The issue that you're all discussing is interesting tro me. Here is my two-cents worth.
I think that for believing the emphasis has to be on God, His Word, His direction to me. ( very personal that is) If HE wants ME to cast a mountain into the sea then so be it. If I'm wrong about it at any given time and place then my words to the mountain will be blown away like so much chaff.
I think that if Dr. Wierwille would have said that "WISDOM works for saint and sinner alike" I would agree completely.
At any rate, that's how I amend what I was taught in PFAL to make it work for me today.
Often times I remember Dr. Wierwille saying something like, "If I only knew how to explain it better" or some such thing.
IMO BELIEVING is acting on a promise from God in the right time and place and it energizes God's own power to bring it to pass.
Without God's specific promise or if something changes it causes the same action to look like a "swing and a miss".
I spose that a sinner can act on a specific promise from God too, but it seems less likely that God would watch over a sinner in the same way he would a believer.
WISDOM works for saint or sinner just the same way.
I never said I believed it was a law, I do believe that it works for saint and sinner ,or anyone that believes.
I think I was pretty clear when I said it was not a cause, What I believe causes God to do nothing, but it does fulfill the conditions necessary for God to bring to pass His will.
The basic commitment God requires of man is the same in every administration,it is believing. Believing is not a cause,it simply fulfills the conditions necessary for God to bring to pass His will.
Example:
If I posted on GreaseSpot that the first 10 people to PM me I would give a hundred dollars to. You would have two choices ,you can walk away and get nothing believing that there is no money, that I have lied to you, or you can believe what I said and send the notice. It would work for saint or sinner , the only requirement being to believe and PM me.
Now what you believe caused nothing, I made the choice to make the money free to the recipient, with one condition . Your believing did not cause me to act, I did so of my free will. But your believing of what I said ,in this case the money is available with one condition, fulfills the conditions necessary for you to receive what I promised. Had you not believed and walked away you would not have received. Likewise there are gifts, promises call them what you like available from God . Free for the taking, the same applies we simply need to believe that they are there for the taking if we don't then we will likewise walk away and get nothing.
So then there's a "promise' in there that says "If you believe hard enough, you won't die."??
I must have missed that one.
Any idea where I might find it?
Again you put words in my mouth I missed the post where I said that.
I think that many folks were hurt by the application of the doctrine in times past.
If leadership blamed me for lack of believing when in truth it was leadership's hypocrisy that meant they could not possibly give me Godly councel; I might be a little perturbed about it all too!!
Some folks here have lost an awful lot due to these type of things.
P.S. Can you read my posts Whitedove or not? Have you put me on ignore? I'd hate to miss out on fellowship that might be good for both of us.
The I Thessalonians 2:13 you cited in your post # 43 – is in reference to the effect of the Word of God ina person – which you even said citing Vines' definition of the "effectual":
Again you fail to read what I said , what is written . what I said was
The basic commitment God requires of man is the same in every administration,it is believing. Believing is not a cause,it simply fulfills the conditions necessary for God to bring to pass His will.
1 Thessalonians 2:13 - For this cause also thank we God without ceasing,
because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us,
ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God,
which effectually worketh also in you that believe.
Vines - effectual "energeo" to put forth power, be operative, to work.also used as the effect produced in a man...
That I don't have a problem with [the effect produced ina man] – there's a similar same idea expressed in Hebrews 4:2 – the Word does not profit someone [again, in reference to the person] if it is not combined with faith. I think it's stretching these passages out of context to assume or suggest they apply to anything other than to the effect of the Word of God in the person of faith.
You say the "soft answer" example is moot because it is not a "promise".
I can recall many, many times when this very verse was offered as an example of the "over 900 promises".
I also don't see in the verse that you quoted where it says the Word is only guaranteed to work if a "promise" is implied.
And I definitely don't see where it says the Word will only work in you if you believe.
(Promise or no promise)
But let's put that aside for the moment.
Back to the "soft answer" example:
( Let's forgo a debate of whether or not this is actually God's word.)
Assuming this is God's word, if and when I use this tactic and it works for me, that would mean that God's word(the "soft answer" technique) is working in/for me, regardless of my status as either a saint or a sinner.
No believing is required on my part.
In fact, I could, with skepticism, try this technique at the advise of someone else merely to see if it works.
If and when it works------------ it is God's word at work in/for me.
Some of you here know the situation with my girlfriend and I. It's in another thread in this section of the forum titled "The Way International: What does it teach?"
I just got back from church and I brought the "blue book", The Bible Tells Me So with me to show to my priest. He looked at it and says he certainly believes there are some incorrect teachings in there, not only that conflict with Orthodox Christianity (as well as with Protestant and Catholic Christianity, of course), but also that he sees the psychological danger in this "law of believing." Fr. John made a very good point about Sts. Peter and Paul the Apostles, two examples of people that died for their faith. Eusebius of Caesarea writes that Paul was beheaded in Rome, and Peter was crucified upside down! If they were "wrongly believing," as Wierwille claims, then why did they die and was their great faith that they died for in vain? Why did Wierwille himself die of cancer? It's essentially a denial of reality.
