Mike

Goey, You shoot from the hip and haven't had time to determine if I speak in error. I already answered your earlier question today and on previous days, but you are not meek in your reading so it slips past you. Many things I have posted sail right on by over everyone’s heads who are looking only for ways to trip me up. Have you ever wondered why politicians are so stingy with their words? It’s because they do not have a coherent story to tell, and they dare not tell the truth, so they feed only a tiny stream of info out to people. They have to keep serious track of any lies they tell so as not to trip up in a contradiction. Have you ever wondered why I am confident enough to post thousands of times here? It’s because I am being honest and I am simply referring to what I’ve been taught, both by Dr and by Jesus Christ. I’m not the slightest bit concerned about being tripped up inn a contradiction because there ARE no contradictions in my message. Oh sure I may flub up in HOW I say something, or accidentally not include something important that needs to mentioned, but these are easily fixed. It gioves you the impression that I’m making it up as I go, but really YOU and many others here are actually making it up as YOU go. You have no set, hard, Standard on your Table of Challenge and you are constantly revising your theology. Me? I just read, study and learn more. If you’d just stop trying to defeat my posts, and listen with a noble Berean willing mind, you’ll be able to see what I’m talking about.

dmiller, Jesus Christ is a MAN, and not God. He had to go through everything that we go through to be our savior. He needed the new birth just as much as we need it. It was NOT available to him or any other man before Pentecost. You have residual trinitarianism in you that puts him out of our reach and out of our situation. You also have a kindergarten understanding of the new birth. Are you spiritually born again or are you naturally born of pneuma hagion? That which is born of flesh IS flesh. We were born of pneuma hagion out from the Bible, which is in the flesh realm. Our new birth is really, from God's point of view only the first birth. When we came out of our mother's womb, we were only body and soul. From God's point of view that's not a real birth of a man, it's just a body and soul animal. When we received spirit seed THEN we were born the first time, naturally, fleshly from the physical/flesh Bible, via our soul operation of believing, a natural/flesh operation. It didn't affect our mind at all, and it remained a natural man mind. There still is a need for the spiritual NEW birth, in the soul category. We need to get Christ formed in there and then the old man nature can do more than be reckoned dead, it can REALLY die. *** Here is something to study for RHST page 27 in the 7th edition, and pages 43-44 in the 6th edition: “As we eat physical food to strengthen the physical body so we must have spiritual food to build up the spirit. Your mental faculties are not built up through the exercise of speaking in tongues, but your spiritual faculties are greatly strengthened. Things which are in the senses world cannot feed the spirit. This is a law of God. “John 3:6: That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. "This law works with mathematical exactness and scientific precision. Anything that is obtained through the five senses-seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching-is in the senses world and relates itself to the flesh. The Bible is in the senses world, and as such the law of God requires that the Bible feed the mind which is included in the Biblical word "flesh." So if the Bible is in the category of the senses world and thus can feed only the mind...” Do you see how Dr TWICE on that page teaches us that the Bible is in the flesh realm? On page 23 of BTMS he teaches that the Word of God is spiritual. Our first birth comes from believing the Bible and receiving holy spirit seed. Our second birth comes from believing the Word of God. There’s a lot of surprises awaiting those who come back to PFAL and really start learning the Word of God.

Goey, You wrote: “Mike, what if Jesus does not come holding up a PFAL book? Are you going to argue with him and tell him to come back when he finally masters PFAL?” Well, I can ask you a similar thing. What if Jesus DOES show himself to you and he IS holding up a PFAL book? Are you going to argue with him and tell him to come back when he conforms to YOUR traditional senses theology?

Goey, In the initial stages of his teaching us, us in our 5-senses understanding and perception, it is a 5-senses teaching out of physical books. As we reach the spiritual stage we can then see things spiritually and his Father can teach us. Like I said above, these things are all very new to you folks, and I understand and expect them to be rejected. As you come back to PFAL and study them out you will see that they are the truth. Until then you are on the outside looking, not inside, but away.

Tom, He's a MAN. He's NOT God!

You aren’t reading my posts clearly. Go back and look for the answer to your question. I’ve been pondering all these things for 6 years. You’ve put about 6 minutes of thought, if that much, into it. Give it some time, and study, why don’t you?

It wasn't AVAILABLE until Pentecost.

