Mike

I'm not doing a very good job of leaving my computer to re-group.

dizzydog, Where did you get that passage of VPW text you posted? I can't find it, and it doesn't look familiar. Many of the ideas do, but I can't place the exact text.

dizzydog, I changed my mind. I was getting into too much editing of my post above, after some had already read it. Here's what I wanted to add: the KJV scriptures I see in the PFAL books that are consistently printed by Dr without modification, I trust as authoritative. It used to be years ago that I trusted the same scriptures because they were in an official publisher's edition of the KJV. It had gold edges so it looked authoritative. The same scriptures I could also find in an interlinear and in other versions. I could see that they were in almost every hotel room. I could see that they came from distant antiquity, and lots of other people thought they were authoritative. All of these reasons for trusting were stepping out on a limb to a degree for me, until I got used to it and then committed to it. After a while I seemed to forgot some of the reasons I committed to it. Now, after been through a few things, I have come to trust the SAME exact English scriptures BECAUSE Dr got the OK from God to print them that way. I see this as a much more solid base that the former. On a practical basis, NEARLY all the KJV verses you believe, I believe, and the way you believe them, but for different reasons. How many people can you say that of? That they have NEARLY all of the same Bible verse beliefs as you?

Goey, We've discussed that title to that part of the book before here. When there's time I'll get to it again. I'm still editing my post to dizzydog. Unfortunately I neeed to add a little near the end.

dizzydog, Thank you for the follow-up. Together they comprise a well thought out essay. I have my work cut out for me. I?m really glad you did come back and pasted back in the original post from a few days ago. I just got home from work, and I was pondering further response to your post, beyond the response I gave at 1:25 pm PDT, my lunch time. So I was still pondering your first post all afternoon, and now I have two more. Let me throw out two items, first. Then I need to re-group and see what I have to do tonight away from the computer. That?ll determine how fast I can get to your recent three posts. I?m genuinely impressed with the richness of your recent posts. ******** (1) When Dr says ?The Word of God? he means the spiritual stuff, that?s in God?s head, and can hopefully get into our heads too. When that king cut up with a knife and burned up the scroll from Jeremiah, God?s Word didn?t get burned up at all. It may have been wrongly divided by the knife (yuk) and other things, but it survived the burning, while the scroll didn?t. The scroll was physical. Word of God is spiritual. (Ahhhhhhh topic return....) Sorry! Just savoring the return to topic. Similarly, in PFAL passages "The Word of God" is spiritual, while "Bible" is 5-senses. The way I see it, the Bible is PART of the Word of God (Deut292:29) revealed in written form. God?s secrets belong to Him. This dichotomy must be looked for diligently (which I?m still learning) in all PFAL passages. So here?s an important God designed dichotomy, Bible/Word of God which I was previously very negligent to inform myself of. That?s what this WHOLE thread is named for. ********* (2) There is another dichotomy, not so God-designed. This is the Version/Bible mix-up. When Dr says ?Bible? he does NOT mean a version, nor a translation, nor a critical text, nor an ancient text fragment. He means the originals in the original understanding of the holy men of God who spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. The ?scriptures? that we can buy in bookstores and put into our hands are approximations of the originals, and sometimes close to the originals, but they are CERTAINLY not the originals in the original understanding of the holy men of God who spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. So this dichotomy is one where Dr says ?Bible? and someone might think their favorite version or their version with wide margin notes, plus some head knowledge. Then there?s a miscommunication. I think this happens a lot. I know I used to think this way. I see others now thinking this way. I think we need to discipline our vocabulary to match Dr?s and then we can see more of what he wrote. It may be that you?ve gone farther with your studies, and when Dr says "Bible" or you see your own translation, or your private assemblage of various criticals, or your private assemblage of various ancient text fragments. If I thought that the 1942 promise extended to you too, then I might be swayed to come to your way of thinking that a better supply of the scriptures (than Dr?s in PFAL) can be found from you or by your suggestions. However, the performance that I am aware of all PFAL grads in leadership positions at the time of the ministry meltdown was so abysmal, and to this day some 15 years later continues to be so abysmal, that I cannot believe the 1942 promise extends to anyone but Dr. I certainly wouldn?t look for spiritual help in the finer points of the ongoing scripture reassembly by modern scholars. I?d only trust a grad to teach me farther than PFAL. But all the grad leaders are now in such a state of failure to speak up and speak God?s solutions to this crisis that I can now only trust a grad who has obeyed Dr and mastered PFAL as Dr told us. Net result: I trust Dr?s presentation of the scriptures in the PFAL books over Zondervan presentations, or any wide margin variation thereof, or any grad scholar. I don?t trust my own ability to GET the Word, to obtain the Word from the fragments that survive. I don?t trust yours, and I don?t trust academia?s. I trust them for approximations, but for the accurate Word and the power I trust God?s 1942 intervention ONLY. I?m training myself to change my vocabulary so that when I see Dr say ?Bible? I see the set of PFAL books and a stack of magazines. ******** You see, if your take on how to absorb the Word of God in it?s finest power distributing secrets from the existing received scriptures, then where were you at the meltdown with the answers from this powerful handle on God?s Word? If it?s in later years that you tapped into the power from your continued exposure to the received scriptures, why didn?t you come here set the record straight about Dr?s Last/Lost Teaching? You see, I observed the unfortunate fact that NONE of Dr?s top leadership had ANY power when the chips were down. They STILL don?t. They were at one time the prime candidates for the first big wave of Christ Formed In People, Jesus Christ men and women with all nine all the time, but they all failed to come back to the PFAL writings. I don?t expect any of them to point in the right direction in the thicket of biblical research with no 1942 promise to guide them. Nor do I expect to see any other grad do it. ******* You said that Dr would be upset at me for my posting. We can leave that for later. I?m telling you that Dr WAS upset with ALL his top leaders for not mastering PFAL. How do you think Dr would feel if he found out that his final instructions were lost? How do you think he?d feel to learn that in the year 1998, tens of thousands (I?ve polled hundreds) of grads, Corps, and clergy would not be even aware of the existence of these final instructions, let alone ever inclined to obey them? When Dr?s up, I?ll be there with a clean conscience to greet him. [This message was edited by Mike on July 14, 2003 at 22:59.] [This message was edited by Mike on July 14, 2003 at 23:07.]