So my priest has instructed that I just gently talk with her about this, maybe not be so intellectual about how I feel, but take a more...holistic...approach to the situation and ask her questions about how TWI has helped her spiritually, or ask her to tell me of experiences where God has healed her or helped her through her faith. He thinks that this is where I should start, and he has a point. If I were to start with an intellectual discourse on why I believe TWI is wrong and start showing her so many documents about how TWI has caused emotional damage to so many people, it may cause her to get angry at me or cause her to regress and just deny all of it. He also thought about maybe sending her a book. Not necessarily to convert her to my faith but to just put some ideas in her head and let her know there's something else out there. Since she sent me one, it would only be fair, right? He suggested Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis. He believes it's probably the best introduction to orthodox, mainstream Christianity, that anyone could ever read. And luckily, I have a copy. I think I might just send her it, but not the one I have...it's all beat up and stuff. I can probably find a copy for about $5 at Barnes & Noble, even cheaper than that with my employee discount there lol.
Just thought I'd give you guys a heads up as to what's been going on. Feel free to post any comments or suggestions you have to add.
Thanks again for all your help everyone. :)
~Phil
Hi Phil,
Thanks for all you've shared here so far - interesting thread here.
My husband was Greek Orthodox before he joined TWI. We're both "cop-outs" in TWI terms. He's somewhat returned to the Church, although he doesn't attend frequently it's more due to logistics than heart. Upon meeting him I had no experience with the Orthodox Church or its teachings. As a former Wayfer, I had trouble going into any church that was trinitarian and feeling comfortable there. Since learning more about the Church I've had no problem attending services and we have even baptized both our children in the Church. The priest is wonderful and very understanding of some of issues families face just to try to get to church - he's down to Earth.
However, I will tell you that the place I've found common ground for both TWI and the Orthodox Church is around the teachings about Easter and more specifically the "traditions" behind them. You and your girlfriend will bump heads on some the things you've mentioned - such as 5 crucified vs. 3 crucified, etc. and most certainly on the polytheism of the Orthodox church but you'll have common ground on the importance of the resurrection.
I will caution you, as others have, to be prepared for her to not accept your believes and to try to whittle away at them. I sense you're rooted in your church and believe you're willing to go the extra mile to connect with this gal. Your priest has given you wise council and I can do no better - only tell you how I relate to your case by my own experience.
I think that many folks were hurt by the application of the doctrine in times past.
If leadership blamed me for lack of believing when in truth it was leadership's hypocrisy that meant they could not possibly give me Godly councel; I might be a little perturbed about it all too!!
Some folks here have lost an awful lot due to these type of things.
P.S. Can you read my posts Whitedove or not? Have you put me on ignore? I'd hate to miss out on fellowship that might be good for both of us.
(edited for spelling)
Jeff you are not on ignore nor have you ever been, I can read your posts fine I have no disagreement with what you posted.
IMO BELIEVING is acting on a promise from God in the right time and place and it energizes God's own power to bring it to pass.
Without God's specific promise or if something changes it causes the same action to look like a "swing and a miss".
I spose that a sinner can act on a specific promise from God too, but it seems less likely that God would watch over a sinner in the same way he would a believer.
Just to clarify I doubt God would watch over a sinner in the same way he would a believer either but the rain falls on the just and the unjust, He does what he wants so I can't rule out that grace is involved at times.
I agree that people were hurt by wrong application of doctrine , I believe it was both parties error at times , wrong teaching /wrong application of what was said. That's done , it does not make the truth of no affect. They can be a little perturbed if they like ,it's a free world, but that does not make their reasons correct, only what they want them to be.
We differ on correcting the doctrine problem I think, I believe, you seem to be saying some folks here have lost an awful lot due to these type of things, so they are perturbed, because of that you are ok with whatever they say. While it's nice to be a peacekeeper , one can not do it at the expense of truth. Correcting the wrong doctrine requires right learning in any situation. I don't associate lack of believing with any blame, one either does or does not. If one does not , that is just the fact, I see no scripture that includes any blame, but the fact remains that is what happened. So big deal? pick up and start again. Look..... if I fail my driving test that is the fact, denying that I did won't do any good , at the same time there is no blame in that. If the instructor informs me that I failed is he blaming me ? I don't think so, he is telling me the truth. If I choose to hear that as blame that's my problem.
You say the "soft answer" example is moot because it is not a "promise".
I can recall many, many times when this very verse was offered as an example of the "over 900 promises".
I also don't see in the verse that you quoted where it says the Word is only guaranteed to work if a "promise" is implied.
And I definitely don't see where it says the Word will only work in you if you believe.
(Promise or no promise)
But let's put that aside for the moment.
Back to the "soft answer" example:
( Let's forgo a debate of whether or not this is actually God's word.)
Assuming this is God's word, if and when I use this tactic and it works for me, that would mean that God's word(the "soft answer" technique) is working in/for me, regardless of my status as either a saint or a sinner.
No believing is required on my part.
In fact, I could, with skepticism, try this technique at the advise of someone else merely to see if it works.
If and when it works------------ it is God's word at work in/for me.
No believing required.
No saint or sinner status necessary.
I've had situations where this has worked and where it has not ,sometimes people just want to expound wrath whether you speak softly or not. It's not a promise , not guaranteed to work, its a proverb a wise saying . It may work in general most times but not in all cases. On the other hand there are at least I see promises that can be believed, when one does the results are received when one does not they are not.
