Mike

Shaz, At least I ADMITTED it was vague memory. Plus I DID show how it could be handled. This data was not ignored, but it's not been totally accepted either. Just because someone states something on my computer screen, I don't immediately accept it as proved. Even seeing printed in a book or three isn't the final word on a subject. I take years sifting through these things. This one has been filed away in the appropriate place for future work.

So I'm away at court for only ONE day, and you all have strewn all this trash around, and tracked in all this mud on MY CLEAN FLOORS! And I JUST cleaned them, you ungrateful hooligans! If your Father wasn't the creator of the heavens and earth... I'd have half a mind to.... OH, NEVER mind! My, oh MY! What AM I going to do with you all? Well you can all just go to your rooms, and I'll have to get busy cleaning this place up AGAIN! There's posts just all over the place, and I hardly know where to begin. I can't wait to see the day when you all are mature enough clean up your own mess. Appear soon Lord! Appear SOON! Well, I guess I got my work cut out for me for a while again. And tomorrow's another day.

Steve Lortz, This is something I wrote last year, and it seems to fit the context here. It fits with the big question you asked about detecting the conterfeit, and it fits with the thread topic. CLOSE COUNTERFEITS Do you remember Dr telling us that the counterfeit is SOOOO close to the genuine that only an expert can tell them apart? He often related this to us, so I'm sure you do remember. He was very adamant about this, and really emphasized just how exceedingly close the counterfeit could be. Yet, I was perplexed about this, in that most counterfeits didn't look all that close to me. After taking PFAL I thought it was easy to spot where denominations were off the truth. I could see how FEELINGS could be counterfeit in that they could be very convincing, yet totaly off. But I couldn't ever see any of the counterfeit DOCTRINES out there that were extremely close to the truth. Where ARE these tricky fakes! I'll soon get to what was missing in my logic on that topic, but first I want to digress slightly to my favorite topic: collateral mastery. It is essential that this mastery, which we were repeatedly told by Dr to achieve, begins in the realm of the 5-senses, and NOT spiritually. This brings up one of the many lame excuses I've seen for NOT obeying Dr's final instructions to master the collaterals. It seems most of us (me included) had such a big ego cooking at the time of Dr's death that we were somewhat "above" going back to such elementary material. I think a lot of us got tricked into thinking that we could master the material spiritually and skip the 5-senses approach. Why crack the books again if God could simply tell us what we need to know when we need to know it? From the "16 Keys to Walking in the Spirit" Dr taught us in Key #4: "Study the Word much. What you can know by the five senses God expects you to know." First we master the collaterals 5-senses wise, THEN we can master it in our spiritual understanding. It's in our 5-senses study of the collaterals that we learn HOW to recognize the difference between true revelations from our Father and false revelations from the devil. Any attempt to spiritually master, without the 5-senses mastery effort, is not only doomed to failure, it's opening up to devil spirits. Remember, the counterfeit is SOOOO close to the genuine, and versions are too blunt to get us that sharp. So, now we're back to the topic I questioned earlier: that the counterfeit is so close to the genuine that it takes a master to tell them apart. Why is it that I couldn't see ANY counterfeits out there that were that close. All the ones I could see were FARRRR from the Word we were taught. Please name for me a close counterfeit; one that takes a MASTER to spot the flaws therein. All the denominations and doctrines out there are laughable in their idiocy. It may be difficult to persuade a person who's swallowed such a counterfeit, but it's not difficult to see that that's what happened. The doctrine is easy to spot as off. WHAT was Dr talking about? He was talking about us. We hold IN OUR OWN MINDS the close counterfeits. They're so close that WE can't tell them apart from the genuine, that's why we allowed them to be built in our own heads. This is the reason we have TOTALLY failed at all nine all the time. This is the reason we never have seen a single raising from the dead. I'm not talking about hospital-bed death pronouncements; I'm talking about four-days-buried and stinketh dead, like Lazarus. We've totally failed at that kind power. Are YOU where you thought you'd be in the power 25 years ago? Would you have continued in all this if someone told you 25 years ago that if you went to the revelation races in 2002 you'd not be able to do any better than chance, even after 25 years of study? We have fallen far from our expectations from way back then, and there has to be a reason. It's because we all fell for the counterfeits. We didn't master what we were told to master, and we were not masterful enough to spot and purge our own error. God gave the revelation to Dr to write the collaterals so that we can someday saturate our minds with them, and spot the counterfeits we have made for ourselves. We'll NEVER spot them without that mastery. The devil is smarter than us and our approximate understanding from translations, and versions. In fact, the devil had a strong hand in the production of these materials JUST SO THAT they would trick us. They're devoid of authority. They are useful tools at times, for a beginner, but devoid of authority. The same holds for the critical Greek manuscripts. Most people don't realize that the critical Greek manuscripts are very modern. The oldest is from 1550, the Stevens text. Stevens undertook a project to rate (thus the word "critical") the ancient manuscript fragments exisiting at that time because they were so very inconsistant. All the critical Greeks manuscripts are the 5-senses products of the critics that compiled them. They are useful tools at times, but devoid of authority. Do you include in your research perspective that the critical Greek manuscripts are devoid of authority? That the Greek interlinear is devoid of authority? That Young's Concordance is devoid of authority? All these are useful at times, especially for beginners, but all are devoid of authority. Many ancient manuscripts were produced by a reprobate church, because they all forsook Paul. They were also under the gun, being heavily persecuted. The copies of the originals they made are very unreliable. The same is the case for the Aramaic and Hebrew manuscripts of the New Testament. This is much less the case for the OT manuscripts we have today, but they don't have the Mystery. Ancient fragments are useful tools at times, but devoid of authority. So where do we get the pure Word of God to learn His voice accurately enough to spot the counterfeit in our own heads or counterfeit revelations? I know of a set of writings that are bigger than us, in which we dare not change a single word. These are writings of Dr's, which are the final product of the 1942 promise, that we can grow up into. Outside of this set of writings, all we have are approximations that we feel totally free to change, correct, white-out, and modify whenever we happen hear some convincing reaseach. We need to be able to put in our hand a book that's God's Word line by line, word by word accurate. Otherwise our lives are mere churchianity, with sporadic healings, a few warm fuzzy feelings, and ending with a massacre by the devil. This is the reason the collaterals were written: God gave us something that's line by line, word by word accurate. Then He told us to master them by way of His same spokesman He had write them. Did you know that we can get revelation from the devil? Jesus got it in the desert (The Word's Way p.93). If the devil could slip revelation through to Jesus how can we be immune to it? Jesus learned from the much more accurate scriptures he had available, and from them he learned to tell the difference between the his Father and the adversary. It wasn't red skin and horns that tipped off Jesus in the desert. The adversary comes as an angel of light. If he was smart, he'd have looked just like what the cultural expectations of God's appearance were at that time. Those visions of splitfoot that Jesus saw in the desert must have been spectacularly beautiful. Anyone who seriously explored the psychedelic sixties spiritual scene can testify to this counterfeit beauty. Remember, Jesus was a novice at having spirit at the time of his recorded desert temptations. How did he know this was not his Father talking to him in the desert? He knew from the devil's deviations from the accuracy of the Word Jesus had mastered at that time. Jesus had mastered the Old Testament scriptures from his youth by way of his five senses. If the OT manuscripts at that time were off, then John the Baptist would have fixed them for him. For several reasons they were extremely accurate at that time. Just like our collaterals. In order to walk the Word them we must know the Word, not just some parts of it, not just paraphrasings of some parts of it, not just approximations. If you want to FULLY walk the True Word in True Agape Love, you must master the details of God's Word. Otherwise your walk will be SOOOOO close, but stuck in the counterfeit and powerless. It's ONLY by mastering the collaterals that we are able to really, FULLY love God. Deuteronomy Chapter Six instructed Israel HOW to love God by saturating their lives with His written Word. Mastering the collaterals means we need to saturate our lives with them (and ONLY them) like Deut 6 perscribes. Once we REALLY love God by loving His Word (collaterals) THEN we can really love others too. I've talked to or written to 200 grads in the past 4 years who have all come up with 201 rationalizations to disobey our clear orders to master what was given to us. I care much about grads. I've seen us all decimated and distracted. I'm not just talking about leader goofups. I'm talking about how we haven't seen the dead raised, and how we haven't seen "all nine all the time" in every member of our PFAL family. I've seen us all going for the crums and not the loaf. I exhort you to get serious about the knowledge God wants us to have from those collaterals that He, God Almighty, produced by way of His servant Dr Wierwille. Here is an early exhortation from Dr about the degree of mastery we needed. This is from the 1979 Advanced Class (seg.5): I have set for our people, and it?s set in the book on ?Receiving the Holy Spirit Today,? and people, when you reach the Advanced Class, you ought to be able almost to quote this line for line. You should have mastered this book by the time you get to the Advanced Class. If you haven?t, you better get busy and do it - work it to where you understand the Word of God in every facet, in every way of it?s utilization regarding the holy spirit field - all of them, you must know this book, in and out. But I?ve discovered as I?ve worked among my people, and even all the grads of the Advanced Class, there still are areas where we got to push ourselves. There are no valid reasons for us to defy this order. We can't really walk in fellowship with God until we obey to master to this degree. "There still are areas where we got to push ourselves." In a few previous letters I recounted Dr's urgings that we test everything we believe against the Word of God. Why did Dr tell us to do this? For the same reason Dr so often warned us of the counterfeit being so close. It's because we were WRONG on so many things. Close, but not close enough to raise the dead. I have learned to only allow teaching to enter my heart that's in print with VPW's name on it. He's the only modern AUTHORITATIVE spokesman for God, since the first century. There's no need for another spokesman because he said it all. Paul was the ONLY authoritative spokesman for God in the first century, being entrusted with the mystery revelation. All other spokesmen for God back then had to line up with Paul. That's what Peter's dying last words were, in the last chapter of his last epistle. The late dates on the Gospels and Revelation are because it took time for Peter and John to get fully on board with Paul. If you want to be a spokesman for God you better say the EXACT same things Dr wrote or you are on the slippery slope to counterfeit churchianity. You need to get it down so familiar that the page numbers of where you get stuff will be easy for you to produce to prove it's right. I don't trust memory, not yours, not mine, not Eve's. Eve thought an approximate knowledge of God's Word was good enough. It wasn't good enough when it came to the tough battle. She lost. Our English versions are useful for those who are just starting to get an understanding of the Father, but they wont help us in the big battles. If they could, surely SOMEONE would have risen up with the power of God at HQ to straighten things out. No one did. NOT EVEN ONE !!! When it comes to mastering the "other" six manifestations mere versions are not close enough. So, wrapping it up for this topic: the close counterfeits are what satisfy, motivate, and block from power every single PFAL grad (who defy Dr's mastery instructions) out there and every single splinter group. Each and every counterfeit, that each and every grad has embraced, is so close that even these grads of the PFAL class can't tell them apart. The more sophisticated the 5-senses skills a grad possesses, the more close the counterfeit the devil can and will fabricate. THAT's why Dr oftened warned us that only a master of the Word can tell them apart, and THAT's why Dr often told us we MUST master PFAL. [This message was edited by Mike on April 25, 2003 at 4:11.]

