Interesting thread So_crates ! Is PFAL god-breathed?
I believe wierwille very subtly suggested just that in the PFAL book. On page 83 of the PFAL book in the chapter “That Man May Be Perfect” wierwille states:
“…Let’s see this from John 5:39. “Search the Scriptures…” It does not say search Shakespeare or Kant or Plato or Aristotle or V.P. Wierwille’s writings or the writings of a denomination. No it says, “Search the scriptures…” because all Scripture is God-breathed. Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; not what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures – they are God-breathed.”
wierwille makes several insinuations here. First off, he suggests that not ALL that wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; that implies SOME of it is…secondly wierwille is not as generous with conferring the God-breathed status on others. For example - he does NOT say “not all what Calvin said was necessarily God-breathed, nor all that Luther said…& etc.” Rather he simply states “not what Calvin said, nor Luther…”which suggests that none of their writings are God-breathed whereas at least some of wierwille’s writings are God-breathed.
Another treacherous aspect of wierwille’s statement is the lack of specificity…WHAT parts of his writings ARE God-breathed? Perhaps it might have helped if he issued a red letter edition of the PFAL books – like Bibles with the words of Christ in red…This way when students needed a shot of the god-breathed wierwille – they could just go their red letter edition of a PFAL book and find exactly the passage of wierwille that was god-breathed.
Now let’s see what a little wierwille-style-vagary does to II Timothy 3:16 using the NIV:
Not all of Scripture is God-breathed but what part is God-breathed – is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness...
Naw…I don’t like it…I’m really gonna have to apply myself to find the god-breathed stuff.
Do I need to enumerate all of Saint Vic's liberties taken with the truth?
How do we know he not just giving us another snow on gas pumps story? Or another claim like he invented the hook shot or fast food?
Not to me, no.
But if I understand correctly, The Law of Believing is essentially a way of telling God what to do. So Mike likely has come to the conclusion VPW Believed through God. God-Breathed.
Someone asked you for your proof in Who will write the book. Your response was to question whether or not you need to start another thread. Rather than wait for you to get around to it (which I doubt you ever will) I shortcutted the process.
I'm calling you out: You claim PLAF is God-breathe, prove it.
What kind of a proof do you want?
An air tight one, where the logic forces you to see that you have no choice but believe it, and ask me where you could send your ABS to?
I knew it! I knew that he'd argue about "proof." ("What kind of a proof do you want?")
My only surprise is that he hasn't asked what "proof" actually means, he only asks "What kind?" as if there are at least two kinds of proof, and possibly more.
Mike, surprise us all with any kind of proof. Emphasis on "proof," not on what kind.
While it might not be possible to prove it (kinda like proving the existence of God), it's entirely reasonable to demand that Mike at least make an argument to support his claim thereof.
I’m not holding my breath. It takes at the very least some honesty and some courage to stand by what you say. I don’t think Mike exhibits either virtue.
On another note, what an insult to God, IMO for Mike to say that p£al is God-breathed. You oughta be ashamed of yourself man.
DWBH commented earlier somewhere about Mike’s “circular illogic”. He’s really good at it. There’s no end to a circle and I don’t foresee an end to Mike’s bs. I’d like to be proven wrong.
Admit you don't know, because that's all your telling me with this poor excuse for an excuse.
This will go on for pages. Then he will eventually vanish. Later, he will claim he answered everybody and provided proof and nobody could dispute him. I don't think he even does it on purpose. He's not seeing the same reality most people are. So, where you see him stall for pages, he "remembers" he actually answered lots of questions. If you want to know what that's like, watch "Lord of the Rings-Fellowship of the RIng", and follow the ring in the scene where Bilbo is supposed to leave it behind as a gift for Frodo. I've shown that scene to people, prefacing it with "follow the ring in this scene", and periodically pausing and asking "Where is the ring now?" to make sure they realize Bilbo's not quite experiencing the reality he thinks he is, at that point.
Don't expect Mike to have learned anything, either. He once made a claim about the Bible. I refuted it verse by verse, and ended with a comment that he would probably make the same disproven claim again 6 months later. Sure enough, 6 months later, he did.
