A Few Big Things I Learned Taking PFAL

[Abigail]

Another Dan, to try to answer you question, I am not comfortable calling Jesus "God". To me, there is only one Supreme God who stands alone. Jesus is not Jehovah Elohim or Allah. I think if God calls Jesus God, that's ok, God can call Jesus whatever He wants.

However I AM personally very comfortable calling Jesus LORD. :)

If that's what you choose to do and have no problem, then its ok with me :)

LOL

No Oldies, that isn't what I do. :) Like you, I hold fast to having no other God before Jehovah. But if others are comfortable calling Jesus God, if others believe in the Trinity, it matters not to me, nor would I be so arrogant as to tell them they were "off the Word", committing idolatry, etc. We all have to chose the path that makes the most sense to us. We all have to form our own individual relationship with God and call Him by the name we know him by.

[oldiesman]

VP with his adamancy that JC is not God, his ridicule of it, basically closed TWIers minds to the immense greatness of Christ - whether you are a trinitarian or not.

That's absolute nonsense. What a cheap shot. The immense greatness of Christ is described in the Word of God. The WORD is THE LOGOS in writing. VP teaching that Christ being the subject of all the books, that the bible is magnified above God's name. I received tremendous abiding respect for Christ and his greatness by understanding the Word, that VP taught.

I think if anyone's mind was / is closed to the greatness of Christ, it is that individual choice and has NOTHING to do with Dr. Wierwille.

[oldiesman]

And what is so awesome is that we too are now in this "family" - this new kind of being.

We too will someday be this "new kind." It will be way beyond what we can imagine.

Way beyond any kind of evolution.

We will be a totally new kind - as he is now, so shall we be.

As he was at the transfiguration when he appeared to Peter and the others in his glorified body - so shall we be.

Peter's mind was blown when he saw that and he mentions it quite a bit.

What ever it will be - it will be awesome.

Which was all taught by Wierwille.

[waysider]

Here's something else that VPW taught in PFAL that I'm certain others besides myself remember.

(paraphrased)-------"When Christ returns, he's coming back as King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

He's coming back as Lord God Almighty!!!!"

The official word we class instructors got was to put a spin on it and explain that he was just wrapped up in the emotion of the moment.

I'm pretty sure *retakes* and *editing* were not unheard of in 1967. <_<

And to think that I was once reprooved for saying "We are AFFILIATED with The Way(Int.)" instead of saying "We ARE The Way(Int.)

[oldiesman]

Here's something else that VPW taught in PFAL that I'm certain others besides myself remember.

(paraphrased)-------"When Christ returns, he's coming back as King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

He's coming back as Lord God Almighty!!!!"

Thanks for reminding me Waysider, I thought that was a terrific teaching. :)

Well I guess that puts to rest the propaganda that Wierwille didn't teach about the immense greatness of Christ. And that is just one statement's worth.

[Sunesis]

You really need to tone down your obvious hatred for me Oldies.

People have said much "worse" then me and you're all respect.

If you cannot respect my views and refute them nicely, then don't comment.

You've had this problem ever since I used a phrase you didn't like a few years ago.

Your hatred of me is quite obvious.

Don't bother responding to me if you can't do it respectfully.

[oldiesman]

If you cannot respect my views and refute them nicely, then don't comment.

Sorry, I think some of your views are hateful nonsense that warrant a strong response. If you can't take your views being strongly challenged, then I suggest you do something else.

BTW, can you offer some concrete information about the immense greatness of Jesus Christ that was NOT taught in TWI? If TWI missed something then, I'm always open to learn more.

[T-Bone]

...I am not comfortable calling Jesus "God". To me, there is only one Supreme God who stands alone. Jesus is not Jehovah Elohim or Allah. I think if God calls Jesus God, that's ok, God can call Jesus whatever He wants.

However I AM personally very comfortable calling Jesus LORD. :) ....

If it's any consolation to you, Oldies, my dear brother – since I left TWI, I don't think a lot has changed for me in the way I perceive God or relate to Him – perhaps my exploration of Trinitarian doctrine has only brought on more questions! I'm not setting myself up as the norm for how a Trinitarian prayers or worships – but after thinking about a few of your recent posts – I'm beginning to think maybe Trinitarians and Unitarians are not that much different on a practical level – as compared to a doctrinal level.

What I'm about to share is an overall summary of my personal prayer and worship. I'm just speaking off the top of my head – it's not like I keep a running tally of who I'm addressing – or that I make a conscious effort to "change the channel" to communicate with the other person. But your posts have caused me to reflect a little deeper on my frame of mind in prayer and worship. I just go with the flow – what comes naturally.

