Mike

Ginger, I realize that this section of PFAL was used later on to ?instill the fear of fear? as you put it, but I don?t think it was the original intent, nor the initial results, of PFAL. I think it instilled a healthy respect for fear and what runaway fear can do. If fear isn?t resisted then it can get into runaway modes at times. He taught that fear unchecked can be damaging. One reason I don?t believe "fear of fear" was the intended result of this section is the abundance of OTHER sections that teach God?s great protection, and many, many soothing, fear calming verses, promises, and perspectives. If Dr wanted to instill fear here, why does he wipe it away in so many more places? As we slowly forgot those other places that teach NO-fear, as those printed passages dimmed in our memories, we still got exposed to the video class and the extreme story of the woman with the little boy. If we had been more obedient, and more familiar with the collateral charters in all the books, then the video soundtrack would have been tempered better with the soothing passages. There are many of them. *********************************************************** socks, I agree that we know too little about this story to analyze it too much more. I agree we need to NOT take this as a prototypical set of events in the average grad?s life. It?s simply a dramatic example of the teaching. *********************************************************** karmicdebt, I?ve documented here some of the many run-ins I?ve had with leadership here. I?ve done my best to confine my cantankerousness to leaders only, but all leaders have admirers who eventually heard of our spats and naturally sided with them. You asked often of the results I get with coming back to this Word. When it comes to results with people in this area, all of my disasters occurred with them before I was shown Dr?s last teaching. After I returned to study PFAL I saw that some times in the previous ten years run-ins, I was the one in wrong. But the net result with them of my returning to PFAL revolved around the fact that I stood against their leadership in clone classes. The results I get, in the areas I apply this Word, are totally satisfying to me. As I apply it to more areas in my life I expect to see more results. One area I am exercising a lot is receive, retain, release with my posting here. I?m very excited to see all the data I?ve been able to post here these months. I consider the range and depth of subjects we have covered here to be monumental and significant. Putting together the things I?ve had a chance to handle here has been a major accomplishment in my mind. I never would have believed this much could have been posted in such a short time. The number of answers I enjoy, that used to be nagging questions is phenomenal. I feel like a wealthy man when I look at all the things I?ve found in the record in the past 5 years. The incredible pain I had for ten years following the meltdown regarding the elusive and mysterious behavior of so many previously wonderful leaders IS GONE! There were nights I literally didn?t sleep a wink I was so angry or perplexed with how the top leaders abandoned us in 1987 or so. When I met Seaspray, he told me that for the past 15 years he had thought about the ministry meltdown EVERY SINGLE DAY since then. I could relate to that! He was ready to accept the answers I had accepted and he too felt exhilarated with the lifting of that Twilight Zone fog that top leadership had camouflaged their exits with. I want to see more results as more grads come back. As far as my number of houses and boats, I?m a light traveler. *********************************************************** Rafael, Here?s what I see in Job. Job 1:9-12 Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land. But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD. Let?s look at this: And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; I see this verse as God recognizing that Job had placed all that he had in the adversary?s power with his great fear. I do NOT see this verse as saying that God took Satan on the dare and granted all that Job had into his power. God is simply beholding this unfortunate transfer of power. BUT WAIT, God isn?t done. Here?s the whole line God speaks here: Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. He sees the one area in Jobs life that has fallen apart believing wise, but He also sees that this fear had not extended all the way to Job?s very life, so God steps in and protects Job where He can. Satan didn?t go into God?s presence to ask permission to inflict Job. He already got that permission from Job, and he went into God?s presence to razz Him about it! Satan wanted to show God that His law of believing was soon going to backfire on Job. But God stepped in and protected Job?s life immediately, and ultimately taught Job to believe again to receive double. . . . [This message was edited by Mike on July 13, 2003 at 0:53.]

karmicdebt, Last week you posted that you did not know me. Now you post that you know my situation. Looks like gossip to me.

