So.......wierwille's extremism is NOT representative in wd's post.....BECAUSE in accordance with scripture the statements in wierwille's orange book, blue book, and beige book are NOT TRUE..???
In other words.......wierwille's "law of believing" is off on another tangent and is FALSE PROPHECY.
Surprised?.......NOPE, not at all.
THAT'S WHY many of us are here at GS......to expose the evil and error in wierwille's ministry.....and since "the law of believing" was one of the main ingredients to wierwille's recipe for a "believer's success"........it leads back to wierwille and his FALSE DOCTRINES.
Thanks whitedove..........you get the Greasespotter Award this week.
Gee that's a nice award and all ,but you might just want to keep it until you read further
So.......wierwille's extremism is NOT representative in wd's post.....BECAUSE in accordance with scripture the statements in wierwille's orange book, blue book, and beige book are NOT TRUE..???
Well not quite what I said, It's NOT representative in WD's post.....BECAUSE I think it was often very confusing in the way it was written in various books It is pretty clear to me that VP intended that God would be involved in the equation. It is also evident
that VP was greatly influenced by the men of his day like Norman Vincent Peale, and Glen Clark. Far too many things were put in the mix that were not believing and I don't think they ever figured out what to do with them. Then we added to the problem with terms, that we may have understood at times what each other was saying, but were a mystery to others. Like believe for, not in the Bible, often substituted for Pray for. While sometimes used in conjunction at times in scripture they are not the same thing. We became adept at using terms that one could not sit down with a Bible and concordance and see in scripture.
In other words.......wierwille's "law of believing" is off on another tangent and is FALSE PROPHECY.
I don't believe it is a law, I'm not sure VP did either in the sense of some Ohio statute. In many respects it is like a law in that it works faithfully. Christians understand that when God states that something is going to happen , and we believe and trust those words, then we see the results. In that point it is like a law like gravity, perhaps that is what he meant to illustrate.
Brushstroke, great conversation. 2 quick points that OM might challenge you: Lord's Prayer is for Jews only, not Christians(despite evidence that it was in liturgical use by 60AD), and 2nd theologians/church fathers are giving a personal spin zone and bloviating(blowing hot air and nonsense) which is diametrically opposite scripture and should not be trusted(i.e. Scripture alone and no individual comment/"idios" ones own spinzone for idiots). Of course, I reject such sentiments. I am surprised that you haven't met our other PFAL obsessed person Mike(who believes that Jesus will appear with all of Wierwille's books, carrying them like Moses with the 10 commandments).
I don't think anyone ever interpreted Wierwille as meaning it was a law in a "legal" sense.
At least I never met anyone who did.
He(VP) clearly stated that it was (in his words) a "law" in the same sense that gravity is a "law".
Like a "law" of physics.
The "laws" of physics are predictably and dependable.
To say that the "law" of believing is on a parallel with the laws of physics is ridiculous.
The laws of physics can be qualified and quantified in a laboratory.
If believing is a "law" in the same sense, it should be possible to do the same thing with it.
Wierwille's "law" of believing was but one variation of numerous other philosophies that were popular at the time.
Some included God in the mix and some did not.
Wierwille not only included God in the mix; he implied that God personally gave him this insight.
I suggest that if we want to continue to take this discussion in this new direction, we move it to one of the many threads that already address this subject.
Brushstroke, great conversation. 2 quick points that OM might challenge you: Lord's Prayer is for Jews only, not Christians(despite evidence that it was in liturgical use by 60AD), and 2nd theologians/church fathers are giving a personal spin zone and bloviating(blowing hot air and nonsense) which is diametrically opposite scripture and should not be trusted(i.e. Scripture alone and no individual comment/"idios" ones own spinzone for idiots). Of course, I reject such sentiments. I am surprised that you haven't met our other PFAL obsessed person Mike(who believes that Jesus will appear with all of Wierwille's books, carrying them like Moses with the 10 commandments).
Speaking of 60 AD
Timothy was written in 67 -68 AD It does not sound like things were going so well.
2 Timothy 1:15
This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me; of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes.
2 Timothy 4:4
And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
Is it any supprise that they decided that it should be added to the list of fables. I wonder why scripture did not think it important for 60 years to mention it. Why did it show up as important 60 years later?
Brushstroke, great conversation. 2 quick points that OM might challenge you: Lord's Prayer is for Jews only, not Christians(despite evidence that it was in liturgical use by 60AD), and 2nd theologians/church fathers are giving a personal spin zone and bloviating(blowing hot air and nonsense) which is diametrically opposite scripture and should not be trusted(i.e. Scripture alone and no individual comment/"idios" ones own spinzone for idiots). Of course, I reject such sentiments. I am surprised that you haven't met our other PFAL obsessed person Mike(who believes that Jesus will appear with all of Wierwille's books, carrying them like Moses with the 10 commandments).
HaHaHaHa
Oh yeah, The Lord's Prayer argument.
