Mike

oldiesman, You wrote: “Now according to Dr. Wierwille, if I am a godly man (a Christian I presume), I shouldn't be prospering because Satan does not want me to. Add to that the fact that I am not tithing so that means I REALLY should have my foot on the hose.” Since you are contradicting God’s Word with disparaging remarks against CSBP which came from God, Satan DOES want you to prosper.

Tom Strange, You wrote regarding my suggestion that you are not acting on the lines of the rightly divided Word of God: “Mike... are you positively SURE that I'm not? What if you're wrong?” In a recent post I mentioned how whenever someone speaks for God the adversary immediately tries to get in there and cause doubt in the mind of the speaker. This DOES happen to me, so the scenario you mention (what if I am wrong) occurs to me CONSTANTLY. I am always thinking that I need to be sure about what I say, and checking it out over and over. What if YOU are wrong, Tom? Have you considered that much? Have you considered the possibility that you have been hoodwinked and talked out of embracing a great treasure?

oldiesman, It was your lack of understanding of CSBP that led to the experiences you report. If you think you have a better take on the things of God, start your own ministry and see if you can open up God’s Word to many thousands like Dr did. You are elevating your imperfect and partial understanding of God’s immutable laws above the man who God directly taught for 40+ years. You ought to AT LEAST give CSBP a read again, in the light of all that I have said here, and keeping in mind all the lack of light you have suffered since you drifted away from PFAL. It’s worth reading again if only for the last chapter.

Tom, When you think along the lines of God’s Word rightly divided You’ve got the True God in mind. When you act along the lines of thwarting that True God’s message from living in your heart or others, then you are acting in concert with the wrong god. If I were you I’d get to acting on the lines of the rightly divided Word of God, and do what your teacher in this Word told you to do and get cracking those PFAL books open.

Pirate, If there was only one reader of this site, you’d have a very good point. There are many silent readers of this site, and they sometimes contact me. A few such readers have even registered JUST SO that they could get my e-mail address from my profile. . . . Just for their benefit, and making it easier for them, here it is now: mikeo "at" ixpres "dot" com I used "at" for "@" and "dot" for "." to avoid spam robots from picking it up. That's mikeo with the character "o" and not the numeral zero. . . . Pirate, since you don't want my message you are excused from further reading.... but thanks for reminding me of those silent readers. [This message was edited by Mike on March 11, 2004 at 2:09.]

shaz, If my context supported that grammatical technicality, you’d have a point. But it doesn’t, so you don’t. The context was: Jesus Christ can not be seen, so how does one tithe to him? I said roughly: first FIND him by mastering the books, and then the problem of his invisibility goes away. I felt taht you left out the most crucial part of my answer to oldiesman. Is it clear now what I meant?

I'm not interested in your god, Tom. Tell him to stick it!

mj412, You wrote: “Will you please seek consel other than this site and other posters, and those who have said what you want to hear? As for me seeking counsel, I do, mostly from those who obey the man of God and endeavor to master God’s Word by mastering PFAL. If you know any, please let me know.

oldiesman, You wrote: “I don't think I ever said tithing was unscriptural.” I'm pretty sure that in some of the places where you brought up CSBP, and they were many, you indicated that you thought Dr failed to properly extract that treatise from scripture. You then wrote: “All I said was, it doesn't work like an immutable law should, like Dr. Wierwille said it was supposed to work. I tried it -- it doesn't work like he said it was supposed to work. That's why I don't practice it anymore, and haven't for years and years, even in TWI-1. Tithing is NOT the key to material prosperity. Never was, never will be.” Here you are saying that it is your experiences that prove CSBP wrong. Might you consider that IF you had understood that CSBP was given by revelation, then your attempts to work it would have been more energetic and when you hit a challenge to your believing in it you would have overcome it and thus seen it work? Thinking from within the paradigm I have presented changes things a lot. I still haven’t explained how CSBP and Grace Administration tithing, plus free will, plus God’s foreknowledge are difficult to see in scripture in this modern world. Maybe when you see this truth you’ll reconsider, and think it through more thoroughly.