This will go on for pages. Then he will eventually vanish. Later, he will claim he answered everybody and provided proof and nobody could dispute him. I don't think he even does it on purpose. He's not seeing the same reality most people are. So, where you see him stall for pages, he "remembers" he actually answered lots of questions. If you want to know what that's like, watch "Lord of the Rings-Fellowship of the RIng", and follow the ring in the scene where Bilbo is supposed to leave it behind as a gift for Frodo. I've shown that scene to people, prefacing it with "follow the ring in this scene", and periodically pausing and asking "Where is the ring now?" to make sure they realize Bilbo's not quite experiencing the reality he thinks he is, at that point.
Don't expect Mike to have learned anything, either. He once made a claim about the Bible. I refuted it verse by verse, and ended with a comment that he would probably make the same disproven claim again 6 months later. Sure enough, 6 months later, he did.
So maybe we should all stop wasting our time with him.
A chance to go on for pages DISCUSSING proof while offering none, then later claiming you did? I'll bet you'd love another one of those (discussions around something that never actually touch the subject.) .
Is this what all that love of God in renewed mind in manifestation has taught you? To waste other people's time?
I'm fighting lymphoma and Parkinson's Disease, so I don't have to play games
I'm sorry to hear of your situation. I am not playing games. I suggest you calm down and end the demands.
Here’s what I will tell you. I proved it to myself that it was my best bet.
How I proved it to my self was a process, and not a one page process.
If you are going to get more detail from me on that proof process, then kindly grant me the same respect you demand of me.
If you think that there exists…….any sheet of paper(s) of Geometry looking proof, with steps sequentially ordered, and objective mechanical decisions are executed at each stage, until the final line reads “Therefore, PFAL is God-breathed.” And all the experts agree………… If you think that there exists a kind of proof like that, then I’d like to see one. If that’s the kind of proof you want, you are on a fruitless quest. They don’t exist.
Now there are other kinds of proofs, and differing kinds of proofs lead to differing kinds and levels of surety.
The process that I proved PFAL’s God-breathedness to myself was a long one. I’ve put many of the details of that process in the two threads I’ve been posting on recently.
***
Another angle I like to look at in discussions is motivation. WHY do you ask me for such a proof? There’s aq lot to explore there. This topic could take all Winter.
.... love of God in renewed mind in manifestation.....
Here is one such post where that documents part of that PROOF PROCESS as it was was proceeding. I just posted it on the other thread and though you may have missed it. It's in response to Chockful's question about the J.S. Paper on adultery and how it affected me:
I was a twig leader in 1980, years before the JS Paper came out. In that year the need for some more clear doctrine on sex moved from the rumor stage to the actual stage when a carload of grads from the State of Maine arrived. There were flimsy rumor doctrines floating around the ministry for years that seemed to justify sex outside marriage. In Maine they got very active at it.
I mentioned earlier that my experience (and that of two other close friend HQ staff members) with these loose sex activities was totally zero. I only heard the flimsy doctrines or justifications there once, and it was very disappointing in who I had to hear it from (another friend). But the rumors on the field were stronger.
What we did in my twig in 1980 was work the words in a Young’s Concordance, and then we compiled a list of the the flimsy doctrines or justifications that we had heard, and then weworked verses that seemed to unravel them.
In July of 1987 I had resisted hearing the many rumors of the ministry falling apart and the POP. There were many reasons for this, San Diego’s great distance from the ROA’86 was one of them. Hardly anyone went. I slugged off the rumors due to non-authoritative sources. But that July I heard that Ralph D was coming out for a visit. I went to hear him speak and was stunned at all the bad news about HQ and Geer, and at how angry every one was.
I knew absolutely nothing prior to that meeting, at that late date.
On a table was a stack of copies of the JS Paper. I had been told that anyone who read it would become a Trinity believer. I was not afraid and picked it up. I was stunned even more at what I saw.
It was almost identical to what we had found 7 years earlier. Even the the flimsy doctrines or justifications we had listed were there in the Appendixes. JS did a much more thorough job, and his Appendixes outnumbered ours by a few.
I felt nauseous the next day. It shook my confidence in PFAL to the core for about 11 years. I confronted leaders and friends about it. I lost many friends and would have been blacklisted but there was too much turmoil for leadership to bother with me.
In the next 11 years I experimented with all sorts of fundamental belief systems. It was quite an adventure. When I finally came back to PFAL in 1998 it was deliberate and it was after considering a wealth of information. I shopped around and compared.