dizzydog, Thanks for waiting. The other day it was fun at first to try conducting 3 and then 4 conversations simultaneously, but it overloaded me quickly. You wrote (and then patiently pasted): ?You have contended on many occasions that the Bible we have in the current forms is no longer reliable. I think you called them unreliable fragments and tattered remnants.? I only call them that in a particular context and to a particular audience. To new people, non-grads, I?d only say it in a much milder way. The problems with the approximate nature of the received texts, and non-authoritative translations thereof, are not pertinent to the new student. There are a slight few areas where they need to be informed of the problems with the texts, but not so much in the first three sessions of the class. Later in the class, after the new student has a footing, then he can be told about variations in the text copies, additions, forgeries, etc. As the student gets into learning of the power, then the approximate nature of the existent texts gets more apparent, and useful translations get more scarce. It?s in the area of power that the received texts are the most tampered with. By the time the new student reaches the Holy Spirit field he?s aware of italicized words being non-authoritative, as well as a few other places. Well after the class he may hear something that contradicts what you wrote next: ?I have contended all along that this is not the case and not the declaration of VPW.? As more advanced students Dr showed us that there are times and places and situations where a decision must be made as to which texts we will rely on, and which ones we will reject. This may start to look subjective to the student. Here is where the 1942 revelations come to play. God tells Dr which ones to rely on. Another time it may be a little more intense, as there is NO text in existence, but Dr would tell us that there HAS to be one that will line up with what his spiritual awareness insists on. This is where I would lose it with Dr in the good old days. Because I had then the same model you are working with now, I felt Dr committed a foul when he would say ?Someday we?ll find a text.? I was bothered by these kind of statements, because as your model insists on, we were supposed to be doing 5-senses, intellectual, biblical research, not mystical tea leave readings. This was a mild equivalent of Dr saying ?Thus saith the Lord? and it bothered me, because it didn?t seem to fit with the research model I thought Dr had taught us. He taught us both. First was the 5-senses approach. Key #4 of the AC?s Keys To Walking In The Spirit: ?...What you can know by the 5-senses God expects you to know.? So, first Dr did his homework 5-senses wise, and THEN God would tell him anything else he needed to know. It took me 27 years to believe this second half. ******** Next you wrote: ?Furthermore I have contended that your relationship with Jesus Christ is affected by your attitude toward the Scriptures. ?In Revelation 19:13 we read, "And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called the Word of God." In this passage of scripture "...his name is called The Word of God." ?The Word of God is always the same and it is always the Word of God no matter whether it is written in Genesis or in the Book of Revelation. The Name and the Word are identical. Wherever the name of Jesus Christ is used, there you have the person of Christ and the Word of Christ as one and the same. The Bible Word, that which is written in the Book called the Bible, is God?s Word. The Written Word and the Living Word are identical. The Church has not majored this. Our hearts are not believing it. The Bible Word is God?s Word because the Bible is the Word of God.? Everything up to the last phrase I?d agree with. The last sentence is in need of a subtle change. ?...because the Bible is the Word of God.? should read ?because the Bible is the REVEALED Word of God.? The thing to remember here, though, is that we live under a handicap of no longer having the original scriptures. What we have is close, but not perfect. We must work the scriptures to find as many of these problem areas as possible, and determine what the originals said. It is impossible for us to be totally like minded, because we all work slightly different ways on different scriptures. On the fine points we all have a slightly different ?Bible? we?re working from, most of the differences being in the wide margins, except for those exceptionally skilled with White-Out and fine point pens. There is no authoritative ONE text. There are millions of different texts (worked by students) and as a result there is no needed likemindedness in the Body...yet. ****** The next big section of scriptures looks quite agreeable to me. ***** You then wrote: ?We have come to a terrible day in history because so many people have set themselves up as critics of the Bible, of the Word of God...? You may think I?m one of these people, but I?ll tell you my criticism is pointed (like I said above in opening) and it is NOT a criticism of the Bible. I see definite problems with miscopies OF the Bible. I see problems with forgeries OF the Bible. I see problems with critical compilations of miscopies OF the Bible. I see problems with translations OF the Bible. The Bible (what existed 2000 years ago) is fine, we just need to get it. There are only 2 ways to go about getting it: 5-senses and revelation. BOTH were required, both were possible, and as Dr writes in PFAL on page 128: ?When we get back to that original, God-breathed Word -- which I am confident we can -- then once again we will be able to say with all the authority of the prophets of old, ?Thus saith the Lord.? The revelation has been given, the work has been done. We have reached this point Dr was confident we would reach, where we HAVE the Word. It?s not a format preserved reproduction of the ancient scriptures, because God didn?t want it that way. When He switched over from the stars to the written Word, the format of the stars was discarded. The same happened to the older scriptures. We still have the approximations, but God has focused attention on the new format of the PFAL writings. Outside of PFAL we only have approximations of God?s Word. ***** You then wrote: ?...when the Bible is given to be our critic. What right does any man have to criticize the Word of God. The Word of God is our critic.? The Bible was lost, just like the scroll was burned in Jer.36, but God?s Word is NEVER lost. He has it in His head. ****** You then wrote: ?The Word is the Father God?s presence with us in his absence, manifested in the senses through the gift from the Holy Spirit in us. So the Word is my contact point with the Master. This makes the Word vital and alive.? Yes, God?s Word is this. But translations and miscopies are not. ****** ?The Bible is not just another book.? The Bible is NOT a book at all. It?s an abstraction of what used to be. We can buy in bookstores only approximate reconstructions of it, or translations of approximate reconstructions of it. ****** ?Your attitude toward the Word is indicative of the place God holds in your life. All revivals are dependent upon the written Word becoming real in the lives of men.? Yes. And it?s also the case that an improper attitude toward the approximate reconstructions of men that have ?Holy Bible? printed on the outside cover is also indicative of how much accuracy is incorporated into that relationship with God. An attitude of too much trust in these works of man will prevent ?all nine all the time.? ****** Lastly you wrote: ?It is impossible to separate a man from his words, likewise, it is impossible to separate God from His Word. So the living Word of God on the lips of a man of believing faith takes the place of the absent Christ. If a man?s word is of no value he will soon reason that God?s Word is valueless. Man?s unbelief in the Word of God is largely due to the lack of believing in his own words. ?When you live in the Word and the Word lives in you, the Word once more becomes flesh among men. Let the Word of God then dwell in you richly for it will be life and health and joy unspeakable.? Very agreeable words. [This message was edited by Mike on July 14, 2003 at 16:38.]