“Positive thinking,” as described by Peale could be broken down into a three step process of practicing repeated self-hypnosis, attaining “divine” or God’s power to use for oneself, and eliminating and avoiding all negativity in life.
The first step in positive thinking is focused on the use of repeated "techniques." Peale describes positive thinking as first and foremost as “simply a series of practical and workable techniques for living a successful life.” [6]
Peale, who had no mental health credentials, was vague as to a definition of his "techniques," although he repeatedly stated that they were scientifically proven and "firmly established as documented and demonstrable truth." [7] Mental health experts, however, clearly saw and identified the techniques as hypnosis.[8] Hypnosis is defined as "A trance like state that resembles sleep but is induced by a person whose suggestions are readily accepted by the subject."[9]
The reader was instructed through constant repetition of affirmations to bypass his conscious mind and implant suggestions into his unconscious mind where they would operate automatically, without the interference of conscious will. “Let them sink into your unconscious and they can help you overcome any difficulty. Say them over and over again. Say them until your mind accepts them, until you believe them – faith power works wonders.”[10] Peale's readers were instructed to "pray ceaselessly," to use his techniques repetitively and permanently.
Peale promised the reader that if they followed and practiced his techniques, they could attain success over almost any adversity. “It is a power that can blast out all defeat and lift a person above all difficult situations.”[11] Peale insisted that the only way to acquire these attitudes was through the unconscious and through his techniques. Peale repeatedly instructed his readers that their conscious will, their self knowledge, self determination, courage and intelligence were not be enough to live a successful life. He described these conscious acts of will as unreliable, untrustworthy and not sufficient to meet the demands of life. The conscious, self-determining self was to be rejected, disempowered and “surrendered,” so that Peale’s techniques and the unconscious were now the determining and motivating factors in the individual’s life.
The payoff for this rejection of self, according to Peale, was the attainment of God’s power, “I hereby draw power from You as an illimitatable source,”[12] is one Peale formula. Men now had superhuman powers, and God had now become "man's omnipotent slave." [13] Peale further said that regular prayer was insufficient to meet the demands of life, that in order for prayer to really work the reader had to use his techniques. Peale said controlling the unconscious, using his techniques, was the only channel to attain God’s power. “Surface skimming, formalistic and perfunctory prayer is not sufficiently powerful” [14] says Peale when describing his “prayers” for overcoming an inferiority complex. Formalistic prayer used for thousands of years by Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and other mainstream religions didn’t produce sufficient results according to Peale.
Peale also promised his readers that if they followed his techniques that they could always think positively and remove all negativity from their lives. Negative attitudes were not to be tolerated but avoided at all costs according to Peale. Negative thoughts were to be repressed, cancelled out and destroyed through his techniques. “It is important to eliminate from conversations all negative ideas, for they tend to produce annoyance and tension inwardly." [15]
Peale’s readers were instructed to never doubt or question a statement Peale made or this would cut off the “power flow.” Any negative doubting of Peale or whether his techniques worked were to be immediately canceled, and the reader was instructed to immediately repeat the Peale phrases.
The Peale statements, and the words that made them up were actual “things” according to Peale. “Thoughts are things,”[16] and the repetition of his phrases were more important than actions. Repeating positive only statements would cause only positive things to happen. But according to Peale, the reverse is also true. Thinking negatively causes negative things to happen. Thus the fear of negativity, of avoiding all negative, fearful "thoughts" and realities is part and parcel of positive thinking. There can be no positive thinking without this avoidance of negative thinking, according to Peale. “Never think of the worst. Drop it out of your thought, relegate it. Let there be no thought in your mind that the worst will happen. Avoid entertaining the concept of the worst, for whatever you take into your mind can grow there.” [17]
“Positive thinking,” as described by Peale could be broken down into a three step process of practicing repeated self-hypnosis, attaining “divine” or God’s power to use for oneself, and eliminating and avoiding all negativity in life.
The first step in positive thinking is focused on the use of repeated "techniques." Peale describes positive thinking as first and foremost as “simply a series of practical and workable techniques for living a successful life.” [6]
Peale, who had no mental health credentials, was vague as to a definition of his "techniques," although he repeatedly stated that they were scientifically proven and "firmly established as documented and demonstrable truth." [7] Mental health experts, however, clearly saw and identified the techniques as hypnosis.[8] Hypnosis is defined as "A trance like state that resembles sleep but is induced by a person whose suggestions are readily accepted by the subject."[9]
The reader was instructed through constant repetition of affirmations to bypass his conscious mind and implant suggestions into his unconscious mind where they would operate automatically, without the interference of conscious will. “Let them sink into your unconscious and they can help you overcome any difficulty. Say them over and over again. Say them until your mind accepts them, until you believe them – faith power works wonders.”[10] Peale's readers were instructed to "pray ceaselessly," to use his techniques repetitively and permanently.
Peale promised the reader that if they followed and practiced his techniques, they could attain success over almost any adversity. “It is a power that can blast out all defeat and lift a person above all difficult situations.”[11] Peale insisted that the only way to acquire these attitudes was through the unconscious and through his techniques. Peale repeatedly instructed his readers that their conscious will, their self knowledge, self determination, courage and intelligence were not be enough to live a successful life. He described these conscious acts of will as unreliable, untrustworthy and not sufficient to meet the demands of life. The conscious, self-determining self was to be rejected, disempowered and “surrendered,” so that Peale’s techniques and the unconscious were now the determining and motivating factors in the individual’s life.
