you mean you were the only one to get the right answer, and the rest of the students said "-1"...
you mean all the rest of the students without exception said "-1"
there was no distinction among the rest of the students - they all said "-1"
there was no exception to this, and there was no distinction made among the students who gave the wrong answer...
that is because all without distinction=all without exception....
it's the same set of students...
why don't you name all the students in the group "all without distinction" who gave the answer "-1"
then name all the students in the group "all without exception" who gave the answer "-1"
and tell me if you don't come up with the same list of names...
Well I see you responded to my post before I had edited the final version. That was my mistake by hitting the "Submit" button before I had everything in place that I wanted to say.
I highly recommend you go back and read the 'edited' version of that post - and try not "looking to far ahead" without gaining an understanding of the material that is being presented to you. We all know what looking ahead without getting a proper understanding of the material that is bering presented results in don't we? It usually results in a less than perfect grade. So we should all (without exception) .... QUIT TRYING TO CHEAT!!
...In ninth grade I gave the conclusion and the correct answer to a math question when the rest of the class was completey wrong when applying the same formula. The correct answer to the quesion was "0". The rest of the class had said something else - they all (without distinction) said: "-1".
The teacher then asked, "How many of you say the answer is "0"? About half the class had their hands raised, mine included. Then she asked, "How many of you say -1?" There were a few more than half of the class whose hands were raised who said -1. She asked again, "How many of you still say 0? Now there were only 3 hands raised, instead of 8 like before. She asked again, How many of you think it is still -1? Nearly everyone's hands were raised now, except mine. Then she asked again, "How many of you still say 0? Now only my hand was raised.
Do you want to know why it was still raised? The reason was I had cheated. I looked in the back of the book to find the correct answer to that math question. That didn't mean I understood how to arrive at the correct conclusion to the math question, I just had the correct answer without having the understanding of how to come to the correct answer. That is exactly where I believe a lot of people are at with the PFAL class today and with the PFAL collateral materials. They cheated and "looked ahead". Of course, we got the correct answer in PFAL - but that doesn't mean we have got the understanding on how to arrive at the correct answer. Now everybody in the class has got their hand raised with some other answer that was already written in the book. ...
Just because the "teacher" in PFAL said he had the correct answers doesn't make it so. And one doesn't need the mentality of a ninth grade cheater to figure that out – just living in the real world…alas, one man's idol is another man's zero.
i agree with you that it's not a big deal if someone makes a grammatical error... (see my previous post on this - post #1060)
however, what i find baffling is that some of the folks on this thread refuse to acknowledge that it IS a grammatical error...
the idolatry is sooo thick that a couple of folks refuse to acknowledge that the "man" (vpw) that they worship could make any errors (including grammatical errors or misusing the english language)
i am grieved by this blatant idolatry and worship of a man...
your choice of words is interesting, to say the least...
um, i was responding to a post on a message board... not trying to "look too far ahead"...
you wrote a simple story about your cheating in the 9th grade (there's no great understanding i need to gain about that)
me thinks you are a bit full of yourself thinking that i have to gain some "proper understanding" of the "material being presented" in your 9th grade cheating story...
btw, your edit doesn't change a thing...
the rest of the students still said "-1"
and if you list the names of all the students (without distinction) who said "-1"
AND
list the names of all the students (without exception) who said "-1",
you will find that the lists contains the exact same names...
but your idolatry will not allow you to think logically!
"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie" (2 Thess. 2:11)
Personally, I have no problem with people believing whatever it is they choose to believe.
Construct a shrine to The Great Purple Horned Toad in your backyard if it makes you happy.
That's religious freedom.
On the other hand, intentionally promoting and recruiting others to a set of doctrines that have been clearly demonstrated to be harmful is an abomination.
Sure, we all promoted PLAF, but we didn't know then what we know now.
Trying to live by the so-called "law" of believing has caused so much pain in this world it is impossible to measure.
People have lost homes, careers, family and friends, trying to follow this nonsense.
I personally knew someone who lost his life because he believed a PLAF grad was telling him the truth while all they were really doing was regurgitating Way drivel.
People have lost loved ones and made to feel guilty because "it must have been caused by their negative believing".
Again, I have more than one very personal experience with this very thing.
People have been crippled for life because they were supposed to over-ride the dangers of LEAD and Rodeo School by using the "law" of believing. Some lost their lives.
The damages are very real.
It's not about someone believing differently than you do.
It's about actively promoting a school of thought that is toxic to those who try to pattern their lives after it.
Of course, someone will probably say, "The truth sets you free" or something along those lines.
