You hit on a good thing when you went back and read my posts better. You discovered that Christ FORMED within is different than Christ CREATED in you. I've been trying to get many to see this difference.
So, now that you've seen it, take a breather before condemning it. You'll see that this Christ formed within is the NEW MAN we have always heard about.
Please go back and re-read Dr's teaching on "Christ Formed In You." THAT'S where I got my info from.
It?s on page 6 of this thread, about one quarter down the page, posted April 13, 2003 13:13.
Most people who heard this teaching thought it was about ?Christ in you the hope of glory.? THAT?S just the beginning. Christ FORMED in you is an advanced stage of the renewed mind. It?s in the SOUL category, and is NOT the same as pheuma hagion.
************
As far as your question goes, I've been trying all along to get you to realize the value of checking out ALL the places where Dr brings up this dichotomy and ALL the places where Dr brings up the kingdom hierarchy. THEN and ONLY then can we proceed to see if your question makes sense, and then possibly find an answer that satisfies you.
I have hardly paid much attention to your question because I recognize it as premature. We need to get ALL those passages on the table before I'll bother much with some nit picky question. Your question is OBVIOUSLY designed to tear down, so I have little respect for it. When you show respect for the ENTIRE collection of passages Dr issued on this subject, then I'll respect your question. Until then, it's like a nasty mosquito begging to be smacked. I prefer to remain on target as I see it.
So, Steve, have you found any of those additional passages? I don't know if my collection is complete, but I do know that if your REALLY wanted to know the answer to my question, then my FIRST mention of additional passages would have gotten your maximum attention. It got minimal. So did my second mention; so did the third.
So, answer me this: what are you going to do with the answer, an answer that satisfys you? Drop your present line of research and start mastering PFAL?
Do you deny your question is designed to tear down confidence in what Dr wrote?
Why do you want me to answer a question designed to hurt others?
See, Steve, I can ask questions too.
[This message was edited by Mike on June 05, 2003 at 11:53.]
[This message was edited by Mike on June 05, 2003 at 14:31.]
I see that you are now taking a tact of ad hominem and using the strawman. Maybe even a appeal to pity.
But let's look as some of your skewed perceptions.
quote:I simply maintain to you folks that you never really finished taking the class. You got a skewed version of it, and missed mountains of truth. I?ll just keep posting the evidence. Soon I?ll be posting the Natural/Spiritual page references and some samples of the hotter texts.
Yes some got such a skewed version of it that they were were made leaders by VPW himself. Seems like VP must have missed that, huh?
quote:It?s because I love you folks and want to see you all healed and SOON that I post these things we ALL missed. I simply offer it as an alternative healing method to the Grease Spot managerie of methods.
We missed them because they are not there. They are only found in your imagination and twisted handling of what VPW said and wrote. VPW promoted the bible as the word of God - you promote PFAL as the word of God. You take what VPW said and wrote out of context and call them "hints" to promote your doctrine. If VPW got the great commission and God indeed was the author of PFAL then VPW would have shouted it from the rooftops. He did not. Why would he resort to hints only to be understood by you some 60 years later?
quote:My method is simple: Master PFAL in it?s pure book form to straighten out all the many twisted TVTs you all are stuck in, broken cicterns that can hold no water.
The method you promote is simple - to master PFAL. But the methods you have used to arrive at this conclusion are not simple - they are a complex assortment of twisted logic, foisting of grammar, and discounting of facts. You have not built a good or believable case for mastering PFAL. It is your cistern that can hold no water. It is your kind of doctrine that VPW was refering to when he spoke of broken cisterns.
quote:Not only are you vying for the Craig Clone Awards, but you?ve all resorted to the EXACT same techniques trinitarians would resort to on me in the 1970?s, when I?d come up with verses they could answer. You're pitiful!
Since the early 70?s I?ve been through the being prayed for AT LEAST 20 time! Devil spirits diagnosed 10 times.
Pretty soon one of you spiritual cowboys are going to do a razzle dazzle Six Gun twirling act: the BORN OF THE WRONG SEED act!
Who exactly are you talking about? Craig Clone Awards? You mean the same Craig that the great VPW himself installed as the leader of TWI? But that aside, what "verses" have you come up with the make your case here? - None. You are not using verses, you are using your rose colored telescope and skewing what VPW wrote and said to prove your preconcieved ideas. No Mike, YOUR methods are pitiful and your approach is lacking any kind of objectivity or intellectual honesty. But if someone charges you with being born of the wrong seed - just dismiiss it - I agree with Mark - there is no such thing. This was just yet another eroneous teaching by VPW.
Who will be the first to try THAT one? You amateurs dismay me. Go start your own threads with your own solutions. I?ll just continue posting my solutions here. I?ve got a backlog of HUNDREDS of posts from all you folks to still answer, so feel free to just go your own way, and I?ll continue posting my way here.
If I have to I?ll resort to my James Bond hi tech Dodge Gadgetry keeping one step ahead of your comic book spiritual attacks. Chick Tracts could use a few writers like you.