You posted: "WHAT??!!?? Jesus Christ wasn't born again... he was RESSURECTED...wasn't that mentioned in the PLAF books?" in reference to my asking about when did Jesus receive the new birth. You have given him a waiver, like he's God and doesn't need to get born again. He did get spirit UPON him, like all the prophets, but he never got it as SEED within because that wasn't available until Pentecost. He had God's seed PHYSICALLY, in his body and soul, but not spiritually. WHEN did he get it? HOW did he get it? The trinitarian notions you cary are that he didn't need to get it and that he already knows everything.

You're avoiding the subject.

Did you read my comments above about residual trinitarianism?

These are predictable and typical trinitarian reactions to an assault on the error they embrace and cherish, and yet never think through.

Doze, You wrote: “It seems to me that if in fact Jesus Christ in the future will be teaching out of one of Wierwille's collaterals, God would be very reticent in allowing you (who apparently speaks for God) to say it.” What makes you think you are qualified to make such a supposition? If you only have a primary coat of paint on a car, how can someone tell what color the car will be when finished? Your impression of the contents of that book is lacking, due to not having mastered it. When I say “PFAL book” now, after 6 years of intense study, I don’t mean anything like my primary impressions of the same book 20 years ago. My current impressions of the book are in full color, while yours are drab gray. I can see how you object to my statements. Come back to PFAL and master it and you can see this from my perspective. *** You wrote: “Futhermore, just think about it objectively for one moment. What has Jesus Christ been doing the last 2000 years? Seated at the right hand of God almighty.” You might think objective thinking is better than subjective, but both are merely carnal, based in senses understanding. With God there is no time. God invented time; He’s bigger than time. When Jesus Christ sat down at the Fathers right hand he was no longer bound by the linear time you and I are bound by. A significant thought is stated in II Cor.5:16 and it urges us to relinquish our flesh impressions and thinking of Christ to seek the spiritual understanding of his nature and interactions with us. Trying to track him through time is something I have learned is fraught with error. I’ve learned to NOT think the way you just invited me to think. I spent 27 years thinking that way. I’m done now. *** You wrote: “He is our intermediary with God. Our advocate to God for us. He is God's only begotten son who always did his father's will. He is the perfect man tempted at all points, yet without sin. He will come back as King of Kings and Lord of Lords.” Now this I can relate to and celebrate with you. *** You wrote: “Now, we only know in part and prophecy in part, then there will be no need for collaterals used in this administration.” You’re making a common assumption that the Appearing Administration starts with a bang, and we get our perfectly renewed minds in a moment of time, in a twinkling of an eye. While the Grace Administration did start at a point in time, Pentecost, Christ’s first coming did not. There were many phases that ushered in his first coming. Even before he was conceived God was active in arraigning John The Baptist’s conception. When Jesus was born he was only a baby and had to develop before his coming meant much. Dr taught us that there are two main events to his second coming involving us (for his saints and with his saints) and then many events afterward, and that there can be MANY PHASES involved, just like his first coming. Here is how Dr puts it in GMWD page 227: “The great hope of the Christian Church is the return of Christ and our gathering together unto him. There are aspects of Christ’s return which we find most clearly explained by God’s rightly-divided Word. In order to understand the coming of Christ, we must also understand “the mechanics” of his coming. Jesus’ first coming began with his conception and birth and ended with his ascension, over thirty years later. There were many significant phases and events during this time. In this, the second coming is similar: it will also cover a period of time and encompass several significant phases and events.” There are four basic events included in the times of the end, when Christ returns. This is their order: (1) Christ’s coming for the Church, the Body of Christ, to gather them together and meet them in the air; (2) the events of the Book of Revelation with Christ’s coming with the Church; (3) the first and second resurrections; and finally, (4) the very end, the final point [telos], when death is destroyed and all things are subdued to God. Having this back-ground, we can now turn to the Word of God and see its clarity.” You are assuming that event (1) takes no time. But this event is our transformation from the senses to the spiritual. It takes time for a human mind to learn these things. I no longer believe we are zapped with a perfectly renewed mind at the Gathering, but that we are TAUGHT it, and that some may learn faster or slower than others, depending mostly on desire (and not so much on intelligence). Far from seeing this process a quick zapping (which would violate all we were taught about God not possessing anyone’s mind), I see it taking a significant amount of time...years for most. During this time Jesus Christ teaches us, and this is why we have the PFAL books. Do you see Jesus teaching us from a KJV? *** You wrote: “The whole idea of The Savior Jesus Christ requiring Wierwille's collaterals is ridiculous.” They’re not Wierwille’s collaterals. He was one of many agents who helped God get them into the senses realm. We require perfect teaching, and we get that from Jesus Christ teaching us, and the Word he teaches us is the revelation God gave Dr. *** Now I’m going to really blow your mind. Get ready. We were taught and became gradually comfortable with (it took me over 15 years) the sentence “Jesus Christ is NOT God” However, we come from a religious tradition that is saturated with notions of Jesus being God that go far beyond the traditional sentence “Jesus IS God.” Merely replacing the latter sentence with the former does not rid us of all trinitarian notions and error. You probably think, with residual trinitarianism in you, that Jesus Christ knows it all, and does not need any teaching himself. Although Jesus Christ DOES share many qualities of his Father, omniscience is NOT one of them. Have you ever wondered when Jesus Christ got born again? He left the senses realm before it was available. When did Jesus Christ receive faith. That too didn’t come until Pentecost. I see Jesus Christ himself requiring the PFAL collaterals for his own learning, as well as for him being able to teach us in the senses realm how to ascend to the spiritual like he did. *** (((Does anyone have any smelling salts? I see a few readers have fainted.))) *** You wrote: “Did the prophets of the old testament gloat that Jesus Christ would be reading out of their books in the future?” I don’t gloat about these things, saying that I am right and you are wrong, so Nanner nanner nanner! Neither would Dr. These things are huge surprises only because we didn’t do what Dr told us to do and master those books. Think about it: all the cultural expectations of Christ’s first coming were skewed by the adversary so badly that most scholars of the OT at his time didn’t recognize him as their expected Messiah. They had built up a false mental picture of him, and he slipped in right under their radar. The simple people could learn to recognize him because they had less error to unlearn. In recent years I have asked many people about Christ’s second coming and their expectations of it. I first verify with them that they are aware of the huge set of surprises and challenges he presented in his first coming to supposedly learned men of the scriptures. When they say “yes” to that I then ask them if they ever considered the possibility that THEIR expectations and mental pictures from their supposed knowledge of the scriptures might be similarly off base. When I ask these things in person, I can always see the surprise on their faces. On the phone there is almost always a long pause and then stammering of sorts. I think, of the 70 to 100 people I have brought this up with, only 2 were even mildly prepared for it. Nearly everything we think we know about Christ’s second coming needs to be re-thought. Without God’s 1942 intervention and the giving of the PFAL texts, this is impossible. . . . . [This message was edited by Mike on March 08, 2004 at 13:06.]