The payoff for this rejection of self, according to Peale, was the attainment of God’s power, “I hereby draw power from You as an illimitatable source,”[12] is one Peale formula. Men now had superhuman powers, and God had now become "man's omnipotent slave." [13] Peale further said that regular prayer was insufficient to meet the demands of life, that in order for prayer to really work the reader had to use his techniques. Peale said controlling the unconscious, using his techniques, was the only channel to attain God’s power. “Surface skimming, formalistic and perfunctory prayer is not sufficiently powerful” [14] says Peale when describing his “prayers” for overcoming an inferiority complex. Formalistic prayer used for thousands of years by Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and other mainstream religions didn’t produce sufficient results according to Peale.
Peale also promised his readers that if they followed his techniques that they could always think positively and remove all negativity from their lives. Negative attitudes were not to be tolerated but avoided at all costs according to Peale. Negative thoughts were to be repressed, cancelled out and destroyed through his techniques. “It is important to eliminate from conversations all negative ideas, for they tend to produce annoyance and tension inwardly." [15]
Peale’s readers were instructed to never doubt or question a statement Peale made or this would cut off the “power flow.” Any negative doubting of Peale or whether his techniques worked were to be immediately canceled, and the reader was instructed to immediately repeat the Peale phrases.
The Peale statements, and the words that made them up were actual “things” according to Peale. “Thoughts are things,”[16] and the repetition of his phrases were more important than actions. Repeating positive only statements would cause only positive things to happen. But according to Peale, the reverse is also true. Thinking negatively causes negative things to happen. Thus the fear of negativity, of avoiding all negative, fearful "thoughts" and realities is part and parcel of positive thinking. There can be no positive thinking without this avoidance of negative thinking, according to Peale. “Never think of the worst. Drop it out of your thought, relegate it. Let there be no thought in your mind that the worst will happen. Avoid entertaining the concept of the worst, for whatever you take into your mind can grow there.” [17]
Wow...never really realized how closely the "law of believing" resembles the philosophy of the New Thought and Religious Science movements. I saw similarities, but when you posted this...heh, wow.
"---the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe."
Is the word "also" supposed to be in that verse? I don't know.
Maybe somebody who is versed in these types of intricacies can chime in here.
If it is, though, it would mean that the word of God works in those who don't believe, too.
Kinda like an additional, descriptive qualifier.
(ie: "---the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you who live in New Jersey.")
That really makes sense when you think about it.
"Also" is there....it is the Greek word "kai" and it could either be a cumulative particle which would allow "also, too"; but to make VPW theologies fit inside the glove, you would have to translate it as an emphatic which would render it as "the word of God, which effectually worketh, INDEED, in you that believe." But that doesn't sound right to force it in that direction. That would be like saying "wow, I didn't know it would work for believers too!" Too goofballey, if you know what I mean. To translate it as an ascensive is even worse, you would come up with "worketh EVEN in you that believe." Like this must be the absolute exception to the rule...doncha know?
Again you fail to read what I said , what is written . what I said was
The basic commitment God requires of man is the same in every administration,it is believing. Believing is not a cause,it simply fulfills the conditions necessary for God to bring to pass His will.
1 Thessalonians 2:13 - For this cause also thank we God without ceasing,
because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us,
ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God,
which effectually worketh also in you that believe.
Vines - effectual "energeo" to put forth power, be operative, to work.also used as the effect produced in a man
When one receives the Word of God not as the word of men but as it is in truth ,the Word of God it puts forth power it opperates, produces effect, in who? ...... those that don't believe? NO, in those that believe. Believing fulfills the condition. If it worked automatically then it would contradict the free will that God gave us. Those that believe what God's word says get the effect produced.
But the key word in this verse should have the emphasis placed on the word "believe"...which is the real crux of the verse. In the Greek language there are words that can have more than one meaning and the context determines how you will translate the word. We have these occurrences too, such as:
1. Give me light (daytime)
2. Give me a light one (weight)
3. Give me a light (flame)
4. Give me a light (lamp)
The Greek word for "believe" is πιστεύουσιν which can be translated as a present active participle, dative plural masculine OR present active indicative, third plural.
Here would be the renderings:
1 Thess 2.13
but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe. KJV
but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually works also in THEM that believe. (Pres. Act. Ind. 3rd pl.)
but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually works also FOR THEM THEM THAT ARE BELIEVING or TO THEM THAT ARE BELIEVING (Pres. Act. Part. Dat. Masc. Pl.)
Guess where the KJV translators came down? Yup! Present active indicative, 3rd plural, which is where I would also come down in my choices during the translational process.
If you try to translate as a Pres. Act. Participle which would give it the verbal force that is needed to maintain TWI theology, just look at how you must translate by using the "helping" words of "for" and "to"? The result is an awkward translation....oh you can force it this way....but it still remains FORCED. Rather, if you let it translate itself naturally, it then is rendered as "WHICH EFFECTUALLY WORKS ALSO IN THEM (that belong in the body of Christ, and therefore ARE BELIEVERS i.e. have faith in Christ).
So then if an atheist uses something from Proverbs, such as " A soft answer turns away wrath", it won't work because there is no "believing" involved?