When I'm blown away by a gorgeous sunrise or sunset – my heart just explodes with praise to God – as the creator of the heavens and the earth – maybe even the classic picture of God with the long white beard seated on His throne is back there somewhere in my mind. When I pray for my family or something I'm concerned about – it's usually directed toward the God I just mentioned…Sometimes, if I'm very troubled – my heart races to my savior, my high priest who is well acquainted with human frailties. I would say my prayers are very much directed to Him in times like that.

There's a great book I read awhile back, Jesus: Lord and Savior by F.F. Bruce. Bruce makes a few interesting points about the title "Lord": New Testament believers applied to Jesus the title reserved for the God of the Old Testament believers. And there appears to be some confusion in the New Testament - places where the reader is not sure if the "Lord" mentioned is in reference to God the Father or Jesus the Son – one can only wonder if it was that big a concern with the author.

[waysider]

Thanks for reminding me Waysider, I thought that was a terrific teaching. :)

Well I guess that puts to rest the propaganda that Wierwille didn't teach about the immense greatness of Christ. And that is just one statement's worth.

No problem.

Always willing to point out the inconsistencies in PFAL.

BTW--- Where is this propaganda you refer to about Wierwille not teaching "the immense greatness of Christ"?

Or, are you referring to the fact that he taught very little about Jesus and our relationship with him?

[oldiesman]

Waysider, what is it about Jesus and folks' possible relationship with him that wasn't taught in TWI?

Every now and then somebody mentions this, but I don't see what it actually consists of and what they are actually talking about.

[doojable]

That's absolute nonsense. What a cheap shot. The immense greatness of Christ is described in the Word of God. The WORD is THE LOGOS in writing.

Describing something and being something are entirely different.

I don't believe that all of the LOGOS is in writing. Not "the Logos" Jesus and not "the Logos" God. In fact, I believe that to say that is limiting God severely to a bunch of words on a page that can be misread and misinterpreted.

VP teaching that Christ being the subject of all the books...

THAT teaching was not VP's. He stole that one as well. He only changed a very few of the words.

Billy Graham taught that teaching first.

[T-Bone]

Waysider, what is it about Jesus and folks' possible relationship with him that wasn't taught in TWI?

Every now and then somebody mentions this, but I don't see what it actually consists of and what they are actually talking about.

I think TWI's strict adherence to dispensational thinking and focusing on the church epistles has a lot to do with it. They said the gospels weren't addressed to us...Where else in the Bible is a person going to look for getting a better understanding of what Jesus was about? Do you think that would have any influence on the reader's relationship with Him?

Edited August 29, 2007 by T-Bone

[waysider]

Waysider, what is it about Jesus and folks' possible relationship with him that wasn't taught in TWI?

Every now and then somebody mentions this, but I don't see what it actually consists of and what they are actually talking about.

Perhaps we could reverse that question to make it "What WAS taught in TWI beyond the obvious Christ aspect of his life?"

And again, I would like to see an example of this "propaganda" you referred to.

Excellent point Dooj-----So much of what God has to say to us has little or nothing to do with what's confined to words in books.

edited for typo.

Edited August 29, 2007 by waysider

[Sunesis]

Oldies, I could offer you much regarding Christ that was not taught in TWI and was and is taught outside of TWI.

Sadly, at this point, it would be a waste of time.

If its not in TWI, you have abolutely no interest.

To you it would be nonsense, cheap shots, ludicrous, and all the other things you've called information posted by many posters here, not just by me.

You are not ready yet to learn anything about Christ, God or the Bible unless it was taught by VP, came from him, and was taught by TWI.

To you its all VP and TWI. You are extremely sold out to that.

I always used to wonder about other Christians' relationship with Christ, they talked about it in such a personal sense. I knew we were missing something in TWI.

It wasn't until I was able to get outside of the TWI box, that God graciously allowed me to see, understand, and know his Son and to understand what a "relationship" with him means - I finally understood what those other Christians were talking about - thank God. I am grateful he in his mercy let me live long enough to know and understand, at least a small portion. It dwarfs TWI's version.

Christ is God's heart, given to us. You will not learn him in TWI or VP's teachings. TWI gave lip service to him, but cut God's heart, his gift to us - Christ - out of the picture.

Until you get out of the VP/TWI worship zone, you will not "see what it actually consists of and what they are actually talking about."

This is why I feel TWI did such great disservice to God's people. Its truly sad, because I have a feeling you want to know more, but you are terrified to go there if it isn't VP sanctioned.

[Nottawayfer]

I always used to wonder about other Christians' relationship with Christ, they talked about it in such a personal sense. I knew we were missing something in TWI.