Shellon, See why I disparage memory? I've learned that my own has plenty of glitches. ;)-->

Whaaaaaaat?

mj412, No, I don't play the same game that TWI played with M&A. What I said was a notice that I will no longer waste my time on games, unless of course, I see an open door to proclaim my message while playing. The Bible does says "mark and avoid" is a good thing AT TIMES? How do you handle that verse? Did you know there was a verse that said that? You are right that I sometimes insist that things be done my way, WHEN I have alligned my way up with God. The bitterness and revenge you think you see in me is probably your own reflecting off your computer screen.

Hey Oak! Hows come your handle area says "Not online" but the General says you are online?

Don't worry Oak. I can tell by m&o's posts I'll never get a beer out of him/her. You are quite likeable, in spite of our differences. Have you had a chance to look at I Cor.7 yet?

metastic&ocular, You wrote: 1. “still trying to provoke an angry response from me?” 2. “but my my! you seem miffed!” 3. “how do you like someone pushing your buttons for once?” 1. No 2. No 3. No buttons are exposed to you. *** You wrote: “since i have never called you i dont know your number.” Then you aren’t the #1 guess I have as to your identity... if you are being honest with your facts. My #2 guess is that your first name begins with V and your husband's begins with R. You can e-mail me for my number, or you can invite me to a thread in the Private Topics forum and I can give you my number there. If you me to pay for the call I can oblige easily. *** You wrote: “but since you mentioned rafaels past response to me i am glad that you took my assignment and went through my posts in a vain attempt to figure out who i am.” Here you guessed wrong. I followed all your posts since you first came here, thinking that you were that #1 guess of mine. *** You wrote: “it digs at you yes?” My curiosity is up, because I love all of my family that God called to PFAL. That’s why I am here. I can see that you dig the idea that I don’t know who you are, and that cues me into your extreme lack of spiritual maturity. I can see the extreme negativity in your heart and I pray you get delivered form it. You can’t fool me that you’re happy and joyous. A joyful and happy person would not post the way you do or put themselves at the center of the universe the way you do. So far, all the clues you’ve left (assuming they are factual {and that’s a big assumption}) I have no idea who you are. If you sincerely don’t know that I was a twig leader twice like you posted, then you’ve overestimated not only the prominence of your personality in my memory, but your own closeness to know me well. When I do consider the character of your posts and the things you’ve said, I suspect that many things you’ve said here are misinformation, false clues to prevent me from knowing who you are. Such petty games are not played by even mature natural men, unless they're harboring a huge grudge. I know, as well you know, that as soon as you reveal your identity in a non-ambiguous way to me, then I will know YOUR weaknesses and failures, and you would loose what you now perceive as an advantage in your anonymity. You game would then be over. Happy people don’t play these kind of mind games, only vindictive bitter people. Then you go and prove my hunch that you know nothing of the things of God by saying this: “as for me operating the agapao,forgiveness,grace. __ i reserve that for those people who DESERVE it!” Jesus said it’s no big whoop to love those who love you back, because anyone can do that. Dogs and cats can do THAT. The very essence of agapao, forgiveness, and grace is reserved for those who DO NOT deserve it. This means you are operating the counterfeits of the above. You are descending fast on my priority list. Keep up the game you are playing, and attempting to get me to play, and you’ll be off the list altogether. [This message was edited by Mike on March 08, 2004 at 1:03.]

Golfie, You wrote: “Why don't you study Jesus' teachings during the last supper when he knew that he was going to die? He gave a wealth of teachings in the gospels just before He was taken captive to be tried and crucified. Don't you think those teachings of the lord Jesus are more important to us than some dead preacher's last words?” Actually, yes I think you’re correct. From 1971 to 1998 I did just that: studied Jesus’ last words before his death, and then his last words before his ascension. Had you thought of this second set of Jesus’ last words? I had. The reason the loss and then the finding of Dr’s last words was so significant to me was because of my studies in last words like this. There are other examples in the OT, like