The problem is that this junk is NOT "The Truth", it's man made gobble- de- gook and it's poisonous.
Why would anyone want to knowingly feed people a slow diet of arsenic?
edited to add:
I apologize to anyone who may have suffered harm via my promotion of The Way and PFAL.
you have added the collaterals (a set of books) and seem to be claiming that they are part of God's "revelation to mankind" (you seem to be holding these "collaterals" as equal to the bible, having been written by your prophet, vpw, who you claim received his information from God)
this is all idolatry!
perhaps you don't know what idolatry is...
jen-o,
Ok, I’ll turn off the sarcasm and work with you.
I’ll agree with you that IF the written part of PFAL is not God-breathed, then my thesis is idolatry, or something just as bad.
Now that I said that, can you agree with me that IF written PFAL is God-breathed then I'm not idolatrous at all?
I see what I am doing as helping grads get the good stuff from the good old days. It’s a right and proper presentation of something new that God has been trying to make available to grads for over 20 years now.
***
From what you said above, I can tell you have not been accurately tracking with what I say. Can you at least track with the above paragraphs? I can help you track a little better by adjusting one idea you expressed as mine.
Above you wrote: “you have added the collaterals (a set of books) and seem to be claiming that they are part of God's ‘revelation to mankind’...”
It’s the ‘revelation to mankind’ part I disagree with.
I see the PFAL collaterals as God-breathed English documents addressed to Dr’s grads of PFAL, a relatively small group of people. The reason I see this is because I dared to open them a lot, again.
***
Here’s a good theological mental exercise you might try to get up to speed with me.
Can you give me the Library of Congress number of a single English text God-breathed book or document? Just one will do.
Was the "law" of believing ever taught in the "printed part"?
Yes, but it generally wasn't well studied in the early years, and in the later years many drifted even more from the written part.
I'm STILL re-learning what the written record is on that subject, and purging the TVTs and private theories (broken cisterns) that I myself drifted into.
Remember, we were taught that we need to see ALL the passages on a particular subject before we have the whole story. This key works for PFAL passages as well as KJV passages. It works for Computer Manuals and Steven King as well.
There are hundreds of PFAL passages to deal with on the law of believing; many are satisfied with taking pot shots at a small number of them. It takes time to do it right, but it's fun work, and enlightening too.
I think that's not quite an English text that's God-breathed, but the Greek one AT BEST.
Your suggestion is an English text version of a translation of modern (1550 and up) scholarly compilation of fragmentary copies of copies of God-breathed documents from Paul's time, in Greek at best.
(Talking about the NT part)
You don't mean to assert that your suggestion is what I was asking for, DO you?
If you do, they we'd have to invent a new way of describing documents that are God-breathed and in English, that is, the English part is God-breathed. THAT'S what I was asking for... it's like asking for a COMPLETELY AUTHORITATIVE translation, the last word on translations.
Oh, I see – you're playing vp's find-the-pea-under-the-shell game…vp invented that little game so as to exert control over the interpretation of the Bible. Works really well on folks who assumed vp was THE ultimate authority on the Bible…What a bunch of double-talking nonsense….Oh yeah, right, I'm gonna believe vp on anything he said about the "God-breathed" Word or translations – an idiot who made up definitions and twisted logic to prove his point – who lied about taking classes from Moody Correspondence School!....Go assert your nonsense somewhere else, jack – it ain't flying here!
I have to assume that since the PLAF book is in English and you are convinced, beyond all reasonably logical evidence to the contrary, that it is "God breathed, you are referring to "the orange book".
Oh, by the way, I checked and discovered that the erroneous "law" of believing is, indeed, presented in the "printed part".
And wouldn't you just know it?
It's in the written PLAF materials.
Hey, Mike, a friend of mine died as a result of what's contained in those classes.
Does it bother you that you continue to promote something that has contributed to deaths?
I think the harm came from non-PFAL sources, or incomplete PFAL sources, or distorted PFAL sources, or verbal....
This means I think your friend, just like all of us, got certain critical things wrong in our thinking, and this drift got worse and worse with time.
That said, YES, I feel badly that we all got hit hard. I think you'll get a lot of peace when you see that your blame is misplaced. When the proper culprit is identified, better remedial action can be taken than when blame is aimed emotionally. I know it hurts. I hurt too. I blew it on my understanding of the law of believing and I hurt for it to this day. But I try to be accurate in my blame. I can't blame you for not seeing this. It's only possible to see it by opening the books up FRESH and A LOT. If you can't bring yourself to do that you can't (for now) see the fine distinctions between culprits in hurt versus generators of the good part of the "good old days."