Here are a few highlights from ?The Love Way? Part II. (with my ALL-CAPS to emphasize the spiritual) ***************************************************** ?...we REALLY become new men and women in concretion in the senses realm.? . ?We have forgotten that love will make a man a success. It will put him OVER where nothing else will make him a victor.? . ?There is no force in the world that it cannot DOMINATE.? . ?...it ENABLES us to TAKE THE PLACE of Jesus Christ here upon earth.? . ?I have sometimes wondered what would happen if a man REALLY dared to go all the way out to the limit of love.? . ?They accused him of being beside himself. But he wasn't. Why? Because the love of God had so set him 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.? . ?When love, the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation, is at WHITE HEAT, selfishness stops reigning.? . ?It is a strange thing how selfishness has never been feared by man. He fears it in another man, but he never fears it within himself.? . ?There are very, very few people who ever believe in LOVE. They believe in force, they believe in intrigue, they believe in self and sense-knowledge judgments and arguments, but do they believe in LOVE?? . ?It is the WAY that you are going to walk regardless of how anyone else walks. You're going to walk the love way.? . ?If you renew your mind, and when you do, you discover that you are living in the love realm. Your home is in love. And whenever you step out of love, you step into darkness and unhappiness. And so you must learn to stay put, to LIVE in the love way.? . ?...this love of God, the agapao, which is ours at the time of the new birth, must now be put on in our minds, and we have to walk in this newness of love, and it must gain the ASCENDANCY in our life.? . ?And when you're out of love, everybody says and does things that they are basically afraid to face up to. You think things outside of love that you wouldn't want to become public property.? . ?So you see, you can UNDERSTAND that if we walk the love way, and the love life, we will say nothing, we will do nothing, we will resolutely refuse to think anything outside of the love of God.? . ?Speaking out of love is speaking out of tune and off key. It breaks the HARMONY. It jars the ears of men and women who are walking and endeavoring to walk in love.? . ?So our whole life swings into the ORBIT of this new kind of love...? . ?What MIGHTY men and women of God we are, when we manifest forth the GREATNESS of the love of God in the renewed mind!? . ******************************************* (I should do this for Part I someday too. Maybe I?ll add them in here, or at the end of Part I.) ******************************************* .....Steve Lortz, here?s a good ?realm? definer. ?Selfishness is the cause of all the wars that have come, and of all the strikes, the battle between labor and capital, the strifes in politics, and in every other realm.?