We have been dealing with your amateurish "James Bond hi tech Dodge Gadgetry" for about 5 months now already. This is nothing new - it will just be a continuance of what you already do. Mike, this is a discussion forum, yet you refuse to actually discuss - you meet challenges with dodges and then cry foul because folks won't play by your rules. It doesn't work that way here. When in Rome...
Mike, if folks here could be Chick Track writers, then you could be the Information Minister for Sadaam Hussein. I hear there is an opening.
Goey
"Most of my fondest memories in TWI never really happened"
When I told you that I had been wrong about my earlier judgments of you I meant it. I am not attempting to accuse you of anything that many others have accused you of.
Indeed I see you as a man who regarded the teachings in PFAL as God inspired and are attempting to show others the value and Godliness of the material.
I will not argue with you about the value of the class or the materials.
My challenge with you is many of the things you write here in this forum cannot be supported by any references in PFAL. In example, your conclusions about Christ formed in you are not in the materials you have encouraged me to master. I am all too aware of what was written in the PFAL materials as I have proven here in the last few days. Don?t criticize me for not giving God the credit of being able to make his Word known to any generation.
You wrote:
?You seem bound to a theology that says God is forbidden to get anything in writing when it comes to these modern centuries. Your dogma cannot tolerate God?s intervention to reissue any or all of His Word. Your dogma will not allow God to inspire perfect writing, even to assist His children as they try to sort through which theologians or scholars they can trust THIS decade to be their necessary middlemen to the ancient scriptures.?
You don?t give me enough credit; of course you don?t seem willing to give anyone any credit.
What I don?t agree with are the conclusions you have drawn from your studies of the materials. You have written volumes on this forum about what you think and you use various references from the materials but many of your references and quotes are vague and could be applied to a number of issues. Much else you write is at best WAY above and beyond what was taught in the PFAL series. At worst some of what you write has no basis whatsoever on anything written in PFAL.
As I have said before, if PFAL is the Word of God you contend that it is then speak the Word, and only the Word. It should be easily entreated, mean what it says and say what it means and so simple that even a child need not err therein. It should also be delivered with the love of God. It?s the love of Christ that constrains a man. If you are right about what you claim then the love of God will deliver where your wrath, anger and accusations will not.
As far as others claim that you are possessed, I will not lay these claims at your feet for two reasons:
1)We need revelation to know whether someone has a devil spirit. God has shown me no such thing about you.
2)Under present circumstances I doubt God would show me such a thing; I could do little to help you in such a forum as this. To accuse you of having a spirit makes a spiritual need personal and shows little love for the person with the need.
I have prayed for you because you are my brother in Christ.
You wrote: ?Yes some got such a skewed version of it that they were were made leaders by VPW himself. Seems like VP must have missed that, huh??
VPW often said (once on tape that I know of) that the people he put into top positions were not put there because they were qualified, but because they were the best God had. He often said this of himself even, and that the whole ministry was by grace, not merit.
God often had a limited number of flawed men He could install as leaders: King Saul and Balaam are two extreme examples discussed here before, among Kings David, Solomon and the apostle Judas. All God selected; all got it screwed up royally. You and I?d have done the same in one category or another had we been tapped to serve God?s people. Maybe we did.
****
You then wrote: ?If VPW got the great commission and God indeed was the author of PFAL then VPW would have shouted it from the rooftops. He did not. Why would he resort to hints only to be understood by you some 60 years later??
He shouted it from ?The New, Dynamic Church? rooftop on pages 34 and 116. And then we forgot it.
****
You then wrote: ?You have not built a good or believable case for mastering PFAL.?
I can respect most of what you wrote, and am especially thankful for your sharp words on internet forums and it?s limits. That was why I immediately responded with the offer to make it more personal by phone or in person.
I can even respect you not buying my pitch.
Since I am not done presenting the PFAL data, and since I have had only a very limited chance to earn your respect, I can?t blame you for not being ready to take ME that seriously.
But Dr. Wierwille is someone who you CAN take seriously. I do think that as we simply obey Dr?s final instructions and master the materials (the exact definition of which will clarify with time), THEN the other things I have been saying will fit better.
Even when I finish presenting my case, if those listening to my presentation don?t follow Dr?s final instructions and have those books open much, then even my finished case will NOT convince.
The real convincing is when people come back to PFAL see that God is with them in coming back to feed from what He wrought in Dr?s written ministry.
The first time I ever questioned your conclusions you made some very personal and disrespectful comments about me and about my regard for God's Word, and those who taught it to me VPW included. You knew nothing about me.
I am sorry for equating you with an internet troll, your behavior however, was remarkably similar to the ones I have seen on other boards. I find you belittling and your speech is rarely seasoned with Grace for the hearer (reader).
Why I should now want to spend time discussing these things with you seems to me would be a chore rather than an enlightenment. I don't think it would be a full sharing with a brother who loved me but rather a confrontation with someone who had an agenda. Perhaps I am wrong, I have been before.