Steve, My analysis of page 83 is 100% 5-senses. Some of what Dr wrote was God-breathed. Not all of what he wrote was God-breathed. Some of what he wrote was non-God-breathed. Not all of what he wrote was non-God-breathed. Every word he wrote TO US is true. TNDC p.34 It was NOT just VP writing to us. TNDC p.116

Yeeeeeooow! It looks like people stayed up all night and early this morning posting here! I'm looking forward to this evening's responses. Right now I'm off to work.

socks, I?ve posted here before that I admired the times that Dr eliminated all gray areas concerning his authority to teach us. Either he lied of told the truth are the only two alternatives, when it comes to supernatural claims. I now see the 1942 promise like I first saw the account on the train in India with the man?s healed arm. When I first heard that story I knew that if Dr was lying here I couldn?t rust him anywhere. He cut out all possibilities of hearing part of what he said and rejecting others. I knew that if he told the truth I should listen very carefully; if he lied I should leave. I had to decide. I stayed. When I heard the 1942 promise I first blew it off as unimportant. In these later years I?ve seen that it?s like the train story. I?m staying. What you say about the story being no proof in itself is accurate. It?s the truths, the many truths, in the class that inspires me to believe the promise. Just so that this promise is not a mere memory remnant, here it is: ************************************************************* The Way ... Living In Love Elena Whiteside pp. 178-181 "Then Rosalind left. It was the fall of the year. Kids were back in school already. It must have been September. I was sitting in my office, an old dentist's office just around the corner from the church where I served - I'll show you that too when we get there. I bet you it's still there, though I haven't been back here since I left. "I was praying. And I told Father that He could have the whole thing, unless there were real genuine answers that I wouldn't ever have to back up on. "And that's when He spoke to me audibly, just like I'm talking to you now. He said He would teach me the Word as it had not been known since the first century if I would teach it to others. "Well, I nearly flew off my chair. I couldn't believe that God would talk to me." He shakes his head slowly smiling. "It's just too fantastic. People won't believe it. But He spoke to me just as plainly as I'm talking now to you. "But really, why is it so strange? When you think about it, you see in the Bible that all through the ages God talked to people. God talked to Moses, to all the prophets. God talked to Paul. All through the centuries, God has talked to people in times of great need. And that's what we have today - a terrific need. People are just so far from hearing and believing the Word of God. "You don't get it in the theological schools. The Word is buried, just like it was in the time of Jeremiah. Oh, they had their priests, their higher echelons, their temples, their rituals. It all looked so religious, you know. But the Word of God was buried. Oh, they were teaching the people something -- they called it the Word of God maybe, but the Word was buried. God spoke directly to Jeremiah. "The Word is buried today. If there's no one around to teach it, God has to teach it Himself. You see, I am a product of my times. God knew me before the foundations of the world, just like He knew you and everyone else. We were all in God's foreknowledge from the beginnings. "God knew I would believe His Word. And every day I am more and more deeply convinced of this ministry which teaches people the accuracy and integrity of God's Word. Without this ministry the world would be in far greater spiritual darkness about His Word. There would be less light in the world. Where else but in this ministry do you find the Word of God so living and real? This is truly a time of terrific need." Doctor nods his head abruptly, as if to punctuate his urgency. "Well, I couldn't believe that God talked to me right then. You see, God's right here. He always has been here. He is still here. And God is willing and able to reveal everything to anyone or everyone. But we are just unable to receive it. We don't believe it. It's like, you can't pour a gallon of water in a teacup. It's just not big enough to receive it, take it all in. You have to make the cup bigger first. You build up the container, and then you fill it little by little. He fills us a little bit at a time as we can take it. He knows how much we can take because God knows everything. God doesn't waste His revelation on people who cannot believe it. "Paul had to be tremendously built up to believe -receive - the mystery that had been hidden since before the foundations of the world. John, too, had to be built up to receive the revelation set forth in the book of Revelation. It's taken many years and a lot of trips and searching to build my believing to this point also. But God knows our hearts. "Well, on the day God spoke to me, I couldn't believe it. But then I came to the point by the next day where I said to myself - maybe it's true. So the next day I talked to God again. I said, 'Lord, if it's really true what you said to me yesterday, if that was really you talking to me, you've got to give me a sign so that I really know, so that I can believe.' "The sky was crystal blue and clear. Not a cloud in sight. It was a beautiful early autumn day. I said, 'If that was really you, and you meant what you said, give me a sign. Let me see it snow.' My eyes were tightly shut as I prayed. And then I opened them. "The sky was so white and thick with snow, I couldn't see the tanks at the filling station on the corner not 75 feet away." Doctor relates this phenomenon in a joyous voice. The car swerves off the highway, onto a narrow black-top road, and the sign with the arrow reads: "Payne, 2 miles." The overcast sky turns restlessly over our heads, and the sparse sprinkling of snowflakes thickens on the windshield. Doctor laughs aloud. "It reminds me of that day in 1942. It reminds me of that other time it snowed." We pull into a sleepy, small midwestern town. Around two corners, we're by a one-story building, the front of which is a many-paned display window. "That's the old dentist's office that was my office," Doctor remarks. By now, the snow is swirling around us. At the corner stands the Marathon Gas Station. Doctor shakes his head from side to side. His face breaks into a ready smile. His eyes are blue, laughing or crying. "It reminds me of the day..." he trails off. "That's where I was sitting when I prayed to God to teach me the Word and show me how. And when I opened my eyes, it was snowing so hard I couldn't see those gas pumps right there." He points to the pumps a dozen yards or more from the window. A car has just pulled in. The dentist's office is deserted now, empty through the window.