Come to think of it---- How does that factor in with Wierwille's statement that "believing" works for saint and sinner alike?
You see, in my Proverbs example, the person is not a "saint" nor are they operating "believing".
I'm just sayin'--------
Waysider,
Wisdom is simply wisdom....and it works for saint and sinner alike. For example, changing the oil in your car every 3k miles so that you don't seize up the engine.
I never said I believed it was a law, I do believe that it works for saint and sinner ,or anyone that believes.
Example:
If I posted on GreaseSpot that the first 10 people to PM me I would give a hundred dollars to. You would have two choices ,you can walk away and get nothing believing that there is no money, that I have lied to you, or you can believe what I said and send the notice. It would work for saint or sinner , the only requirement being to believe and PM me.
Now what you believe caused nothing, I made the choice to make the money free to the recipient, with one condition . Your believing did not cause me to act, I did so of my free will. But your believing of what I said ,in this case the money is available with one condition, fulfills the conditions necessary for you to receive what I promised. Had you not believed and walked away you would not have received. Likewise there are gifts, promises call them what you like available from God . Free for the taking, the same applies we simply need to believe that they are there for the taking if we don't then we will likewise walk away and get nothing.
Again you put words in my mouth I missed the post where I said that.
White Dove...YOUR example works but 1 Thess 2.13 does not....
WHAT is EFFECTUALLY WORKING? It is the WORD OF GOD that is EFFECTUALLY WORKING. So it should be obvious it isn't WORKING for the sinner, else s/he would now be a saint. <_<
Dear Whitedove,
P.S. Can you read my posts Whitedove or not? Have you put me on ignore? I'd hate to miss out on fellowship that might be good for both of us.
(edited for spelling)
Well, how RUDE! That's really infantile! That's despicable! :blink:
Bride, I believe that the Koine Greek word "kai" can also be translated as "and" "yet" and "even" as well as "also", if my memory is correct.
They can be translated as "and, but", but that is only a "connective" and wouldn't make much sense. Put them in when you read it and you will see for yourself. It doesn't matter how many words one can squeeze out of "kai", but the question remains, "Does it fit?"
“Positive thinking,” as described by Peale could be broken down into a three step process of practicing repeated self-hypnosis, attaining “divine” or God’s power to use for oneself, and eliminating and avoiding all negativity in life.
Repeated self-hypnosis.. I wonder if speaking in tongues "like a house afire" and running retemories through one's head, all the while covering the ears and saying "I'm not wistening" qualifies..
Wisdom is simply wisdom....and it works for saint and sinner alike. For example, changing the oil in your car every 3k miles so that you don't seize up the engine.
Well---OK
But suppose I faithfully change that oil without a clue that the engine could seize-up if I didn't.
Would the engine still benefit from my proper course of action? Or, would my ignorance negate the benefit?
White Dove...YOUR example works but 1 Thess 2.13 does not....
WHAT is EFFECTUALLY WORKING? It is the WORD OF GOD that is EFFECTUALLY WORKING. So it should be obvious it isn't WORKING for the sinner, else s/he would now be a saint. <_<
Yes it is the The WORD OF GOD that is EFFECTUALLY WORKING in those that believe If it did not work for sinners then we would all be in dire straits.
expanding your vision into other areas besides way doctrine would help you
and that's good advice from someone who reakky does care
Way doctrine does not include spiritual matters.
As they (spiritual matters) are now and active. As well as in the bible.
It's a carnal devilish approach to scripture that vpw cooked up.
Really? and then would I end up like you? Will I ramble in circles like you as well? Gee that would be swell, let me think about it a min........Naw I'll pass..............
Quote cman
Something named God created heaven, earth ,angels, man.
Everthing was 'good' to God I suppose.
Then along comes this serpent or devil or angel that fell with a third of the group.
So they say.
Talks Eve into eating of a tree.
Adam eats too, knowing damn well what God said.
They die that day.
People piddle around waiting for this God to come up with a 'redeemer'.
A better plan of 'saving' mankind.
And so he shows up, does some cool things and is killed a horrible death.
Thus saving mankind, or as some say only the ones that 'believe'.
-------
Now do we go by what's on the surface here as to what happened or is happening?
Or is there other ways of viewing this, from many angles and perspectives.
Are there other ways of viewing this that is recorded in many texts.
Putting timelines aside is one way of giving it a start towards a different look.
Changing the roles that the participants played is another.
-----
So I'm supposed to tell someone if they don't 'believe' their life will be fried forever or eliminated after a good cooking?
Believe what? That God raised Jesus from the dead? Hell he set it up for him to die!Believe without seeing? There's more then one way to see.
-----
There has to be better understanding of all this that is occuring for us and what happened to Jesus.
-----
I didn't ask for eternal life, but I believe it exists.
I will not try to explain it in a word for word dictate.
But will continue to explore the many ways of approaching this subject of life.
------
If it's true that some will not have everlasting life then I want to be one of them, cause this sucks.
But it's not true and there is hope and faith and love and the Light is in the darkness within.
It cannot be put out, that flaming sword is still there, in the garden, the earth, and the heavens.
------
Is it possible to consider other ways of seeing this?