Wierwille said it doesn't apply to us because:
1. It was for the Christ "administration" and this is the Grace "administation.
Therefore, it's not written "to us".
2. Asking God to "Give us this day our daily bread" contradicts the Epistles where it says God has already blessed us with "all spiritual blessings", etc.
Therefore, we don't have to ASK God for anything.
We just tell him what we want and thank him in advance.
"Just name it and claim it."
OOPS! Almost forgot.-----Make sure you are "believing" when you do that last step. <_<
"The great things of this world are available to men and women who know how to operate one of God's laws, namely the law of 'believingequals receiving.' And this law includes 'believing equals action.' Great accomplishments are not necessarily just for people with great intellectual ability; they are attainable by men and women who believe to receive. It doesn't hurt to have a few brains, but it doesn't help unless one operates this universal law of believing. Many operate the law of believing without even having a knowledge of God's Word, for this law of believing works for saint and sinner alike."
NOTE: THE GREAT THINGS OF THIS WORLD are available to men and women who know how to operate ONE OF GOD'S LAWS, namely the law of 'believing equals receiving.'
I don't think anyone ever interpreted Wierwille as meaning it was a law in a "legal" sense.
At least I never met anyone who did.
He(VP) clearly stated that it was (in his words) a "law" in the same sense that gravity is a "law".
Like a "law" of physics.
The "laws" of physics are predictably and dependable.
To say that the "law" of believing is on a parallel with the laws of physics is ridiculous.
The laws of physics can be qualified and quantified in a laboratory.
If believing is a "law" in the same sense, it should be possible to do the same thing with it.
in the same sense - meaning that it worked every time just as gravity does ......... I believe that God's promises do just that.
Christians understand that when God states that something is going to happen , and we believe and trust those words, then we see the results. In that point( in that sense) it is like a law like gravity, perhaps that is what he meant to illustrate. Analogies are not perfect in every point, in the sense that it works consistently just like gravity, in that point only yes it is like the law of gravity. in other points it fails as a analogy.
Analogies are not perfect in every point, in the sense that it works consistently just like gravity, in that point only yes it is like the law of gravity. in other points it fails as a analogy.
Oh, my!
How can this be possible?
The collaterals were given by divine inspiration to Dr. Wierwille.
Why, oh why did God give him a defective analogy?
I mean, if you've been waiting 2,000 years to divulge a secret, you surely want it to be worded perfectly, no?
"The great things of this world are available to men and women who know how to operate one of God's laws, namely the law of 'believing equals receiving.' And this law includes 'believing equals action.' Great accomplishments are not necessarily just for people with great intellectual ability; they are attainable by men and women who believe to receive. It doesn't hurt to have a few brains, but it doesn't help unless one operates this universal law of believing. Many operate the law of believing without even having a knowledge of God's Word, for this law of believing works for saint and sinner alike."
Wierwille authored this book.....God's Magnified Word.
Wierwille elaborated on "the law of believing".......read the above paragraph.
Wierwille's book series is for his 'students' to learn detailed information on the 'more abundant life.'
Wierwille's 'law of believing'.....is a UNIVERSAL law. It can be operated even WITHOUT HAVING A KNOWLEDGE OF GOD'S WORD.Again.......read above paragraph from his book.
And, lest we forget from wierwille's corps program.......Corps Princle #4: Practice believing to bring material abundance to you and the ministry. At times, corps were shackled with the FULL RESPONSIBILITY OF BELIEVING for corps finances......or the rain to stop at corps week.
I don't think anyone ever interpreted Wierwille as meaning it was a law in a "legal" sense.
At least I never met anyone who did.
Exactly the point , that would be silly wouldn't it ? but some might argue that it was not a law because it had no statute. you understood that was silly.
Then again some might argue that it was not a law because it was not qualified and quantified in a laboratory. and that would be equally silly Now wouldn't it?
If believing is a "law" in the same sense, it should be possible to do the same thing with it.
Then again some might say
If believing is a "law" it should have a statute
Both seem clearly as you noted ,not what he was talking about. I never met anyone that thought it should be qualified and quantified in a laboratory either by the way.................
Oh, my!
How can this be possible?
The collaterals were given by divine inspiration to Dr. Wierwille.
Why, oh why did God give him a defective analogy?
I mean, if you've been waiting 2,000 years to divulge a secret, you surely want it to be worded perfectly, no?
Maybe that's the real "great mystery".
Not defective , it works in the way it was intended, analogies break down at some point, they are not perfect in all or every point.
The collaterals were given by divine inspiration to Dr. Wierwille.
Exactly the point , that would be silly wouldn't it ? but some might argue that it was not a law because it had no statute. you understood that was silly.
Then again some might argue that it was not a law because it was not qualified and quantified in a laboratory. and that would be equally silly Now wouldn't it?
Then again some might say
Okay...then what does Wierwille mean by calling it a "law," if it means neither a scientific nor legal law?