Oakspear, I pay MUCH more respect and attention to what I read on PFAL pages than I do with PFAL for years, and who have a negative attitude towards Dr. If you were to read PFAL itself, instead of what posters say is in it, I think you're more likely to agree with how I read it. One of the big differences in where we read differently is PFAL page 83, where Dr uses different handling of his own name in accordance with the many "thus saith the Lord" statements he's made over the years. If Dr had meant to include his name in that list with others EQUALLY he could have easily and unambiguously written this: The Bible was written so that you as a believer need not be blown about by every wind of doctrine or theory or ideology. This Word of God does not change. Men change, ideologies change, opinions change; but this Word of God lives and abides forever. It endures, it stands. Let?s see this from John 5:39. ?Search the scriptures ....? It does not say search Shakespeare or Kant or Plato or Aristotle or V.P. Wierwille?s writings or the writings of a denomination. No, it says, ?Search the scriptures ....? because all Scripture is God-breathed. Not what Wierwille writes will be God-breathed; not what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures ? they are God-breathed. The above paragraph is what you and others WANT that page 83 of PFAL to say, but it does NOT say the above. Here is what is actually written: The Bible was written so that you as a believer need not be blown about by every wind of doctrine or theory or ideology. This Word of God does not change. Men change, ideologies change, opinions change; but this Word of God lives and abides forever. It endures, it stands. Let?s see this from John 5:39. ?Search the scriptures ....? It does not say search Shakespeare or Kant or Plato or Aristotle or V.P. Wierwille?s writings or the writings of a denomination. No, it says, ?Search the scriptures ....? because all Scripture is God-breathed. Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; not what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures ? they are God-breathed. It?s the addition of just a few words, ?not all? and ?necessarily? that make the big difference. Here?s the critical sentence (A) your way, and then (B) Dr?s way: (A) Not what Wierwille writes will be God-breathed; not what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures ? they are God-breathed. (B) Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; not what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures ? they are God-breathed. Now let me ask you. Suppose you were writing this book. Suppose that you wrote sentence (A) and then looked at it. You see that it clearly says that none of your writings are going to be God-breathed like the scriptures from the first century. But then you remember that in 1942, and in many other situations since then, God has told you that you were given the job to first learn God?s Word from Him directly, and then you were to teach it to others in written form like it had nopt been known since the first century. How would you then correct sentence (A) to reflect this truth that SOME, not all, but SOME of your writings were going to be God-breathed like in the first century? How would you correct sentence (A)? Let?s use the sorter sub-sentence versions for simplicity: (A) Not what Wierwille writes will be God-breathed; Ok. For if we first change ?Not? to ?Not all? that might help. This is because only SOME, not all, of what you write is in this exceptional category. (A.4) Not all what Wierwille writes will be God-breathed; And a minor change would be to fix ?what? to ?that? for better flowing grammar. So now we have. (A.6) Not all that Wierwille writes will be God-breathed; Now that could almost do the job of communicating the truth of some of your writings being in this exceptional category. But something?s missing in the surety department. The context is all these nice guys who have nice writings, but that are NOT God-breathed. The context kind of squelches this contra-contextual piece of information. You want to make this a more positive statement of this exceptional situation of some, not all, but some of your writings being God-breathed. Add the word ?necessarily? and see what happens. (A.8) Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; Hey! We?re there! This is the same as the book. The word ?necessarily? adds in the idea that OF NECESSITY there is an exception to the rule of this context. Not ALL, but some, of Dr?s writings NECESSARILY are going to be God-breathed. If you wanted to convey that some of Dr?s writings of necessity