In short, why should I listen to or read what you have to say about PFAL when I can read it for myself?
And I will study it as I always have. As well as Bullinger, Kenyon and many others, always with the scriptures open on the same desk.
Don`t be rediculous Mike, nobody ever can or WILL take VP pmatf, (proven man after the flesh, since you are so fond of acronyms) seriously again. God tells us clearly in the scriptures to eschew such unsavory characters...
To even read your use of the word Dr in connection with him is irritating. He never earned that degree....He BOUGHT the friggin title at a degree mill. It`s as false as the REST of his claims!
You are following a false prophet, and worse, you are trying to entice folks back into spiritual darkness Mike... THAT puts you on the wrong side of the fence no matter HOW sincere your motives are!
[This message was edited by rascal on June 05, 2003 at 16:24.]
How many times did Wierwille plainly say that the Bible was the Word of God? - Thousands.
How many times did Wierwille plainly say that PFAL was the Word of God? Or that PFAL superseded the Bible - Never.
All you have is a feeble theory based upon inferrences from taken from bad logic that were gleaned from hidden messages that only you can see.
Without your guidance and input, mastery of PFAL would most likely only lead folks to believe that the Bible was the revealed Word of God and that PFAL was simply a tool to help folk understand it.
Question: Does mastery of PFAL include mastery of VPW's joke about the woman who married the four men? You know, "One for the money, two for the show..." Is this joke also the Word of God?
Goey
"Most of my fondest memories in TWI never really happened"
You?re right, about ?The first time I ever questioned your conclusions you made some very personal and disrespectful comments about me and about my regard for God's Word, and those who taught it to me VPW included. You knew nothing about me.?
I did come on strong and fierce with you, but you may not have noticed that you popped at a particularly fierce point in an extended argument. I was swinging hard at some who deserved it, and suddenly you walked in.
Correct me if my memory is wrong, but not only was your entrance abrupt, but you mentioned up front that you were away from GS for a while, and hadn?t read anything on that particular thread, and that you hadn?t read any of my other posts. Then, from that admitted stance of not having collected even a smattering of the facts, you proceeded to make judgements. It SEEMED to me that you were executing a page from the Corpse Leadership Handbook in the chapter on how to act as if your just received revelation, without ever mentioning it.
So, with the fierce context you walked into, and with the gall and disrespect I perceivd towards me and my carefully placed posts numbering well past 700 at the time, you made your judgement on a guts feel or maybe revelation. I couldn?t let that stand and let you have it. Since then, I?ve noticed that you don?t have that repeating troll like way as Steve goads me. I try to forget the disrespect I seemed to see you fling my way at your entrance, and that?s easy to do when you post something substantive. You do, so I don?t mind apologizing about our opening fisticuffs. I trust I didn?t draw blood. Nor did you of me.
****
You then wrote: ?In short, why should I listen to or read what you have to say about PFAL when I can read it for myself??
You shouldn?t.
You should give MAXIMUM respect and reading time to PFAL, and minimal to me in both categories.
Dr should have earned your respect. There?s no way I have done that. I admit that.
What I HAVE done is get your attention. Dr?s final instructions were totally ignored.
Dr?s final instructions are fun to follow. PFAL is a gold mine, even richer the second time around.
****
You then wrote: ?And I will study it as I always have. As well as Bullinger, Kenyon and many others, always with the scriptures open on the same desk.?
I don?t want to prescribe personal study habits. It does seem that Dr has something to say about them, though. He said some things in the record that I can post.
IF it?s the case that God gave Dr revelation in those dying last words, then we are 17 years late in exciting that PFAL mastery that's twice insisted upon in that last teaching. Such a situation might very well deserve a shift in study habits to make up for lost time.
It looks to me that Dr?s final instructions would demand that we give some larger chunk of our study time to PFAL. The things we?ve been studying a lot these last 17 years might deserve a lower priority IF IT?S THE CASE that God gave revelation to Dr in that last teaching.
After seeing the level of wisdom of all Dr?s students, I?ve decided to give Dr. Wierwille, as my teacher, top respect. He earned it.
Dr's definition of "Bible" is not the same as the common definition.
There are some several subtleties in how Dr can use that word.
The common definition of ?Bible? is ?That which you are shown in a bookstore when you ask to see the Bibles.?
In segment 16 of the class Dr specifically says that HIS definition is NOT like the common definition.
"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."
Several minutes before that he had said this about common bookstore bought Bibles:
"Now I said that no translation, no translation, let alone a version,
no translation may properly be called The Word Of God..."
A couple minutes before that he had said this:
"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!"
For beginning students the KJV was a fairly close approximation to what Dr meant when he said ?Word of God? or ?Bible.? He let us think that in the early stages, and then when we grew more he showed us more and more to master the PFAL writings.
You?re focusing on the teachings of Dr addressed to beginning students, with KJV in focus.
Dr?s last teaching was addressed most specifically to upper leadership with PFAL in focus.