Jacob’s at the end of Genesis. My favorite pre-death near-last words of Jesus was John 17. I studied that one a lot. It’s Jesus’ prayer to his Father and it teaches much. *** Unlike many other grads around me I made it a point to systematically read the Gospels from time to time. Before “Jesus Christ Is Not God” came out in 1975, I had combed the Gospels to collect in a file everything Jesus said as to what he is and what he is not. I wanted to be VERY sure I wasn’t insulting him by saying he was not God if he was. Now, let me ask you a question or two: Do you think Jesus’ words in the Gospels are more important than Paul’s words in his epistles. Paul is a dead preacher too, don’t forget. I also made a very intense study of Paul’s last words in II Timothy. I spent 11 years looking that epistle over because of it’s connection to the Canon. Likewise with Peter’s dying last words. Have you noticed the similarities between Jesus’ last words, Paul’s last words, Peter’s last words, and Dr’s last words? There is a connection, but only those who study them all will ever see it.

vickles, You wrote: “Mike, I would hope that after this time and my posts that you would understand that I don't play games.” I didn’t mean to insult you about game playing. I was actually hoping for your sake that you were. Since you insist you are not, I have pity on your lack of knowledge. Now PLEASE don’t be insulted by me saying this. I do think I see a lack and I am trying to help. I will try to explain, but please don’t let your feathers get ruffled because I say I see a lack of knowledge. Some of the things I’ve recently seen in your posts indicate an lack of understanding of what were taught about believing. That you would use that story of a child crying for something and believing from learned responses of the mother, rather than believing the promises of God, indicates a very worldly or new-age style of understanding of the details in law of believing. You seem to have separated the law of believing from the necessity of having a promise of God to believe. At the point I expressed a concern that you were just playing games with me, you had written : “I'm pretty sure I remember hearing in the pfal class and yourself that this principal is suppose to work for the saint and the sinner alike.” This sentence was in the response to me mentioning that a promise of God was necessary. Tell me if I am wrong, but it looks to me that you think that for the “principle” of believing to work for a sinner, that sinner is excused from having to know a promise of God. Or maybe you think the Dr’s use of the word sinner means he was teaching that someone who is so far from knowing the promises that he can go ahead and operate the law anyway. The accuracy of what Dr taught is that if a sinner HAPPENS to be believing something that IS a promise of God, THEN the law of believing will work for him. Same thing with a child who wants something. If a child wants something that HAPPENS to be a promise of God, then that child too can operate the law and receive that promise. Like I said, I’m guessing from your posts that you make no connection between the total necessity to be believing on a promise before the law of believing kicks in. Both your mention of a child and a sinner point in that direction. In Session One Dr uses the word “available” so many times that I’d apologize in advance to people I signed up for the class about it, and promise them that the repetition would fade away as the class progresses. Now I know that Dr uses that word so many times JUST SO fewer people would get the misimpression that they could believe for anything and receive it. Dr uses the word “available” to indicate that there is a promise of God that MAKES IT AVAILABLE to claim the desired situation. You are not the only one who has not connected the need of a promise from God to be the focus of the believing, so please don’t think I’m singling you out. This disconnect was rampant in the 80's TVT. Was that when you first took the class? If you DO know that believing only works for that believing which is focused on what God has made available by one of His promises, then please tell me, and then please tell me why you said what you did about the child and the sinner. If you want, you can start all over at the beginning of this theme in your posts to me. If I am correct about your thinking on believing being disconnected from the promises of God, then this is ample proof TO YOU that Dr was very much on the ball in insisting that we master the books we got from the class. You mentioned that you thought you “heard” these things in the class. For most of us these details need more than hearing to get totally straight. We need to read them and master them that way.