It wasn't until I was able to get outside of the TWI box, that God graciously allowed me to see, understand, and know his Son and to understand what a "relationship" with him means - I finally understood what those other Christians were talking about - thank God. I am grateful he in his mercy let me live long enough to know and understand, at least a small portion. It dwarfs TWI's version.

This is so true and worth repeating again. It's a hard one for some ex-wayfers to follow. It's not about the Trinity either.

[oldiesman]

Christ is God's heart, given to us.

That's a great statement, and it would be nice for you to share it without having to repeatedly disparage VP and TWI, as your writings often do.

This is so true and worth repeating again. It's a hard one for some ex-wayfers to follow. It's not about the Trinity either.

Perhaps you can elaborate about some of the workings and attributes of this relationship since Sunesis seems to think this is way over my head.

[oldiesman]

Describing something and being something are entirely different.

I don't believe that all of the LOGOS is in writing. Not "the Logos" Jesus and not "the Logos" God. In fact, I believe that to say that is limiting God severely to a bunch of words on a page that can be misread and misinterpreted.

THAT teaching was not VP's. He stole that one as well. He only changed a very few of the words.

Billy Graham taught that teaching first.

It was either Graham or Roberts; VP said he didn't originate it, and I didn't say VP originated it. Who cares anyway?

But too bad about your disparagement of the bible.. "God is severely limited to a bunch of words." I'm glad the bible means more to me than that.

Golly, just look at Jesus who had a much greater approach to the Word of God than that.

Show me anything that even hints Jesus had that approach. "God is limited to a bunch of words" baaaaa.

Here's one verse from 2 Peter that elaborates the greatness of the Word:

2Pe 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that [pertain] unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:

Of course folks can receive word of knowledge too but 99% of the knowledge people would ever need is in the Word of God.

[rascal]

That was beautifully said Sunesis.

I too...yearned for the understanding the personal relationship as opposed to the historical view. All of my efforts seemed works based ...do a+b search long enough... work the word diligently enough...discipline your thoughts enough...witness enough...tithe enough...to achieve the spirituality that I believed would bring the closeness I craved.

Ever searching but never coming unto a knowledge of....describes it perfectly ......

[oldiesman]

"understanding the personal relationship", what does that mean?

"achieve the spirituality that I believed would bring the closeness I craved."

what does that one mean?

Edited August 29, 2007 by oldiesman

[waysider]

snip

99% of the knowledge people would ever need is in the Word of God.

snip

Two questions, Oldies.

1. What is the source of that statistic?

2.When you refer to "The Word of God", are you referring specifically to "The Bible"?

( according to PFAL, "The Bible" is "The Word of God" when it is "rightly divided".----session #2/ The God Breathed Word.)

[oldiesman]

Actually according to PFAL, VP taught that the Word of God he was speaking of was the Word as it originally came when holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

The statistic I offered is my opinion. But my mind is open to hearing new views and Waysider, you haven't answered my previous question about Jesus and folks' possible relationship with him that wasn't taught in TWI?

Since you assert this idea, I think it's incumbent upon you to explain what you mean so folks like me can learn where twi was possibly wrong or deficient.

[doojable]

Actually according to PFAL, VP taught that the Word of God he was speaking of was the Word as it originally came when holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

VP said in PFAL:

To the extent and in the proportion that we Rightly divide the Word of Truth we will have the God-breathed Word."

I still say that this puts us too in control and allows us to limit God.

[oldiesman]

How?

[waysider]

Oldies

First let me say that I am not trying to make this a personal issue.

TWI taught us precious little from and about the Gospels.

If you want to learn about Jesus, you simply can not ignore the Gospels.

This would be true even if your motives were purely academic or historic.

The closest we got to even thinking about Jesus(not *Christ*) was when we sang songs out of the blue book.

Wierwille made a big deal out of emphasizing that we must always refer to him(Jesus Christ) as Christ and not Jesus because the power is in the resurrection not the suffering. That line of thinking was the springboard for the teaching from which I quoted a paraphrase several posts ago.

*Emphasize the post-resurrected Christ and minimize the pre-resurrection Jesus*.

That is what Wierwille exhorted us to do. Not once, but over and over and over again.

In my opinion, I think that deprives an individual of understanding this man called Jesus.

How can you have a relationship with someone you don't even know?

[Lifted Up]

Wierwille made a big deal out of emphasizing that we must always refer to him(Jesus Christ) as Christ and not Jesus because the power is in the resurrection not the suffering.

I got the idea of emphasis, but I dont think there was ever any "always" about it. I remember him mentioning/referring to "Jesus" without the "Christ" on quite a number of occasions, including the numerous times he led us in "Turn Your Eyes upon Jesus" at PFAL77.