I have several to post, but I'm waiting to see if you or anyone else finds some. If anyone finds one that I have not yet seen, then I can count that one as another "find" and add it to my list.
Mike--you claim to be a proponent of grace and yet your whole schtick is nothing but self-righteous Phariseeism with a twist of scribe-flavored gnostiscism thrown in for good measure. You seem to think secret knowledge is the door to the kingdom, not the atoning work of Christ--which covers it all, without the need for your secret decoder ring, er, PFAL "Mastery"...
Who or whom do you think you glorify, Mike?? Others hear have addressed that question far more capably and patiently than I... I find you deceived and a deceiver...
I have been pretty quiet on this thread. I don't feel like snapping at everybody, as this pmatf has plenty of shortcomings of various types. I have been quite dissapointed by some of the posts, but then I have been so by myself at times.
Neither do I feel like snapping at one side or the other when both deserve it (or don't deserve it if you will) roughly equally.
Yes I made a couple of exceptions quite some time back, but I dont feel like it now, unless you consider simply posting to be an exception.
All I want to say now is that Dizzydog has come the closest to saying some things that I feel, though of course he is the one who said it.
maybe YOU should start a poll to see if anyone really gives a fiddler's fart if you continue posting this shmack...Does your leadership really think this is a good idea? You know, casting your pearls before swine and all? Perhaps it only makes you feel empowered to read the thoughts in your own head...It is frustrating to watch good people trying to have real discussions about real issues and you respond with the same old 'master PFAL' or your question is not given in the spirit of meekness so I shall not answer and (God help me)...Dr. this and Dr. that....
I agree. I am antagonist for antagonisms sake. A am a Cynic of the 1st order. But Steve and Dizzy and Goey, Mark and so many have tried to talk to you...Gosh, Look at Pat Schwaiger...She bent over backwards to connect with you. Please for the nth time state your purpose and mosey on to Eph320.com or something...You are wasting far too much internet space stroking your own ego...
Love, Karmicdebt
PS: It is okay to be a nut case...Look at me...but I do not carry on trying to convert GSers to my delusion...You may have fun if you leave your dogma and VP worship at the door....
Given O Blakely wrote this on 6/6/03 on THE CERTAINITY OF GOD'S PROMISES.
"The Divine objective of conforming us to the image of God's Son (Rom 8:29) is actually accomplished through the promises of God. They are the appointed means through which we participate in the Divine nature. As it is written, "Whereby are given unto us EXCEEDING GREAT AND PRECIOUS PROMISES: that BY THESE ye might be partakers of the Divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust" (2 Pet 1:4). Conformity to Christ's image does not come through the commandments, but through the promises. It is not merely by doing what you are told that Christ is "formed in you" (Gal 4:19). Rather, it is by appropriating what God provides in Christ Jesus.
Although it should not be necessary to say so, this in no way demeans the commandments of God. There simply is no such thing as a salvation that has a disregard for the commandments of the Lord. Where such disregard is found, Satan is ruling the individual. Fulfilling our duty is one thing. Receiving what has been promised is another. Both are essential, but conformity to the image of Christ comes through the latter. "
"I don?t want to prescribe personal study habits. It does seem that Dr has something to say about them, though. He said some things in the record that I can post."
Thank you for respecting me enough to not prescribe my personal study habits.
As far as "Dr having something to say about them" once again you tell me what you think he has said but you don't tell me what he said. Speak the Word.
Regarding my study habits, they are directed by my heavenly father, who is as living and real to me now as he ever has been.
James 1:5
If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
If there are things written in PFAL or any other work done by VPW that will help and guide me to be a better workman of God's Word I will seek those things out. My approval comes from God and him alone, not you Mike.
I just listened to a tape last night on righteousness that VPW did in the late 70's, I found it very enlightening as I have been studying righteousness recently, including an extensive study from the collaterals and Kenyon.
I don't disagree with PFAL I disagree with your conclusions about PFAL.
You wrote: ?You seem to think secret knowledge is the door to the kingdom, not the atoning work of Christ--which covers it all...?
No, I don?t think or say that. The atoning work of Christ is a free gift. God wants two things for us: saved & knowledge of the truth.
The atoning covers the saved, rescued, eternal life part.
Many extra rewards are due to our own works. Knowledge of the truth and HOW MUCH truth depends on hunger and work. How much power depends on how much attitude of service and other things.
Mastering PFAL allows OLGs to partake in a job of service. It means we can serve better. Dr?s last teaching was ?The Joy of Serving? and the how of serving in that teaching is master PFAL.
Besides, even if I were making the mistake you think I?m making, when one of my meeker readers started mastering PFAL, my error would be quickly straightened out.
*****
You then accused... er... I mean wrote: ?Who or whom do you think you glorify, Mike?? Others hear have addressed that question far more capably and patiently than I... I find you deceived and a deceiver...?
I?m not giving glory to myself, and not to Dr.