...I can't blame you for not seeing this. It's only possible to see it by opening the books up FRESH and A LOT. If you can't bring yourself to do that you can't (for now) see the fine distinctions between culprits in hurt versus generators of the good part of the "good old days."
I think the harm came from non-PFAL sources, or incomplete PFAL sources, or distorted PFAL sources, or verbal....
This means I think your friend, just like all of us, got certain critical things wrong in our thinking, and this drift got worse and worse with time.
That said, YES, I feel badly that we all got hit hard. I think you'll get a lot of peace when you see that your blame is misplaced. When the proper culprit is identified, better remedial action can be taken than when blame is aimed emotionally. I know it hurts. I hurt too. I blew it on my understanding of the law of believing and I hurt for it to this day. But I try to be accurate in my blame. I can't blame you for not seeing this. It's only possible to see it by opening the books up FRESH and A LOT. If you can't bring yourself to do that you can't (for now) see the fine distinctions between culprits in hurt versus generators of the good part of the "good old days."
It happened in 1972, long before "this drift got worse and worse".
Let me state this as straightforwardly as I can, Mike.
This doctrine you tout and openly promote has caused countless people irreparable damage and grief.
Some have even paid for it with their lives.
If you wish to continue to believe it has real value, that's your choice.
"Opening the books up FRESH and a LOT" may work for you but I would suggest you take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror and think about the damage this crap has caused when you continue to promote it.
I don't believe you have accurately identified the culprit of that event some several decades ago.
There's no amount of emotion you can try to bring to the board that is going to force me to change. That's an LCM method of the lowest order. I offered help for your pain, and you have a right to refuse it, but you can't bully me into backing off on what I have dedicated my life to. You'll wear out your emotions trying. Now, I'm going to end this conversation with you if you don't get a grip and drop this latest strategy to argue points. Let's see what's inside the books, not the details of all that went wrong. There's PLENTY of that on this board. I like to discuss what went right IN MY OPINION. If you got a problem with that, then put me on "ignore."
I don't believe you have accurately identified the culprit of that event some several decades ago.
There's no amount of emotion you can try to bring to the board that is going to force me to change. That's an LCM method of the lowest order. I offered help for your pain, and you have a right to refuse it, but you can't bully me into backing off on what I have dedicated my life to. You'll wear out your emotions trying. Now, I'm going to end this conversation with you if you don't get a grip and drop this latest strategy to argue points. Let's see what's inside the books, not the details of all that went wrong. There's PLENTY of that on this board. I like to discuss what went right IN MY OPINION. If you got a problem with that, then put me on "ignore."
Mike
In all the time I have been posting here, I have never put anyone on "ignore".
(Though I have joked about it from time to time.)
I'm not trying to bully you into anything.
Believe whatever floats your boat.
I know what's inside the books, Mike, and it's a steady diet of arsenic.
But, like the two dear old ladies in Arsenic and Old Lace, the person who administered it laced it with something to make it more palatable.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
128
169
106
102
Popular Days
Feb 19
54
Feb 26
50
Feb 22
47
Feb 25
40
Top Posters In This Topic
rascal 128 posts
Mike 169 posts
Ham 106 posts
waysider 102 posts
Popular Days
Feb 19 2008
54 posts
Feb 26 2008
50 posts
Feb 22 2008
47 posts
Feb 25 2008
40 posts
Posted Images
What The Hey
Well I see you responded to my post before I had edited the final version. That was my mistake by hitting the "Submit" button before I had everything in place that I wanted to say.
I highly recommend you go back and read the 'edited' version of that post - and try not "looking to far ahead" without gaining an understanding of the material that is being presented to you. We all know what looking ahead without getting a proper understanding of the material that is bering presented results in don't we? It usually results in a less than perfect grade. So we should all (without exception) .... QUIT TRYING TO CHEAT!!
Edited by What The HeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
cman
It's supposed to be all with distinction.
Not all without distinction.
It's a known grammatical error by VPW as well as others who were involved.
The Problem is VP decided which all was being used.
And also 'all with distinction' does not exclude 'all without exception'.
Move on, sheeesh, it ain't a big deal.
Wierwille used it to promote his own interpretation.
That's the problem.