yeah

This ?Love Way? teaching was put on the radio and played over and over all over the country in the 70?s, plus it was sold in the bookstore on cassette. I?ve never seen it in written form from Dr?s day, but the tape sounds very much like it was being read by Dr from a prepared written script. It was radio, with little dead air, and a lot of information was being packed into many other mini teachings like it in format. I wonder how many people never heard it or never saw it until now? Or how many haven?t thought of it for decades. Here?s the next part. ********************************* The Love Way Victor Paul Wierwille The Teacher Broadcast Part II You know, that the greatest thing in the world today is the manifestation of the love of God in the renewed mind. To the end that we are born again of God's spirit and have renewed our mind on what we have in Christ Jesus, and we manifest forth this love of God, we really become new men and women in concretion in the senses realm. In the great chapter of I Corinthians 13, in the first verse of that chapter, we read: "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels," and that's tremendous, "and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal". The word "charity" is the word agapao. There are three words used, three different Greek words used, and translated "love." One is the word agapao, the other is phileo, and the other is eros. Both phileo and eros were in the world, practiced and operated before the day of Pentecost, and still are, but these basically are nothing more than sex love or sex attraction, or animal love, that's all. But the word agapao has a new connotation. It signifies and means the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation. And though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, which you do when you speak in tongues, but if I do not have the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation, there's nothing wrong with the speaking in tongues of men and of angels, but I am become as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal. We have forgotten that love will make a man a success. It will put him over where nothing else will make him a victor. Love never fails, it is the Master's rule. It will lead a man out of selfishness, out of weakness and failure, into the very strength and ability of Christ. There is no force in the world that it cannot dominate. It makes us wanted, it makes us a blessing, it enables us to take the place of Jesus Christ here upon earth. I have sometimes wondered what would happen if a man really dared to go all the way out to the limit of love. Some have neglected it, acting as though it did not exist, even in those who are born again of God's spirit, utterly ignoring its very existence, and yet, somehow or other they want the Father's help in time of need. Ladies and gentlemen, love must be enthroned in our lives in manifestation. It must govern our lives. You know, Paul's friends had challenged him one day, saying that he was off his rocker. They accused him of being beside himself. But he wasn't. Why? Because the love of God had so set him 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. You know, you can understand I Corinthians 10:24 where the Word of God declares, "Let no man seek his own, but each his neighbor's good." When love, the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation, is at white heat, selfishness stops reigning. Selfishness, my friend, is a deadly poison. It is poison to the spirit, it is poison to the Body of Christ, it causes practically all the diseases in the human body. It is a strange thing how selfishness has never been feared by man. He fears it in another man, but he never fears it within himself. Selfishness is the cause of all the wars that have come, and of all the strikes, the battle between labor and capital, the strifes in politics, and in every other realm. The epistle of I John, chapter 4, verse 16, was one of the most difficult verses of scripture that I ever had to face up to. It didn't seem to me that I could ever master it or understand it or bring it into concretion. This is what it says, "And we know and have believed the love which God has..." In our case, God is love, and he that abideth in love abideth in God and God abideth in him. Here are some great truths. First I have come to believe in love. I believe that the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation is the best there is to allow to govern my life. I have come to believe that the best method of ruling a home, a business, a government, is the love of God in the renewed mind. There are very, very few people who ever believe in love. They believe in force, they believe in intrigue, they believe in self and sense-knowledge judgments and arguments, but do they believe in love? If in your heart, the innermost part of your being manifested in the renewed mind, you believe that love is the way and that it is the best way, then you must act it. Not only is it best, but it is the only way. It is the way that you are going to walk regardless of how anyone else walks. You're going to walk the love way. If you renew your mind, and when you do, you discover that you are living in the love realm. Your home is in love. And whenever you step out of love, you step into darkness and unhappiness. And so you must learn to stay put, to live in the love way. You have found that living in love is actually living in the highest and sweetest fellowship with the Father, it is actually living with Him. He has come into your body to make it His home. And in I John 4:17, which is the verse following 16 which I read a moment ago, it says, "Herein is love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment, because as He is, even so are we in this world." Isn't that wonderful? What does that mean? It means that love is perfect in itself. But it also means that this love of God, the agapao, which is ours at the time of the new birth, must now be put on in our minds, and we have to walk in this newness of love, and it must gain the ascendancy in our life. When this love of God in the renewed mind becomes the rule of my life, I grow up into it until my life is dominated, it is ruled, it is governed by it, and that gives me a quiet fearlessness in His presence as well as in everybody else's. You see, God is love and I am a love child if I'm born again by the spirit of God, and as I renew my mind I walk in the realm of love. I think in the terms of love. I act according to the rule of love and my whole life is pitched to the key of love. Then you can understand that there is no fear in love. There is fear in everything else, but the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation has no fear. And when you're out of love, everybody says and does things that they are basically afraid to face up to. You think things outside of love that you wouldn't want to become public property. But this perfect love in the renewed mind casts out all fear, because fear has punishment. You know, my friend, the Word of God says he that feareth is not made perfect in love. He's made perfect spiritually on the inside, this is a work of God, but not on the outside because this man has not put on the mind of Christ, he has not renewed his mind and manifested forth the greatness of this wonderful love of God. So you see, you can understand that if we walk the love way, and the love life, we will say nothing, we will do nothing, we will resolutely refuse to think anything outside of the love of God. Can't you see what a fearless life that would be? No matter what happens, you know you're walking in love. When you speak you know it is love. Ephesians 4:15 illustrates this great truth where we read, "But speaking truth in love, may grow up in all things unto him, who is the head, even Christ." Speaking out of love is speaking out of tune and off key. It breaks the harmony. It jars the ears of men and women who are walking and endeavoring to walk in love. So our whole life swings into the orbit of this new kind of love, this new creation life, when we manifest forth the greatness of the love of God which we have spiritually, in our walk, by renewing our minds and manifesting it forth as the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation. This is why Christian workers, when they are born again of God's spirit and manifest forth the greatness of the power of God, it just melts the men and women with whom they walk and talk and to whom they minister. What soul winners we are! What mighty men and women of God we are, when we manifest forth the greatness of the love of God in the renewed mind! This is the great walk, the great privilege of being so dynamically different and powerful in this our day and in our time.

def59, You wrote: ?I think one key is understanding scripture is getting away from the KJV and trying the newer ones. The New International Version is a great Bible and there a plethora of types out there that appeal to almost any demographic.? I agree with you about that key. Their appeal is part of their problem. I agree that reading other Bibles is very useful, and I did do that a lot. Prior to 1982 we were supposed to study the available Bible as best as possible. Reading other translations is a KEY part of Bible mastery. But one inherent problem in these appealing Bibles is that their producers DO THINK about demographics. If they didn?t automatically think that way they?d never get into the publishing business, or they would last long there. The theology of the demographics affects the non-inspiration part of their end product. Remember, if one word is changed, then it?s no longer God?s Word, at least not in that area. In a translation almost ALL the words are changed. Translation itself is a somewhat subjective process, and when the subject matter is near and dear to the translators, their emotions and connectivity to their church?s tradition will guarantee many such places where the Word is lost. The adversary engineers such subtle effects on a very high priority basis when the passage deals with the power. Thwarting the power is essential to his smooth operation. Revealing that power again was the calling Dr answered. *** You wrote: ?The New Living Translation is a great version as well and brings the scriptures alive.? I like that one. I?ve also spent a lot of time in the NASB and The New English Bible. *** You wrote: ?KJV0-only types are almost cultic in their admiration of the book.? I have met people who are not only that type, but their whole denomination is based on the KJV being God-breathed. I have a books titled ?Which Bible?? and it?s put out by The ?Which Bible?? Society. Not joking. *** You wrote: ?There were several versions of KJV from 1611-1753. One book said to covet your neighbor's wife, another said the unrighteous will inherit the earth.? Those sound like mistakes in early printings, and not so much deliberate versions. [This message was edited by Mike on April 25, 2003 at 0:09.]

Exy, Your brevity speaks volumes.

Goey, You mentioned ?The Septuagint uses the word "agape" a bunch of times in it's translation of the Hebrew OT into Greek.? There?s a very vague memory of mine to that effect... I think... but I can?t remember if there was a mitigating factor. This should be looked into further. What are your sources for this? You continued: ?It is clear that the word "agape" was in common use some 300 or so years before Pentecost. Agape "love" was not absent before Pentecost.? How sure are you that it?s not words SIMILAR to agape? I have another vague and old memory that Paul coined the term himself? I remember it like a Bible dictionary or something non-TWI. You then wrote: ?Prior to Pentecost, Jesus used the word agapao quite a few times. John 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth [agapôn] me: and he that loveth [agapôn ] shall be loved [agapêthêsetai] my Father, and I will love[agapêsô] him, and will manifest myself to him. The tense is clearly in the present at the time that Jesus said these words.? It?s also the case that John has a few ?flash-forwards? to Pentecost in that Jesus speaks of being born again. One such flash-forwards in John is accompanied with explicit text that Jesus was talking about the future when the spirit was to be given. You closed with: ?The notion that folks cannot "agape love" without being born again and renewing their mind is unbiblical and nonsensical.? Well, I don?t know about the Septuagint or other use of the WORD agape (or however it?s spelled), but here is something I do know. Let?s look closely at the text under question. ?The Love Way? has this in it?s opening sentences: ?As we understand this new kind of love, we come to the great realization that there really never was any love before the day of Pentecost, that the love that came with the day of Pentecost is a spiritual thing on the inside, and it only comes into concretion, in manifestation, as we put it on in our mind and manifest it forth.? Now, the purpose of this thread is to help us read these materials AS THEY WERE INTENDED to be understood. Dr?s use of vocabulary gives us two clues as to what he REALLY means in this sentence. Do you see the two words? In earlier posts I mentioned that certain words were used exclusively by Dr to emphasize the spiritual. Remember in the class, when teaching I Cor.12 and one of it?s earlier verses, Dr summarizes the verse by saying ?No man can REALLY say that Jesus is Lord, but by pneuma hagion!? The two spiritually hot words in the sentence above are found in ?great realization? or ?great REALization? and the word really. I don?t know if the word agape, or something like it, was floating around prior to Paul. I don?t know if Paul?s USE of this word, his own usage, his own definition, his use of it was a historical first or not. I seriously doubt that Paul?s definition (really God?s) was floating around at the time of the Septuagint. That?s impossible. I know that the sentence above, in Dr?s vocabulary, means this: As we SPIRITUALLY understand this new kind of love, we come to the great SPIRITUAL realization that there never SPIRITUALLY was any love before the day of Pentecost, that the love that came with the day of Pentecost is a SPIRITUAL thing on the inside... There may have been five senses similarities to agape in some rare people?s lives, some of the time, like super phileo, but Pentecost made the real stuff, the SPIRITUAL stuff available for the first time, to anybody and everybody on a full time, lifetime basis.