herbiejuan, You wrote: “What would happen if Drs last teaching wasn't really his last?” The theme of “The Joy of Serving” was the same as his theme in his last teaching at Emporia (reported here) and his last Limb meeting (reported here) and his last encounters with several individuals I know. This theme is: master PFAL and love. If your scenario should someday prove factual, the truth of our need to master PFAL still stands. He even told us we needed to master these things in 1979 in the AC, and as early as 1975 in the Ephesians Corps tapes. That “The Joy of Serving” is the last recorded teaching to surface, and in the magazine it twice mentions it as his last public teaching pretty well seals it up. The magazine mentions it in a tiny muted editor’s note with fine italic print just before the teaching, and also in the table of contents. Craig also mentions it is his last in the Corps tape that went out two days after Dr died. Many have testified that when Dr had returned from Scottland he was visibly worse off health wise, and he rapidly deteriorated then. Dr says in the POP that it was to be his last. Nice try.

Tom Strange, If you were to think from within my paradigm you’d think different about my supposedly inadequate etiquette. If I’m right about PFAL being of God, then your complaint of me is like someone in a movie theatre telling me it’s rude to say “Fire!” while the movie is playing and interrupting. If you could see the catastrophic proportions of your stand against this Word, you’d know that my toughness is done in total love.

Zixar, You wrote: “I think I'm going to be sick...” I think you’re just realizing that you’ve been sick for a long, long time. Come back to PFAL and get healed.

WordWolf, Thanks for the spelling correction. I assumed oldiesman’s situation, but left the door open that my post might not apply to him, hoping others in the assumed situation would still benefit. I said that I was not satisfied with what I could find on those two topics. I did find some, but it was not adequate in my mind. In many previous posts I mentioned that in my first 27 years I frequented many other churches and theologians, not being insular like many of my fellow grads at the time.

Tom, I could swear you gave me my report card unsolicited. Either way, I do not recognize you as an unbiased judge of my behavior. Like other biased posters who have singled me out and ignored the most egregious behavior of many others here, you have disqualified yourself from sitting on that bench. This egregious behavior of many others here I cite HAS been bemoaned by a FEW other posters here. I mentioned Abigail, and Ginger Tea before as such, SPECIFICALLY mentioning this horrendous behavior as it is aimed at me. It’s also the case that Research Geek complained about it in a more general sense, and one or two that escape my memory now did simnilarly. I’m walking out your courtroom with impunity. See if you can stop me!

I assume you asked Him. Can't you ask about all the others here? Or don't you care if they displease God?

oldiesman, Shazdancer wrote to me: “...How do you tithe to Christ himself? Do you throw it up in the air, and what he catches he keeps??” And I responded with: “No, it’s obey the man of God and master the PFAL books so he can be seen.” So then shaz retorted with: “Your statement that tithing today is studying PFAL is just absurd. *********************************************************** Oldiesman, you then repeated her retort to open your post to me and followed with: “Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, and if you really believe this, that's your option. However, since Dr. Wierwille taught that tithing was something entirely different in CSBP, and you have taught us that we should get back to the original Wierwille writings, well ... do you see the apparent problem ?” First I want to show YOU a problem. What does “this” refer to in your post? It refers to your pasted repetition of shaz’s retort, not my position, but shaz’s representation of my position. So, you bring up the idea of going back to the originals of Dr’s material, yet you didn’t do the same with my material. You took her words to adequately represent my position. They do not. You based your post on a misrepresentation of me. Do you see how she misrepresented me? I said: “...master the PFAL books so he can be seen.” Shaz said: “...studying PFAL...” She changed master to study, and she omitted “so he can be seen” You have, on a number of threads, accurately pointed out that Dr taught that the “absent Christ” in no way means a disconnected Christ, but one that can’t be PHYSICALLY seen, yet is spiritually well connected. I pointed out that by mastering PFAL we can learn to see him spiritually. As this is being accomplished he can show you where and how to tithe. In the class Dr taught us that we should give to where the integrity and accuracy of God’s Word is being upheld. He taught that we should give to where is can do the most good, to sow on fertile ground. As we learn to see Christ, this problem of where to give money becomes very easy. As we develop this spiritual understanding of things MANY conundrums of this world vanish. *** Now, last time we talked about tithing and CSBP I had brought up a few challenges to you. On this board, time and time again I have seen you bring up CSBP as if it was a real thorn in your side. The other day you brought it up while a very intense discussion was going on about something totally unrelated to tithing. I have seen this before in your posting. You have pointed out that you checked out CSBP and that you find it unscriptural. You can’t see it backed up in the Bible, so you reject it as not God’s word and will. In my challenge to you the other day I asked if you could give me the scriptural basis for God’s detailed absolute foreknowledge and for our free will being a reality as opposed to determinism. I will assume you do believe these two tenets. If not, then this will still apply to those who do. Now I ask you, are these two tenets scriptural? If you believe them, surely you long ago checked them out like you did tithing, right? So, surely now, after two days you must have found or remembered the verses you based your belief in these two tenets, right? Or, maybe you didn’t happen to research out these two tenets, but in the past two days surely you went and found a few verses, right? Can you produce your basis for believing in these things? If you have, I am HUNGRY to see them, because in 35 years I have never been able to find much to satisfy myself. The reason CES dumped their belief in God’s detailed, specific, total, absolute foreknowledge is because THEY TOO can’t find adequate scriptural basis for it. The reason Calvinists dumped the idea of total free will believing unto salvation, at man’s prerogative, is because THEY TOO can’t find adequate proof of it in their Bible. So here you are suspended in mid-air believing in both but you can’t prove them with verses. Why can’t you believe the revelation God gave Dr in CSBP in spite of your inability to back it up in your Bible. As you understand what I have pointed out so far, I’ll try to explain why ALL THREE of these tenets are so hard to find in your Bible. . . . . Thanks to WordWolf for a spelling correction. [This message was edited by Mike on March 10, 2004 at 13:45.]

