When Was PFAL in Written Form?

[WhiteDove]

QUOTE Mike

No, I posted above what he taught. It's not "the Bible" but "The Word" that he took as his only rule. That was in 1967, when hardly any of PFAL was in written form. In those days all WE had was our KJV and the spoken class to fix some of it. We went with what we had, which was better than nothing.

Whitedove Reply

Hey Mike

I am confused as to why you think that in 1967 hardly any of PFAL was in written form. There were pamphlets that accompanied the class they just were not combined into the one book format. but they were done by 1953 the monographs or Youth Caravan Pamphlets as they are referred to sometimes. By 1955 the second edition of receiving the Holy Spirit Today was out. From 62 - 66 Studies in abundant living series were printed covering a good portion of the class

Quote Mike

This is a good question. I don't have a good answer all prepared and at my fingertips right now

I'll try to answer some of it, and as more comes to me I'll add it in.

The year 1967 was obviously a pivotal one with the filming of the class. In 1977 plans were made to re-film it and replace it, but they were canceled at the very last minute by a revelation Dr announced at lunch that the film class was a one time deal. He said we'd go ahead with video taping PFAL '77 but it would only be a grad supplement class, and then even that never happened.

The year 1971 was another pivotal year with the publication of a slew of books that ended up being in their final edition: PFAL, BTMS, TNDC, and WWAY. It seemed to signify that certain publications that had been in the preliminary stages for decades were finally done. Around that same year we saw the publication of the 1st edition of ADAN, plus RHST 6th edition. The ministry had “arrived,” in a sense, at the threshold of book production.

In the May/June1979 issue of the Way Magazine the Our Times article by Dr titled “How the Word Works” talked about mastering the Word. In that same issue was the main article titled “Masters of the Word.” In that Our Times article we read:

"At these occasions, the years of Biblical research I have spent come back to my mind, and joy wells up inside me as I think of what is available to you today through The Way Ministry in book and magazine form, setting forth the accuracy of God’s Word. This research took me years to work out, and now you can see the depth of it in just a few short hours of reading. Any person who works this material will have a fantastic opportunity to see how the Word works."

This seemed to be an indication that the “book and magazine form” of setting forth the accuracy of God’s Word had come into being, and fairly recently relative to that 1979 publication date. By then JCNG and GMWD had come out and JCOP was in the works.

Around this time scripture indexes for the books (most of which were now published in their near final form) were produced in booklet form and made available. There were also made scripture indexes for the Way Magazine articles, two of them, one for 1976-80 and 1981-86. We have not seen a magazine index for earlier dates.

The hunch is that books from 1971 and up, and magazine articles from 1976 and up are the primary “setting forth” of what God taught/guided Dr for teaching to us. We have earlier books and earlier magazines, but for our study, we had to draw lines SOMEWHERE and so far these seem to be the best.

It’s pretty obvious, when looking at books and magazines from earlier dates that they are somewhat in a preliminary form. In 1963 there was a black and white film class made like this, and it was rather primitive compared to the ’67 version. I’ve seen this film class and it is obviously a preliminary version. The charts are hand drawn and Dr’s camera style is not good. Early magazine articles also show less polish. There’s a book Dr wrote in 1952 that I once heard him say that if he has his way, we’ll never see it. His 1956 “Dilemma of Foreign Missions in India” while fascinating in certain respects, is doctrinally lacking and he seemed to try and keep this from us also.

That’s the best I have right now.

Whitedove Reply

Thanks for taking time to answer, while this makes a case for the books being a preferred method to study. It does not address the question I had which was

I am confused as to why you think that in 1967 hardly any of PFAL was in written form.

Maybe here is a better explanation

Just today a pulled at random one of the booklets from the class, you know the ones VP held up in several sessions. I think there are around 60 or so of them that came with the class. The one I happened to pick was Your Power of Attorney. In comparing it to the book form there was very little difference, and none in content, mostly the verbiage was cleaned up to read better. I'd say that is true of most of the booklets. They were done prior to 1967. Many of them are just reprints of the monographs that were before them. In any case they in print contain I'd guess about 99% of the same material that is in the books . That is a long way from hardly any of PFAL in written form and only having the KJV Bible and the spoken class. I'd say the bulk of it was in written form.

I'll spin this off to another thread and you can get to it when you can.

Reply Mike

I’ve toyed with the idea that the PFAL revelations were first discussed and hashed about, much like Dr says in the Thessalonians Univ. of Life tapes that Paul and Timothy and Silas hashed out Paul’s revelations before they were put into written form. This is NOT the dictation model of written revelation. I’ve discussed this here before, how in Psalms it says (with suitable corrections) that every Word of God is pure, words-of-earth tried in an oven seven times. That sounds like hashing it out, discussing it, editing and revising it until it’s good for consumption. Maybe those booklets were part of that process. The fact that they were discontinued in 1971 should tell us something.

