Mike

dizzydog, If time were more abundant I?d love to get into all the points you made. Some will have to wait, though. For the few I can deal with this morning, I will have to resort to pasting in pre-written material. One point is this: there is a difference between OBTAINING God?s Word and RIGHTLY DIVIDING it. You wrote: ?In PFAL VPW states that 85-90% of the Word of God can be interpreted in the verse from Genesis to Revelation.? If I had the time now I?d find the exact quote. Once we HAVE the Word, we can THEN see that it interprets itself 85-90% of the time. But, what about where we DON?T have the Word. There?s no guarantee that it all survived the first century reprobate copyists and the second century persecutions, nor a guarantee that any lost or distorted portions would get derived or straightened out by working the portions that did get handed down relatively intact. Dr did sometimes talk about the non-authoritativeness of the existing manuscripts, and he even occasionally mentioned that academic collection of fragments is neither authoritative nor complete. Here is a section of a recent e-mail with a friend. ************* >Having served at HQ and as a region leader, and having participated in >numerous research sessions, a statement like "someday we'll find a text that >substantiates this" was VERY rare, and always in the context of the Word >interpreting itself, not Dr W prophesying without an obvious solid biblical >basis. Do you have any of these statements that would show otherwise? > Yes. But it requires MASTERING the material, not just being familiar with it, before these page references will have the authority of proof in your eyes. It wasn't all THAT rare Dr said those kind of things. I was NEVER in a research meeting with Dr, yet I heard statements like "someday we'll find a text" several times, even on SNS tapes. I think he was dropping hints for now, when we are supposed to be mastering the books. He was always dropping hints like "I didn't write the book" that could easily be associated with his books as the Bible. For him to even ONCE say "someday we'll find a text" should have arrested the attention of all those around him. I remember being embarrassed or angry when I heard him say it the several times I did. I thought there was something wrong. It never fit for me. Now it does. I have MANY, many statements in print and on tape that will fit into this picture of WHY we should be mastering the PFAL writings. Regardless if I succeed in proving to you this reason WHY we should master the PFAL writings, it's STILL THE CASE that Dr told us all to do it, and we all disobeyed. **************** Back to you, diz. You see, there is NO authoritative texts in Greek or Aramaic. Even if there were, there?s still no official authoritative Greek scholar (or team) that?ll give us the last word on what was written. It?s all guesswork, often right, but wrong in unknown places, and incomplete in other unknown places. Dr did teach us to work our 5-senses on what IS available. The KJV is a VERY good place to start. It?s approximate, and Dr tells us that often, and to change it in places, or ?scratch out? something that crept in. He did often tell us that this approximation was pretty good at times. We ALL knew the KJV was far from authoritative. Some of us knew that the ancient manuscripts were devoid of authority. It wasn?t talked about much. . ************** Here?s another area where Dr indicated that the existing manuscripts were not good enough for those who wanted to go all the way with God. This is a paste from a previous post It's obvious that I laid some pretty incredible ideas on you. These things will become clearer as we obey Dr's final instructions and get down to mastering those collateral books that came with the class. And who are we to refuse Dr's dying last words to us? The grand summary of all that I've attempted to communicate to you is that those PFAL books are much bigger than we had ever dreamed, MUCH MUCH bigger! They really are directly from God and far surpass what the King James translation committee were able to come up with. That mere version, and all versions are NOT really the Bible. Versions can be close in some places, far in other places. Without PFAL, the KJV and all man-made versions are powerless and flawed. Counterfeits will, of necessity, contain some positive truths, but when the power is most needed it will not be found. PFAL is God's way of making limp, opinionated versions of the Bible come to life. This same recognition of the man-made status of all versions applies to translations as well, and even to the existing ancient manuscripts. Remember that those manuscripts are not really copies of the originals, they're mis-copies. They were made and preserved mostly by a reprobate church, having all forsaken Paul, and they were all made under very extreme pressures of persecution. The reason for the "critical" texts is to sort through the massive differences in all the ancient manuscripts. Even if we had THE original manuscripts, we'd still be subject to the massive satanic influences residing in the teachers and schools of the ancient languages which we'd depend on. Add to that dilemma all the devilish evolution of languages and idioms and cultual, plus the overwhelming religious bias we are all born into. So when Dr said in "The Way Living In Love" page 179 (right after the page on the 1942 promise), that the Word is buried, he meant that the real Bible is NOT available outside that audible promise from God. He uses that word "buried" there THRICE. Other phrases in that section include phrases like "terrific need" and "so far from hearing" and "no one around to teach." It's believing an illusion to think that we have a choice between the Bible and PFAL. We simply don't have the Bible, only counterfeits. Just because a traditionally respected book has the label "Bible" on the outside, that doesn't change the pickles on the inside. And we really are in a pickle ourselves if we are immersed in existing man-made versions of the Bible without prior PFAL mastery. ************************ Here?s the text of those cited pages in ?The Way ... Living In Love? by Elena Whiteside, with my ALL CAPS 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 sign we have comes from our obedience to master the books we were told to master.