Steve Lortz In a much earlier post above, you wrote: ?...I would presume that the subtleties of the natural/spiritual dichotomy need be mastered before progressing to the possibly salacious subtleties.? Actually, this document HELPS in getting to see how important natural/spiritual dichotomy is. It is a teaching aid for this thread. You wrote: ?As you can see from the questions I posted above, I don't understand what Wierwille meant when he wrote about natural and spiritual "realms". There are probably others in the same boat. Is it wise to post your possibly salacious material before you have led us into mastery of the natural/spiritual dichotomy?? I can?t lead anyone into this mastery, that?s the Master?s job. I can point it out. I myself have not yet mastered it, so I?m not the teacher here, really. I?m just a student with a little head start, and I?ve joined the cheer leading squad.... er... as a ... ...as A COACH!....? Yeah! That?s the ticket. I?m just pointing out what?s been pointed out to me and some of the veracity of it. It speaks for itself better than I can, but it just involves a little adjustment of the meekness mode for reading. I cant lead anyone into mastery, but I AM willing to share my notes, like some of the 81 page references, AND pass on what I?ve learned like the stuff from the record, but this mastery thing is all a part of the one-on-one relationship with the Father, and with His Son. It?s got to be a personal thing with you and the Father, knowing that He is the real author as you read for mastery. I can?t do that for anyone else, but myself, and that?s a big enough job for me. I?m not qualified to be the teacher here. ********** Then in a more recent post you wrote: ?Thanks for responding to my questions, and thanks for admitting that you don't have answers for all of them. I believe our style of interacting is improving, even though we don't agree.? Thanks. I cherish the less emotions discussions. It?s quite easy to get edgy when dealing with several unfriendly as all get out posts, and then run into a friendly one, and not see it. It?s easy for us all to both read hostility into something addressed to us when it?s not intended to be there, AND it?s also very possible to write something with NO INTENDED venom, but somehow the words chosen, and the cadence, just rub the someone raw that?s addressed to. Typing heart by ASCII characters can lead to a host of miscommunications. Maybe that?s what happened with the insult Oakspear felt earlier. You then wrote : ?Shortly after leaving TWI in 1987, I began re-examining PFAL, asking the questions I was so subtly discouraged from asking while involved. I would read the material, or listen to the tape, and ask three questions: what did he say? what does that mean? and how does that line up with other things I know about the Word of God?? I know how you felt about those who discouraged asking questions. Did you see the post I did about me hounding Dr at the 1972 Rock with several pages of questions? He was VERY gracious about it. In later years I saw those who discouraged it, and I mini M&Ad them when it came to my questions. I sought out the thinkers to ask, and often found them. They were usually NOT in positions of dealing with hundreds and thousands of people. They weren?t high profile leaders who were always on stage at the Rock. I still keep in touch with some of them. You then wrote: ?I came to the conclusion that some things were right, and some things were just wrong; some things Wierwille taught lined up with the Word of God, and some did not. That is still my conclusion.? Same with me, for 1986 to ?98, until I came across Dr?s last teaching and some grads who were into the mastery thing for a few years already. Then EVERYTHING changed as they showed me the same things I?ve showed here, and more. Having some exposure to philosophy, I can see better where you?re coming from. These disciplines make a good show of banging words together as if they were algebraic objects, or Euclidean proofs. But, since they lack God?s hand of guidance, they fail miserably in being as practical as they promise. I suggest you look at Dr?s use of these words, natural/spiritual/realms and such, on a MUCH simpler level than philosophy books treat these items. The grad audience of Dr?s were not all treated with the meat and potatoes of academic philosophy, but more the fine wines from the wedding in Cana of Galilee. Remember too, that the class was designed so that a 12 year old could take it. Like a course in genetics it was not, PFAL was not trying to outdo or augment high brow philosophy. It's supposed to be simpler than that, so we can use it everyday. ********** You then wrote: ?You gave the following loose definitions for the two "realms": natural realm... all that the 5-senses can detect and interact with; spiritual realm... all that can be detected and interacted by way of manifestations of the spirit.? First of all, thanks for recognizing the looseness of those definitions. I?m still working a lot of this. Directly adjoining the above, you the wrote: ?Here is another honest question: How can a person distinguish between information that is coming from the holy spirit and information that is coming from demonic sources? Or in other words, how can a person detect counterfeit manifestations of the spirit?? Add a third possibility to holy and unholy manifestations: 5-senses guesses! Now it?s even MORE complicated. This question plagued me for DECADES! I thought that the upper leadership had this nut cracked, and they could tell the difference, but I knew I had NO handle on it whatsoever. Then, starting in 1983, one by one, all the top leaders I knew or knew of, all of them demonstrated to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that they were faking the receiving of revelations from the Father. This total lack of a handle on telling the difference was MOST unpleasantly displayed in how they all handled (or didn?t handle) the ministry meltdown. I was flabbergasted with each and every such letdown over a decade?s time. Each one utterly surprised me, because all of them had been such great believer leaders in the years prior to 1982. Their sense knowledge language and leadership skills had well served many thousands of us grads, so I mistakenly thought they'd do well again in the meltdown crisis. But as they drifted into their own thing, and then 1982 came when God changed the course of His guidance to the ministry, their decreased insight and effectiveness became open and obvious. This question of yours is at the heart of why things went so wrong in TVT and the meltdown and the early splinters, when so many good and powerful people had holy spirit and a lot of knowledge, yet were powerless to handle it. Solving this detection problem would sure be a boon, wouldn?t it! Ok, now here?s the good news! This question of yours was finally answered for me these recent years. I haven?t fully implemented the answer, but that?s what life is all about, fun learning. I have posted a little on this situation, and I have written several friends about it. To save time I?m going to paste in some of those discussions, and then we can talk about it later. These pasted in paragraphs are from e-mails of recent years, so please forgive the sudden lurches in context in the way they open: *** One of the greatest errors of all us grads (me included) was that we often mislabeled 5-senses hunches as revela- tion. We haven't learned to operate all nine that well. This is humbling, but I know we're just not that super- natural...yet. We haven't yet fully utilized key #4 of walking in the spirit: Study the Word much; what you can learn by the 5-senses God expects you to learn. We all got on ego trips of getting revelation and it sunk us. When you can go to the races and get all ten horses right by revelation, let me know and I'll be very interested in your hunches possibly being revelation. We have not yet learned to distinguish between revelation