Exy, I re-read your post and had more thoughts. I saw lots of situations arise, especially later on, where the people who ran the class didn?t have their finger on the pulse of each and every new student. I saw lots of things happen like what you described with your mother, and it was how well the local leadership played up or played down certain things that determined how comfortable some were in taking the class. It was a battlefield, and lots of things went wrong. I?m grateful for what went right, and for what promises to more than make it all up for us. *** When terrible events happen they stir up lots of negatives and fears. I think sometimes we can step in and make it even worse by trying to make a forced and premature inventory of who blew it and where. I see very little to no profit in trying to figure ?blame? for terrible events when looking at other people. I only really have access to my OWN thoughts, so it sometimes CAN be useful for me to look at where I may be negative and need some tune up. But if a calamity happens, the LAST thing I need is someone ELSE telling me where I blew it. Maybe I didn?t blow it! Maybe it was more complicated than that. If I did, it may take time to learn from it, and condemnation makes it much more difficult. Uriah died, so should we blame his believing? No. God shows us that there were lots of things going on in that situation besides Uriah?s believing. It was complicated. I try to not dive into complications like that.

dizzydog, It SEEMED to imply that to me, but in case you haven't noticed, I have several, count them, SEVERAL conversations going on at once here. Do you think we could start all over? I hate playing games. Say what you want to say, and I have to go to work soon.

Exy, There are things that happen that are baffling. I would never try to pin "blame" on anyone for terrible events, UNLESS God gave me revelation. And for me to trust that revelation, I think I'd have to have a better relationship with Him than I do now.

dizzydog, No. I mean re-issue His Word in a completely different format, like when He replaced the stars as the bearers of His Word.

Ginger, I think the big point Dr was making was how intensly she cultivated the wrong things. There are religious circles where people who DON'T exhibit a fear of going to hell, then that kind of cocky attitude places them right on the edge of the pit. These circles encourage fear bigtime. Advertizing and the news foster fear. If fear isn't resisted it's damaging. This is the whole point.

It COULD be an alegory, but he seems to make it literal when he says he went to the funeral.

karmicdebt, I'm willing to fail your tests. Give me my "F" and let me out. I want to talk about things better than me, OK?

Now that I re-read it, it only seems to imply it. If I didn't have a better replacement of God's Word given in English as PFAL is, then I'd NEVER have complained about the "difficulties" with the ancient received scriptures. Prior to 1998 I figured that these difficulties were God's problem and not mine. I just worked what was available to the best of my ability. I think God's answer to the difficulties in the ancient scriptures, translation being a biggie, has been to re-issue His Word in a different format, PFAL. When I say God has delivered His Word to us today in this form of PFAL, don't you say "no" and thus forbid this kind of process?

karmicdebt, I guess I'm doomed to the same fate of ignorance Jesus seems to have had to suffer from having no DNA children. dizzydog, I'm off to work, and I want the story of the woman and her little boy to settle. Remeind me again. Please don't forget that from 1971 to 1998 I did more Bible study than most, plus in all my recent PFAL study, I'm seeing KJV verses on every page. Also remember that a translation of the Word of God is only as authoritative as the authority of the translator. For all your expressed believing in God giving His Word in ancient times, why does your paradigm forbid God from doing the same kind of giving to us in modern times of His Word in English?

Ginger, I don?t see it as taking a shot at the woman. When God had the story of David?s great sins placed in the scriptures, I don?t see that as God taking a shot at David. David was a wonderful man. But he also had some great flaws that God knows we can learn from, so He has the story of David and Uriah in there for our learning. The same is the case with Dr and this woman. There?s anguish in his voice about the loss of her son. It?s like he?s saying ?if ONLY this could be prevented!? I see Dr teaching this to help us learn and understand how to get better results in our lives. Later, MUCH later, stories like this were misused and mis-taught in fear motivation schemes to keep the ministry together. The earlier is PFAL, the later is TVT. Let?s stopp dredging up this story from memory and look carefully again at the text for a minute. There are key points that describe the intensity of the woman?s fear in this text. This fear was CULTIVATED by systematically. She had some teaching available to her by someone who was a good example in this area, and she still let this fear grow and grow. These quotes are from the text I posted above: . . . this woman... was always frustrated, always nervous, always afraid. this one woman ...boy she was a nervous frustrated woman if you ever saw one. week after week and month after month it got worse. in the first grade she did the same thing--in the second grade--third grade. And she called on this minister ...He relinquished them to the Lord. The fear in the heart in the life... Her own fears were the contributing factors that ultimately made possible... [This message was edited by Mike on July 12, 2003 at 15:59.]

karmicdebt, Seeing my trail through your computer screen may be a difficult trick. Want to come to San Diego? Come and see?

karmicdebt, I've had fears and I've had loved ones.