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
15
23
13
14
Popular Days
Apr 8
39
Apr 7
26
Apr 13
23
Apr 16
17
Top Posters In This Topic
WhiteDove 15 posts
waysider 23 posts
brideofjc 13 posts
Brushstroke 14 posts
Popular Days
Apr 8 2008
39 posts
Apr 7 2008
26 posts
Apr 13 2008
23 posts
Apr 16 2008
17 posts
JeffSjo
The issue that you're all discussing is interesting tro me. Here is my two-cents worth.
I think that for believing the emphasis has to be on God, His Word, His direction to me. ( very personal that is) If HE wants ME to cast a mountain into the sea then so be it. If I'm wrong about it at any given time and place then my words to the mountain will be blown away like so much chaff.
I think that if Dr. Wierwille would have said that "WISDOM works for saint and sinner alike" I would agree completely.
At any rate, that's how I amend what I was taught in PFAL to make it work for me today.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JeffSjo
Often times I remember Dr. Wierwille saying something like, "If I only knew how to explain it better" or some such thing.
IMO BELIEVING is acting on a promise from God in the right time and place and it energizes God's own power to bring it to pass.
Without God's specific promise or if something changes it causes the same action to look like a "swing and a miss".
I spose that a sinner can act on a specific promise from God too, but it seems less likely that God would watch over a sinner in the same way he would a believer.
WISDOM works for saint or sinner just the same way.
Edited by JeffSjoLink to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Thomas ,TBone Doojable
I never said I believed it was a law, I do believe that it works for saint and sinner ,or anyone that believes.
I think I was pretty clear when I said it was not a cause, What I believe causes God to do nothing, but it does fulfill the conditions necessary for God to bring to pass His will.
The basic commitment God requires of man is the same in every administration,it is believing. Believing is not a cause,it simply fulfills the conditions necessary for God to bring to pass His will.
Example:
If I posted on GreaseSpot that the first 10 people to PM me I would give a hundred dollars to. You would have two choices ,you can walk away and get nothing believing that there is no money, that I have lied to you, or you can believe what I said and send the notice. It would work for saint or sinner , the only requirement being to believe and PM me.
Now what you believe caused nothing, I made the choice to make the money free to the recipient, with one condition . Your believing did not cause me to act, I did so of my free will. But your believing of what I said ,in this case the money is available with one condition, fulfills the conditions necessary for you to receive what I promised. Had you not believed and walked away you would not have received. Likewise there are gifts, promises call them what you like available from God . Free for the taking, the same applies we simply need to believe that they are there for the taking if we don't then we will likewise walk away and get nothing.
Again you put words in my mouth I missed the post where I said that.
Edited by WhiteDoveLink to comment
Share on other sites
JeffSjo
Dear Whitedove,
I think that many folks were hurt by the application of the doctrine in times past.
If leadership blamed me for lack of believing when in truth it was leadership's hypocrisy that meant they could not possibly give me Godly councel; I might be a little perturbed about it all too!!
Some folks here have lost an awful lot due to these type of things.
P.S. Can you read my posts Whitedove or not? Have you put me on ignore? I'd hate to miss out on fellowship that might be good for both of us.
(edited for spelling)
Edited by JeffSjoLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
The I Thessalonians 2:13 you cited in your post # 43 – is in reference to the effect of the Word of God in a person – which you even said citing Vines' definition of the "effectual":
That I don't have a problem with [the effect produced in a man] – there's a similar same idea expressed in Hebrews 4:2 – the Word does not profit someone [again, in reference to the person] if it is not combined with faith. I think it's stretching these passages out of context to assume or suggest they apply to anything other than to the effect of the Word of God in the person of faith.
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
You say the "soft answer" example is moot because it is not a "promise".
I can recall many, many times when this very verse was offered as an example of the "over 900 promises".
I also don't see in the verse that you quoted where it says the Word is only guaranteed to work if a "promise" is implied.
And I definitely don't see where it says the Word will only work in you if you believe.
(Promise or no promise)
But let's put that aside for the moment.
Back to the "soft answer" example:
( Let's forgo a debate of whether or not this is actually God's word.)
Assuming this is God's word, if and when I use this tactic and it works for me, that would mean that God's word(the "soft answer" technique) is working in/for me, regardless of my status as either a saint or a sinner.
No believing is required on my part.
In fact, I could, with skepticism, try this technique at the advise of someone else merely to see if it works.
If and when it works------------ it is God's word at work in/for me.
No believing required.
No saint or sinner status necessary.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
Hi Phil,
Thanks for all you've shared here so far - interesting thread here.
My husband was Greek Orthodox before he joined TWI. We're both "cop-outs" in TWI terms. He's somewhat returned to the Church, although he doesn't attend frequently it's more due to logistics than heart. Upon meeting him I had no experience with the Orthodox Church or its teachings. As a former Wayfer, I had trouble going into any church that was trinitarian and feeling comfortable there. Since learning more about the Church I've had no problem attending services and we have even baptized both our children in the Church. The priest is wonderful and very understanding of some of issues families face just to try to get to church - he's down to Earth.
However, I will tell you that the place I've found common ground for both TWI and the Orthodox Church is around the teachings about Easter and more specifically the "traditions" behind them. You and your girlfriend will bump heads on some the things you've mentioned - such as 5 crucified vs. 3 crucified, etc. and most certainly on the polytheism of the Orthodox church but you'll have common ground on the importance of the resurrection.