Both seem clearly as you noted ,not what he was talking about. I never met anyone that thought it should be qualified and quantified in a laboratory either by the way.................
Not defective , it works in the way it was intended, analogies break down at some point, they are not perfect in all or every point.
Says Who? Not my recollection.....
In what way was the Law of Believing intended to work?
Okay...then what does Wierwille mean by calling it a "law," if it means neither a scientific nor legal law?
In what way was the Law of Believing intended to work?
in the same sense - meaning that it worked every time just as gravity does ......... I believe that God's promises do just that.
Christians understand that when God states that something is going to happen , and we believe and trust those words, then we see the results. In that point( in that sense) it is like a law like gravity, perhaps that is what he meant to illustrate. Analogies are not perfect in every point, in the sense that it works consistently just like gravity, in that point only yes it is like the law of gravity. in other points it fails as a analogy.
Look today we say Murphy's law, which is neither a phyical law that can be qualified and quantified in a laboratory, nor a legal statute. Do we pick at someone when they say Murphy's law. Nope, we understand the analogy. Only when it's wierwille do we be so stupid as to miss it, or most likely just want something to pick at.
in the same sense - meaning that it worked every time just as gravity does ......... I believe that God's promises do just that.
This is precisely why it is NOT a law. It doesn't work every time.
You can know what's available, know how to receive it, know what to do with it after you've gotten it, got your needs and wants parallel, and even pray with two or three in agreement with you and still not get something.
OH! I know! Someone musta doubted!
You can't take the infinite (God) and squeeze it into the finite (some "law" with questionable results.)
Look today we say Murphy's law, which is neither a phyical law that can be qualified and quantified in a laboratory, nor a legal statute. Do we pick at someone when they say Murphy's law. Nope, we understand the analogy. Only when it's wierwille do we be so stupid as to miss it, or most likely just want something to pick at.
I don't recall anyone ever claiming that Murphy's Law came via revelation from God Almighty.
Anyway, calling Murphy's Law a "law" is a bit of cynical, ironic, sarcastic twist of words as the average person who has reasoning skills may recognize that the concept itself is doomed to fail when forced to fit the criteria for a "law". Hence, you will surely fail if you try to prove it to be a "law".
"The great things of this world are available to men and women who know how to operate one of God's laws, namely the law of 'believing equals receiving.' And this law includes 'believing equals action.' Great accomplishments are not necessarily just for people with great intellectual ability; they are attainable by men and women who believe to receive. It doesn't hurt to have a few brains, but it doesn't help unless one operates this universal law of believing. Many operate the law of believing without even having a knowledge of God's Word, for this law of believing works for saint and sinner alike."
whitedove stated in post #102:
I don't believe it is a law, I'm not sure VP did either in the sense of some Ohio statute. In many respects it is like a law in that it works faithfully. Christians understand that when God states that something is going to happen , and we believe and trust those words, then we see the results. In that point it is like a law like gravity, perhaps that is what he meant to illustrate.
NOW.......whitedove tries to explain WHAT WIERWILLE MEANT when he wrote "the law of believing. :blink:
NOW.......whitedove does NOT want to go by WHAT IS WRITTEN. :blink:
NOW.......there seems to be a DIFFERENCE between the pfal class and the pfal books. :blink:
NOW.......the 'dance around vpw's law of believing' TAKES ON NEW DANCE STEPS.
NOW.......pass the popcorn and WATCH THOSE BACK-STEPPING MOVES IN ACTION.
Brushstroke......as you uncover twi beliefs, it should be noted that:
1) Some twi followers believe that wierwille's pfal class was given by divine revelation.
2) Some twi followers believe that wierwille's books give greater depth to the pfal class.
3) Some twi followers see wierwille's two sides (stage persona and carnal man) and still stand with twi.
4) Some twi followers rarely do any in-depth biblical research......but follow twi's chain of command.
5) Some twi followers follow the mantra.......even after errors and inconsistencies and plagiarism are noted.
6) Some twi splinter groups uphold SOME of wierwille's class......and DISMISS other parts.
Welcome to the TWI-light zone...........
Inconsistency after inconsistency after inconsistency...oy vey...
This makes me wonder where I'm going to go with my ideas and what I want to say when the subject of our beliefs comes up when I'm there. It will, it's inevitable. Is there anything I should expect them (her parents and possibly her) to ask or say?
Brushstroke, don't get a heartstoke. If you can figure this all out, you will be light years beyond where we were in the 70's. Think of VPW as a real version of Elmer Gantry(movie stared Burt Lancaster and Shirley Jones). TWI did not quite rise to Jim Jones or David Koresh(although many thought LCM was paranoid and ready for the nut house(has nothing to do with Mr. Ham, Our Squirrel of God for all time. "The word of Ham is the will of the Squuirel")
What is Available -- How does one determine what is available in their life, or what one needs and wants?