Another angle I like to look at in discussions is motivation. WHY do you ask me for such a proof? There’s aq lot to explore there. This topic could take all Winter.
In addition to WHY do you ask, what will you do with the answer? Have you thought that through?
BTW, this same thing was asked of me here ten years ago. Should I go fetch those files?
I'm sorry to hear of your situation. I am not playing games. I suggest you calm down and end the demands.
Here’s what I will tell you. I proved it to myself that it was my best bet.
How I proved it to my self was a process, and not a one page process.
If you are going to get more detail from me on that proof process, then kindly grant me the same respect you demand of me.
That respect you want, your not so good about giving. The respectful thing to do is answer a question when asked.
Look, I dig it. My step father was a big muckity muck in the local school corporation, he was on the board, worked his way up from a teacher, to a principal, to working in the corporation offices. The biggest problem when we talked to him was he forgot we were adults (as my brother would say, he'd been a teacher too long), he thought he was still talking to students.
I don't know where you come from, but in my parts of the woods, you get respect by giving it. You had my respect, then you started dodging questions and telling people they needed a rounded education.
Quote
If you think that there exists…….any sheet of paper(s) of Geometry looking proof, with steps sequentially ordered, and objective mechanical decisions are executed at each stage, until the final line reads “Therefore, PFAL is God-breathed.” And all the experts agree………… If you think that there exists a kind of proof like that, then I’d like to see one. If that’s the kind of proof you want, you are on a fruitless quest. They don’t exist.
Now there are other kinds of proofs, and differing kinds of proofs lead to differing kinds and levels of surety.
The process that I proved PFAL’s God-breathedness to myself was a long one. I’ve put many of the details of that process in the two threads I’ve been posting on recently.
***
Another angle I like to look at in discussions is motivation. WHY do you ask me for such a proof? There’s aq lot to explore there. This topic could take all Winter.
What you fail to understand is most of us here have done your program and its failed us miserably.
Please don't tell me about believing.
I first attended twig when I was 18 and I had no job, no car.
When I first got into the ministry, I would hitchhike home 12-miles, in all seasons, after twig. How much believing you think that took?
Then, after I moved into town, I had an hour an a half hike one way to twig. I would walk both ways. How much believing do you think that took?
Did God provide me the means to get a drivers license and a car? No.
I finally did get a car, long after I left the ministry and when I was well into my 40s.
Even after I left The Way, I blamed my self for things not working out. After years and years of trying to get the principles to work, I came to a conclusion: it wasn't me, it was the doctrine.
All this time, while I was faithfully trying to get PLAF to work, my life went by, my preductive years went by.
All that believing and what do I have to show for it?
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
63
252
68
130
Popular Days
Jan 25
114
Jan 6
58
Jan 9
51
Jan 3
45
Top Posters In This Topic
Rocky 63 posts
Mike 252 posts
waysider 68 posts
So_crates 130 posts
Popular Days
Jan 25 2018
114 posts
Jan 6 2018
58 posts
Jan 9 2018
51 posts
Jan 3 2018
45 posts
Popular Posts
DontWorryBeHappy
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead."........Thomas Paine.
penworks
Here's an idea: we each drop out of this topic and go read a book.
DontWorryBeHappy
Can anyone tell me dictor paul's scriptural position on the word "Covfefe"? What is the true meaning of that word?? Mike's textual criticism, and use of the basic dictor "keys to research", is as made
Posted Images
T-Bone
Interesting thread So_crates ! Is PFAL god-breathed?
I believe wierwille very subtly suggested just that in the PFAL book. On page 83 of the PFAL book in the chapter “That Man May Be Perfect” wierwille states:
“…Let’s see this from John 5:39. “Search the Scriptures…” It does not say search Shakespeare or Kant or Plato or Aristotle or V.P. Wierwille’s writings or the writings of a denomination. No it says, “Search the scriptures…” because all Scripture is God-breathed. Not all that Wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; not what Calvin said, nor Luther, nor Wesley, nor Graham, nor Roberts; but the Scriptures – they are God-breathed.”
wierwille makes several insinuations here. First off, he suggests that not ALL that wierwille writes will necessarily be God-breathed; that implies SOME of it is…secondly wierwille is not as generous with conferring the God-breathed status on others. For example - he does NOT say “not all what Calvin said was necessarily God-breathed, nor all that Luther said…& etc.” Rather he simply states “not what Calvin said, nor Luther…”which suggests that none of their writings are God-breathed whereas at least some of wierwille’s writings are God-breathed.