I?m giving glory to the REAL (spiritual) Author of PFAL Who is God Almighty, the Father of Our Boss, the lord Jesus Christ and it?s in his name I write.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
82
119
656
81
Popular Days
Jun 15
86
Jul 3
73
Jul 12
50
Mar 31
49
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 82 posts
mj412 119 posts
Mike 656 posts
Steve Lortz 81 posts
Popular Days
Jun 15 2003
86 posts
Jul 3 2003
73 posts
Jul 12 2003
50 posts
Mar 31 2003
49 posts
Popular Posts
Yanagisawa
Did you say "get the ball rolling" or get the kaballa rolling...for it sounds like that's your current freak - some sort of hidden, mystical kaballa-esque gnostic esotericism. I'm fascinated with you
Mike
Steve,
You hit on a good thing when you went back and read my posts better. You discovered that Christ FORMED within is different than Christ CREATED in you. I've been trying to get many to see this difference.
So, now that you've seen it, take a breather before condemning it. You'll see that this Christ formed within is the NEW MAN we have always heard about.
Please go back and re-read Dr's teaching on "Christ Formed In You." THAT'S where I got my info from.
It?s on page 6 of this thread, about one quarter down the page, posted April 13, 2003 13:13.
http://www.gscafe.com/groupee/forums?a=tpc...2192#5746062192
Most people who heard this teaching thought it was about ?Christ in you the hope of glory.? THAT?S just the beginning. Christ FORMED in you is an advanced stage of the renewed mind. It?s in the SOUL category, and is NOT the same as pheuma hagion.
************
As far as your question goes, I've been trying all along to get you to realize the value of checking out ALL the places where Dr brings up this dichotomy and ALL the places where Dr brings up the kingdom hierarchy. THEN and ONLY then can we proceed to see if your question makes sense, and then possibly find an answer that satisfies you.
I have hardly paid much attention to your question because I recognize it as premature. We need to get ALL those passages on the table before I'll bother much with some nit picky question. Your question is OBVIOUSLY designed to tear down, so I have little respect for it. When you show respect for the ENTIRE collection of passages Dr issued on this subject, then I'll respect your question. Until then, it's like a nasty mosquito begging to be smacked. I prefer to remain on target as I see it.
So, Steve, have you found any of those additional passages? I don't know if my collection is complete, but I do know that if your REALLY wanted to know the answer to my question, then my FIRST mention of additional passages would have gotten your maximum attention. It got minimal. So did my second mention; so did the third.
So, answer me this: what are you going to do with the answer, an answer that satisfys you? Drop your present line of research and start mastering PFAL?
Do you deny your question is designed to tear down confidence in what Dr wrote?
Why do you want me to answer a question designed to hurt others?
See, Steve, I can ask questions too.
[This message was edited by Mike on June 05, 2003 at 11:53.]
[This message was edited by Mike on June 05, 2003 at 14:31.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Mike,
I see that you are now taking a tact of ad hominem and using the strawman. Maybe even a appeal to pity.
But let's look as some of your skewed perceptions.
Yes some got such a skewed version of it that they were were made leaders by VPW himself. Seems like VP must have missed that, huh? We missed them because they are not there. They are only found in your imagination and twisted handling of what VPW said and wrote. VPW promoted the bible as the word of God - you promote PFAL as the word of God. You take what VPW said and wrote out of context and call them "hints" to promote your doctrine. If VPW got the great commission and God indeed was the author of PFAL then VPW would have shouted it from the rooftops. He did not. Why would he resort to hints only to be understood by you some 60 years later?The method you promote is simple - to master PFAL. But the methods you have used to arrive at this conclusion are not simple - they are a complex assortment of twisted logic, foisting of grammar, and discounting of facts. You have not built a good or believable case for mastering PFAL. It is your cistern that can hold no water. It is your kind of doctrine that VPW was refering to when he spoke of broken cisterns.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dizzydog
Mike,
When I told you that I had been wrong about my earlier judgments of you I meant it. I am not attempting to accuse you of anything that many others have accused you of.
Indeed I see you as a man who regarded the teachings in PFAL as God inspired and are attempting to show others the value and Godliness of the material.
I will not argue with you about the value of the class or the materials.
My challenge with you is many of the things you write here in this forum cannot be supported by any references in PFAL. In example, your conclusions about Christ formed in you are not in the materials you have encouraged me to master. I am all too aware of what was written in the PFAL materials as I have proven here in the last few days. Don?t criticize me for not giving God the credit of being able to make his Word known to any generation.
You wrote:
?You seem bound to a theology that says God is forbidden to get anything in writing when it comes to these modern centuries. Your dogma cannot tolerate God?s intervention to reissue any or all of His Word. Your dogma will not allow God to inspire perfect writing, even to assist His children as they try to sort through which theologians or scholars they can trust THIS decade to be their necessary middlemen to the ancient scriptures.?
You don?t give me enough credit; of course you don?t seem willing to give anyone any credit.
What I don?t agree with are the conclusions you have drawn from your studies of the materials. You have written volumes on this forum about what you think and you use various references from the materials but many of your references and quotes are vague and could be applied to a number of issues. Much else you write is at best WAY above and beyond what was taught in the PFAL series. At worst some of what you write has no basis whatsoever on anything written in PFAL.