Hi Phil,
From the twi viewpoint ... in the words of Dr. Wierwille "find out what's available from God's Word..." The "law of believing" was taught in the context of believing to receive the written promises of God in the bible. For example, does the bible say is it available for someone to win lotto? No. So praying/believing to win lotto would be out of bounds and wouldn't work. On the other hand, John 10:10 says:
Jhn 10:10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have [it] more abundantly.
This is the foundational scripture for Power for Abundant Living .... Jesus came so that we might have life, and have it more abundantly. We were taught in twi that life is the greek word "zoe" life in all of its manifestations including eternal life. That is a promise... so praying/believing to receive that life in all of its manifestions would be within God's will and availability, as long as one fulfills the specific condition required for receiving. Jesus said when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them. "and what soever ye ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive". Praying for what? The written promises of God. Life in all of its manifestations, among other things.
One of Wierwille's lines from PFAL (I write this from memory) was "there are over 900 some promises in the Word for a person to profit and be in health.. how many do you know? The more one knows, the more one can believe to receive".
So then according to twi doctrine, having an abundant life is God's will; not dying a horrible and painful death. God is love, and wants the best for people, especially his kids. That is why in your previous example of Peter and Paul, I don't believe it was God's will they die a painful excrusiating death and so forth ... I believe they were fulfilling God's will for their lives by continuing in faith, but I believe the pain, hurt, anguish and death came from the thief, the devil. I don't believe those horrific deaths were in God's plan and further I believe God would work to help them out of those painful deaths.
"By his stripes we are healed" Jesus had to endure a painful death so we wouldn't have to.
1Pe 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
The promise to us is this: That God will save our life, if we lose our life (Matt. 16:24-28). God is very willing to save us, He wants us to be with Him. The truth of Christ's message isn't about getting what you want/need in the here-and-now (see Matt. 19:23, Luke 12:13-34), it is about striving to be with God, storing up our treasure in heaven by our faith in God alone and doing His commandments, having faith that He will provide what He wishes us to have, not what we think we need or want, and humbly submitting ourselves to Him and giving up everything for the one thing that matters in life over all other things: His will. It's not to say that He doesn't wish us to be happy, He does, but we shouldn't ever think we know His will or that we know what we need or want in our life. St. Isaiah the Prophet rightly asked "Who knows the Lord's mind...?" (Isaiah 40:13)
The idea "we shouldn't ever think we know His will" is the opposite of what you'll experience in twi. We ex-twi were taught that "the word of God is the will of God", so the Word would be the Lord's mind revealed. The word came "as holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit." It is the revelation of Jesus Christ. So the Word of God is the will of God and we can know it and believe it. This foundational belief is what you will encounter when dealing with your girlfriend and her parents.
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:
God has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness through the knowledge of Him ... that knowledge is in the word of God. Doesn't mean we don't receive knowledge and guidance from the holy spirit, but what is already written God expects us to know and believe.
Have you ever bothered to even read some of the articles here that discuss discrepancies in how some of the scriptures in the foundational class were interpreted and used?
From the twi viewpoint ... in the words of Dr. Wierwille "find out what's available from God's Word..." The "law of believing" was taught in the context of believing to receive the written promises of God in the bible. For example, does the bible say is it available for someone to win lotto? No. So praying/believing to win lotto would be out of bounds and wouldn't work. On the other hand, John 10:10 says:
Jhn 10:10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have [it] more abundantly.
This is the foundational scripture for Power for Abundant Living .... Jesus came so that we might have life, and have it more abundantly. We were taught in twi that life is the greek word "zoe" life in all of its manifestations including eternal life. That is a promise... so praying/believing to receive that life in all of its manifestions would be within God's will and availability, as long as one fulfills the specific condition required for receiving. Jesus said when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them. "and what soever ye ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive". Praying for what? The written promises of God. Life in all of its manifestations, among other things.
One of Wierwille's lines from PFAL (I write this from memory) was "there are over 900 some promises in the Word for a person to profit and be in health.. how many do you know? The more one knows, the more one can believe to receive".
So then according to twi doctrine, having an abundant life is God's will; not dying a horrible and painful death. God is love, and wants the best for people, especially his kids. That is why in your previous example of Peter and Paul, I don't believe it was God's will they die a painful excrusiating death and so forth ... I believe they were fulfilling God's will for their lives by continuing in faith, but I believe the pain, hurt, anguish and death came from the thief, the devil. I don't believe those horrific deaths were in God's plan and further I believe God would work to help them out of those painful deaths.
"By his stripes we are healed" Jesus had to endure a painful death so we wouldn't have to.
1Pe 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
I agree with you that it is God's will that we shall live, and not die. Death was vanquished through the Cross, Christ rose, having conquered death and giving life to those spirits in prison who died before He came into the world (1 Peter 3:18-22). But the question remains...if Christ is risen, having trampled down death by His own death, and has given life to those who were held captive, why is there still suffering?