and 5-senses hunches, or worse yet, rev- elations from the adversary (See page 93 of Vol.III) That's why we need to master by the 5-senses what God gave us in those PFAL books, and THEN we can start to see things spiritually. *** Jesus Christ received revelation from the devil in the desert. See "The Word's Way" page 93 at the bottom of the page. Because he had mastered God's written Word he recognized that these revelations were from the wrong source and rejected them. Jesus Christ got revelation from the devil through the oppression process, not by possession. They tried to push his buttons, but he shook them off and they failed. *** It depends on our mastery of all nine manifestations. If I could go to the races, like Dr mentions in the Advanced Class, and get all ten horses correct by revelation, then I'd feel confident enough to consider that it's the true God telling me in a more important situation, and not a counterfeit revelation from splitfoot, or a dumb 5-senses hunch. Did you know that we can receive revelation from the adversary too? Jesus Christ did, in the desert. Dr mentions this in Vol.III page 93 with emphasis. Jesus could tell it was not from his Father because he had mastered the Word. The visions he had there were not like the traditional artwork of the adversary being red skinned, horns and tail. It was probably a BEAUTIFUL vision, designed to fool Jesus in to thinking it was from God. Jesus saw through it by the words that the vision spoke. Jesus had mastered the written Word. The OT was much more protected from corruption than the NT was for many reasons. Until we've obeyed what God told Dr to tell us in his last teaching and master the books, we can't tell the difference between 5-senses hunches, Godly revelation, or the counterfeit MOST of the time. I realize we can operate the revelation manifestations SOME of the time, but it's hit or miss. We can't get all ten horses correct...yet. If anyone tells you he can, he's lying. A lot of the top ministry leaders allowed us to think they were skilled at getting revelation. They lied. We're ALL still beginners, and that's why Dr told us to master what he taught us. *** In this case I think George's policy may have well originated with God. Once in a while we all seemed to get accurate revelations. Because I saw lots of profit from his refusal, and God is getting the glory, he may very well have hit a spiritual home-run THIS time. However, until he gets serious about mastering Dr's books, his ability to get revelation will be as sporadic and shaky as it always was, before Dr died in the good old days. This is the case for us all. None of us have grown up into our full potential, but as we really work those books, and refuse distraction, we will certainly grow. There are hidden truths in Dr's books. You already saw some in the form of foretelling of the ministry meltdown, and our return to the Fountain as you were reading the PFAL book last month. There are many more. Dr's books are the ideal arena for learning revelation. Hearing from God means hearing or seeing something the 5-senses can't hear or see. Out in the world we face many devilish 5-senses situations that confuse us. These situations contradict God's Word and will. Turning to God's direct voice in that contaminated environment is very difficult. In reading Dr's books we are again in a 5-senses environment, but this one is NOT confusing, because it is God-breathed. It does NOT contradict God's Word. As we master and learn the 5-senses messages in those books, with repeated and thorough readings, we can then turn our attention to hear God whisper to us the hidden messages HE, GOD, put in there that our 5-senses would never pick up. Also the 5-senses readings help us build protection against devilish doctrines that are all around out there. Our adversary can and will attempt at times to whisper wrong meanings to us as we work the Word. ((((((( Did you know that it's very possible to receive a revelation from the devil, and not be possessed? Jesus Christ heard a voice and saw a vision, but he recognized the contradictions with the written Word. Dr says on page 93 of Vol.III that this was a revelation to Jesus from the wrong god. It wasn't like the devil looked ugly, with red skin, a tail and horns. He probably was the most beautiful thing Jesus had ever seen in his life! But Jesus wasn't fooled or distracted because he had spent so much time with the written Word. They had some excellent texts available back then. Jesus never spent any documented time correcting the texts because they didn't need it. Dr said we aren't responsible for thoughts that occur to us (devil revelations), but we ARE responsible for not letting them lodge (take up residence) in our hair. We're also responsible for mastering the excellent texts God has provided us: Dr's books ))))))) If we only dabble with the 5-senses message in Dr's books, then our attention is required in each reading to focus on the surface meaning, and this necessary focus on the 5-senses message can distract us from operating the revelation manifestations and God's direct voice. Besides, why should God tell us these hidden meanings if we've not yet been faithful stewards of the open 5-senses message? If we only dabble with the 5-senses message in Dr's books, and then go out into the devil's world, or even to the KJV, we could hear from the wrong god and not recognize his contradictions with the PFAL book material, because it's not yet mastered. That's why it's hard to hear God's voice in the world. But Dr's books are the perfect place to learn. Step one: master the 5-senses message. Step two: keep reading, and hear the secrets. Dr wrote some things on this conjunction of subjects (secrets, receiving revelation, and mastery of God's Word) in The High Calling" (Vol II p. 182). In a race or in a track meet, the finish line deter- mines the winner. Paul says he will press toward the finish line which will culminate in the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Verse 15: Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you. The word ?perfect? means ?initiated ones,? those who have been brought into the inner secrets of the great mystery, that mystery which was kept secret from the foundation of the world and was first made manifest unto the Apostle Paul as recorded in Ephe- sians 3:3. Paul here is talking to those who know that mystery, the initiated ones, those who have gone further with the Lord than just being pledges or neophytes or carnal Christians. ?Let us therefore, as many as be perfect [initiated], be thus minded? ? be intent on reaching the finish line. ?And if in anything ye be otherwise minded,? ? if you have any other goal ? ?God shall reveal even this unto you? by a continued accurate study and right dividing of The Word or by revelation. It takes time, and patience for us to attain this 5-senses mastery, and that's only half the task, because the spiritual mastery is then required. The changes this demands of our thinking processes can be the most difficult things we ever have to do, but they're the most important also. This is why Dr put the "master the books" instructions for all us dabblers as the most important item in that most important last teaching of his. And this is why these instructions were so hidden by the adversary. Dr's MOST important message to us is in that teaching. These two pages are an astounding addition to the subject of ALRI, the Arena for Learning Revelation and Impartation: H.S. book (7th ed) pages 8 and 212. I urge you to look them up. On page 8 it's the bottom paragraph, midway: "opening up the Word by divine revelation." On page 212 it's the second paragraph, midway: "Will you read it under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, in the light of it's own statements." Well, Steve, that was a long answer to a short paragraph, and there?s more, but it?ll have to wai until next time. [This message was edited by Mike on April 24, 2003 at 22:57.]