were a fulfillment of the 1942 promise, and you wanted to say this on page 83, in that context, then this is how you would have to say it: Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed. This means OF NECESSITY, some of what Wierwille writes will be God-breathed. ************************************************************ The other page reading we disagreed on were whether or not Dr says that he originated all the material when he says he researched or wrote something. Dr was totally up front with us, on so many occasions, on NOT being the originator of the material. He told us of his 5-senses exploits in collecting information, and he told us of his special connection with God to sort it all out and put it together. How many times did you hear Dr say that phrase ?put it together? ?? Lots! When I read pages where Dr talks a little about his research, I bring in all the other things Dr said about it. I don?t put on blinders and look for ways to ?prove? him wrong. I read what?s written. ps - Will you STILL buy me a Leinenkugel? [This message was edited by Mike on July 14, 2003 at 1:32.]

Ginger, You wrote: ?I did 'get' PFAL.? For a few hours I was wondering if I should have put in more detail when I implied you did NOT get it. What I meant is that there is a world of fine detail in PFAL that I don?t think ANYONE got. This is the reason Dr kept on saying to master the books. THAT?S where the real action of PFAL is at. Most of us who dedicated our lives had to have ?got? it to SOME degree, but I now see that there is far more in there to be gotten than any of us saw in the good old days. Your familiarity with the soundtrack, like most everybody in those days, is probably quite rich. One of the key messages I?ve repeated here over and over is how much more there is to the class that just the soundtrack. The books, and those chapters in the collaterals, have MUCH more detail than the soundtrack. Plus, the written aspects of the class are far more refined and precise. Lastly, coming back to these books is where the biggest jolt of truth comes. When we were first exposed to them we had different needs, and our maturity allowed only so much absorption. Now that we?ve been through a few of life?s hoops, our RE-exposure to PFAL will be much richer than the first. The difference between knowing the soundtrack and some chapters years ago, and knowing the entire set of chapters now, is astounding! Separating out the TVT from the books can ONLY happen as we study the books now. There are lots of surprises in the books that quickly dispel TVT darkness. Separating out these differences can also be a lot of work, as some of the errors are quite complicated. What you see now to be damaging aspects of the class, you will either find to be not that way at all in the actual texts, or you will find they are not in them at all. When you say that some of what is in PFAL is irresponsible, what I see you appraising is a conglomeration of notions and experiences, only some of which are accurately from the books. ******** There are many things I like to discuss along with my presentation of data. Hit me with some of the ones you like, and maybe we can work them into this thread or another. Your attitude and approach make it easier to get into things.

Rafael, Do you think God handed Job over to the adversary? I don't.

Ginger, You wrote: ?I think PFAL had the potential, and did, in places, apply unrealistic, and unproven absolutes (fear is negative believing, unbelief, etc.), fool-heartedly I must add, that could not and would not hold-up under scruitiny...I'm not talking about the Word of God as someone understands it...I'm referring to the application of it with unsound and unproven absolutes that were not biblically based whatsoever, in concept or design.? I don?t think you yet know what is REALLY in PFAL, but you do know some of it mixed with a lot of experiences, most of which are with people (TVT) and not with sentences in the books. THERE, in that TVT counterfeit of PFAL, your analysis of some flaws seems to fit. Many aspects of the TVT would not stand up to scrutiny. But PFAL, free of TVT, stands up to scrutiny marvelously. The scrutiny of the world?s philosophy, psychology, world history, archeology, english literature, world literature, science, physics, calculus is uninteresting to me. Those diciplines are fine in their own field, but that?s a 5-senses field only. They are incapable of competent scrutiny of PFAL. Just the opposite: PFAL scrutinizes them and they come up wanting. God?s Word is the critic of the thoughts and intents of the heart, and PFAL is revelation form God.

