Is PLAF theopneustos, god-breathed?

[Raf]

1 hour ago, waysider said:

This right here, Mike. I asked you a perfectly simple question. ("The ancient city of Nicaea was located in what modern country?") The correct answer is Turkey. One simple word. Your answer? "That depends, yada,yada, blah, blah blah, ad infinitum". There is nothing to "rethink". You dodged the question because you know it reveals an error in PFAL. You can't change facts simply because they don't agree with your "thesis".

Where did PFAL say it is?

[waysider]

12 minutes ago, Raf said:

Where did PFAL say it is?

France

[Raf]

An understandable mistake.

[So_crates]

A less understandable mistake in PLAF, that no one has mentioned and I'm not sure is on the error thread is:

 

Needs and wants paralell

 

If needs and wants were paralell then they would never meet, like two paralell lines.

I think it was Waysider or Skyrider that told me it should actually be:

 

Needs and wants balanced

[waysider]

Well, the context involved something that happened at The Ecumenical Council of Nicaea. Maybe it was the creation of the Canon, I don't really remember. This isn't like you and I having a conversation and hearing something incorrectly. This is an event of epic proportions in the history of the Catholic church. There were two (IIRC) Ecumenical Councils in France but they were much later and in Lyon, hence they are known as the Councils of Lyon.

[Thomas Loy Bumgarner]

On 1/24/2018 at 4:00 AM, waysider said:

It's flawed because it is a false equivalence.

"A common way for this fallacy to be perpetuated is one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result.^[2] False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors. The pattern of the fallacy is often as such: "If A is the set of c and d, and B is the set of d and e, then since they both contain d, A and B are equal". d is not required to exist in both sets; only a passing similarity is required to cause this fallacy to be used."....SOURCE

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to the scriptures, Paul "wrote" Ephesians as he was moved by the Holy Spirit. There was no intermediary source.

VPW "wrote" PFAL through a process of consolidating the works of other writers. There were several intermediary sources.

 

Apples are fruit.

Bananas are fruit.

Therefore, apples are bananas.

There is no need to fear the banana-Fox's The Orville

[Thomas Loy Bumgarner]

On 1/24/2018 at 1:29 PM, waysider said:

Mike, there is nothing in the premise referenced in your most recent post to suggest PFAL is divinely inspired. Wierwille used some common words that can also be found quite easily in the Bible. What does that mean? Absolutely nothing.

I hope you catch your golden pony. He's pretty elusive.

no, it's a unicorn, lol. But don't tell Greg Gutfield

[Thomas Loy Bumgarner]

1 hour ago, waysider said:

France

yeah, right, Nice France is Nicea. Doofus Wierwille obviously never studied church history. Oh right , he studied homiletics-how to preach a sermon. Silly old me. lol

[Raf]

1 hour ago, waysider said:

Well, the context involved something that happened at The Ecumenical Council of Nicaea. Maybe it was the creation of the Canon, I don't really remember. This isn't like you and I having a conversation and hearing something incorrectly. This is an event of epic proportions in the history of the Catholic church. There were two (IIRC) Ecumenical Councils in France but they were much later and in Lyon, hence they are known as the Councils of Lyon.

The Council of Nicea is where the church decided once and for all that Jesus is God and of one substance with the Father, begotten not made, not a creation but the Creator.
It was indeed an event of epic proportions. 

 

And it is an actual error to say Nicea was in modern day France. Good catch. I missed it. [I can't verify because my copies of these books have been transformed by the renewing of their pulp into Bounty towels.

[Mike]

3 hours ago, waysider said:

This right here, Mike. I asked you a perfectly simple question. ("The ancient city of Nicaea was located in what modern country?") The correct answer is Turkey. One simple word. Your answer? "That depends, yada,yada, blah, blah blah, ad infinitum". There is nothing to "rethink". You dodged the question because you know it reveals an error in PFAL. You can't change facts simply because they don't agree with your "thesis".

I thought I answered that question, eventually, with my reference to proofreaders oversights and printers errors. You many have missed it.

 

It certainly was not a new issue to me, though, so I did nothing to change the goalposts. I was onto many JCNG details in very hot debate with Trinitarians starting in 1972. When JCNG came out around 1975 I devoured it. I remember choking on Nice, France. Happy to see it fixed in the 2nd edition, around 1982.

 

I said “eventually” above because I do reserve the right to set up things I want to talk about. The more obvious and adversarial the set-up question is that’s hurled at me, the more set-up in my answer my poetic license will easily allow.

[Raf]

Proofreaders' oversights and printers' errors?

That's NONSENSE.

Those were Wierwille's words. He didn't misspell "Turkey" "F-r-a-n-c-e." He wrote something that was actually in error. 

The dishonesty of your answer is fruit. Tells me all I need to know about the tree.

[So_crates]

8 minutes ago, Mike said:

 The more obvious and adversarial the set-up question is that’s hurled at me, the more set-up in my answer my poetic license will easily allow.

You mean the more obvious and adversarial you percieve the percieved set-up question, don't you?

[Mike]

1 minute ago, So_crates said:

You mean the more obvious and adversarial you percieve the percieved set-up question, don't you?

Yes. It's my perception. 

BTW, I'm pondering a response to your car salesman analogy.

 

[So_crates]

9 minutes ago, Mike said:

Yes. It's my perception. 

And perceptions may or may not be true, right?

Quote

BTW, I'm pondering a response to your car salesman analogy.