dizzydog, Unlike my Natural/Spiritual dichotomy notes, I do happen to have my notes on the ?The Perfectly Renewed Mind? in e-form. Although it?s very late at night, and time is short, I can unload an outline form of the ?chapters and verses? for you. The following is something I compiled over a few years time. ************************** An earlier teaching of Dr's that was made available, "Christ Formed In You," has proved to be very important in many ways. It connects with "The Love Way" teaching also mad available earlier. In "The Love Way" the phrases like "Jesus Christ self" and "Jesus Christ men and women" are the same thing as Christ formed in the soul, which is the topic of the first teaching. Dr attached great importance to this advanced topic of Christ FORMED within the soul/mind, and in later years he re-did the teaching with the title "Forming Christ In You" and Walter also did a teaching with a very similar title. There are many other places where this pops up with slightly different descriptions, and this topic needs to be worked extensively. The section below includes a long list of page references where I see this in Dr's books. The perfectly renewed mind is the same thing as Christ Formed Within. I really enjoy moving on to topics like these, leaving behind the ministry meltdown topics. There are still many loose ends there, but I've found that as these light filled topics like Christ Formed Within are worked, more insights as to what went wrong back then can be better straightened out. ******************************* There is a very intriguing passage near the end of "The Bible Tells Me So" on page 193: "(2)To be assured in the present that in the not-too-distant future "we shall be like him..." Dr could have written this different. He could have written: "(2)To be assured in the present that in the future we shall be like him..." leaving out the phrase "not-too-distant." If he had written it that way it would then not have the intrigue I mentioned. So why did he put that phrase in there? Leaving that phrase out would be the way most of us would have expressed it had we been the writer. Notice also he did not write: "in the uncertain, unknown, probably very-distant-future" which is the way some of may feel about this at times. What he did write was "in the NOT-TOO-DISTANT future." And that was written in the not-too-distant past! Then there is that line in the song "The Mystery Train" circa 1976 where Dr's own voice narrates "Soon it will stop!" First he writes "not-too-distant future," published in 1971, then he says "soon" in 1976. THEN what? **************************** There is a mountain of evidence suggesting the Perfectly Renewed Mind is somewhat or totally available NOW. This is summarized in the following quote of Dr from his editorial in Sep/Oct'84 page 35, "The Royal Rules of Freedom." where Dr teaches I Peter 5:10 and the phrase "make you perfect" to set up the context for my quote. In column Three, midway down Dr writes: "At those moments when you are active in love, you are perfect." Below are many more "Perfectly Renewed Mind" references, but this seems to me to be an especially fundamental, and clear one. This is only a partial list: ***************************** PFAL Book : p. 89 - bottom "we are to be..." perfect. 90-92 - artios 201 - perfection in weakness 250 - perfect fellowship (2), perfect communion 257 ? (for Adam) life was perfect 306 - perfect fellowship *331 - "When we let His mind be in us which was in Christ Jesus, we have a perfectly renewed mind." *337 ? walk confidently in renewed mind *350 ? having the renewed mind *353 - perfecting the saints in their walk and renewed mind ***************************** Vol I "The Bible Tells Me So" * 9 ? can absorb, become part of us 183 - "... again in perfect fellowship." 193 - "assured ..not-too-distant future ...like him... perfect love." ***************************** Vol II "The New, Dynamic Church" : 25 - matured to the point..." TO THE POINT... !!! 30 - perfect love casts out fear, God made it possible to have 93 - able to live blameless 96 - it shall be done, new, p.97 "when we have renewed..." 195 - easy... willfully determine 210 - Having spirit from God makes possible perfect fellowship." 212 - if we keep our minds renewed... perfected in our minds 216 - perfect fellowship 219 - Thus, we who have this hope should..." pure as spirits. 220 - perfectly renewed mind" 221 - born again and have renewed their minds..." 227 - When believers begin to practice..." 229 - God's love is perfected in our walk as our minds are renewed." 229 - perfected in our minds 230 - perfect love casts out fear, God made it possible to have agape. ***************************** Vol IV "God's Magnified Word" : 11 - perfectly conditioned *21 ? 22 - God enabled renewed mind, fig. many 'all's 26 ? having cast off all 81 - you've got to get fully persuaded... then you can do 86 - every weight. We do it. 88 - If and when we ...put God first ALWAYS..." 112 - more and more perfected" "learning ...perfection" 115 - lower - only one perfectly... "More and more we too.." 132 ? settled in the innermost resources of our souls 149 - whole page 200 - God wants ... become perfect. 201 - To grow to perfect man ... 201 - quoting Eph.4:13 "For the perfection of the saints..." "more and more" - p.89, 100, 112 (3 times), 115, 167 (RHST p.9) ***************************** Vol V "Order My Steps In Thy Word" 7 - be thou perfect - twice 75 - and p. 77 - errorless 94 - up - "When... complete perfection." 104 ? need no correction (like Thess.) 243 ? habit conscience 248 - "...you are the light when..." ***************************** Advanced Class seg.#1 : ?Now, I would like to believe that, in this Advanced Class, you will become and be a maximum believer. For so long, people have listened to what men say, rather than what the Word says. The reason, class, we have such a dearth of spiritual truth made manifest today, is because man's words have gained ascendancy over God's Word.? ***************************** "The Love Way" : a self like Jesus Christ Jesus Christ like a love self a Jesus Christ self Jesus Christ men and women "The Love Way" : I have sometimes wondered what would happen if a man really dared to go all the way out to the limit of love. "The Love Way" : Because the love of God had so set him [Paul] on fire that he was an extension, a manifestation in the senses realm, of the man who goes all out with the love of Christ. His very being was saturated with the passion that sent Jesus to the cross. ***************************** "Christ Formed In You" : "You and I have to so love, to have Christ formed within us, that we are the demonstration of the love of Christ in the renewed mind in manifestation." "Christ Formed