This gets into one of my least-favorite subjects: theodicy. I have much to say about it though. Surely a good God would not cause all this suffering that happens in the world. I mean, would God want 150,000 people around the world to die each day, or want those people in Africa to starve, or want the war in Darfur to continue? I don't think so. Christianity has traditionally defined evil and suffering and the horror of this mortal existence as a privation of the good, something entirely unnatural and foreign to God's good will for His creatures. He's the Source of life, not of death. So evil does not exist per se but it "exists" in that it is an absence of that which is good in the world.
What most people find intolerable about Christianity, is that God even allows evil to happen. It appears to imply that God's providence and the coming of His kingdom include all the evil in the world, so even though His good will will come to pass, the suffering of this world has an indispensible part to play. The notion that suffering will prove to have been meaningful, to have had a purpose, to have been in some sense a good and necessary thing; for most, the suffering of children in broken homes, of the people in Africa who are starving to death, of the people in Darfur who are at war is an infinite scandal, and their consciences could never allow it to sink to the level of some provisional passage through darkness on the way to some radiant future. I think this mindset is actually quite Christian. The mindset of the ancient Church was always one of division from and rebellion against those principalities and powers -- death chief among them -- that enslave and torment creation. All that Christian scripture asserts is that death and evil and suffering will not thrwart the coming of His kingdom. Divine providence, will of course, always bring about God's good ends despite -- and in some sense through -- the evil of this world. This isn't the same thing as saying that evil has a necessary part to play in God's plans or that God requires evil to bring about His kingdom.
The one thing most people ask in this question, is "Where is God?" My answer is that He is in and beyond all things, and nearer to the essence of each creature than that creature itself, and infinitely outside the grasp of all finite things. Even in the suffering of this world He is nearer to us than we will ever realize. In writing this, I find myself thinking about a photo I saw in an issue of National Geographic when my mom and I were taking our cat to the vet. The article was about an ancient tribe in Ethiopia, and they live in the most unimaginable poverty. In the background of the photo was a scattering of huts made from crates and shreds of canvas, and on all sides barren earth with no vegetation. But in the front of the photo was a little girl, extremely pretty, dressed in tatters, but with her arms outspread, a look of delight upon her face, dancing. To me that was a heartbreaking picture, of course, but it was also an image of something amazing and glorious: the sheer ecstasy of innocence, the happiness of a child who can dance amid despair and desolation because her joy came with her into the world and prompts her to dance as if she were in the midst of paradise. It's the small sparks of beauty that we see in all the horror of this world that show us God's presence here, the deep indwelling truth of creation, the divine image that resides in the very heart of the world, the stainless image of God. This is the nature of God's presence in creation, and He is in every fiber of His being willing and able to restore that which has fallen, and He will not suffer to see us fall into further corruption.
So no, God didn't will for Peter and Paul to die, but if you have experienced any kind of hardship, then it should be apparent that He works through the evil of this world (that is caused by the devil and is also just an aspect of a fallen world) and despite whatever bad happens, His good will won't fail in the end. As you said, "by His stripes we are healed." Jesus' death on the Cross shows us the love of God. Not only that the Father loves us enough to send His Son down, but that God Himself, i.e. Jesus Christ, suffered our suffering and took it upon Himself to save us! This is a point where Wierwille went very wrong. The Incarnation of Christ is absolutely essential to Christianity. In the words of C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity, "either Christ was a liar and He wasn't really God, or He was a lunatic on the level of the man who calls himself a poached egg." He died not to take our place, not necessarily so that we don't have to die; but His death opens a door, it gives us someone who understands our sufferings and someone who we can lean on, as He will give us rest for our souls and will in the end destroy all evil, all death, and all suffering.
The idea "we shouldn't ever think we know His will" is the opposite of what you'll experience in twi. We ex-twi were taught that "the word of God is the will of God", so the Word would be the Lord's mind revealed. The word came "as holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit." It is the revelation of Jesus Christ. So the Word of God is the will of God and we can know it and believe it. This foundational belief is what you will encounter when dealing with your girlfriend and her parents.
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:
God has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness through the knowledge of Him ... that knowledge is in the word of God. Doesn't mean we don't receive knowledge and guidance from the holy spirit, but what is already written God expects us to know and believe.
I don't have much to say about this now, except that it sounds very Gnostic...the idea that we are able receive some sort of special knowledge...
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
WhiteDove
Gee that's a nice award and all ,but you might just want to keep it until you read further
Well not quite what I said, It's NOT representative in WD's post.....BECAUSE I think it was often very confusing in the way it was written in various books It is pretty clear to me that VP intended that God would be involved in the equation. It is also evident
that VP was greatly influenced by the men of his day like Norman Vincent Peale, and Glen Clark. Far too many things were put in the mix that were not believing and I don't think they ever figured out what to do with them. Then we added to the problem with terms, that we may have understood at times what each other was saying, but were a mystery to others. Like believe for, not in the Bible, often substituted for Pray for. While sometimes used in conjunction at times in scripture they are not the same thing. We became adept at using terms that one could not sit down with a Bible and concordance and see in scripture.