Along with his ignorance of the english language.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Just because the "teacher" in PFAL said he had the correct answers doesn't make it so. And one doesn't need the mentality of a ninth grade cheater to figure that out – just living in the real world…alas, one man's idol is another man's zero.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jen-o
hey cman,
thanks for your short, clear explanation...
i agree with you that it's not a big deal if someone makes a grammatical error... (see my previous post on this - post #1060)
however, what i find baffling is that some of the folks on this thread refuse to acknowledge that it IS a grammatical error...
the idolatry is sooo thick that a couple of folks refuse to acknowledge that the "man" (vpw) that they worship could make any errors (including grammatical errors or misusing the english language)
i am grieved by this blatant idolatry and worship of a man...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~
hey what the hey,
now you are presenting "material" to me?!?
your choice of words is interesting, to say the least...
um, i was responding to a post on a message board... not trying to "look too far ahead"...
you wrote a simple story about your cheating in the 9th grade (there's no great understanding i need to gain about that)
me thinks you are a bit full of yourself thinking that i have to gain some "proper understanding" of the "material being presented" in your 9th grade cheating story...
btw, your edit doesn't change a thing...
the rest of the students still said "-1"
and if you list the names of all the students (without distinction) who said "-1"
AND
list the names of all the students (without exception) who said "-1",
you will find that the lists contains the exact same names...
but your idolatry will not allow you to think logically!
"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie" (2 Thess. 2:11)
this verse applies to anyone who idolizes vpw!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Personally, I have no problem with people believing whatever it is they choose to believe.
Construct a shrine to The Great Purple Horned Toad in your backyard if it makes you happy.
That's religious freedom.
On the other hand, intentionally promoting and recruiting others to a set of doctrines that have been clearly demonstrated to be harmful is an abomination.
Sure, we all promoted PLAF, but we didn't know then what we know now.
Trying to live by the so-called "law" of believing has caused so much pain in this world it is impossible to measure.
People have lost homes, careers, family and friends, trying to follow this nonsense.
I personally knew someone who lost his life because he believed a PLAF grad was telling him the truth while all they were really doing was regurgitating Way drivel.
People have lost loved ones and made to feel guilty because "it must have been caused by their negative believing".
Again, I have more than one very personal experience with this very thing.
People have been crippled for life because they were supposed to over-ride the dangers of LEAD and Rodeo School by using the "law" of believing. Some lost their lives.
The damages are very real.
It's not about someone believing differently than you do.
It's about actively promoting a school of thought that is toxic to those who try to pattern their lives after it.
Of course, someone will probably say, "The truth sets you free" or something along those lines.
The problem is that this junk is NOT "The Truth", it's man made gobble- de- gook and it's poisonous.
Why would anyone want to knowingly feed people a slow diet of arsenic?
edited to add:
I apologize to anyone who may have suffered harm via my promotion of The Way and PFAL.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
well I think the harm came from non-PFAL sources, or incomplete PFAL sources, or distorted PFAL sources, or verbal....
but the printed part was not that way at all...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
jen-o,
Ok, I’ll turn off the sarcasm and work with you.
I’ll agree with you that IF the written part of PFAL is not God-breathed, then my thesis is idolatry, or something just as bad.
Now that I said that, can you agree with me that IF written PFAL is God-breathed then I'm not idolatrous at all?
I see what I am doing as helping grads get the good stuff from the good old days. It’s a right and proper presentation of something new that God has been trying to make available to grads for over 20 years now.
***
From what you said above, I can tell you have not been accurately tracking with what I say. Can you at least track with the above paragraphs? I can help you track a little better by adjusting one idea you expressed as mine.
Above you wrote: “you have added the collaterals (a set of books) and seem to be claiming that they are part of God's ‘revelation to mankind’...”
It’s the ‘revelation to mankind’ part I disagree with.
I see the PFAL collaterals as God-breathed English documents addressed to Dr’s grads of PFAL, a relatively small group of people. The reason I see this is because I dared to open them a lot, again.
***
Here’s a good theological mental exercise you might try to get up to speed with me.
Can you give me the Library of Congress number of a single English text God-breathed book or document? Just one will do.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Was the "law" of believing ever taught in the "printed part"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Yes, but it generally wasn't well studied in the early years, and in the later years many drifted even more from the written part.
I'm STILL re-learning what the written record is on that subject, and purging the TVTs and private theories (broken cisterns) that I myself drifted into.
Remember, we were taught that we need to see ALL the passages on a particular subject before we have the whole story. This key works for PFAL passages as well as KJV passages. It works for Computer Manuals and Steven King as well.
There are hundreds of PFAL passages to deal with on the law of believing; many are satisfied with taking pot shots at a small number of them. It takes time to do it right, but it's fun work, and enlightening too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
So then you agree that the "law" of believing was part of the "printed part"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
The Holy Bible, New International Version, Zondervan NIV Compact Reference
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 73-174297
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I think that's not quite an English text that's God-breathed, but the Greek one AT BEST.