Zixar, I repaired a botched post addressed to you above. It's at 4-23-03 at 10:24

Goey and Oakspear, Gads! Hold your horses! I?m going to post this soon, don?t worry. I?m not doing a control freak thing here. I just thought that if I didn?t say what I did, then I?d probably be working double time after the post to beg for the attention to go where it fits this thread. For me to do this same thing a little BEFORE posting shouldn?t be thought of as any kind of insult. I?m just asking people up front to TRY and not go where they are most inclined from recent years of discussion. I can pretty well predict what people will latch on to. The habitual courses of conversations here at GS are well established and somewhat predictable. This pre hype was not intended as condescending or insulting. I just want the MOST important ideas in this to prevail, and not be drowned in the predictable. I mentioned that this material may also hit some P&C (plagiarism and copyrights) issues. Here?s the twist. I was told that this material ?originated? with Kenyon. So, if the sexual hot buttons do push some into wild criticisms of Dr here, it just may be Keynon who is in the firing line also. Everybody loves Kenyon! So criticizing Dr here may be criticizing Kenyon. What Dr says is practical. It should be examined in the lights of it?s merits, not how it reminds us of sex scandals revolving around Dr, and the hurt, and the outrage. This material was broadcast by Dr on the radio for years. It may be that he had an arrangement with Kenyon to do that. Or he may have originally credited Kenyon on the air, but the tape that was made in later decades has no such reference. If anyone does have the Kenyon version, I?d love to see it. What got changed is what I?d key in on. One thing I keep in mind about this material is that this portrays the man Dr knew to be, but also wished he was. The Christ Formed Within is that man, but here Dr uses different vocabulary to describe that same process, in it?s maturity. Here?s what to look for: ?a self like Jesus Christ? ?Jesus Christ like? ?a love self? ?a Jesus Christ self? ?Jesus Christ men and women? One of the main themes of Dr?s last teaching is love, agape love. In that teaching he told his audience that there was a need for love. Theology without love is so empty. The need for love in the later days of the TWI-1 was pretty apparent. I see many practical things this teaching can minister to in the area of love, but no where more important is that than in our relationship with Jesus Christ. By loving as he loved, by developing that same love in our hearts that he had, the difficult things we still deal with will go much better. Here is Part 1 (of 3) of ?The Love Way? from The Teacher Broadcast series ********************************************* The Love Way Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille Part 1 of 3 I want to teach in the field of love for a moment, because so little is understood and known about this great field which came specifically into concretion and reality with the new birth on the day of Pentecost. This new birth on the day of Pentecost brought a new kind of love, which had been made available to us, however, by Jesus Christ. As we understand this new kind of love, we come to the great realization that there really never was any love before the day of Pentecost, that the love that came with the day of Pentecost is a spiritual thing on the inside, and it only comes into concretion, in manifestation, as we put it on in our mind and manifest it forth. There are three words, three Greek words, translated ?love.? It's the word agapao, the word phileo, and the word eros. Eros is nothing more than just the kind of love that one animal would have for another, basically speaking. The word phileo love is the kind of love where one person loves another because one person scratches your back you're gonna scratch the other fellow's back, so forth. It's the word from which we got the English word, for instance, Philadelphia, brotherly love. The other is the word agapao. Agapao is translated in the King James ?charity? as well as ?love.? The word ?charity? and ?love? translation are way too weak for this word, agapao. The word agapao literally means that it becomes yours when you're born again of God's spirit, when that eternal life which is Christ in you comes in at the time of the new birth. He brings with him many things, this new birth has many things, among which it has agapao, which is love of God. Then we have the love of God spiritually, but how do I get it into manifestation, into concretion? This I do by putting this love of God which I have received spiritually into my mind, and manifest it forth by my walk. This is why every place where the word agapao, or ?charity? is used, it should be translated ?the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation.? Now with those basic truths set before you, again let me say that this new kind of love, the agapao love, was brought to the world by Jesus Christ. The thing that people have called ?love? has been basically nothing more than sexual attraction, or brotherly love where you scratch my back, I scratch your back. If you do not do right to me, I'm not going to do right to you. But we'll get along good together in a brotherly fashion because it'll be profitable for me, it'll be profitable for you, therefore we just have this kind of love. Both of these, the phileo love and the sexual love of the eros, are relatively insignificant and never build a certainty within life or within the depth of the soul of a man which is lasting. This thing which we have called love has been basically nothing but sex attraction. You see, this sex attraction which we refer to as love is hardly any higher than that seen in the animal world which is nothing but eros. But Jesus Christ brought a new thing. This word translated ?charity? or ?love? in our Bible should always be translated ?the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation.? When we are born again we are born in love. God is love, and so the new birth is the impartation of the nature of the Father which is love. Then by birth, spiritually, we become children of love. This family to which you and I belong then is a love family because we are born into this family. Paul speaking in Romans, chapter five, and I'll just read this to you, Romans chapter five, listen to this from the New Testament, Romans 5:5, and I just flip to it, ?...And hope maketh not ashamed; because, listen, ?the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the holy ghost which is given unto us.? The love of God, the agapao, is shed abroad in our hearts, within the spiritual part of man, by God who gave this unto us. So you see, the love of God has flooded us within, it's our spirit, it's on the inside. You don't feel, smell, taste, or touch spirit, but the Word says it's in there because when Christ came he brought it with him. This love nature which we now have spiritually is the great law of the new creation in Christ Jesus. Remember in John 13, in verses 34 and 35, Jesus had declared, ?A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love (agapao) one another: even as I have loved (agapao) you, that ye also love (agapao) one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye love (agapao) one another.? This love was to be the stamp, the brand, if you please, that would differentiate the believer from the people of the world. The Apostle Paul declared, ?...I bear, or I have branded on my body, the marks of the Lord Jesus.? He meant that he had the scars and wounds that had been given to him due to persecutions, but the believer, the born-again believer, bears the marks, the brands, of the love of Christ upon his spirit. In Romans, chapter 12, verses 5 to 6, it says that every man when he comes into the family of God has the measure of faith given to him. This measure of faith is spiritual faith. Now in order to manifest this in the believing world, in the senses realm in the believing world, he must renew his mind. He has it spiritually but it comes into concretion into manifestation, when he believes with his mind what he has spiritually. He has to cultivate faith, spiritual faith, to make it manifest into the senses realm and develop it. Likewise, the same thing is true regarding this new kind of love which is given unto us when we are born into the family of God. That measure of love is given unto you and it comes with the new birth. This is the love nature. This love nature spiritually must be developed as you develop your faith life and manifest it forth by believing into the senses realm. As you give love freedom to grow and act, it naturally will gain in ascendancy in your whole life, in your whole being. This love of God which is in the renewed mind in manifestation must be fed by the Word of God and then it will express itself in action as we operate it. Remember according to Matthew 4:4, Jesus declared, ?...Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.? You see, the real man of whom I am speaking is your spirit. If you're born again of God's spirit that is the real man. Your spiritual hunger and your spirit needs are just as great as your mental or your physical needs. Your spirit must have the privilege of meditating in the Word. You must learn to feed upon this Word of God as Jeremiah did when he said he ate it, he ate the Word (Jeremiah 15:16). You feed and exercise this new love that has come into you by practicing love. The exercise makes it strong, just as exercise makes your body strong. Colossians 3:16 says, ?Let the Word of Christ dwell in you richly,? gaining the ascendancy over all of your faculties. This agapao love, this love life, makes you gentle, makes you Jesus-Christ-like. It makes you strong and vigorous like the Master. It makes you absolutely fearless in your walk with the Lord. You know, some people have imprisoned love, and I recently heard of a father that locked up his boy in a room and kept him a prisoner until that child was nearly dead. How many have done that same thing to love? Instead of letting love have its perfect sway and control, we have limited it. . . . . [This message was edited by Mike on April 25, 2003 at 4:36.]