Ginger, I can only see the 'listener' at a disadvantage if they are sold bad items? I often marvel at how Joseph in Egypt was given the revelation how to trick his brothers into doing the right thing, even to the point of the entire family moving to Egypt. PFAL was not a harmful thing that people were tricked into. I do see bad items that came later, in the TVT, but not in PFAL. I don?t see an overall flaw in Dr?s approach. It worked. We got the Word. Dr did what I see Paul doing in Acts 17 where he made his sales pitch that worked for some. When you look at the details of his sales pitch there he goes to their PAGAN alter to the unknown god, and he quotes to them their own PAGAN poet. Looking at Paul?s approach, not knowing he was working with God?s revelation, you might think Paul was a bit of an aggressive huckster. Looks can be deceiving. Dr got revelation how to sell a bunch of us boomers on a good thing. ****** I know that there were things that DID go wrong. Same with Paul?s ministry. When he went to Thessalonica there was a riot. Similar things happened a lot around Paul?s ministry. Paul had an exclusive revelation and the adversary hounded the perimeters of Paul?s ministry looking for whatever he could exploit to make it look bad. Ditto with the construction of the TVTs to make Dr?s exclusive (1942 promise) revelation look bad.

WordWolf, You wrote: ?God calls Job BLAMELESS. Those who place the blame on JOB, therefore, contradict God. "Why did Job's kids die? Oh, Job was afraid." For those of you who somehow missed it, that's BLAMING JOB.? I?ve mentioned before here that when I use the word ?blame? it?s not in the usual hard, harsh sense. I see a soft blame that can be useful for limited conversation. It?s an abbreviation for the much more complex topic of locating what went wrong, what HAD been going right, and how do we FIX it to get it right again. There?s no condemnation, so there?s no blame in that sense. It?s just useful to get to ultimate causes of things to effectively eliminate symptoms. Like I?ve mentioned just a few posts above, getting into specifics about actual situations can be hopelessly complicated without revelation. When God places some situations in His Word about people screwing up, HERE we do have revelation, and this affixing of soft blame on Job by God in His Word is not an unloving thing at all. God shows how He FIXES the situation, as I mentioned above. God does some much heavier, overt affixing of this ?soft? blame in the accounts on David. Once again, we have revelation here on David, not a rumor mill, or a set of first-hand eye witness human 5-senses affidavits, it?s the written revelation. But, again God shows us the FIX where David comes back. God knew this in His foreknowledge, and knew that hard blame wasn?t called for. God already knew that adversary was going to kill David?s son, and that David?s believing to build the temple was totally shot. ************ The 9/11 and SARS ?fear? you pointed out I see as worry and concern. For SOME people these worries and concerns can grow to fear, but it takes time and repetition, just like full blown believing.

Ginger, I don't see the ultimate goal of God working His Word with DR in the PFAL writings as a reaching out to the masses, like a revival. I see God's purpose here as MUCH bigger than mere revival. I also see God's purpose as much more focused on just one small group of people, PFAL grads, because He has a job for us. It's not yet a reach out to the masses thing. That can come only after we fully master this Word, so we can fully answer the call, and fully carry out the job. Dr's Last/Lost Teaching says just this: first master, THEN serve.

Ginger, You wrote: "The fear you are referring to, as negative fear ~ very possibly has it's root in a brain chemistry misfire or disorder." Yes, some extreme runaway fears that happen are due to "brain chemistry misfire or disorder" causes. BUT, there are also some fears that CAUSE "brain chemistry misfire or disorder" symptoms to occur. Sometimes BOTH kinds are happening at the same time feeding each other. It can get quite complicated, so complicated that there's NO way to sort through any events or anecdotal information without revelation. The only things we can efficiently sort through are our own thoughts and bringing them into obedience to Christ, who IS the Word. ***** You wrote: "Are there still bible-thumpers out there who believe everyone must have perfect health, and if they don't, they have brought ALL circumstances of this on themselves by their own thoughts and actions? YES!" Yes, but not me, and not Dr. ***** You wrote: "Explain the challenges of aging than...cellular death...etc." Life sometimes seems like a series of battles. Even the ones we win take their tolls. The BIG win here though is the new body we receive in a moment of time. That seems to be LAST on the list. Right now it's the perfectly renewed mind that's been made available. ***** You wrote: "If people are so impressionable in their youth, w/o life experience and mature sensibilities...when they take a class like PFAL...concepts that are completely new to them, some which are mis-taught by the instructor who does not have a WORKING understanding of the material anyway, who is only attempting to assign a moral connection to things he does not/can not legitimately do service to...we have something like an 'experiment' that doesn't pan out...or goes bad...you know?" Playing the "What IF" game is pretty shakey, but it looks to me that there is one implied here. Let's see if I can draw it out. The "What IF" game was exploited by SNL for several skits worth of comedy because it can get really ridiculous, really fast if we're not careful. I only want to illustrate ONE point by this, so stretching it out will naturally bring out unwanted points. What if ... we in our impressionable youth had NOT been sold PFAL? How bad would THAT experiment go is the question that your posted challenge implies. . . Let's see... my impressionable youth............... . . Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm................................................ . . I can remember it as if it were happening NOW! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .....Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .......Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .....Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .....Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .......Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .....Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .....Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .......Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .....Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .....Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .......Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .....Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ..............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .....Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ............................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .......Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! .....Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! ...........................Diddle ittle ittle ittle IT! . . . . . . . Is that the Moody Blues I?m hearing? I wonder where I can find some pure mescaline to go with this music? I?ve been reading the Tibetan Book of the Dead lately and this death thing is looking more and more fascinating. Maybe I could go down in a blaze of glory resisting the Vietnam war. Or an overdose of acid. That would be great! Maybe I?ll just veg out with all my friends. . . . . . . . . . . . . MIKE! ...DIDDLE ITTLE ITTLE ITTLE IT!..............SNAP OUT OF IT!!!! . . . Oh! What a bad ?what if? I just had! Oh thank God I got sold PFAL!!!. . . . [This message was edited by Mike on July 13, 2003 at 17:01.]