As I have said before, if PFAL is the Word of God you contend that it is then speak the Word, and only the Word. It should be easily entreated, mean what it says and say what it means and so simple that even a child need not err therein. It should also be delivered with the love of God. It?s the love of Christ that constrains a man. If you are right about what you claim then the love of God will deliver where your wrath, anger and accusations will not.
As far as others claim that you are possessed, I will not lay these claims at your feet for two reasons:
1)We need revelation to know whether someone has a devil spirit. God has shown me no such thing about you.
2)Under present circumstances I doubt God would show me such a thing; I could do little to help you in such a forum as this. To accuse you of having a spirit makes a spiritual need personal and shows little love for the person with the need.
I have prayed for you because you are my brother in Christ.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Goey,
You wrote: ?Yes some got such a skewed version of it that they were were made leaders by VPW himself. Seems like VP must have missed that, huh??
VPW often said (once on tape that I know of) that the people he put into top positions were not put there because they were qualified, but because they were the best God had. He often said this of himself even, and that the whole ministry was by grace, not merit.
God often had a limited number of flawed men He could install as leaders: King Saul and Balaam are two extreme examples discussed here before, among Kings David, Solomon and the apostle Judas. All God selected; all got it screwed up royally. You and I?d have done the same in one category or another had we been tapped to serve God?s people. Maybe we did.
****
You then wrote: ?If VPW got the great commission and God indeed was the author of PFAL then VPW would have shouted it from the rooftops. He did not. Why would he resort to hints only to be understood by you some 60 years later??
He shouted it from ?The New, Dynamic Church? rooftop on pages 34 and 116. And then we forgot it.
****
You then wrote: ?You have not built a good or believable case for mastering PFAL.?
I?m not done yet.
.
.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
dizzydog,
I can respect most of what you wrote, and am especially thankful for your sharp words on internet forums and it?s limits. That was why I immediately responded with the offer to make it more personal by phone or in person.
I can even respect you not buying my pitch.
Since I am not done presenting the PFAL data, and since I have had only a very limited chance to earn your respect, I can?t blame you for not being ready to take ME that seriously.
But Dr. Wierwille is someone who you CAN take seriously. I do think that as we simply obey Dr?s final instructions and master the materials (the exact definition of which will clarify with time), THEN the other things I have been saying will fit better.
Even when I finish presenting my case, if those listening to my presentation don?t follow Dr?s final instructions and have those books open much, then even my finished case will NOT convince.
The real convincing is when people come back to PFAL see that God is with them in coming back to feed from what He wrought in Dr?s written ministry.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dizzydog
Frankly Mike,
With all due respect and love. I don't trust you.
The first time I ever questioned your conclusions you made some very personal and disrespectful comments about me and about my regard for God's Word, and those who taught it to me VPW included. You knew nothing about me.
I am sorry for equating you with an internet troll, your behavior however, was remarkably similar to the ones I have seen on other boards. I find you belittling and your speech is rarely seasoned with Grace for the hearer (reader).
Why I should now want to spend time discussing these things with you seems to me would be a chore rather than an enlightenment. I don't think it would be a full sharing with a brother who loved me but rather a confrontation with someone who had an agenda. Perhaps I am wrong, I have been before.
In short, why should I listen to or read what you have to say about PFAL when I can read it for myself?
And I will study it as I always have. As well as Bullinger, Kenyon and many others, always with the scriptures open on the same desk.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Don`t be rediculous Mike, nobody ever can or WILL take VP pmatf, (proven man after the flesh, since you are so fond of acronyms) seriously again. God tells us clearly in the scriptures to eschew such unsavory characters...
To even read your use of the word Dr in connection with him is irritating. He never earned that degree....He BOUGHT the friggin title at a degree mill. It`s as false as the REST of his claims!
You are following a false prophet, and worse, you are trying to entice folks back into spiritual darkness Mike... THAT puts you on the wrong side of the fence no matter HOW sincere your motives are!
[This message was edited by rascal on June 05, 2003 at 16:24.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Mike,
How many times did Wierwille plainly say that the Bible was the Word of God? - Thousands.
How many times did Wierwille plainly say that PFAL was the Word of God? Or that PFAL superseded the Bible - Never.
All you have is a feeble theory based upon inferrences from taken from bad logic that were gleaned from hidden messages that only you can see.
Without your guidance and input, mastery of PFAL would most likely only lead folks to believe that the Bible was the revealed Word of God and that PFAL was simply a tool to help folk understand it.
Question: Does mastery of PFAL include mastery of VPW's joke about the woman who married the four men? You know, "One for the money, two for the show..." Is this joke also the Word of God?
Goey
"Most of my fondest memories in TWI never really happened"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Folks,
Looks like we need a bit of a light-hearted break here. SO, to provide the humor good for a chuckle or three, ... I present you this:
Prophet Emeritus of THE,
and Wandering CyberUU Hippie,
Garth P.
www.gapstudioweb.com
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Garth,
I see you haven't lost your delicate sense of humor.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
dizzydog,
I don?t blame you for not trusting me.