I'm not sure what you mean, so I?ll guess. We all have bouts of fears, but we fight it off mostly. The woman in the story is a rare type who zones into a negative expertise with little to no resistance. When bad things DO happen to us, I don't think we need compare ourselves to this woman in the story, though. Sorting through an inventory of where we often blow in our believing is NOT what we should be doing, although that is what things degenerated to at times. Sorting through an inventory of the promises of God is what we were encouraged to do in the class.

While reading this, pay close attention to the intensity and persistence of the negative believing portrayed here. This is the film class transcript for the story with my commentary in square brackets regarding its differences with the book: *********************************************************** Fear brings results. But they are negative results. They are results in reverse, just out of the opposite order of the positive results. [this paragraph was removed from the book] Years ago I knew a minister whose wife had passed away and he had seven or eight children. I just do not recall how many children. About a year later he married another woman who had four or five of her own. And I suppose this gave it to them cheaper by the dozen, but I'm not sure. But they lived happily together. And about a block and a half away lived a woman who had just one boy. And this woman who had just this one son was always frustrated, always nervous, always afraid. While this minister and his wife who had this whole bunch of children it just seemed like some how or another nothing ever happened to them. Oh they get a black eye once in awhile, somebody comes home with a bloody nose, but they just lived. But this one woman with her one son, boy she was a nervous frustrated woman if you ever saw one. And week after week and month after month it got worse. [this paragraph was removed from the book] When her little boy started to kindergarten she used to walk him across the street and put him in the next block where the kindergarten was for fear he might get run over. Afraid he might get hit by an automobile. When he was in the first grade she did the same thing--in the second grade--third grade. And she called on this minister and she said, "I don't understand why I'm so nervous and so upset all the time. I have just one boy, that's all I have to care. You have got all of these children, some how or other it just seems like nothing ever happens to them and you just live abundantly." You know what he said to her? He said, "ma'am this is how we operate. We get them around the breakfast table. It's the only time we can get our whole family together. We get them all around the breakfast table and when we have them seated around the breakfast table I do the praying. Everybody's quiet, I pray. And I pray like this: `Lord here we are all together at breakfast; now Lord,' he said, `they're all going out to school and other places today. So what I'm going to do with this family Lord; I give them all to you right now. Amen.' Boy right after you give them to the Lord you say `amen' real quickly because you don't want to take them back." He relinquished them to the Lord. Literally, he just let go and let God and those children just did amiably. About a year and a half or two later this son of this woman was coming home from school early once. Mother hadn't met him at the street across the block. He came home from school and they were living on a road where not more than three houses were located at the time. And when they came back from school that day the boy walked out in that street and got hit by an automobile and killed outright. I went to the service of that boy and you know what the minister preached on? That God now had another rose petal in heaven. My God people! To think of it, that God Almighty, who created the heavens and the earth, that he should want to kill a little boy like that because God needed another rose petal in heaven. Oh my God when are we going to learn something? That's blasphemy! Do you know what killed that little boy? You just quit yakking about anything else. You know what killed him. God didn't kill that boy. You know what killed that boy? The fear in the heart in the life of that mother--because that mother was just desperately afraid something was going to happen to her little Johnny. And she kept that fear and kept it, till one day it happened. Why? Because it's a law! It's a law. That which you are afraid of is what you are going to receive. She was afraid of her boy, she was afraid he was going to get killed. She was afraid she was going to lose him and she did just that. God didn't do it! She did it with her own negative believing. Her own fears were the contributing factors that ultimately made possible the death of that little boy. [this paragraph was removed from the book]

shaz, You're right about a certain type of fear being a useful survival mechanism built in us to protect us. That was what I was getting into when I mention "sudden fear" above. But there is ALSO a more intense mental ability of people to believe metaphysically or in the supernatural. This second type of fear is the more intense stuff Dr is talking about.