I will caution you, as others have, to be prepared for her to not accept your believes and to try to whittle away at them. I sense you're rooted in your church and believe you're willing to go the extra mile to connect with this gal. Your priest has given you wise council and I can do no better - only tell you how I relate to your case by my own experience.
All the best to you.
-Krista
(ChasUFarley)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Jeff you are not on ignore nor have you ever been, I can read your posts fine I have no disagreement with what you posted.
Just to clarify I doubt God would watch over a sinner in the same way he would a believer either but the rain falls on the just and the unjust, He does what he wants so I can't rule out that grace is involved at times.
I agree that people were hurt by wrong application of doctrine , I believe it was both parties error at times , wrong teaching /wrong application of what was said. That's done , it does not make the truth of no affect. They can be a little perturbed if they like ,it's a free world, but that does not make their reasons correct, only what they want them to be.
We differ on correcting the doctrine problem I think, I believe, you seem to be saying some folks here have lost an awful lot due to these type of things, so they are perturbed, because of that you are ok with whatever they say. While it's nice to be a peacekeeper , one can not do it at the expense of truth. Correcting the wrong doctrine requires right learning in any situation. I don't associate lack of believing with any blame, one either does or does not. If one does not , that is just the fact, I see no scripture that includes any blame, but the fact remains that is what happened. So big deal? pick up and start again. Look..... if I fail my driving test that is the fact, denying that I did won't do any good , at the same time there is no blame in that. If the instructor informs me that I failed is he blaming me ? I don't think so, he is telling me the truth. If I choose to hear that as blame that's my problem.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
I've had situations where this has worked and where it has not ,sometimes people just want to expound wrath whether you speak softly or not. It's not a promise , not guaranteed to work, its a proverb a wise saying . It may work in general most times but not in all cases. On the other hand there are at least I see promises that can be believed, when one does the results are received when one does not they are not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
This is from a "wiki" on Norman Vincent Peale regarding his Power of Positive Thinking.(1952)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Teachings
“Positive thinking,” as described by Peale could be broken down into a three step process of practicing repeated self-hypnosis, attaining “divine” or God’s power to use for oneself, and eliminating and avoiding all negativity in life.
The first step in positive thinking is focused on the use of repeated "techniques." Peale describes positive thinking as first and foremost as “simply a series of practical and workable techniques for living a successful life.” [6]
Peale, who had no mental health credentials, was vague as to a definition of his "techniques," although he repeatedly stated that they were scientifically proven and "firmly established as documented and demonstrable truth." [7] Mental health experts, however, clearly saw and identified the techniques as hypnosis.[8] Hypnosis is defined as "A trance like state that resembles sleep but is induced by a person whose suggestions are readily accepted by the subject."[9]
The reader was instructed through constant repetition of affirmations to bypass his conscious mind and implant suggestions into his unconscious mind where they would operate automatically, without the interference of conscious will. “Let them sink into your unconscious and they can help you overcome any difficulty. Say them over and over again. Say them until your mind accepts them, until you believe them – faith power works wonders.”[10] Peale's readers were instructed to "pray ceaselessly," to use his techniques repetitively and permanently.
Peale promised the reader that if they followed and practiced his techniques, they could attain success over almost any adversity. “It is a power that can blast out all defeat and lift a person above all difficult situations.”[11] Peale insisted that the only way to acquire these attitudes was through the unconscious and through his techniques. Peale repeatedly instructed his readers that their conscious will, their self knowledge, self determination, courage and intelligence were not be enough to live a successful life. He described these conscious acts of will as unreliable, untrustworthy and not sufficient to meet the demands of life. The conscious, self-determining self was to be rejected, disempowered and “surrendered,” so that Peale’s techniques and the unconscious were now the determining and motivating factors in the individual’s life.
The payoff for this rejection of self, according to Peale, was the attainment of God’s power, “I hereby draw power from You as an illimitatable source,”[12] is one Peale formula. Men now had superhuman powers, and God had now become "man's omnipotent slave." [13] Peale further said that regular prayer was insufficient to meet the demands of life, that in order for prayer to really work the reader had to use his techniques. Peale said controlling the unconscious, using his techniques, was the only channel to attain God’s power. “Surface skimming, formalistic and perfunctory prayer is not sufficiently powerful” [14] says Peale when describing his “prayers” for overcoming an inferiority complex. Formalistic prayer used for thousands of years by Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and other mainstream religions didn’t produce sufficient results according to Peale.
Peale also promised his readers that if they followed his techniques that they could always think positively and remove all negativity from their lives. Negative attitudes were not to be tolerated but avoided at all costs according to Peale. Negative thoughts were to be repressed, cancelled out and destroyed through his techniques. “It is important to eliminate from conversations all negative ideas, for they tend to produce annoyance and tension inwardly." [15]
Peale’s readers were instructed to never doubt or question a statement Peale made or this would cut off the “power flow.” Any negative doubting of Peale or whether his techniques worked were to be immediately canceled, and the reader was instructed to immediately repeat the Peale phrases.