In You" : "When this Christ is formed within us to the end that we love with the love wherewith he loved, and people it is possible, it is possible to love the unlovable, in spite of. It is possible to so renew your mind that there is absolutely nothing that any other Christian believer does but that you still love them and don't criticize them and find fault with them." ***************************** Way Magazine ?Masters of the Word? MJ?79 p.6 L low: ?perfect presentation? ***************************** Way Magazine ?The Believer and the Hoper? ND?82 p.11 R upper: ***************************** Way Magazine ?Counsel of the Lord? JA?75 p.7 R lower: walk a perfect and powerful walk ***************************** Way Magazine "The Christian Family" May/Jun'84 p.4 mid column: "The love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation is the bond or cohesiveness which holds things together perfectly." ***************************** Way Magazine "The Importance of Words in the Word" Sep/Oct'83 p.8 right, lower: "If you'll watch the useage of words we've just studied and really drill your mind to get the understanding, you will avoid many pitfalls through the years. You must be alert to recognize how accurately God uses specific words, and you must separate out truth from error with a very great quickness of mind and sharpness of your knowledge of the Word. Then you can use God's Word that is sharper than any two-edged sword to cut out the devil from your life and the lives of others around you by doing the works that Jesus Christ did." ******************************************* Way Magazine "The Royal Rules of Freedom" Sep/Oct'84 page 35, Column Three, midway Dr teaches I Peter 5:10 and the phrase "make you perfect" to set up the context for: At those moments when you are active in love, you are perfect." ***************************** Way Magazine ?Counsel of the Lord" JA'75 p.7 R mid: "...we are to walk perfect and powerful" this article supercedes Blue Book chapter this quote not in book ***************************** Isa 26 perfect peace Acts 18 way more perfectly I John perfect love casts out fear ***************************** Sunday 10:30 am service 12-30-79 (tape available) "Christ ego" ************************************ Way Magazine "The Royal Rules of Freedom" Sep/Oct'84 During the Power for Abundant Living class, and for some time after you got the knowledge of God?s Word in that class, you felt like you were supercharged with God Himself. At that time?during that class and afterward?the old timidities were conquered, and the lifelong habits of imposing condemnation and limita-tions upon yourself were banished from your life. You were motivated with a great inner desire to endeavor to change other people?s lives from the faulty pattern by which they were living. And your desire was for God to work in their lives as He had in yours and for His will to prevail in their lives. God was the divine pro-cess in your life but not the dictator of that process. You now had a new sense of time, and that was the sense of ??eternality?? which made it possi-ble for you to plant God?s Word ac-cording to its light and leave the rest in your life up to God. You had a new joy in your heart for the new life you had gained, and you knew that it was yours at a great cost to God. Then, sometime later, the light of this initial enthusiasm and transport that had changed your life started to a great extent to fade out of your day-by-day working. But a vivid memory re-mained of what you had touched and been touched by in the class, and you realized that what you had been taught and touched by was real. You have said, ?Why did I lose that great en-thusiasm and passion for life and living and the Word of God and people?? And your heart has been asking for the key that would help you to establish contact once more and recapture in a more permanent way the experience of certainty you had felt. If you want a clear, concise statement that will tell you how you can regain that experience of certainty and integrate it into your whole life, I Peter 5:10 is the truth for you. It is the lamp of revealing light, and it puts forth the concrete, specific rules that you have been seeking. I Peter 5:10: But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you. This verse holds the unfailing technique for attaining union with the life and mind of Christ. Realizing this truth, you will no longer be in doubt concerning the path that leads to a true release from the bondages of limitation and doubt, but you will come to the realization of one of the great fruit of the spirit, joy. ?The God of all grace.? Other gods will let you down, but the true God, the God of all grace, will not fail you, and the spark in your life will not go out. The radiance will not fade, and you won?t be jumping from one thing to another. It is not law that you need, but mercy you need?a God of love, a God of grace, a God of understanding, a God of forgiveness. ?By Christ Jesus?? [this should read ?by Jesus Christ?]. You have to make Jesus Christ the center and work from him outward. He is the door. By him you can enter in and not only be saved, but go in and out and find pasture. That?s having total freedom and having the abundance-of-life pasture instead of the dry stub-ble of your previously restricted mor-tal life. ?After that ye have suffered.? You suffered religion?s bargain basements before you came into the experience of Power for Abundant Living. You suffered enough defeats with substitute religions, and PFAL cut the tangled knots of compromise which you could not untie. ??Make you perfect.?? Yes, in con-duct and behavior, in the personality, the character of Christian love, in the conduct and behavior of your life. Above all these things put on love, which is the bond of perfectness (Colossians 3:14). At those moments when you are active in love, you are perfect. Walk in love (Ephesians 5:2). In this man-ner you can be in union with the God of all grace, for ?he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God? (I John 4:16). ??Stablish, strengthen, settle you.?? These three, but the greatest of these is settle. To be settled is to be established in the faith, strengthened in the works of believing; thus you can be settled in the grace of His love which is the final test of release and salvation. For I Peter 4:8 says that above all things you are to have fer-vent love among yourselves, for love covers a multitude of sins. These are the royal rules to freedom. Here is the technique you have been looking for, the blueprint for your life. Just three bare, plain rules, but they are the charger and the guiding light for you as you go through life. [This message was edited by Mike on June 04, 2003 at 4:43.]

