of Jesus that still remains. For instance, when I proposed the image of him learning from PFAL it violated nearly every posters’ cherished image of him being all knowing, just like God. I too am very thankful for the individuals, God’s infiltrators in the devil’s religious system, who sought and found light. I’m thankful for the monks who copied as accurately as they could and preserved the scriptures. I’m thankful for the theologians who broke away from the pack and found truths to deposit back into the culture. I’m thankful for the genuine missionaries who weren’t on a personal power trip and did spread the pieces of the Word that were preserved or re-discovered. I’m thankful for the original apostles who did do a good job at first (like us) under very adverse circumstances (unlike us). AND I’m thankful that God found a tireless, fearless, smart sinner like Dr. Wierwille who was willing to defy tradition after tradition (including the Holy Copyright Law) to put together all these many gallantly prefabricated pieces of Word he received from his predecessors in the order God told him to make PFAL, and to market (yes, market) it around the world. The more we develop a real spiritual relationship with God’s Christ (not an 5-senses emotional relationship with a pretty boy Caucasian god-hippie foisted on us by the devil) then we will see that the Word, the WHOLE Word was buried and unavailable before 1942. It was lost in the first century and kept down for centuries. Look how it took 1500 years for someone to get around to reading Romans, believing it, and defying traditional authority to distribute it like Luther did.

Grizzy, If God gave Dr revelation, then id doesn't matter that Dr's dead 20 years. The real author is alive. If dead men's revelations bother you, then I suggest you throw out your KJV. Every writer of that book has been dead for at least 2000 years.

Shaz, There are so many points you made that are far off the mark that I don’t want to get into it all. I can’t blame you on many of these not-so-near misses because I did shut down my disclosures at many points. I’m just not at all willing to discuss some private things in public. Maybe by e-mail or phone, but not here. When the threads get this deep into the sexual stuff I shut down. I feel a need to get away from this topic. I’ve said enough. Please allow me to point out two items though. The first is easy. You have the wrong take on that incident I reported about getting chewed out by Dr. I think I corrected this misunderstanding before, probably with someone else. That incident does not bother me at all now nor then. It puzzled me at first, but I’ve come to an understanding. I forget why I posted it, but is wasn’t to say I was horribly hurt. Sure it stung, but I’ve had much worse pain in common situations outside the ministry and lived through them quite well. The other point is you objection to Dr getting revelation at a time when you think he shouldn’t have. One of the reasons I posted that mini teaching on I John and confessing broken fellowship is to remind you and others that God made it very easy and quick to get back into fellowship, and that He does not put all the constraints on this restoration that people would. God is bigger than you think on this issue. Several times I’ve posted that I had to apply that I John verse a hundred times in one day. This figure is not a figure of speech. I’m not exaggerating. There are times when various kinds of temptations and sin can be raging in a battle royal with my desire to maintain fellowship. I’m gl;ad those kinds of days are relatively rare, but then again, I’ve not been placed in a very highly targeted hotseat very much like Dr was. Because of his mission he was under an enormous variety of constant attacks. I can easily see him quickly getting back into fellowship and functioning very well in God’s plan. Another challenge to your objection to both Gods working with and on him in the same day and time is the story of Balaam. He was right in the act of professionally cursing God’s people and he comes out with a most beautiful prophesy of God blessing Israel with his Son. It blew his employer’s mind that his mind could switch so quickly to the truth from error. Because of this account, it should NOT blow our minds that Dr could get revelation. Think of this too: we can get it too, even when we think we don’t deserve it. *** I’m sorry about backing off on so many of the other things you posted. I can only take so much of the sex stuff and my mind shuts down. Maybe some other time. I am grateful that you and excathedra (Thanks Exy) acknowledged that men can be hurt in these areas too. It’s just in different ways, and our culture pretty well forbids discussion of it by the victims.