Another treacherous aspect of wierwille’s statement is the lack of specificity…WHAT parts of his writings ARE God-breathed? Perhaps it might have helped if he issued a red letter edition of the PFAL books – like Bibles with the words of Christ in red…This way when students needed a shot of the god-breathed wierwille – they could just go their red letter edition of a PFAL book and find exactly the passage of wierwille that was god-breathed.
Now let’s see what a little wierwille-style-vagary does to II Timothy 3:16 using the NIV:
Not all of Scripture is God-breathed but what part is God-breathed – is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness...
Naw…I don’t like it…I’m really gonna have to apply myself to find the god-breathed stuff.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Not to me, no.
But if I understand correctly, The Law of Believing is essentially a way of telling God what to do. So Mike likely has come to the conclusion VPW Believed through God. God-Breathed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
now we're talking - she was one of my favorite characters on Star Trek: Voyager !
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
What kind of a proof do you want?
An air tight one, where the logic forces you to see that you have no choice but believe it, and ask me where you could send your ABS to?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Why ain't I disappointed? Somehow I knew you'd dodge the question.
You have an answer or no? If I asked you how to find the area of a circle you wouldn't be showing me The Way two-step.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Passive aggressive non-responsive reply.
Not even an attempt at an argument to support your claims.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
I knew it! I knew that he'd argue about "proof." ("What kind of a proof do you want?")
My only surprise is that he hasn't asked what "proof" actually means, he only asks "What kind?" as if there are at least two kinds of proof, and possibly more.
Mike, surprise us all with any kind of proof. Emphasis on "proof," not on what kind.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
This topic beyond logic.
This belongs in Doctrinal. We're talking about God-breathed stuff.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
What kind of proof you got?
Balls in your court, dude.
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
JayDee
I’m not holding my breath. It takes at the very least some honesty and some courage to stand by what you say. I don’t think Mike exhibits either virtue.
On another note, what an insult to God, IMO for Mike to say that p£al is God-breathed. You oughta be ashamed of yourself man.
DWBH commented earlier somewhere about Mike’s “circular illogic”. He’s really good at it. There’s no end to a circle and I don’t foresee an end to Mike’s bs. I’d like to be proven wrong.
So_Crates called you out Mike. Back your play.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
How many characters are you going to limit me to? 40?
How about one page?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
You just love to stall, don't you?
Admit you don't know, because that's all your telling me with this poor excuse for an excuse.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
This will go on for pages. Then he will eventually vanish. Later, he will claim he answered everybody and provided proof and nobody could dispute him. I don't think he even does it on purpose. He's not seeing the same reality most people are. So, where you see him stall for pages, he "remembers" he actually answered lots of questions. If you want to know what that's like, watch "Lord of the Rings-Fellowship of the RIng", and follow the ring in the scene where Bilbo is supposed to leave it behind as a gift for Frodo. I've shown that scene to people, prefacing it with "follow the ring in this scene", and periodically pausing and asking "Where is the ring now?" to make sure they realize Bilbo's not quite experiencing the reality he thinks he is, at that point.
Don't expect Mike to have learned anything, either. He once made a claim about the Bible. I refuted it verse by verse, and ended with a comment that he would probably make the same disproven claim again 6 months later. Sure enough, 6 months later, he did.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
So maybe we should all stop wasting our time with him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I'd just love to have a conversation on proofs.
Have you ever seen a such a proof?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I have no idea what you even mean by a proof.
Show me something similarly deep that you feel is proved.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Sorry, I'm going to a conversation where I'll accomplish something.
Good luck with that.
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
A chance to go on for pages DISCUSSING proof while offering none, then later claiming you did? I'll bet you'd love another one of those (discussions around something that never actually touch the subject.) .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Is this what all that love of God in renewed mind in manifestation has taught you? To waste other people's time?
I'm fighting lymphoma and Parkinson's Disease, so I don't have to play games
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
So_crates, that's a tough break, man - - my thoughts and prayers are with you
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I'm sorry to hear of your situation. I am not playing games. I suggest you calm down and end the demands.