dizzydog, Here are some quotes that have been somewhat forgotten. In the film class (segment 16, page 127 in the book) Dr. says: "No translation, no translation, and I want you to listen very carefully; for no translation, and by the way that's all we have today at best are translations. No translation may properly be called The Word Of God... ..no translation!" Then a minute later he repeats: "Now I said that no translation, no translation, let alone a version, no translation may properly be called The Word Of God..." Then several minutes later he hits it again: "And in this class on Power For Abundant Living, when I refer to The Word Of God I may hold the King James Version or I may hold some other version and point to it; I do not mean that version. I mean that Word of God which was originally given when holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit."

Steve, You are not the first to attempt to hound me into some dumb derailment or distraction. I will focus my limited time where it seems it will be better spent. Your badgering me in the past has proved to be myopic, but you seem to have not learned from that incident. You started a whole thread to try and beat something out of me, and in the end you looked pretty shabby. If you want to know what Dr means on those pages in the Blue Book, get meek and read it! You said that you had studied PFAL years ago, and I'm proving to you either did a partial job, or some has leaked out, or both. There's no great difficulty in understanding those pages when someone reads these things with meekness, and the reading is thorough. Keep reading PFAL and you'll have no problem understanding those pages. Keep goading me and you'll NOT understand those pages. You decide. Do you want to understand them, or do you more want to tear down understanding of those pages? My educated guess is that you are desiring to tear down, so as a result, you and your demands plummet on my time priority charts. If this guess is wrong, then you have a large and challenging job of proving this guess wrong before I?ll change my strategy. Try proving to me that you want to understand, to learn, to be coached, to be meek. I'm waiting.