Steve Lortz, Thanks for the topical post. Please let me admit up front, that I do not have all the answers, but I?ll do my best to work this a bit. I?ll see what I can do to answer it now, and as we progress more into this subject, we may learn more. You wrote: ?What did Wierwille mean when he used the word "realm"? I looked it up in the concordance, and it only occurs seven times in the Word of God, always in the OT, mostly in Daniel. There, "realm" is translated from words that literally mean "kingdom".? One thing to keep clear is that the KJV translators used words they though best fit the texts they had. Their decisions are not authoritative. The English word ?realm? NEVER appeared in the originals, because English wasn't invented until over a thousand years after the originals were penned. I?d say your appeal to the concordance may be misguided here. This is only slightly on subject, but have you noticed that the word ?concordance? is not used in the Bible? That may seem like a joke, but it?s not. We know what concordances are without having to look it up to see it?s Biblical useage, even if it did appear in there. I think the same case applies to Dr?s use of world and realm. If you are trying to get a KJV Biblical understanding of it I would expect to see things get confused a bit. We were taught to use a concordance NOT to see how words are used in everyday life, but to see how Biblical words were used when first written. In this situation we are not trying to better understand a KJV word, but one of Dr?s words. How he used these two words in HIS vocabulary is what is important. Until all Dr?s books are on-line the prospects of manually making a VPW concordance are slim. However, I have been collecting many page references of Dr?s on this very subject, so they may soon shed some light on this. As I digitize these notes they?ll be made available. In one place Dr suggests a dictionary may be of occasional use. Sounds kind of funny, doesn?t it? We have such a strong background in doing things a certain way with concordances and interlinears, that whod?a ever thunk it, that a dictionary may help us? If the word ?world? had appeared in a KJV verse, the proper place to go for deeper understanding would be a concordance, but not necessarily for Dr?s books. If he did get revelation in the writing, then it?s HIS vocabulary that?s critical, not the KJV translators. Have we progressed any? If you relax the urge to hit the concordance, I think the meaning is not so hard to fathom. The words realm and world connote ?all encompasingness.? Realm carries an aspect of rulership. World carries the aspect of geometry, but Dr so often emphasized the time element from Biblical useage that I feel free to think that too could be in his vocabulary. (I?m thinking out loud here) My best feel for these two words is that they fit together to describe an all encompassing situation and how things are governed in it. For the natural realm or world, we should think of all that the 5-senses can detect and interact with. This would include most of everyday life, as well as science. The spiritual realm is all that can be detected and interacted by way of manifestations of the spirit. For both worlds or realm to be here means that both can be detected and interacted with by utilizing 5-senses for one and spirit for the other. Given two people in the same proximity, if one person operates in the natural, and another operates in the spiritual, we shouldn?t be surprised if they have two radically different impressions of the same event. ******** You wrote: ?Did he mean that the natural "realm" and the spiritual "realm" are both co-terminal in space? In time? In space and time? Existentially or metaphorically? Did he mean New Knoxville, Ohio? What did he mean by "here"?? Space and time are natural/physical commodities. They can be measured with the 5-senses. I think of ?here? as where God is. God originated both realms. ******** You wrote: ?I assume from Wierwille's parallel of "realm" and "world" in a previous sentence, and by his uses of "kingdom(s)" and "world" in the sentence under examination, that the phrase "this world" is referring to either the natural or the spiritual "realm".? This may not be the best assumption. I?ve seen in other places that Dr?s use of the word ?this? can be much less casual than my original expectations of him. It could very well be here that ?this world? is something entirely different. I?d have to think on this much more before going with that assumption. ******* You then wrote (with my use of ALL-CAPS): ?Because Wierwille included the kingdoms of plants, animals and men, I further take it that "this world" means the natural "realm" in this sentence. .... IF THAT?S THE CASE, then what are we to make of Wierwille's inclusion of "the Kingdom of God" in the natural "realm"? Is the Kingdom of God dependent on the senses and man's reason?? If that?s the case, then where did you get the Kingdom of God?s dependency on man?s senses and reason? Plants and animals (or their realms) don?t seem similarly dependant. To ?include? the Kingdom of God in the natural realm doesn?t necessarily degrade it. I do see the little knot you are pointing out, but I don?t see it as a debilitating factor in reading with meekness. By far, the most powerful method of study is simple reading. As we live in these books, the vocabulary Dr employed will become a part of us. Diving in with a concordance and a lot of detailed parsing seems to be a bit of overkill to me. I asked WordWolf about his questions on overdetailed definitions of mastery, and I need to ask you the same. Are you genuinely interested in mastering this material, or looking for hang-ups to help justify NOT studying? Or to discourage others from studying? This is not difficult metaphysical material, but very useful for our practical and spiritual growth. To be aware of the two perspectives, man?s and God?s , and the VAST differences there can be between the two, and the superiority of the spiritual, all help us to grow in our ability to interact with the spiritual. You may be making it harder to understand by attempting to blast in first in too detailed a fashion. We?ve all been away from these books for along time, and even our original exposure was not complete or perfect. I suggest that this problem will dissolve as more scope is achieved. Recent scope, that is. I just counted 81 page references I?ve collected on this subject in the past 5 years, and I too could use more exposure to them. ****** You wrote: ?"This world" is literally "this age" in the Greek. We are told in a number of places in the Word of God that "this age" is going to come to an end at the appearing of the Lord. Will the natural "realm" come to an end at the appearing of the Lord?? SOMETHING gets dissolved in white heat, or something like that I think Peter talks about. We know that the second heaven and earth, the setup we live in now, will come to an end. We know that the adversary?s rulership has an end. How the realm operates will come to an end. ******* You wrote: ?If the statement that the adversary is the "god of this world" means that the adversary controls the "senses realm", and if the Kingdom of God is "in this world", doesn't that put the Devil in charge of the Kingdom of God?? This is still assuming the ?this word? is as the natural. If that?s so, it sure looks like the Devil has some ability to mess with what Adam handed him, and Adam got it from God. If it?s the case that the Kingdom of God is "in this world," I don?t see that putting the Devil in charge of it. Wouldn?t that be reasoning? ******* So, let me ask you this? What are you going to do about this? Do you see a contradiction? Or a book less that what you?d expect God to bring forth? I don?t. As I read and live in this Word, it unfolds for me with great satisfaction. I see your pointing out of ?this world? as one more thing to look into and enjoy. I think the WRONG approach would be to say ?If these things can?t fit for me right now, then Dr?s books can?t be worth mastering.? Your original idea to use a concordance had a kernel of truth in it. Concordances help us to see where one particular word is used in many places in the Bible. By examining all such uses of the word in question, a much greater scope can be gained; greater than simply looking at the supplied definition. The same is the case for Dr?s books. If we want greater understanding of realms, then we need to look at ALL the places where Dr mentions or utilizes these words. That will take time. ********* Lastly, you wrote: ?Regarding Wierwille's four kingdoms in the natural "realm" he wrote, "As... one supercedes the other... so, there is a natural world and a... spiritual world." How do the four kingdoms Wierwille listed "supercede the other"? ? I don?t think of the superceding as one eating the other. When people are born body and soul only, they inhabit the animal realm. When such a body and soul animal believes in Christ, and receives the gift of holy spirit, the kingdom of man is entered. Later, as Christ is formed in the soul/mind the Kingdom of God is ascended to. [This message was edited by Mike on April 25, 2003 at 4:24.]

Jesse Joe, It's just that wisdom that urges me to prepare for this post a little. I'm aware of the nerves, and that's why I'm going slow right now. In addition to the nerves situation, I want to highlight the NON-sexual aspects of this post. Hopefully the sex angle will be a big letdown, and the subtle issues can survive for discussion.

Steve Lortz, I know I?m always begging for time, but I?m just in for a minute, and then out again. The material I will be posting cannot in any way be regarded as sexually salacious material. However, if there is not a concerted effort to the contrary, this material will be treated AS IF it were sexually salacious. I don?t think this learned association and its associated behavior, are proper but they are ingrained by now. I think it?s a bad habit, especially if it distracts the participants from the more subtle issues I want to point out. Maybe I should just post the stimulating buzz words as a preview that will help acclimatize readers, and then they?ll be more able to resist the reflex. Anyway, I?ll be back. I see above that there?s lots to respond to..... later. [This message was edited by Mike on April 24, 2003 at 4:27.]

I was going to post this many hours ago, but it got mixed up with another file, and I then pasted in the wrong file. This is what I intended to post. . . . . . Zixar, You wrote: ?With respect to your message, look up Wierwille's definition of "apeitheia"--that's the majority of us here. We've heard far more than enough to believe in your crackpot theories if we wanted to. Nobody wants to, don't you get it?? I think not! It?s more apistia, and for that very reason I want to post things that slipped by or were forgotten. I think the leadership did a very bad job (me too) in the later years before Dr?s death by getting into our own theologies. The quick development of many splinter groups tells me that a lot of the big shots were long harboring fantasies of escape pods from the mess the TVT religion had become. We OLGs, somewhat in the years before Dr?s death and bigtime in the years afterward, we OLGs were drifting back ?into our own thing? which was a popular movement that we boomers had emerged from the early 1960?s. There was a lot of information that did NOT get well noticed or passed around as it should have. Your FEELING may be apeitheia, but it?s not based on full knowledge. A ton of things are still unknown to many. I?ve spent 5 years collecting them, and one by one presenting them. Now Zixar, comparing me to the KKK is insulting to me, but so what? I hurt for your credibility. If it is religiously offensive to you to see my opinions, then you owe it to your self to not come and see what offends you. Your religion is offensive to me, but I see no point in saying so to you, until now. YOU, sir, are more of the KKK mentality here than me. You want to exclude, not me. [This message was edited by Mike on April 24, 2003 at 20:22.]