Shellon, Ohhhh! You mean you were being sarcastic. To convey such a complex nuance you need to put more data in the message. I did see the "wink" but that can be interpreted a number of ways. Did you see Juan's post right under mine where large portions of the article are posted?

Shellon, Happy to oblige. That verse used to bug me too, until that issue came out. *** Trefor, Are you lamenting an unwise act in tossing them out?

metastic&ocular, Oh, I forgot something. You wrote: “mike can you say: "jesus christ is my lord and saviour and i believe that God has raised him from the dead" __ can you say that? __ can you write it?” Yes, and I can write it, and with proper grammar too: Jesus Christ is my Lord and savior, and I believe IN MY HEART that God has raised him from the dead. If you call me you can hear me say it. Now it’s YOUR turn to prove me wrong. Prove to me that you are attempting to walk like Christ and not a moron.

metastic&ocular, You wrote: “that's a crude dodge mike __ do you think everyone here does not see that?” Do you really mean “everyone” or do you mean a majority of the active posters? Because your reading here is so sparse you are unaware of those here (include lurkers here) that agree with me. Because your reading of my posts is so sparse and poorly executed, you are unaware that I don’t give a flying flock what people think of my righteous dodges. Why should I spend valuable time on answering your crude and vicious posts? Suppose I addressed you with an insult. Would you feel like answering me? You say you know me, so why don’t you call me? My phone number hasn’t changed in 17 years. Are you afraid to confront me by phone? Why should I waste time on someone so dedicated to negativity as you? You are SO negative Rafael not only assumed you were a man, you almost took his breath away when you first appeared here. I could almost see him gasping for air at that time. If you want me to spend time on this board with you then you need to come up with substantive posts. I’d prefer to deal with you privately by phone so that whatever terrible grudge you bear against me can be straightened out. I know I’ve not lived a perfect life, but I also know that I try to, and if you point out something I did to offend you in the past I can apologize and try to make it up to you. So far you’ve merely presented yourself to me here as a bitter, negative know-nothing. I think you are blaming me and DR and PFAL for your own failures and lack of character. This is common. Why don’t you do the uncommon thing and operate the love of God, forgiveness, and grace? So far all you seem to want is strife and negativity. Please prove me wrong here.

vickles, You wrote: “Sorry mike, I don't read the kjv version so I don't get that from there.” Does this fix it for you? What’s NOT masterable is your NIV, as I pointed out in my fourth post on the first page of my “Masters of the Word – Mastering PFAL.” No scholar in the world has ever mastered the NIV, the critical Greek texts or the ancient fragments. You can substitute any other version into the spots where NIV occurs there. *** You wrote: "I'm pretty sure I remember hearing in the pfal class and yourself that this principal is suppose to work for the saint and the sinner alike.” Are you playing with me or are you serious? Just in case you’re serious, the PRINCIPLE works for all, saint and sinner, young and old. It’s the MISAPPLICATION of the principle that won’t work. Attempting to work the law of believing but not basing the believing on a promise of God, like the post where you portrayed of a child, will not work, at least with the True God. He may graciously help anyway, but that is not guaranteed.