dizzydog, When Dr mentions ?scriptures? in your quotes, he is referring to the ORIGINALS, in their original understanding. When I say "unreliable fragments AND tattered remnants" I am referring to the MODERN hand-me-down versions of scripture, along with the usual suspects like Greek translators. There?s almost 2000 years difference in the two topics you?ve fused into one. *************** When I say "unreliable fragments AND tattered remnants" I am referring to the area of how WE are to operate all nine all the time. In the different area of how a beginning student of PFAL should approach the scriptures, then working a KJV is fine, and even a formal requirement for attending the first session of PFAL. For many areas of the renewed mind prior to 1982 the KJV, along with the accumulating inspired PFAL writings in assistance, was a big part of God?s plan of development for us. After 1982 we all were supposed to turn our attention to mastering the PFAL writings. Dr started gently saying this in that year and stepped up the intensity of this message until his last words were up front in the open and repeated twice in a very short teaching. The REASON for the 1942 intervention and the PFAL writings, was to make the perfectly renewed mind available for the first time in written form. This was a very new thing that happened in 1982. The perfectly renewed mind cannot be received from KJV study, but it can be received by mastering the PFAL writings, including it's repetition of many KJV verses. ************** Most of the KJV verses you all find most crucial are printed in the PFAL writings, and given a rightful context and foundation for us in our time now. In a practical sense, mastering PFAL would INCLUDE mastering a very hefty portion of the KJV. There?s nothing missing in the PFAL diet. ************* In my 80 some PFAL passages on the Natural/Spiritual dichotomy, at least 5 look to be what Steve wants from my own paraphrasing. Most of my notes are in hand writing, so transcribing the page numbers and some pertinent text can go slow at times. Also, as EWB surmised, this clever ploy of mine may tempt some posting or lurking GreaseSpot readers to search out a few in their tattered remnants of PFAL writings. I?m including magazines and tapes here, too. As some home detectives search for the dichotomy WHO KNOWS WHAT ELSE THEY?LL FIND! This could get rich. The passage I first posted (on pages 23 and 24 of BTMS) is, as I stated there, one of the FIRST occurrences, but it is certainly not the last. That no one so far, for months now, has come up with the other occurrences is very telling. Either the PFAL message was only partially received, or some leaked out, or both. [This message was edited by Mike on June 03, 2003 at 12:27.] [This message was edited by Mike on June 03, 2003 at 12:29.]

shazdancer, You have a valid point. I have spent MANY hours looking into that which you?ve brought up, by interviewing people who edited for him. Dr mentions them in an interesting way, in a VERY interesting way, at the end of the Preface to ?Receiving the Holy Spirit Today.? ?To his helpers and colleagues every writer owes a profound debt. This seventh edition has been read and studied carefully by men and women of Biblical and spiritual ability.? Notice that he says ?Biblical AND spiritual ability.? The Biblical means 5-senses, and the spiritual means spiritual. In other words, OTHER members of the team got revelation too! The PFAL writings were bigger than Dr; they were a TEAM effort, and GOD supervised it all on the spiritual level. Dr mentions this same topic in the Thessalonians tapes where Paul, Silas, and Timothy are all mentioned as authors. This same topic has come up on GS too.

EWB, You?re partially on to me. Steve, I will produce more references. I?ve been culling through the 80 I mentioned last month. I?ve whittled it down to 50, and will soon pick out the best 10 or 20. Time is at a premium just now. I wish I had time to answer all, so hang in there.