Uncle Hairy, You wrote: “I am aware of the fact that twi did not function in a way that was compatible with wierwilles written books...that's true, I will concede that point to you.” Thank you. Can you concede that your memory of the contents of those books is not compatible with what is actually written in them? If you think about it, such a concession is pretty hard to make without actually going to said books and spending some substantial time with them. Memory likes to think it’s true. It’s very disconcerting to have an old memory of something, like a book or a movie, and then going back to see that the original is different. Memory will rebel at first and try to think that someone has changed the original. It’s quite humbling. *** You wrote: “I believe that when wierwille came up with his waytree scheme, he compromised greatly on what he had written in his earlier books...” I have a 1972 tape where he somewhat agrees with you. He says that the ministry leadership, especially on the field, was spiritually immature and needed some 5-senses guidelines to keep things straight. Moses' father-in-law came up with a very similar plan for the spiritually imature nation of Israel to operate. Moses accepted this "scheme" because it was from God. On that tape he says that things like the centralized abs should be only temporary. Unfortunately, as the decade wore on, the upper leadership started regressing instead of growing. He offered solutions, but they were declined. HQ went down fast, but the field held things up for a while longer. It too went down. By 1982 no one in upper leadership was paying any attention to Dr. There is lots of tape and magazine article evidence of these things. I’ve posted reams of it. It’s one thing to formulate a theory of what happened. But the next step is to test that theory against the evidence. You can’t dredge that evidence up from memory. It must be recorded evidence in tape or print. *** You wrote that “Christians Should Be Prosperous” “…was always the FIRST assignment in pfal...get it?” Yes, I get it. People put money first in their lives, and need to be taught to not do that. *** You wrote: “His over simplified approach was both naive and sophmoric. When critiquing his "works" from a scholarly perspective, he falls far short of having even a modicum of any depth in his writings.” Since PFAL is revelation from God it should not be surprising that God made it readable by the many, instead of catering to the elite. You see brother, how not many mighty, not many noble according to the flesh are called. I’m paraphrasing Paul. It also should not be surprising that God would chose the weak to confound the mighty. If a mighty scholar is meek, he’ll have a field day seeing all the depth God put in there behind that simplistic fa?e. *** You wrote: “I maintain that if wierwille's doctrine is of interest to anyone, they would fare much better by going to the several serious writers that wierwille copied from.” He didn’t copy wholesale, he corrected, and that was by revelation. What he did copy he attributed to God giving THEM revelation in those instances. I posted a transcript of a 1965 tape called “Light Began to Dawn” where he says this. *** You wrote: “His understanding of certain aspects is often flawed or skewed.” Yes, I thought that too, and for years, and it was growing in intensity. When I cracked the books again I found out it was ME Oh Lord, who was flawed. I had only accurately absorbed a fraction of what is written. *** You wrote: “Wierwille should never be compared to any of the 1st century apostles, or to any of the serious Christian theologians…” The theologians I can’t get at all excited over. I have no spiritual respect for them as a whole. I see them as refined Pharisees. I don’t compare Dr to the apostles. I do see a lot of similarities between the revelation God gave Him and the revelation He gave the apostles. God is able to give revelation to anyone who is willing to absorb it. He worked with David, Balaam, Solomon too. If you or I were God, we’d not be so magnanimous, but He is.