In other words.......wierwille's "law of believing" is off on another tangent and is FALSE PROPHECY.
I don't believe it is a law, I'm not sure VP did either in the sense of some Ohio statute. In many respects it is like a law in that it works faithfully. Christians understand that when God states that something is going to happen , and we believe and trust those words, then we see the results. In that point it is like a law like gravity, perhaps that is what he meant to illustrate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thomas Loy Bumgarner
Brushstroke, great conversation. 2 quick points that OM might challenge you: Lord's Prayer is for Jews only, not Christians(despite evidence that it was in liturgical use by 60AD), and 2nd theologians/church fathers are giving a personal spin zone and bloviating(blowing hot air and nonsense) which is diametrically opposite scripture and should not be trusted(i.e. Scripture alone and no individual comment/"idios" ones own spinzone for idiots). Of course, I reject such sentiments. I am surprised that you haven't met our other PFAL obsessed person Mike(who believes that Jesus will appear with all of Wierwille's books, carrying them like Moses with the 10 commandments).
Edited by Thomas Loy BumgarnerLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I don't think anyone ever interpreted Wierwille as meaning it was a law in a "legal" sense.
At least I never met anyone who did.
He(VP) clearly stated that it was (in his words) a "law" in the same sense that gravity is a "law".
Like a "law" of physics.
The "laws" of physics are predictably and dependable.
To say that the "law" of believing is on a parallel with the laws of physics is ridiculous.
The laws of physics can be qualified and quantified in a laboratory.
If believing is a "law" in the same sense, it should be possible to do the same thing with it.
Wierwille's "law" of believing was but one variation of numerous other philosophies that were popular at the time.
Some included God in the mix and some did not.
Wierwille not only included God in the mix; he implied that God personally gave him this insight.
I suggest that if we want to continue to take this discussion in this new direction, we move it to one of the many threads that already address this subject.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Speaking of 60 AD
Timothy was written in 67 -68 AD It does not sound like things were going so well.
2 Timothy 1:15
This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me; of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes.
2 Timothy 4:4
And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
Is it any supprise that they decided that it should be added to the list of fables. I wonder why scripture did not think it important for 60 years to mention it. Why did it show up as important 60 years later?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Then why was wierwille's name on the beige book.....??
Quotes below.
Edited by skyriderLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
HaHaHaHa
Oh yeah, The Lord's Prayer argument.
Wierwille said it doesn't apply to us because:
1. It was for the Christ "administration" and this is the Grace "administation.
Therefore, it's not written "to us".
2. Asking God to "Give us this day our daily bread" contradicts the Epistles where it says God has already blessed us with "all spiritual blessings", etc.
Therefore, we don't have to ASK God for anything.
We just tell him what we want and thank him in advance.
"Just name it and claim it."
OOPS! Almost forgot.-----Make sure you are "believing" when you do that last step. <_<
("Works for saint and sinner alike.")
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
NOTE: THE GREAT THINGS OF THIS WORLD are available to men and women who know how to operate ONE OF GOD'S LAWS, namely the law of 'believing equals receiving.'
Is Wierwille's name on this book?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Oh, my!
How can this be possible?
The collaterals were given by divine inspiration to Dr. Wierwille.
Why, oh why did God give him a defective analogy?
I mean, if you've been waiting 2,000 years to divulge a secret, you surely want it to be worded perfectly, no?
Maybe that's the real "great mystery".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Wierwille authored this book.....God's Magnified Word.
Wierwille elaborated on "the law of believing".......read the above paragraph.
Wierwille's book series is for his 'students' to learn detailed information on the 'more abundant life.'
Wierwille's 'law of believing'.....is a UNIVERSAL law. It can be operated even WITHOUT HAVING A KNOWLEDGE OF GOD'S WORD. Again.......read above paragraph from his book.
And, lest we forget from wierwille's corps program.......Corps Princle #4: Practice believing to bring material abundance to you and the ministry. At times, corps were shackled with the FULL RESPONSIBILITY OF BELIEVING for corps finances......or the rain to stop at corps week.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Then again some might argue that it was not a law because it was not qualified and quantified in a laboratory. and that would be equally silly Now wouldn't it?
Then again some might say
Both seem clearly as you noted ,not what he was talking about. I never met anyone that thought it should be qualified and quantified in a laboratory either by the way.................Not defective , it works in the way it was intended, analogies break down at some point, they are not perfect in all or every point.
Says Who? Not my recollection.....
Edited by WhiteDoveLink to comment
Share on other sites
Brushstroke
Okay...then what does Wierwille mean by calling it a "law," if it means neither a scientific nor legal law?
In what way was the Law of Believing intended to work?
Edited by BrushstrokeLink to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
in the same sense - meaning that it worked every time just as gravity does ......... I believe that God's promises do just that.