Exy, I'm having a hard time deciphering that. Want to say it again?

sirguessalot, You wrote: ?It seems to me, that PFAL really failed to express most of the wisdom of this story. Almost as if the ?law of believing? was, in PFAL, the whole essence of the drama, particularly the consequence of fear. Because PFAL never seems to address the specifics of Job?s ?positive believing? that got him restored.? I agree. Dr says at the beginning of the class that he?s not going to teach all of it. In these early sessions of the class the topic was believing, not all the wisdom in Job. As to what got Job restored, it was God?s Word. Believing comes by hearing, hearing the Word. Job had esteemed God?s Word as more important than food, and this is how God was able to teach him and give him double. THIS is taught much in the class, but not with reference to Job. ***** ?(And if this wasn?t the essence, how are we then to understand the book of Job via PFAL alone?)? By first mastering PFAL and then applying the keys. ***** ?Mike, does PFAL blame consequence on fear, therefore equating fear with sin?? I can?t give you a reference yet, but it seems to me that NOT believing God is the bottom line for all missing the mark, sin. It?s the fear that trusting God won?t work that drives us to try something stupid or at least think about it. ***** ?Sh!t DOES happen to innocent people, regardless of their fear or faith. And there is always so much more to the story than we can know. And nothing about us can be so broken that God will not fix it in season. ?To me, this is more comforting than any success-or-failure formula. Makes life and love into an art form again, rather than a program.? I see that sh!t does SEEM to happen to innocent people, but we can?t see the condition of their heart and what kind of believing is in there. I totally agree with: ?there is always so much more to the story than we can know.? I?m all for the artistic dance of life, AFTER having been shown the formula of the steps. TEACHING the dance in formula form isn?t bad, it?s good. Once we learn it, we no longer need the 5-senses formula, and spiritual serendipity with Daddy is the name of the game.

Socks, You wrote: ?It's right in the class, first two sessions. Believing isn't presented as being restricted in it's rightful place to God's Word, because as it's been stated in this thread before, if a person believes negatively there's no God's Word involved.? Yes. Believing is a mental process that anyone can do. Dr does show in the class that there are those who believe things other that the promises of God. In these cases I think there is a natural component to the law of believing that does help them enjoy some positive results. But to really get ALL there is to receive from God, then the most efficient application of this law, bringing in all the supernatural resources of God, will demand a knowledge of the promises and acknowledgement of the Promise Maker. The first main point of the class was to help us receive, lambano. Thus Dr taught both the natural and supernatural ways the law helps us when we apply it most efficiently (the 5 things we know to receive). As to the dark side of the force, I mean negative believing, I see there again a natural element, where bad attitudes get bad results. As to the supernatural enforcement of the law?s a$$-end by the adversary, I know very little.

Rafael, I don't see any of Satan?s visits as asking permission. He?s razzing God about Job?s deteriorationg believing. After the first hit it declined. For God to arbitrarily hand over all of Job?s possessions and family to Satan, simply because of a dare, would be very perplexing to me if I believed it. I see God as having no choice in His conversations with Satan but to immediately honor the law of believing, and to ultimately help Job to utilize it properly. **** For Job?s fear to be documented as it is in Chapter One means to me that it was runaway fear, like the poor woman with the little boy. It wasn?t mere worry or concern that drove Job to the temple every day, and it wasn?t mere worry and concern that cause God to have this habit pattern documented. Job was into it up to his ears. Given this intense runaway fear that was taking over Job?s life on a daily basis, I see it as entirely likely that his family LEARNED this unhealthy attitude from him. They TOO were tricked into runaway fear. Satan took advantage of this.