Steve, I'm now off to work, and will read your most recent post again later today. But while I'm gone you can think about the question I?ve asked you several times so far with no answer. Why do you want to focus totally on that one passage in the Blue Book, when I?ve repeatedly told you there are many more passages to consider? My question is why are you so silent on bringing in those many other passages? ******************** I stand by my paraphrase of PFAL page 83. Re-stated in most simple form it simply says what would have to be said in the situation, had any Biblical writer been under consideration. It says exactly what we would have expected would have been said of any writer God selects to take down His Word in written form. Where that selected man was in obedience to God, his words are His Words. Where that man was not in obedience to God, then his words were only his words. I?m betting my life that Dr?s writings in PFAL are FAR different and better than anyone?s writings since the first century.

shazdancer, There was another word besides "necessarily" that set off the statement about Dr as different than the list of others near him. In your "restored-from-obvious-ellipsis" sentence, you acknowledge this distinction in that this OTHER critical word STILL sets off the Wierwille statement from the statement associated with the list of others. Here is YOUR reconstructed ?that?s-what-he-REALLY-meant? sentence: "Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; not what Calvin said would necessarily be God-breathed, nor what Luther said would be necessarily God-breathed," Do you see the critical word? It?s ?all? as in ?not ALL that Wierwille writes....? I think it?s time for you to go back to the ellipsis drawing board. This time try thinking it through more thoroughly. I?d also suggest you have more to back up your detection of an ellipsis than the word ?obvious.? Your entire assumption here is not at all obvious to me, and I reject t it.

shazancer, I see those names handled differently on that page 83 of PFAL. There's no use of the word "necessarily" associated with them. I looked at them long ago with this in mind, and excluded them from further consideration. I don't mind discussing things a bit, but when people demand a high degree of proof and rigor from me, I must examine their motives. If they want learning, I engage. If they want to tear down, I decline.

Goey, The bottom line is that Dr did say "Thus saith the Lord" on many occasions and in many ways, and he didn't contradict himself in saying we should be wary of all flesh pronouncements, including any of his own. Now, if it were the case that I held this consistency up as a proof of content, THEN your objection would be valid. I merely claim consistency here. I believe it was dizzydog who tried to show an inconsistency, and I simply showed the contradiction to be only apparent.

Exy, I agree. But if you come to tear down, I can deflect your efforts.

karmicdebt, My impression is that you?d really like to see Dr grovel for your forgiveness, and anything less won?t satisfy. To you I say the same thing I once said to Exy, and that is if you were to get what you think you want, the next day you?d want it again. I have seen a few things Dr placed in the record that satisfies me that he was aware of the inefficiencies he allowed to exist in his behavior and that he felt bad about it. In your present state of blood thirst, these items will not help you. ***************************** Exy, Why bother to state the obvious? ***************************** Goey, I think you wish that the word ?necessarily? was not placed in there on page 83. If it were not there, I?d be giving Chubby Checker a run for his money. In the tape version of the class Dr VERY deliberately places ?necessarily? where it is, and the wording is almost identical. That one word ?necessarily? sets up a local contra-context, from which you feel the twist. It?s a tiny island where the context is exactly reversed. . . P.S. This was the THIRD time I posted this analysis of PFAL page 83. How is it that THIS time it's "most dishonest twistings of language that I have ever seen" when it's been posted twice before? Maybe, like PFAL, there are pieces of my message that have slipped by unnoticed or not understood.