Ginger Tea, Why didn't people get up and walk out on the little boy story? Because of how well Dr paints the picture that this was an EXTREME case, not something we have to worry about in our own lives. THAT came much later, but it's not in the class.

The point I was bringing out with Job was how the the word "greatly" indicated intensity. The point of Dr's story rests on the intensity of her fear. It was the intensity I was bringing attention to. *** As far as who gets the credit for when the law of believing works? I'd say it all goes to God, Who designed the law, Who inspires great operation of it, and Who stands buy to excute His promises and energize the operation of His laws, as He watches over His Word.

Has anyone noticed anything about the intensity level of the woman's fear regarding her little boy?

Another thought on the intensity requirements for believing or fear, Job said it was what he GREATLY feared that got him.

Rafael, I?m not dismissing Dr?s words. I?m dismissing the implications you see in them. From my perspective I?m absorbing Dr?s books exclusively, and daily for 5 years. I?m posting back to you what I?ve been able to ?rightly divide? from Dr?s books. Some of this believing stuff I?ve posted goes back to the 70?s when I first started noticing that some people were slipping into teaching the abbreviated form of the law, and not it?s fuller God based, promise based version. I read Dr a little differently, some things I take in a figurative sense, while you look at them literally. There are other factors that go into this, but my agreeable-to-you reformulation of this law is as straight from what Dr teaches as I can get it. The ?iffy? aspect that I acknowledge is due to how ?iffy? our believing can be, and how easily it can actually be only mental assent. Dr acknowledges this ?iffy? aspect when he finally does teach mental assent, later on. But in these earlier sessions of the class he teaches on the NON-iffy aspects of the law and God?s part. I?m presenting the same message as Dr, only in a different order, and with emphasis or focus slightly rearranged. The reasons my presentation looks different from Dr?s to you is because of your exposure to the TVT, and the resulting different way you look at the books. My motivation to find something good in the books is different that yours, because I saw a ten year period where it all worked very well. I have a different attitude toward the books, more time in recent years with them, and some exceptionally mature teaching from others on these matters. As we communicate more on all these matters, more will be untangled. *** I have another thought as to the difference between believing and mental assent and how believing is of a higher intensity. Look at how long it took Abraham to get his believing together. It was a task for him that took time. Some things are easy to believe for, but it?s when we face challenges to our believing and then still try to do it, THAT?S when we get into the real thing. The things that are easy to believe for now may be difficult later, unless this believing muscle is flexed and exercised like Abraham did.

How about this? It's a law designed BY God to be operated WITH God. Any operation of it outside God is doomed to partial results to counterfeit harmful results.

The most efficient, maximum yield, spiritual use of the law of believing requires a promise of God. Sure, there are 5-senses applications of all sorts, but they are not as powerful. Having a positive attitude on a job interview is going to help score points.

I've always seen the law of believing as being more powerful on the positive side than the negative. I've never seen anything to the effect that the fear of a mustard seed will bring results. The same way we sometimes label our own mental assent or agreement as believing, I think we sometimes see worries and concerns as if they were full blown fears. We were taught in the 70?s that the feeling you get from a speeding car headed in your direction is NOT fear. A shot of adrenaline and high heart rate in such an emergency is normal, natural, and part of God?s design in the human body. I think there was a verse to this effect that goes: ?Be not afraid of sudden fear.? I think, that in order to align our vocabularies with Dr?s, we need to recognize that the milder mental operations of mental assent, agreement, worry, concern, and sudden fear, are just that: mild precursors to the stronger operations of believing and fear. When we get to the story of the mother and her little boy, we?ll see which mental operation she had cooking. The red drapes are interestingly not in the book, and I don?t yet know what to make of that. Another change going from film class to the book, regarding needs and wants, is that the word ?parallel? was changed to ?in balance.? As far as receiving something from another source than God, it does seem to be possible, but not as reliable, due to the flaky nature of the adversary. As a student of these matters, and not an expert, I?m learning to not say more than I know.