Meatloaf said if life is a highway, the soul is but a car

Edited January 25, 2018 by So_crates

[Mike]

1 hour ago, So_crates said:

A less understandable mistake in PLAF, that no one has mentioned and I'm not sure is on the error thread is:

Needs and wants paralell

If needs and wants were paralell then they would never meet, like two paralell lines.

I think it was Waysider or Skyrider that told me it should actually be:

Needs and wants balanced

The film class has "parallel" but the book has "balanced" for most of it. (I think. There may be one appearance of "parallel" ) 

I always took his use of "parallel" to mean how a child's teeter totter is parallel to the ground when the children's weights are balanced.

I always took it as an Ohio-ism, or a local idiom.   This happened (I think) in the early printings of the Blue Book with the phrase "un-loosed" changed to "unleashed."

I'm not bothering to look these things up, because my break time is short.

[Bolshevik]

Wanna know another Ohio-ism?

Alcoholism.

 

 

[So_crates]

5 minutes ago, Mike said:

The film class has "parallel" but the book has "balanced" for most of it. (I think. There may be one appearance of "parallel" ) 

I always took his use of "parallel" to mean how a child's teeter totter is parallel to the ground when the children's weights are balanced.

I always took it as an Ohio-ism, or a local idiom.   This happened (I think) in the early printings of the Blue Book with the phrase "un-loosed" changed to "unleashed."

I'm not bothering to look these things up, because my break time is short.

I was born and raised in Cleveland and I can assure you I've never heard anyone use "parallel" for "balanced."

Edited January 25, 2018 by So_crates

[Mike]

2 hours ago, waysider said:

Well, the context involved something that happened at The Ecumenical Council of Nicaea. Maybe it was the creation of the Canon, I don't really remember. This isn't like you and I having a conversation and hearing something incorrectly. This is an event of epic proportions in the history of the Catholic church. There were two (IIRC) Ecumenical Councils in France but they were much later and in Lyon, hence they are known as the Councils of Lyon.

I was in a staff meeting where VPW grilled David C in front of us all for the number of typos in the last Way Magazine. There were a lot of people involved. Room for miscommunications and errors. In possibly the same staff meeting (can't remember for sure) VPW said that if the Way International waited for every single tiny detail to be perfect then we'd never ship our anything.

I'm happy with getting a copy of PFAL that's tens of thousands of times more accurate to the "originals" than any Eglish Version of the Bible is to those ancient originals. We were taught how to handle errors that creep in, and these were little.

[Mike]

27 minutes ago, Raf said:

Proofreaders' oversights and printers' errors?

That's NONSENSE.

Those were Wierwille's words. He didn't misspell "Turkey" "F-r-a-n-c-e." He wrote something that was actually in error. 

The dishonesty of your answer is fruit. Tells me all I need to know about the tree.

That book was written by committee. I think some chapters had several people working on it. I personally knew a few of them. I lived with two of them.

[So_crates]

14 minutes ago, Mike said:

The film class has "parallel" but the book has "balanced" for most of it. (I think. There may be one appearance of "parallel" ) 

I always took his use of "parallel" to mean how a child's teeter totter is parallel to the ground when the children's weights are balanced.

I always took it as an Ohio-ism, or a local idiom.   This happened (I think) in the early printings of the Blue Book with the phrase "un-loosed" changed to "unleashed."

I'm not bothering to look these things up, because my break time is short.

As of 1979, the error was still in it.

Check out the link and the attribution at the bottom

http://www.picturesofsilver.com/abundantly/abundantly01-03.php

 

Perhaps you should check your PLAF books

Then you can show me where it was corrected.

Edited January 25, 2018 by So_crates

[Mike]

13 minutes ago, So_crates said:

I was born and raised in Cleveland and I can assure you I've never heard anyone use "parallel" for "balanced."

I also can see parallel meaning "in line" or or "pointing in the same direction" or harmonious or ....balanced.

Have you ever heard a new student ask what parallel meant there? Not me.

I think it was easy for all of us to see what he was saying: don't overshoot with greed; don't undershoot with cheating yourself.

 

Edited January 25, 2018 by Mike

[waysider]

16 minutes ago, Mike said:

I always took it as an Ohio-ism, or a local idiom. 

I've lived in various parts of Ohio for 67 years.  I've never heard it used that way.

[Mike]

1 minute ago, waysider said:

I've lived in various parts of Ohio for 67 years.  I've never heard it used that way.

how about "un-loosed" ?

 

[So_crates]

6 minutes ago, Mike said:

I also can see parallel meaning "in line" or or "pointing in the same direction" or harmonious or ....balanced.

Have you ever heard a new student ask what parallel meant there? Not me.

I think it was easy for all of us to see what he was saying: don't overshoot with greed; don't undershoot with cheating yourself.

 

Or don't stretch the language too far, because it'll snap back like a rubber band

You want to torture the language a little more?

Edited January 25, 2018 by So_crates

[Mike]

16 minutes ago, So_crates said:

As of 1979, the error was still in it.

Check out the link and the attribution at the bottom

http://www.picturesofsilver.com/abundantly/abundantly01-03.php

 

Perhaps you should check your PLAF books

Then you can show me where it was corrected.

 

I was wrong. Most of the “parallel” usages are still there, but with 2 explanations given in

PFAL on pages 19,20:

 

“If we are going to tap the resources for the more

abundant life, we must not only know what is available,

how to receive it, and what to do with it; but we

must also get our needs and wants parallel. If our

needs are light and our wants are heavy, we are not

balanced. If our wants are light and our needs are

heavy, we will never get an answer. When we believe,

we get results in prayer if our needs and our wants are

equal.”

 

I did not understand where that link was from.