You?re right, about ?The first time I ever questioned your conclusions you made some very personal and disrespectful comments about me and about my regard for God's Word, and those who taught it to me VPW included. You knew nothing about me.?
I did come on strong and fierce with you, but you may not have noticed that you popped at a particularly fierce point in an extended argument. I was swinging hard at some who deserved it, and suddenly you walked in.
Correct me if my memory is wrong, but not only was your entrance abrupt, but you mentioned up front that you were away from GS for a while, and hadn?t read anything on that particular thread, and that you hadn?t read any of my other posts. Then, from that admitted stance of not having collected even a smattering of the facts, you proceeded to make judgements. It SEEMED to me that you were executing a page from the Corpse Leadership Handbook in the chapter on how to act as if your just received revelation, without ever mentioning it.
So, with the fierce context you walked into, and with the gall and disrespect I perceivd towards me and my carefully placed posts numbering well past 700 at the time, you made your judgement on a guts feel or maybe revelation. I couldn?t let that stand and let you have it. Since then, I?ve noticed that you don?t have that repeating troll like way as Steve goads me. I try to forget the disrespect I seemed to see you fling my way at your entrance, and that?s easy to do when you post something substantive. You do, so I don?t mind apologizing about our opening fisticuffs. I trust I didn?t draw blood. Nor did you of me.
****
You then wrote: ?In short, why should I listen to or read what you have to say about PFAL when I can read it for myself??
You shouldn?t.
You should give MAXIMUM respect and reading time to PFAL, and minimal to me in both categories.
Dr should have earned your respect. There?s no way I have done that. I admit that.
What I HAVE done is get your attention. Dr?s final instructions were totally ignored.
Dr?s final instructions are fun to follow. PFAL is a gold mine, even richer the second time around.
****
You then wrote: ?And I will study it as I always have. As well as Bullinger, Kenyon and many others, always with the scriptures open on the same desk.?
I don?t want to prescribe personal study habits. It does seem that Dr has something to say about them, though. He said some things in the record that I can post.
IF it?s the case that God gave Dr revelation in those dying last words, then we are 17 years late in exciting that PFAL mastery that's twice insisted upon in that last teaching. Such a situation might very well deserve a shift in study habits to make up for lost time.
It looks to me that Dr?s final instructions would demand that we give some larger chunk of our study time to PFAL. The things we?ve been studying a lot these last 17 years might deserve a lower priority IF IT?S THE CASE that God gave revelation to Dr in that last teaching.
After seeing the level of wisdom of all Dr?s students, I?ve decided to give Dr. Wierwille, as my teacher, top respect. He earned it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Goey,
Dr's definition of "Bible" is not the same as the common definition.
There are some several subtleties in how Dr can use that word.
The common definition of ?Bible? is ?That which you are shown in a bookstore when you ask to see the Bibles.?
In segment 16 of the class Dr specifically says that HIS definition is NOT like the common definition.
"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."
Several minutes before that he had said this about common bookstore bought Bibles:
"Now I said that no translation, no translation, let alone a version,
no translation may properly be called The Word Of God..."
A couple minutes before that he had said this:
"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!"
For beginning students the KJV was a fairly close approximation to what Dr meant when he said ?Word of God? or ?Bible.? He let us think that in the early stages, and then when we grew more he showed us more and more to master the PFAL writings.
You?re focusing on the teachings of Dr addressed to beginning students, with KJV in focus.
Dr?s last teaching was addressed most specifically to upper leadership with PFAL in focus.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
rascal,
All you have is tired old complaints and criticisms. Why don't you do something constructive? Do you have light to build up with? If so, use it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Steve,
I have several to post, but I'm waiting to see if you or anyone else finds some. If anyone finds one that I have not yet seen, then I can count that one as another "find" and add it to my list.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
alfakat
Mike--you claim to be a proponent of grace and yet your whole schtick is nothing but self-righteous Phariseeism with a twist of scribe-flavored gnostiscism thrown in for good measure. You seem to think secret knowledge is the door to the kingdom, not the atoning work of Christ--which covers it all, without the need for your secret decoder ring, er, PFAL "Mastery"...
Who or whom do you think you glorify, Mike?? Others hear have addressed that question far more capably and patiently than I... I find you deceived and a deceiver...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lifted Up
I have been pretty quiet on this thread. I don't feel like snapping at everybody, as this pmatf has plenty of shortcomings of various types. I have been quite dissapointed by some of the posts, but then I have been so by myself at times.
Neither do I feel like snapping at one side or the other when both deserve it (or don't deserve it if you will) roughly equally.
Yes I made a couple of exceptions quite some time back, but I dont feel like it now, unless you consider simply posting to be an exception.