Christians understand that when God states that something is going to happen , and we believe and trust those words, then we see the results. In that point( in that sense) it is like a law like gravity, perhaps that is what he meant to illustrate. Analogies are not perfect in every point, in the sense that it works consistently just like gravity, in that point only yes it is like the law of gravity. in other points it fails as a analogy.
Look today we say Murphy's law, which is neither a phyical law that can be qualified and quantified in a laboratory, nor a legal statute. Do we pick at someone when they say Murphy's law. Nope, we understand the analogy. Only when it's wierwille do we be so stupid as to miss it, or most likely just want something to pick at.
Edited by WhiteDoveLink to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
This is precisely why it is NOT a law. It doesn't work every time.
You can know what's available, know how to receive it, know what to do with it after you've gotten it, got your needs and wants parallel, and even pray with two or three in agreement with you and still not get something.
OH! I know! Someone musta doubted!
You can't take the infinite (God) and squeeze it into the finite (some "law" with questionable results.)
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
cman
Gravity isn't a law either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I don't recall anyone ever claiming that Murphy's Law came via revelation from God Almighty.
Anyway, calling Murphy's Law a "law" is a bit of cynical, ironic, sarcastic twist of words as the average person who has reasoning skills may recognize that the concept itself is doomed to fail when forced to fit the criteria for a "law". Hence, you will surely fail if you try to prove it to be a "law".
You would have to. (It's Murphy's Law.
)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
NOW.......whitedove tries to explain WHAT WIERWILLE MEANT when he wrote "the law of believing. :blink:
NOW.......whitedove does NOT want to go by WHAT IS WRITTEN. :blink:
NOW.......there seems to be a DIFFERENCE between the pfal class and the pfal books. :blink:
NOW.......the 'dance around vpw's law of believing' TAKES ON NEW DANCE STEPS.
NOW.......pass the popcorn and WATCH THOSE BACK-STEPPING MOVES IN ACTION.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Brushstroke......as you uncover twi beliefs, it should be noted that:
1) Some twi followers believe that wierwille's pfal class was given by divine revelation.
2) Some twi followers believe that wierwille's books give greater depth to the pfal class.
3) Some twi followers see wierwille's two sides (stage persona and carnal man) and still stand with twi.
4) Some twi followers rarely do any in-depth biblical research......but follow twi's chain of command.
5) Some twi followers follow the mantra.......even after errors and inconsistencies and plagiarism are noted.
6) Some twi splinter groups uphold SOME of wierwille's class......and DISMISS other parts.
Welcome to the TWI-light zone...........
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brushstroke
Inconsistency after inconsistency after inconsistency...oy vey...
This makes me wonder where I'm going to go with my ideas and what I want to say when the subject of our beliefs comes up when I'm there. It will, it's inevitable. Is there anything I should expect them (her parents and possibly her) to ask or say?
Edited by BrushstrokeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Sunesis
Brushstroke, I'm really enjoying your posts! I'm so glad you could join us. :)
You too Sky.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thomas Loy Bumgarner
Brushstroke, don't get a heartstoke. If you can figure this all out, you will be light years beyond where we were in the 70's. Think of VPW as a real version of Elmer Gantry(movie stared Burt Lancaster and Shirley Jones). TWI did not quite rise to Jim Jones or David Koresh(although many thought LCM was paranoid and ready for the nut house(has nothing to do with Mr. Ham, Our Squirrel of God for all time. "The word of Ham is the will of the Squuirel")
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Hi Phil,
From the twi viewpoint ... in the words of Dr. Wierwille "find out what's available from God's Word..." The "law of believing" was taught in the context of believing to receive the written promises of God in the bible. For example, does the bible say is it available for someone to win lotto? No. So praying/believing to win lotto would be out of bounds and wouldn't work. On the other hand, John 10:10 says:
Jhn 10:10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have [it] more abundantly.
This is the foundational scripture for Power for Abundant Living .... Jesus came so that we might have life, and have it more abundantly. We were taught in twi that life is the greek word "zoe" life in all of its manifestations including eternal life. That is a promise... so praying/believing to receive that life in all of its manifestions would be within God's will and availability, as long as one fulfills the specific condition required for receiving. Jesus said when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them. "and what soever ye ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive". Praying for what? The written promises of God. Life in all of its manifestations, among other things.
One of Wierwille's lines from PFAL (I write this from memory) was "there are over 900 some promises in the Word for a person to profit and be in health.. how many do you know? The more one knows, the more one can believe to receive".
So then according to twi doctrine, having an abundant life is God's will; not dying a horrible and painful death. God is love, and wants the best for people, especially his kids. That is why in your previous example of Peter and Paul, I don't believe it was God's will they die a painful excrusiating death and so forth ... I believe they were fulfilling God's will for their lives by continuing in faith, but I believe the pain, hurt, anguish and death came from the thief, the devil. I don't believe those horrific deaths were in God's plan and further I believe God would work to help them out of those painful deaths.
"By his stripes we are healed" Jesus had to endure a painful death so we wouldn't have to.