In some previous posts I have mentioned page 83 in the pfal book and a "Thus saith the Lord" statement hidden in some slightly complex grammar. This is my attempt to explain that grammar, and thus reveal what's been on that page all this time. My goal is to produce a paraphrase equivalent of a sentence on that page. Also, I am particularly focused on attempting to fully incorporate the use of the word ?necessarily? that appears in the original sentence. The sentence is: ?Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed.? Just for simplicity, let?s temporarily remove the word "necessarily" and see what happens. Now we have: ?Not all that Wierwille writes will be God-breathed.? The sentence almost seems to still say the same thing. It's almost like nothing was altered, but don't believe it. Soon we'll see why "necessarily" was in there. Practically speaking, if I eat NOT ALL of a pie, then there?s SOME pie left for you. In the sentence under study the phrase "not all" implies "some." Mathematically speaking, the phrase ?not all? is equivalent to ?some or possibly none.? So, substituting the phrase ?some or none? for the phrase ?not all? in the sentence we then have: ?Some (or possibly none) that Wierwille writes will be God-breathed.? This then can be separated out to two possible sentences: ?Some that Wierwille writes will be God-breathed.? ?None that Wierwille writes will be God-breathed.? Now let?s restore the word "necessarily" ?Some that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed.? ?None that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed.? The second sentence is rather strained grammar and logic. It also radically contradicts what Dr. wrote on page 34 of the Green Book: ?...you will find that every word I have written to you is true.? I believe for these and other reasons it must be rejected in favor of the first sentence. The first sentence fits (and the second does not) with all that we spiritually sensed when we first took the class. Likewise the first fits with the 1942 audible promise from God. And it fits with the last night of the class when Dr. said: ?...if you're in this class, you've heard the Word, you've believed God's Word, God is always faithful. And nobody ever misses, if you'll do exactly what I tell you to do, right down to the minute detail. It's like, in I Thessalonians, chapter 2, verse 13. Remember where the Apostle Paul said: ?I thank my God, that, when you received the Word of God which you heard of us, you received it not as the word of man, but as it is in truth, the Word of God.? Now, if you'll be as honest with God as that Word of God says, you too can walk into the greatness of the manifestation of the power of God. But, if you think this is just V.P. Wierwille talking, you'll never get it. But if you know that what I am saying -- it's V.P. Wierwille saying it, but these are words which the Holy Ghost has spoken and is utilizing and speaking to you through my ministry and my life, then you too will manifest forth the greatness of the power of God.? So, in a nutshell: the use of the word ?necessarily? eliminates the possibility of ?none? of Dr?s writings being God-breathed. Recently I came up with a paraphrase of the original page 83 sentence that incorporates this perspective. The context of page 83 is God-breathed words are trustworthy; man-breathed words are not. We know that Jesus Christ said that he did not speak forth HIS OWN untrustworthy, man-breathed words, although he was tempted to. He only spoke forth the words his Father told him to speak. He was the only one to achieve this TOTAL purity of all words issued. Here's the paraphrase: ?Even MY own writings... (and I was commissioned by God?s audible voice in 1942 to bring forth God-taught explanations of the Bible, and because of that SOME of my writings are not really my own, but are REALLY God-breathed)... but even MY own writings, when they?re merely my own, are not trustworthy like God's are.? The word ?necessarily? implies the contents of the above parenthesis. The original sentence on page 83 says that even someone who is given the job, by God, to teach the Word ?like it hasn't been known since the first century? is going to have words, his own words, that fall short of the perfection of God. Therefore, because not all, but just SOME of what Dr. Wierwille wrote is NECESSARILY God-breathed, the next step is identifying WHICH of his writings ARE God-breathed. Hint: Dr?s Last/Lost Teaching contains the MOST IMPORTANT thing he could want to tell us.

Hey! Now we're talking!

rascal, (1) I don?t trust any of your judgements in the area of understanding exactly the meanings of those verses. (2) I don?t trust any of your judgements in the areas of knowing exactly what took place in Dr?s life. You have failed to earn my respect in these two areas. You are not alone in this failure. Very few people have earned my respect in these two areas. ******* Goey, Someday I will clear up the telescope mystery. Honest. And I'll try to be brief. You may get a small chuckle. As for now, it?s not the word of Mike that needs detailed examination, it?s the Word of God that He taught Dr and Dr taught us in written form. THAT?S what folks need to work carefully. ******* WordWolf, I've been frequently up front here with admitting that I?m not out to prove, but more to present. I think the proof is in the pudding, or in the putting. Putting PFAL into the mind is where the proofs happen. When people approach PFAL with proper respect then God can go to work and furnish all the proof you need. The kind and style of ?intelligent discourse? you demand of me is not available. I just don?t have the time nor the inclinations. I don?t trust your attitudes and your approaches. You can point out how much I fail to meet your demands all you want. I?ll even help you with this up front re-assurance that I will NOT engage you in the sport of your choosing. I came here to present crucial information in the teaching record of VPW that we either didn?t recognize or remember. There?s a lot more information to present, and I do like to engage in some rich discussion along the way. But, if you want full rigorous debate you?ll have to find someone else to do it with. I?m just too busy with something I consider much more important than your investigations. ******* dizzydog, Correct. Beyond my sincerity and beyond my obstinacy are the details of the PFAL text. If I?m correct, and God had His hand in their writing, then His Word will speak for itself better than I could ever. That?s where the truth is guaranteed.

rascal, You are not the official ?inheritance assessor? and I utterly reject your attempt to usurp that authority.