Hi Rafael, I just saw the tail end of your post, and have little time right now. I don?t think Job deserved what he got from Satan. I think Satan pulled a technicality, God honored it, and then God gave Job double. I don?t think Joseph deserved to be sold into slavery, and THEN later on, to be thrown into prison. I do often wonder about injustices. Someone posted something about this two days ago, but I lost it. This is a frontier in my knowledge. I wonder about transient fluctuations in results that can come in life. It seems the law of believing works over a time average. There may be oddities that happen outside the law of believing, but they tend to smooth out in time. When Dr says something like ?you ARE where you are because of your believing? I take it that the place where ?you ARE? in this statement is stable and not a transient fluctuation. Where ?you are? is averaged over time a bit. I?m still pondering injustices, and if they can happen, and how quickly they get straightened out.

Ginger, I?ve only begun to read this mornings posts and yours was first. You wrote: ?can you explain where all fear is negative and will always have a negative result?? All of the intense, self built, self sustained kind of fear is negative. The comparatively milder fear of heights or loud noises that is inborn is not always negative, in fact, it save people?s lives at times. The sudden fear of an oncoming speeding car is useful at times. The mild fear of a bad grade may sometimes be the motivation a student needs to study. But the cultivated, gnawing, runaway fear that people sometimes get trapped into is always negative. This voluntary (deceived as it is) building and maintaining of fear will naturally lead a person into a less efficient life (negative results) and if the person is an unbelieving believer, someone with a strong connection with the True God, then the adversary has an extra motivation to see where he can add supernatural negative results to this person?s life, and thereby make God look bad. This is an opportunity the adversary can?t pass up, so for US GRADS, fear will always have a negative result. We?re not talking about occasional worry or concern, but about ?pure and disciplined? fear. like that poor woman with the little boy. Wont it be WONDERFUL when that little boy is raised from the dead and restored to his mother and entire family!!! I so yearn to see her set free!

Why 'sell' God, packaged in fear? I don?t believe the film class or the books do that, for the many reasons I?ve cited. I do see that the TVT (Twi?s Verbal Tradition) DID INDEED resort to fear, starting in the late 70?s and progressing into the 80?s. Why did post PFAL TVT proponents 'sell' God, packaged in fear? Because the love motivation was forgotten. As leadership drifted away from the pure revelation in the books, the love became less and less manifested. They had less and less a handle on the revelation manifestations as a result, and needed to resort to 5-senses management techniques, fear one of the biggest. The overall presentation of fear IN THE CLASS, both video and books, is balanced and done with wisdom. Fear is presented as an avoidable foe, when the entire class record, all the book chapters, are included in the mix. The presentation that prevailed in the later years in the TVT was not balanced, because the balancing chapters were not emphasized by leadership. As leadership became bored with the books, they presented them with less gusto in the later years, so new students were left with only part of the picture. If we all had gotten into mastering the books like Dr told us to starting in 1979, then we would have had a more balanced picture of fear for our own comfort and profit, as well for how beneficial a picture we transmitted to new people. The imbalance of fear that prevailed was due to our lack of exposure to the entire PFAL message. Because we allowed that one extreme story of the mother with the little boy to have de facto preeminence, it was easy to build a quite distorted picture of Dr?s intentions for including the story. When ALL of Dr?s teaching and references to fear are brought together, we have a simple, practical, and powerful understanding of how to work with God in great comfort.

Hi Ginger, It?s been exciting, discussing these things. I suggest you take your time to ponder all these things. Many of the things I?ve tried to bring into the mix here have been relatively missing from our collective consciousness for years now. Earlier I mentioned that Dr had included, along with the story of the woman and her little boy, lots of other passages that helped people not fear. I thought I?d bring in a few of those fear soothing passages, that help to temper the extreme story of the mother in PFAL. ************************************************************ This is from GMWD p.19, from the chapter on Psalm 103. ?Healing for all is God?s will. But when we fail to rise up to our rightful and legal privileges, due to a variety of causes?the greatest cause being a negative society where people talk about, expect, and cope with negative things?we fail to be healed. To claim and manifest God?s healing we must believe on the positives of His Word, not the negatives of the world. If we would become immersed in the Word and start living, we would find that God is still able to quiet down the nerves; God is still able to bring health and peace without antibiotics, sedatives, or alcohol. ?Verse 4: Who redeemeth thy life from destruction... ?God redeems us from the destruction that is constantly around to destroy us. Do you get the impact of this truth? That which surrounds us everyday, that which endeavors to kill us prematurely?God has redeemed our lives from that type of destruction. And He adds to this safeness the warmth and love which makes life enjoyable.? ************************************************************ And this other one is also from GMWD, page 42: ?We must believe rightly without fear of anything, knowing that with the Lord in your life nothing can harm you. We must know the Lord is with us as stated in Psalms 139:8: ?...if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.? We must expect to drive our automobiles and be safe. We must expect to go to our businesses and jobs without fear, because underneath us are the everlasting arms of God, on each side of us are the everlasting arms of God, and above us are the everlasting arms of God. ?What was it the angel said to the shepherds on the Judean hills the night Jesus was born? ?Fear not.? What did the angel say who appeared to Mary, the mother of Jesus? ?Fear not.? Wherever God is and wherever the power of God is known, the message is ?Fear not.??