Oak, Just started reading your three posts, when a thought hit. This SAME pondered post will hit some P&C - PC buttons. ................(that?s Plagiarismpoopoo & Copyrighteousness,self - Political Correctness) But there?ll ALSO be an interesting twist to it, if my hunch is correct. Time will tell. Will read the rest soon.

def59, So far NO ONE has even mentioned their willingness (or not) to suspend the "rounding up of usual suspects" when I do post this. We've been round and round this mulberry bush a hundred times since Christmas, and before I ever posted it was a thousand times. I can almost write the catcalls and hoots myself when I look at the material, because I too have developed the same knee jerk association. I have to fight my mind's habit patterns myself, so I feel a need to prepare this time for this post. For this particular post, the sex association is very strong, YET the non-sex value of the Jesus Christ part is very high. But it's only a still small voice, compared to justifiable outrage over sexual pain and boisterous scatological humor. This is not a taudry titilating tease; it'a pre-post prep.

Datway, If all the reports here about the WAYGB reading this are true, then I AM giving this data to Rosalee by posting here. It probably gets read better here than if I mailed it certified delivery.

Zixar, No. It's a volunteer audience I'm looking for. And it's to serve THEM, not me. I'm just asking that the audience TEMPORARILY suspend their knee jerk urge to magnify the sex end of my next post, rather that the much more subtle spiritual end. It's just not fair to readers who are trying to concentrate on the sublime, to be hit with lemons. I'm just asking for some temporary emotional control, in not overemphasizing the sexual references, so that the part about our relationship with Jesus Christ can be given fair consideration. After it's over everyone can let 'er rip with catcalls and whistles.

Oakspear, As time goes by we?ll have to learn better how to not hit that anger button of yours. I do not intentionally ever do that to people. As for the plagiarism and copyright issues, I simply won?t let those subjects deter me in my study nor in my posting. My posting is slowed and delayed a little by these subjects because I want to help those who want to brush them aside like I do. I?ve got an itinerary, and I?m done with this spur in the route to where I?m going. If you want to keep bringing this subject, start another thread, and maybe I?ll join you for a little. But here I want to get back in topic. You may have interpreted my determination to wrap up this sup-debate as hostility or condescension, but to me it?s just my way of saying ?IT?S TIME!? It's time to pack up and ?Westward Ho!? the wagons. So, a few screens back I asked if people were ready to tie their knees with leather straps, because there?s some kinky material up and coming. Should I interpret the total silence on this announcement to mean that everyone is ready to suppress that sure to be felt knee jerk reaction to the material I will soon be posting? I want to avoid the sex deviations from the post post discussion, and go for the much more subtle issues of our rich relationship with the active Jesus Christ. The things that appeared in ?Christ Formed In You? will come up again, and be greatly enriched if we can keep our minds out of the gutter. Who?s ready for some mature, disciplined discussion?

Goey, You wrote: ?...why in the world would you think that anyone would take you up on this challenge of yours? You have offered no good reasons.? The OLGs have already been shown the good reasons: this Word that did work for ten plus years, for thousands of people. They were eye witnesses and are probably all now wondering what the heck went wrong with THEIR believing. They KNOW what went wrong with Craig?s, and lots of other grads, but their own performance must be bugging them by now. Surely they must be realizing that in 1977, a full twenty five years ago, the picture they had of themselves and their spiritual growth for 25 years later in the 21st century, must be haunting them by now. The proficiency they all thought they?d have by now in the ?other? six manifestations must be embarrassingly high compared to how things are doing inn their personal lives and in their ministry to God?s people. I KNOW THIS IS TRUE FOR ME, and I started doing something about it when I saw the open door of PFAL mastery. The one stone unturned in my 10 year investigation, was to literally obey Dr?s last words to us, as I literally obeyed his words in the LAST night of the class when he led us into tongues. Sure the TVT confuses OLGs in their motivation to master, but as they learn (like I?m learning) to separate this Word out from the deadly TVT patterns and memories, then the motivation to come back and start again increases. Other OLG motivations can come from the Easter Eggs they find, which Dr hid in the record. As I show all the pretty colors of the ones I have found, then others will start looking for hidden PFAL treasure, and doing things like steaming off their album covers, just like Mikey! After a wave or two of OLGs come back and see results, you?ll start getting your reasons from them to come back. Or... you could experiment now with your believing, push your believing buttons, and start reading, slowly and systematically. See what happens. ********* You also wrote: ?By you own admission you have not mastered PFAL, so you could not possibly know the results of such mastery.? Five years of partial mastery is enough to set a fire in my bones to tell now what I?ve found. As we pool knowledge, the 5 years can shrink for others, as the collective learning curve increases in efficiency. So I do know SOME of what modern day, recent mastery can do. It took much less than 5 years for me to see one very great benefit of mastery efforts. This is in the area of understanding of the TVT and the soap opera the ministry became. By mastering PFAL for a short time I learned how and why all those wonderful top leaders we had went from spiritual supermen.... to total shipwrecks, in any number of ways in a broad spectrum of crippling deviations from the Christ like standard of this Word. Some were wimps, and some were bullies. Some were tight lipped and stingy with needed words, while some were blabbermouths of all sorts of destructive and unneeded words. No one had any good answers for what went right, what went wrong, and what do we do about it, in those ministry meltdown years of 1986-89. So some of the short run results of starting mastery are TVT separation, soap opera backstage insights, Easter Egg collecting, lots of fun Bible exposure, and many things about the change in administrations at Christ?s return.

ljn698, You can always ask me directly in the second person, you know. You could also search the record I left here at GS, because your entire question has been totally answered. You?re not the first to be nosey in that area. Do you keep tabs on all the other mega posters here and wonder the same things? OR only those who run against your grain? Thumbnail answer: window cleaning 23 years, work available 7/24, winter (now) rainy season = abundant time to type. Plus a lot of my writing work is pasted in here from the past 5 years of study and accumulating material, and debating the same subjects with 200 individuals in the past 5 years. So, the shortest of answers is: hard work. Oh yeah, and I have no wife or children.

Oakspear, You wrote: ?Once again, I'm insulted at your characterization of my opinion as "trivial and laughable", not that you won't listen to me.? Ok, If I seemed to say that YOUR OPINION is trivial and laughable, then I?ll take that back. I see the position you are defending or promoting as trivial FROM my perspective of recognizing God?s strong hand in the matter. From that perspective you are acting like the sister who busied herself with house cleaning tasks when Jesus came for a visit. Her sister recognized the triviality of these chores, and dropped them to learn from the master. Your attendance to copyright laws and plagiarism protocol is like the misguided sister?s trivial focus. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, the master?s here, in book and magazine form, the Word made paper, and that takes such great preeminence that your focus, the target of your opinion, is COMPARITIVELY trivial. The laughs will come when he appears and we eventually have a big laugh about all the trivial misunderstandings we all, and that includes me, had. So with the clipboard of your mind, please paste this page over the "trivial and laughable" label that was misapplied to your opinion.

Goey and Oakspear, I?m headed out, and just saw your two long posts. Later I?ll read and respond. I did read a tiny. Also I had something I put together (below) that?s an expansion on my recent post to Goey. In a nutshell: I?m not trying to prove that PFAL is very special, of God, and worth mastering. I do indulge in logic when we discuss the ramifications of the record material I post, but I?m NOT trying to to force acceptance of all this with some kind of logical proof, with postulates and theorems. I?m not trying to prove that PFAL is very special. I?m am TELLING you that PFAL is very special. I?m TELLING you it is, and then I?m then giving the data that proves Dr taught all this, only it slipped by us, or we forgot it, or both. STILL, I admit, that?s no proof of the foundational belief in the material?s trustworthiness. That shouldn?t be required of me by OLGs. It?s understandable that non-OLGs would want to demand that, and I can relate to their indignation with me, but I?m limited in that area of my target audience. I repeatedly remind people of this too. Most of my message directly relates only to OLGs.