1Pe 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
The idea "we shouldn't ever think we know His will" is the opposite of what you'll experience in twi. We ex-twi were taught that "the word of God is the will of God", so the Word would be the Lord's mind revealed. The word came "as holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit." It is the revelation of Jesus Christ. So the Word of God is the will of God and we can know it and believe it. This foundational belief is what you will encounter when dealing with your girlfriend and her parents.
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:
God has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness through the knowledge of Him ... that knowledge is in the word of God. Doesn't mean we don't receive knowledge and guidance from the holy spirit, but what is already written God expects us to know and believe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Hey, Oldies
Have you ever bothered to even read some of the articles here that discuss discrepancies in how some of the scriptures in the foundational class were interpreted and used?
Just wonderin'.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brushstroke
I agree with you that it is God's will that we shall live, and not die. Death was vanquished through the Cross, Christ rose, having conquered death and giving life to those spirits in prison who died before He came into the world (1 Peter 3:18-22). But the question remains...if Christ is risen, having trampled down death by His own death, and has given life to those who were held captive, why is there still suffering?
This gets into one of my least-favorite subjects: theodicy. I have much to say about it though. Surely a good God would not cause all this suffering that happens in the world. I mean, would God want 150,000 people around the world to die each day, or want those people in Africa to starve, or want the war in Darfur to continue? I don't think so. Christianity has traditionally defined evil and suffering and the horror of this mortal existence as a privation of the good, something entirely unnatural and foreign to God's good will for His creatures. He's the Source of life, not of death. So evil does not exist per se but it "exists" in that it is an absence of that which is good in the world.
What most people find intolerable about Christianity, is that God even allows evil to happen. It appears to imply that God's providence and the coming of His kingdom include all the evil in the world, so even though His good will will come to pass, the suffering of this world has an indispensible part to play. The notion that suffering will prove to have been meaningful, to have had a purpose, to have been in some sense a good and necessary thing; for most, the suffering of children in broken homes, of the people in Africa who are starving to death, of the people in Darfur who are at war is an infinite scandal, and their consciences could never allow it to sink to the level of some provisional passage through darkness on the way to some radiant future. I think this mindset is actually quite Christian. The mindset of the ancient Church was always one of division from and rebellion against those principalities and powers -- death chief among them -- that enslave and torment creation. All that Christian scripture asserts is that death and evil and suffering will not thrwart the coming of His kingdom. Divine providence, will of course, always bring about God's good ends despite -- and in some sense through -- the evil of this world. This isn't the same thing as saying that evil has a necessary part to play in God's plans or that God requires evil to bring about His kingdom.
The one thing most people ask in this question, is "Where is God?" My answer is that He is in and beyond all things, and nearer to the essence of each creature than that creature itself, and infinitely outside the grasp of all finite things. Even in the suffering of this world He is nearer to us than we will ever realize. In writing this, I find myself thinking about a photo I saw in an issue of National Geographic when my mom and I were taking our cat to the vet. The article was about an ancient tribe in Ethiopia, and they live in the most unimaginable poverty. In the background of the photo was a scattering of huts made from crates and shreds of canvas, and on all sides barren earth with no vegetation. But in the front of the photo was a little girl, extremely pretty, dressed in tatters, but with her arms outspread, a look of delight upon her face, dancing. To me that was a heartbreaking picture, of course, but it was also an image of something amazing and glorious: the sheer ecstasy of innocence, the happiness of a child who can dance amid despair and desolation because her joy came with her into the world and prompts her to dance as if she were in the midst of paradise. It's the small sparks of beauty that we see in all the horror of this world that show us God's presence here, the deep indwelling truth of creation, the divine image that resides in the very heart of the world, the stainless image of God. This is the nature of God's presence in creation, and He is in every fiber of His being willing and able to restore that which has fallen, and He will not suffer to see us fall into further corruption.
So no, God didn't will for Peter and Paul to die, but if you have experienced any kind of hardship, then it should be apparent that He works through the evil of this world (that is caused by the devil and is also just an aspect of a fallen world) and despite whatever bad happens, His good will won't fail in the end. As you said, "by His stripes we are healed." Jesus' death on the Cross shows us the love of God. Not only that the Father loves us enough to send His Son down, but that God Himself, i.e. Jesus Christ, suffered our suffering and took it upon Himself to save us! This is a point where Wierwille went very wrong. The Incarnation of Christ is absolutely essential to Christianity. In the words of C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity, "either Christ was a liar and He wasn't really God, or He was a lunatic on the level of the man who calls himself a poached egg." He died not to take our place, not necessarily so that we don't have to die; but His death opens a door, it gives us someone who understands our sufferings and someone who we can lean on, as He will give us rest for our souls and will in the end destroy all evil, all death, and all suffering.
I don't have much to say about this now, except that it sounds very Gnostic...the idea that we are able receive some sort of special knowledge...
Hmm...I'll have more to say on this later.
~Phil
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.