Edited January 18, 2009 by WhiteDove

[WhiteDove]

I’ve toyed with the idea that the PFAL revelations were first discussed and hashed about, much like Dr says in the Thessalonians Univ. of Life tapes that Paul and Timothy and Silas hashed out Paul’s revelations before they were put into written form. This is NOT the dictation model of written revelation. I’ve discussed this here before, how in Psalms it says (with suitable corrections) that every Word of God is pure, words-of-earth tried in an oven seven times. That sounds like hashing it out, discussing it, editing and revising it until it’s good for consumption. Maybe those booklets were part of that process. The fact that they were discontinued in 1971 should tell us something.

We agree that the goal was always to have the material in book form. I'd say the fact that they were discontinued was due to the nicer book form being in print though, nothing else. Much like the the monographs went by the wayside when the booklets were printed because they were a nicer format. It's easier having 3 books than trying to corral sixty some booklets, the downside though is that I liked the booklets in terms of they were easy to slip into the pocket and read later as opposed to a book. With very little change in content for the most part as I said mostly the verbiage was cleaned up to read better. I'd say that we had far more than the Bible and the spoken class, I'd submit we had the books as well ,just not in as nice of form as the later. Today they are on pdf files nothing has changed really there either (scanning errors aside )but it is yet another advance in format. I can't say that I learned any more or different things from the book form as opposed to the booklets. It essentially the same info at least the sum and gist. I can't see where a minimal changes to make it read better would disqualify it from being in print as you state it in 1967. .

[Bolshevik]

PFAL is old wineskins. that was two classes ago. you need to stick to the present truth.

[WhiteDove]

PFAL is old wineskins. that was two classes ago. you need to stick to the present truth.

I thought it was one class ago.. ???

[Oakspear]

I thought it was one class ago.. ???

Yeah, that's what I thought. Maybe the "new" WayAP class is considered newer the than the new one. :blink:

[WhiteDove]

Yeah, that's what I thought. Maybe the "new" WayAP class is considered newer the than the new one. :blink:

Maybe Oakspear? I though it was the same class? Anyway I prefer my wine in bottles...... and eventually in glasses preferably in my hand.

[Bolshevik]

Yeah, that's what I thought. Maybe the "new" WayAP class is considered newer the than the new one. :blink:

If the "teacher" wears a blue tie the first time around, and a red tie the second time around, for a dumb wayfer, it's fresh and new.

[WhiteDove]

If the "teacher" wears a blue tie the first time around, and a red tie the second time around, for a dumb wayfer, it's fresh and new.

So then you were incorrect it was one class ago....... Point noted

[waysider]

So then you were incorrect it was one class ago....... Point noted

You neglected to end your statement with proper punctuation.

Should we debate about how that affects the validity of your post?

[skyrider]

Yeah, that's what I thought. Maybe the "new" WayAP class is considered newer the than the new one. :blink:

I really don't care to get into a pi$$ing contest here.....

Just wanted to add:

1996 ------ Martindale taught The Way of Abundance and Power class

2005 (?) --- This new(er) class kept the same name, but had differences. Most notably.........three teachers: 1) John Rupp taught the first two sessions, 2) Steve Longley taught sessions 3-6 and 3) David Chavoustie taught sessions 7-12.

Carry on.

[leafytwiglet]

But it really is just the same information Correct?

[skyrider]

But it really is just the same information Correct?

Well............

1) TWI turned down the volume of lcm's rants.

2) TWI softened the confrontation (17 minutes into session #1) of who Jesus Christ was.

3) TWI eliminated the "original sin" of the lesbian/eve encounter.

4) TWI, obviously, got rid of lcm-memorabilia, lcm-vp comparisons, lcm-boasting.

5) TWI kept the same name, WAP, to facilitate a smoother transition.

6) TWI was not forthcoming to its followers on all the changes and editing.

But, yes................it's essentially the same class. And yet, I suppose one could make an arguement that LCM's class was "really the same information" as Wierwille's PFAL Class.........but I'll refrain.

Edited January 18, 2009 by skyrider

[Bolshevik]

So then you were incorrect it was one class ago....... Point noted

OMG!! Who Cares?!!! lol

[WhiteDove]

OMG!! Who Cares?!!! lol

In the interest of factual record here I do. It is doubtful misinformation will be of any benefit to discussion.

[skyrider]

In the interest of factual record here I do. It is doubtful misinformation will be of any benefit to discussion.

Well..............

In the interest of "factual record"..........you, WD, were incorrect.

It had been two classes ago from pfal.

<_<

[WhiteDove]

Well..............

In the interest of "factual record"..........you, WD, were incorrect.

It had been two classes ago from pfal.

<_<

But, yes................it's essentially the same class.

So which is it ? New or the same?