UncleHairy, No I’m not arrogant; I just don’t have to take junk from you or anyone else. Yes I admit that I had a terrible grasp on the material until I started taking a refresher course. Since I’m the only one here that studies the material in the present, it’s no big deal that I’d have a better command of the material. When others start coming back I’ll fall in on the bell curve somewhere; I don’t know where, but I don’t think it’s important. Would you think I was arrogant if I happened to be the tallest person posting and “admitted” it? If, as a tall person I wanted to be worshiped and served for my tallness then THAT would be arrogance. But if with my tallness I served others who couldn’t reach the top kitchen shelf, then it wouldn’t be arrogance. Now imagine some short person hear me say “Here, I’m taller than you. Please let me reach that for you.” If that short person had a chip on their shoulder about their height, they might be inclined to think my offer was arrogance. There are no spiritual rewards I know of for being tall, or being smart, or being early in returning to the original material for a refresher course. Offering accurate and important information to others, and in the face of great opposition, may land some rewards if it’s done in love. Sometimes love needs to be a little tough. If you want to keep that chip on your short stack of accurate facts about what really happened and what really was taught to us, then it’s YOU that’s arrogant for refusing my help. Want to grow up to the stature of Christ? Take the refresher course and you too can reach for things that are out of others reach, and you to can serve with love. *** The reason I can remain humble is because I screwed up so bad, and because someone else taught me all this. I’m just passing on the accuracy. I didn’t invent it, I just read it. You wrote: “The fact that you have NO IDEA of how much of the material I have "command" of,…” I most certainly DO have an idea of what you do NOT have a command of. You don’t know that we were taught a lot on forming a relationship with Christ. I know you don’t know what we were taught that became obsolete in the “Our Father” after Pentecost, even though you reported a supposedly vivid memory of the attitude you THINK Dr had when he taught it. Plus, I have seen some other arrogant displays of your inclination to join the mob and parade inaccuracies here. Most important Iknow what God says about all falling short. I think it’s YOU who have no idea how much (or little) command you have on the facts. I challenged you to a debate and you backed of real fast. I asked you to bring up more of your vivid regurgitation of the “Our Father” teaching and you attack me as arrogant. It’s probably been many years since you even talked to anyone who has positive and accurate memories of our teaching history. You probably have run into zero opposition on these matters and have no skill in dealing with someone like me. I suggest you crack those books and get smart… again.

Pjroberge, Maybe you can tell me what kind of two-bit battle of wits you're engaging in with pejorative salutations, and plagiarized ones at that. I spent most of my life outside my present PFAL mindset, so it’s very easy for me to switch gears. I attend weekly poetry meetings in the low rent gay district of town, filled not only with homosexuals, but with the most left-wing radical anarchists you’ve probably ever seen, and I have no trouble being friendly with absolutely everyone there. If there’s anyone stuck in a corrupt mindset it’s YOU! You talk just like the TWI robots, only with a vocabulary overhaul, but with the same attitudes of snickering stuckupedness. Well, now that we’ve exchanges pleasantries, let’s get down to business. You asked me: 1) How did the Apostles operate the ministry of reconcilliation without piffle? 2) How did B.G. Leonard operate a ministry of deliverance far beyond VeePee's and was Veepee's teacher without your precious piffle 3) How is your holding piffle as an object of virtual worship by yourself not idolatry? 1) They failed to operate it! Haven’t you seen that the first century church fell? Most of the epistles were reproof and correction, but it didn’t take. Most of the apostles had a hard time accepting the revelations God gave to Paul. Peter had to be rebuked by Paul (by revelation) in front of many people. That means he didn’t pay attention to the private approaches. Peter twice refused to accept the visions and revelation God gave him on the rooftop, and needed a third. Also he nearly screwed up at Cornelius’ house with water baptism. Finally Peter got it right and with his dying last words and said whatever you do, don’t screw up on the epistles of Paul because they were from God, and many DID screw up on them. It was to late, though, and Peter’s ministry failed. Even Paul screwed up and landed in jail, where he had to pretty much finish up his last epistles. Like us, they all started off pretty well, but need the written word to sustain the battle. 2)Gee? I looked it up on Google and couldn’t find any references on BG’s ministry being that successful. Where did you get that? 3)If it is the case that PFAL is revelation from God, then it is idolatry to NOT master it. If it is not revelation from God then my goose is cooked. Place your bet. The KJV (or any other translation) is a man-made effort to re-construct the original meaning of the scriptures. The KJV is surely man-breathed, so fully embracing it is idolatry. How many KJV embracers have you asked question #3 of? Some realize that the KJV is not authoritative and has mistakes, so they try to correct it with their own man-breathed efforts. They research it for themselves or they select and trust other scholars to do it for them. Either way, it still all man-breathed end-products that they embrace, so that’s idolatry. I say from a distance that the safer bet is in PFAL, because it’s only maybe idolatry, while the KJV approach is surely idolatry. When I close that distance and return to PFAL, my surety increases because the contents speak loud, and magnify the True God’s still small voice. Now, let see if next time you can come up with something more witty to lambaste me with next time than smikeol, ok? That’s getting pretty old and worn out. And aren’t VeePee and piffle someone else’s work too? Do they know you’re trying to copyright them?