Your suggestion is an English text version of a translation of modern (1550 and up) scholarly compilation of fragmentary copies of copies of God-breathed documents from Paul's time, in Greek at best.
(Talking about the NT part)
You don't mean to assert that your suggestion is what I was asking for, DO you?
If you do, they we'd have to invent a new way of describing documents that are God-breathed and in English, that is, the English part is God-breathed. THAT'S what I was asking for... it's like asking for a COMPLETELY AUTHORITATIVE translation, the last word on translations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Who is deciding whether it's "God Breathed"?
You or the Library Of Congress?
I have to assume that since the PLAF book is in English and you are convinced, beyond all reasonably logical evidence to the contrary, that it is "God breathed, you are referring to "the orange book".
Oh, by the way, I checked and discovered that the erroneous "law" of believing is, indeed, presented in the "printed part".
And wouldn't you just know it?
It's in the written PLAF materials.
Hey, Mike, a friend of mine died as a result of what's contained in those classes.
Does it bother you that you continue to promote something that has contributed to deaths?
Just thought I would ask.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I said earlier:
I think the harm came from non-PFAL sources, or incomplete PFAL sources, or distorted PFAL sources, or verbal....
This means I think your friend, just like all of us, got certain critical things wrong in our thinking, and this drift got worse and worse with time.
That said, YES, I feel badly that we all got hit hard. I think you'll get a lot of peace when you see that your blame is misplaced. When the proper culprit is identified, better remedial action can be taken than when blame is aimed emotionally. I know it hurts. I hurt too. I blew it on my understanding of the law of believing and I hurt for it to this day. But I try to be accurate in my blame. I can't blame you for not seeing this. It's only possible to see it by opening the books up FRESH and A LOT. If you can't bring yourself to do that you can't (for now) see the fine distinctions between culprits in hurt versus generators of the good part of the "good old days."
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
bfh
Conversations with God: an uncommon dialogue - Neale David Walsch
Call Number: BF1999. W228 1996
LC Control No.: 96034667
ISBN: 0399142789
A Course in Miracles
Call Number: 230.99 COURSE
LC Control No.: 99072583
ISBN 1883360056
A Return to Love - Marianne Williamson
Call Number: BP605.C68 W56 1996
LC Control No.: 9613916
ISBN: 0060927488
Both Neale David Walsch and Marianne Williamson have written several books.
I just don't have the time nor the inclination to list all of them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Thank you for sharing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
The following is a public service announcement.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
T-Bone,
Here's one of the Jesus items I wanted to get back with you on:
"I have yet many things to say unto you,
but ye cannot bear them now."
but you cannot bear to hear them now.
(John 16:12)
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
It happened in 1972, long before "this drift got worse and worse".
Let me state this as straightforwardly as I can, Mike.
This doctrine you tout and openly promote has caused countless people irreparable damage and grief.
Some have even paid for it with their lives.
If you wish to continue to believe it has real value, that's your choice.
"Opening the books up FRESH and a LOT" may work for you but I would suggest you take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror and think about the damage this crap has caused when you continue to promote it.
I plan on visiting his grave next month.
Shall I lay a flower on it in your honor?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
So what are you saying? Jesus had to wait for vp to come on the scene? Oh boy, concentric circles of the essential vp!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
waysider,
I don't believe you have accurately identified the culprit of that event some several decades ago.
There's no amount of emotion you can try to bring to the board that is going to force me to change. That's an LCM method of the lowest order. I offered help for your pain, and you have a right to refuse it, but you can't bully me into backing off on what I have dedicated my life to. You'll wear out your emotions trying. Now, I'm going to end this conversation with you if you don't get a grip and drop this latest strategy to argue points. Let's see what's inside the books, not the details of all that went wrong. There's PLENTY of that on this board. I like to discuss what went right IN MY OPINION. If you got a problem with that, then put me on "ignore."
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
********
No, I was toying with Godel's Theorem and a little word play.
The scripture part is serious.
Are you familiar with that part of the Jesus with whom you have a relationship, as per our conversation of many posts ago on this thread?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Mike
In all the time I have been posting here, I have never put anyone on "ignore".
(Though I have joked about it from time to time.)
I'm not trying to bully you into anything.
Believe whatever floats your boat.
I know what's inside the books, Mike, and it's a steady diet of arsenic.
But, like the two dear old ladies in Arsenic and Old Lace, the person who administered it laced it with something to make it more palatable.
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.