The Peale statements, and the words that made them up were actual “things” according to Peale. “Thoughts are things,”[16] and the repetition of his phrases were more important than actions. Repeating positive only statements would cause only positive things to happen. But according to Peale, the reverse is also true. Thinking negatively causes negative things to happen. Thus the fear of negativity, of avoiding all negative, fearful "thoughts" and realities is part and parcel of positive thinking. There can be no positive thinking without this avoidance of negative thinking, according to Peale. “Never think of the worst. Drop it out of your thought, relegate it. Let there be no thought in your mind that the worst will happen. Avoid entertaining the concept of the worst, for whatever you take into your mind can grow there.” [17]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brushstroke
Wow...never really realized how closely the "law of believing" resembles the philosophy of the New Thought and Religious Science movements. I saw similarities, but when you posted this...heh, wow.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
whitedove, you got some problems fella
too deep for a forum to, handle imo
you don't know a lot of basic 1st grade stuff
expanding your vision into other areas besides way doctrine would help you
and that's good advice from someone who reakky does care
Way doctrine does not include spiritual matters.
As they (spiritual matters) are now and active. As well as in the bible.
It's a carnal devilish approach to scripture that vpw cooked up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
And sometimes I allowed my children to experience the consequences of their actions. Perhaps God does the same, Oak.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
"Also" is there....it is the Greek word "kai" and it could either be a cumulative particle which would allow "also, too"; but to make VPW theologies fit inside the glove, you would have to translate it as an emphatic which would render it as "the word of God, which effectually worketh, INDEED, in you that believe." But that doesn't sound right to force it in that direction. That would be like saying "wow, I didn't know it would work for believers too!" Too goofballey, if you know what I mean. To translate it as an ascensive is even worse, you would come up with "worketh EVEN in you that believe." Like this must be the absolute exception to the rule...doncha know?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thomas Loy Bumgarner
Bride, I believe that the Koine Greek word "kai" can also be translated as "and" "yet" and "even" as well as "also", if my memory is correct.
Edited by Thomas Loy BumgarnerLink to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
But the key word in this verse should have the emphasis placed on the word "believe"...which is the real crux of the verse. In the Greek language there are words that can have more than one meaning and the context determines how you will translate the word. We have these occurrences too, such as:
1. Give me light (daytime)
2. Give me a light one (weight)
3. Give me a light (flame)
4. Give me a light (lamp)
The Greek word for "believe" is πιστεύουσιν which can be translated as a present active participle, dative plural masculine OR present active indicative, third plural.
Here would be the renderings:
1 Thess 2.13
but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe. KJV
but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually works also in THEM that believe. (Pres. Act. Ind. 3rd pl.)
but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually works also FOR THEM THEM THAT ARE BELIEVING or TO THEM THAT ARE BELIEVING (Pres. Act. Part. Dat. Masc. Pl.)
Guess where the KJV translators came down? Yup! Present active indicative, 3rd plural, which is where I would also come down in my choices during the translational process.
If you try to translate as a Pres. Act. Participle which would give it the verbal force that is needed to maintain TWI theology, just look at how you must translate by using the "helping" words of "for" and "to"? The result is an awkward translation....oh you can force it this way....but it still remains FORCED. Rather, if you let it translate itself naturally, it then is rendered as "WHICH EFFECTUALLY WORKS ALSO IN THEM (that belong in the body of Christ, and therefore ARE BELIEVERS i.e. have faith in Christ).
TWI theology.....CRASH AND BURN, BABY!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
Waysider,
Wisdom is simply wisdom....and it works for saint and sinner alike. For example, changing the oil in your car every 3k miles so that you don't seize up the engine.
Edited by brideofjcLink to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
White Dove...YOUR example works but 1 Thess 2.13 does not....
WHAT is EFFECTUALLY WORKING? It is the WORD OF GOD that is EFFECTUALLY WORKING. So it should be obvious it isn't WORKING for the sinner, else s/he would now be a saint. <_<
Well, how RUDE! That's really infantile! That's despicable! :blink:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
They can be translated as "and, but", but
that is only a "connective" and wouldn't make much sense. Put them in when you read it and you will see for yourself. It doesn't matter how many words one can squeeze out of "kai", but 
the question remains, "Does it fit?"
Edited by brideofjcLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Repeated self-hypnosis.. I wonder if speaking in tongues "like a house afire" and running retemories through one's head, all the while covering the ears and saying "I'm not wistening" qualifies..
Edited by HamLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Well---OK
But suppose I faithfully change that oil without a clue that the engine could seize-up if I didn't.
Would the engine still benefit from my proper course of action? Or, would my ignorance negate the benefit?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Yes it is the The WORD OF GOD that is EFFECTUALLY WORKING in those that believe If it did not work for sinners then we would all be in dire straits.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Really? and then would I end up like you? Will I ramble in circles like you as well? Gee that would be swell, let me think about it a min........Naw I'll pass..............
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
This topic about *the law of believing* has been discussed (many times) here before.
I've said it before -- I'll say it again ----
I believe in God's ability to DO, according to what He has promised.
I do NOT believe in *my believing trumps God's wishes*,
and that I can *believe for* anything outside of His wishes.
I've also mentioned that in the past -- I used to work for a company run by W. Clement Stone.
He was good buddies with Og Mandigo, Napolean Hill, and others
who promoted the *THINK AND GROW RICH* concept.
Docvic fit right in there with that crew ---
cause that other outfit taught the *law of believing* too.
And guess what --- it was all about $$$$$$$$$$$. Go figure, eh??
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.