Indeed it was ,due to the facts presented ,not the distraction of a tie color which of course would not change a class it appears it is a new class, although one can argue it is the second edited. After all no new content just less. Nothing new per say. But ain't it grand when the facts not speculation or tie color show us the truth.

I suppose we can agree on this I bet they charge for it again to see the same class with the edited part left out. I suppose that might be the real measure of things, if they are letting them repeat the class then it would not be new. You can bet they would charge for a new one.

Edited January 18, 2009 by WhiteDove

[skyrider]

I suppose we can agree on this .....

.....it's new(er)

Lots of good football on right now!

Edited January 18, 2009 by skyrider

[WhiteDove]

I’ve toyed with the idea that the PFAL revelations were first discussed and hashed about, much like Dr says in the Thessalonians Univ. of Life tapes that Paul and Timothy and Silas hashed out Paul’s revelations before they were put into written form. This is NOT the dictation model of written revelation. I’ve discussed this here before, how in Psalms it says (with suitable corrections) that every Word of God is pure, words-of-earth tried in an oven seven times. That sounds like hashing it out, discussing it, editing and revising it until it’s good for consumption. Maybe those booklets were part of that process. The fact that they were discontinued in 1971 should tell us something.

We agree that the goal was always to have the material in book form. I'd say the fact that they were discontinued was due to the nicer book form being in print though, nothing else. Much like the the monographs went by the wayside when the booklets were printed because they were a nicer format. It's easier having 3 books than trying to corral sixty some booklets, the downside though is that I liked the booklets in terms of they were easy to slip into the pocket and read later as opposed to a book. With very little change in content for the most part as I said mostly the verbiage was cleaned up to read better. I'd say that we had far more than the Bible and the spoken class, I'd submit we had the books as well ,just not in as nice of form as the later. Today they are on pdf files nothing has changed really there either (scanning errors aside )but it is yet another advance in format. I can't say that I learned any more or different things from the book form as opposed to the booklets. It essentially the same info at least the sum and gist. I can't see where a minimal changes to make it read better would disqualify it from being in print as you state it in 1967. .

[shazdancer]

From Mike,

Maybe those booklets were part of that process. The fact that they were discontinued in 1971 should tell us something.

No, those tracts were still being made available at ROAs through the '70s. I bought a slew of them there or at The Way East over the years. If "that which was greater" had come, why wasn't the "lesser" being done away with?

Besides, can you imagine Paul sending out the Ephesians letter as a first draft, to be amended later after they'd perfected it?

[Mark Clarke]

From Mike,No, those tracts were still being made available at ROAs through the '70s. I bought a slew of them there or at The Way East over the years. If "that which was greater" had come, why wasn't the "lesser" being done away with?

Besides, can you imagine Paul sending out the Ephesians letter as a first draft, to be amended later after they'd perfected it?

Thanks! You just reminded me of another of VP's patently false one-liners.

[skyrider]

Besides, can you imagine Paul sending out the Ephesians letter as a first draft, to be amended later after they'd perfected it?

Yeah........ludicrous, isn't it?

And, if "little booklets" preceded the final draft, picture this.....

Ephesians chapter 1 (of sorts).........is circulated near Ephesus, 57 A.D.

Ephesians chapter 4 (of sorts).........is circulated in Ephesus, 58 A.D.

Ephesians chapter 2 (of sorts).........is added to completed work, 59 A.D.

Ephesians chapter 5 (of sorts).........was taught, and comprised, at a couples' advance in 58 A.D.

Ephesians chapter 6 (of sorts).........worked on while in prison, 59 A.D.

Ephesians chapter 3 (of sorts).........surfaces from a late-night teaching, and added 59 A.D.

Compiled and edited by Luke and others.......Paul releases "this new publication" for Ephesus and beyond.

[WhiteDove]

From Mike,No, those tracts were still being made available at ROAs through the '70s. I bought a slew of them there or at The Way East over the years. If "that which was greater" had come, why wasn't the "lesser" being done away with?

Besides, can you imagine Paul sending out the Ephesians letter as a first draft, to be amended later after they'd perfected it?

This may be a fine point Like you I bought a few at the rock, that I had given away or loaned out along the way I'd say up until 74 maybe. But I think Mike may be right as well they were discontinued , it's just that they had a stock built up and they discounted them out to clear them out.

[waysider]

Remember when they went from hardbound to paperback?

I wonder what the spiritual significance of that was.

[leafytwiglet]

Remember when they went from hardbound to paperback?

I wonder what the spiritual significance of that was.

Cost effective strategy. The cost of paper skyrocketed in the mid seventies.

They were paper back when I took it in 79 so I am assuming they changed in 76 or 77?

Edited January 19, 2009 by leafytwiglet

[waysider]

Cost effective strategy. The cost of paper skyrocketed in the mid seventies.

They were paper back when I took it in 79 so I am assuming they changed in 76 or 77?

Oh, sure

I can see why it would seem that way just looking at it with your 5 senses.