Here’s what I will tell you. I proved it to myself that it was my best bet.
How I proved it to my self was a process, and not a one page process.
If you are going to get more detail from me on that proof process, then kindly grant me the same respect you demand of me.
If you think that there exists…….any sheet of paper(s) of Geometry looking proof, with steps sequentially ordered, and objective mechanical decisions are executed at each stage, until the final line reads “Therefore, PFAL is God-breathed.” And all the experts agree………… If you think that there exists a kind of proof like that, then I’d like to see one. If that’s the kind of proof you want, you are on a fruitless quest. They don’t exist.
Now there are other kinds of proofs, and differing kinds of proofs lead to differing kinds and levels of surety.
The process that I proved PFAL’s God-breathedness to myself was a long one. I’ve put many of the details of that process in the two threads I’ve been posting on recently.
***
Another angle I like to look at in discussions is motivation. WHY do you ask me for such a proof? There’s aq lot to explore there. This topic could take all Winter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Here is one such post where that documents part of that PROOF PROCESS as it was was proceeding. I just posted it on the other thread and though you may have missed it. It's in response to Chockful's question about the J.S. Paper on adultery and how it affected me:
I was a twig leader in 1980, years before the JS Paper came out. In that year the need for some more clear doctrine on sex moved from the rumor stage to the actual stage when a carload of grads from the State ofMaine Maine
I mentioned earlier that my experience (and that of two other close friend HQ staff members) with these loose sex activities was totally zero. I only heard the flimsy doctrines or justifications there once, and it was very disappointing in who I had to hear it from (another friend). But the rumors on the field were stronger.
What we did in my twig in 1980 was work the words in a Young’s Concordance, and then we compiled a list of the the flimsy doctrines or justifications that we had heard, and then we worked verses that seemed to unravel them.
In July of 1987 I had resisted hearing the many rumors of the ministry falling apart and the POP. There were many reasons for this,San Diego
I knew absolutely nothing prior to that meeting, at that late date.
On a table was a stack of copies of the JS Paper. I had been told that anyone who read it would become a Trinity believer. I was not afraid and picked it up. I was stunned even more at what I saw.
It was almost identical to what we had found 7 years earlier. Even the the flimsy doctrines or justifications we had listed were there in the Appendixes. JS did a much more thorough job, and his Appendixes outnumbered ours by a few.
I felt nauseous the next day. It shook my confidence in PFAL to the core for about 11 years. I confronted leaders and friends about it. I lost many friends and would have been blacklisted but there was too much turmoil for leadership to bother with me.
In the next 11 years I experimented with all sorts of fundamental belief systems. It was quite an adventure. When I finally came back to PFAL in 1998 it was deliberate and it was after considering a wealth of information. I shopped around and compared.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
In addition to WHY do you ask, what will you do with the answer? Have you thought that through?
BTW, this same thing was asked of me here ten years ago. Should I go fetch those files?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
That respect you want, your not so good about giving. The respectful thing to do is answer a question when asked.
Look, I dig it. My step father was a big muckity muck in the local school corporation, he was on the board, worked his way up from a teacher, to a principal, to working in the corporation offices. The biggest problem when we talked to him was he forgot we were adults (as my brother would say, he'd been a teacher too long), he thought he was still talking to students.
I don't know where you come from, but in my parts of the woods, you get respect by giving it. You had my respect, then you started dodging questions and telling people they needed a rounded education.
What you fail to understand is most of us here have done your program and its failed us miserably.
Please don't tell me about believing.
I first attended twig when I was 18 and I had no job, no car.
When I first got into the ministry, I would hitchhike home 12-miles, in all seasons, after twig. How much believing you think that took?
Then, after I moved into town, I had an hour an a half hike one way to twig. I would walk both ways. How much believing do you think that took?
Did God provide me the means to get a drivers license and a car? No.
I finally did get a car, long after I left the ministry and when I was well into my 40s.
Even after I left The Way, I blamed my self for things not working out. After years and years of trying to get the principles to work, I came to a conclusion: it wasn't me, it was the doctrine.
All this time, while I was faithfully trying to get PLAF to work, my life went by, my preductive years went by.
All that believing and what do I have to show for it?
So, if I'm a hard sell, now you know why.
Edited by So_cratesLink 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.