Steve, Now for the long form. My priorities are such that proving anything to you is very low in how much time and attention I?m willing to give it. It?s obvious from the challenging questions I?ve posed to you and your refusal to answer, that you do not want to understand PFAL better. That's what this thread is all about, understanding PFAL better. I?m impressed with your lack of interest in seeing ALL the places in the PFAL books where Dr expounds on this topic of the physical/spiritual dichotomy. This manifest disinterest of yours plummets your challenges to me on my priority charts. I will spend my time discussing my posts here with the focus on the internal text of PFAL, and not me, my interpretations, postings, understanding, credentials, etc. I?m impressed with your aversion to explore within the text of PFAL. From whence does it stem?

I?m admitting that I am not paying much attention to the details of your demands.

Goey, I find that an odd criticism. Tell me in 1000 words or less "Why does wordiness bother you so?" ********************************************** rascal, I think you see the outer surface of what I?m promoting, and then resort to debating, not picking up much further detail. ********************************************** shazdancer, You have a point. However it?s not getting people understanding the details from ME that I seek. It?s seeing people get the details in this Word God taught Dr and Dr taught us ********************************************** Steve, I said several times earlier that there are many more places where Dr discussed this dichotomy. I?m impressed with your lack of interest in seeing ALL the places where Dr expounds on this topic. Isn?t that one of the research keys Dr taught us in PFAL, to consider all the places where a topic is dealt with? Your focus on only one place tells me you?re more interested in tripping me up in some statement I made, than you are interested in understanding Dr?s presentation of this topic. You wrote: ?we cannot explore what *you* say about PFAL without exploring *your interpretation* of what Wierwille wrote.? To this I suggest you therefore give up exploring my ?interpretation of what Wierwille wrote? and give up exploring ?what I say about PFAL? and simply READ PFAL! This later alternative is the simplest, and you can count on my lack of cooperation for the earlier two. What?s actually in the PFAL text is far more exciting than grilling me endlessly, looking for slip ups. What if you find one? It won?t negate my message that the PFAL writings are rich in benefits to us that we forgot about or never saw the first time around. Steve, play detective all you want, but when I?m ready to post some more PFAL page references I will. Why don?t you do your sleuthing there, within the pages of PFAL? Now, THAT could get exciting. ********************************************** Exy, You can be excused, or you can curl up with your blanky in the corner until we?re done.

WordWolf and Exy, I disagree. My posts are often poorly read, or not read at all by you both. Many others here exhibit similar low levels of precision in the way they receive my words, and as I see, low levels of precision in the way they received Dr's too. [This message was edited by Mike on May 29, 2003 at 11:42.]

Shaz and Exy, It's news when you come back and read the books AGAIN. By paying closer attention to the long list of words I posted much earlier, then more can be learned from the books. I'll get to some examples of where this key is useful one of these days. I have in the past applied this key in posts before this thread existed, and the usefulness of the key was not seen. Maybe I'll find a few of them and re-present them.

Steve, May I suggest this? Instead of your plan to ?explore more deeply your [MY] interpretation of the simile Wierwille drew...? might you instead explore more deeply exactly what Dr wrote? That?s what I?m repeating over and over, that we come back to the actual text of PFAL instead of our memories. I?m a student of this material, not an authoritative interpreter. There are lots more places where Dr overtly brings up this dichotomy, and there are many, MANY more places where he simply and briefly UTILIZES key words that emphasize one side or the other of the dichotomy. We should more deeply explore NOT my interpretations of all this, but the actual text. It?s the difference between reading the Word and reading around the Word. Instead of being your interpreter, I?ll be your tour guide, with many page references to discuss.

WordWolf and Shazdancer, You might also review the context. I was not seeking to post my credentials above, merely to establish that I have NOT made false claims. It also establishes the fact that my message, though often attacked, is rarely read with precision and thoroughness. It?ll be interesting to see who will be next to play home detective and dig up some ?dirt? on me. As long as people go after me they demonstrate to all readers that they cannot deal with my message, and so attack the messenger. In a sense, my minor bruises from such skirmishes are my credentials.

The credence in my message is that we ALL did once believe the PFAL message. Anyone who wants world based credentials of my own is out of luck. In other words, I?ll only tolerate so much discussion of me before I steer things back to the topic some want to run away from, that we are not finished receiving what God taught Dr and Dr taught us in written form.