Tom, How does God feel about all the other posters here? Can you give us ALL our report cards, and not just me?

karmicdebt, I agree with you that the idea of righteous anger grew to an abomination. I’ve posted on that here, that tough love is cheap and easy for those who want to skip around gentle love and loving enemies. But don’t forget that Jesus Christ, who was all love, DID get angry at times and tough at times. That’s where the description of Jesus as the “man of steel and velvet” came from. One of his tough guy times was when Peter was getting into false, religious humility. Mark 8:33 But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men.

shaz, To mangle a quote from someone a hundred years ago, when someone buys their cyber ink by the barrel, you gotta respect them. And really, who am I to complain to someone who gave me a soapbox.

Tom, There’s a difference between vicious name calling and poorly fitting the names to the individual. Jesus called a few some names who deserved it. The Pharisees he called hypocrites and Peter, at one point, he called Satan. Paul too called someone a whited sepulcher. There’s no viciousness in my heart, although I can be angry at times and righteously angry at that. I try to sternly deal with heavy error and those in deep error sometimes need such sternness, as well do their audiences. *** As for your dragging bodies, because of two poignant posts by shazdancer and Oakspear on the poll thread, I am re-thinking my desire to stay here on About the Way. I’m ready and willing to go to jail... er...uh... the Doctrinal Forum to keep the peace. Shaz and Oak showed me an angle I hadn’t considered much before. .... huh? What’s that music I hear...? Oh Yeah! I remember that golden oldie: They’re coming to take me away ha ha! They’re coming to take me away. To the doctrinal Forum, where life is...

Hey Pawtucket, It just occurred to me that me posting my shpeal here may be like electioneering within 100 feet of a polling place. If you want I'll shut up here totally.

Just Thinking, I was just thinking that! Wouldn’t it be pleasant to have the worst name-callers banned! Pleasaant yes, but then they wouldn’t get to say even the little thoughts they have. As for my posts on PFAL, I’m constantly pointing out that SOME of the problems were due to leadership on all levels, even down to unofficial leaders who were simply mature and doing some guiding of others. I know that at first it’s unpleasant to hear it’s not one villain that’s to blame for everything, and that WE must accept the blame for some things, especially how things went on the field before during and after the meltdown and in every splinter group, BUT LATER ON that unpleasantness can subside when we see that our part in the fiasco can be EASILY corrected by coming back to PFAL and catching up on what we missed. If you look at my posts in this light, they are very much on target and About The Way.

Pawtucket, You wrote: “I am going to place this poll in multiple forums, just in case the "Doctrine" folk don't come in here.” WHAT! You mean they are allowed out on furlough? Hey, then it’s not as bad as I thought then, being banished there. Do you allow conjugal visits too?

Zixar, Because you rest on your partial and leaking memory, you are in a very bad position to say what Dr saw. You see what you see, and that's about all.

I just said that very thing! I'm not him!