All I want to say now is that Dizzydog has come the closest to saying some things that I feel, though of course he is the one who said it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
karmicdebt
Mike,
maybe YOU should start a poll to see if anyone really gives a fiddler's fart if you continue posting this shmack...Does your leadership really think this is a good idea? You know, casting your pearls before swine and all? Perhaps it only makes you feel empowered to read the thoughts in your own head...It is frustrating to watch good people trying to have real discussions about real issues and you respond with the same old 'master PFAL' or your question is not given in the spirit of meekness so I shall not answer and (God help me)...Dr. this and Dr. that....
I agree. I am antagonist for antagonisms sake. A am a Cynic of the 1st order. But Steve and Dizzy and Goey, Mark and so many have tried to talk to you...Gosh, Look at Pat Schwaiger...She bent over backwards to connect with you. Please for the nth time state your purpose and mosey on to Eph320.com or something...You are wasting far too much internet space stroking your own ego...
Love, Karmicdebt
PS: It is okay to be a nut case...Look at me...but I do not carry on trying to convert GSers to my delusion...You may have fun if you leave your dogma and VP worship at the door....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mj412
Given O Blakely wrote this on 6/6/03 on THE CERTAINITY OF GOD'S PROMISES.
"The Divine objective of conforming us to the image of God's Son (Rom 8:29) is actually accomplished through the promises of God. They are the appointed means through which we participate in the Divine nature. As it is written, "Whereby are given unto us EXCEEDING GREAT AND PRECIOUS PROMISES: that BY THESE ye might be partakers of the Divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust" (2 Pet 1:4). Conformity to Christ's image does not come through the commandments, but through the promises. It is not merely by doing what you are told that Christ is "formed in you" (Gal 4:19). Rather, it is by appropriating what God provides in Christ Jesus.
Although it should not be necessary to say so, this in no way demeans the commandments of God. There simply is no such thing as a salvation that has a disregard for the commandments of the Lord. Where such disregard is found, Satan is ruling the individual. Fulfilling our duty is one thing. Receiving what has been promised is another. Both are essential, but conformity to the image of Christ comes through the latter. "
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dizzydog
Mike, you wrote:
"I don?t want to prescribe personal study habits. It does seem that Dr has something to say about them, though. He said some things in the record that I can post."
Thank you for respecting me enough to not prescribe my personal study habits.
As far as "Dr having something to say about them" once again you tell me what you think he has said but you don't tell me what he said. Speak the Word.
Regarding my study habits, they are directed by my heavenly father, who is as living and real to me now as he ever has been.
James 1:5
If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
If there are things written in PFAL or any other work done by VPW that will help and guide me to be a better workman of God's Word I will seek those things out. My approval comes from God and him alone, not you Mike.
I just listened to a tape last night on righteousness that VPW did in the late 70's, I found it very enlightening as I have been studying righteousness recently, including an extensive study from the collaterals and Kenyon.
I don't disagree with PFAL I disagree with your conclusions about PFAL.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Hey Mike the ONLY thing that my posts are destructive to, is the lie of the illusion vp mogfot.....and that IS constuctive.
Lol too bad you are so deeply entrenched in your idolitry that you can`t SEE the light that everyone here is shining in your direction, pal.
Sorry that we are such a dissapointment to you lifted up, however, when you have to confront lies and idolotry, it is rarely a pretty sight....
[This message was edited by rascal on June 06, 2003 at 9:14.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dizzydog
Mike,
As far as our first encounters, no fault no error.
I hold no animousity toward anyone in the body of Christ, God paid too much for our lives. Even if I disagree on some points.
This is part of the reason why I reentered the discussion. I felt obligated to give you an honest hearing and response.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
alfakat,
You wrote: ?You seem to think secret knowledge is the door to the kingdom, not the atoning work of Christ--which covers it all...?
No, I don?t think or say that. The atoning work of Christ is a free gift. God wants two things for us: saved & knowledge of the truth.
The atoning covers the saved, rescued, eternal life part.
Many extra rewards are due to our own works. Knowledge of the truth and HOW MUCH truth depends on hunger and work. How much power depends on how much attitude of service and other things.
Mastering PFAL allows OLGs to partake in a job of service. It means we can serve better. Dr?s last teaching was ?The Joy of Serving? and the how of serving in that teaching is master PFAL.
Besides, even if I were making the mistake you think I?m making, when one of my meeker readers started mastering PFAL, my error would be quickly straightened out.
*****
You then accused... er... I mean wrote: ?Who or whom do you think you glorify, Mike?? Others hear have addressed that question far more capably and patiently than I... I find you deceived and a deceiver...?
I?m not giving glory to myself, and not to Dr.
I?m giving glory to the REAL (spiritual) Author of PFAL Who is God Almighty, the Father of Our Boss, the lord Jesus Christ and it?s in his name I write.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Lifted Up,
I too have noticed the substance in dizzydog's posts, while not entirely agreeing with him.
That's why I've been steering more of my limited time in his direction lately.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
karmicdebt,
I'm not trying to convince.
I'm trying to present lost data.
I am succeeding.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.