It appears like I made a mistake in being too quick with one line:
QUICK LINE that may have confused you:
"If you folks are found guilty of trashing God's biggest work in 2,000 years, the restoration of His Word, then you will soon be knowing how Judas felt at the day of Pentecost.
***********************************
EXPANDED ANSWER, of my whole passage that contains the line that it too brief, with my red additions:
" IF I am wrong, it is not that big a deal to me, nor to God. I've been wrong before, and forgiven. It's easy for me to bounce back from my errors. Besides, my PFAL stand means I absorb LOTS of KJV verses in my PFAL study, and what I am judged for is how I walk in love on that Word that I know. I would be guilty of overestimating God's love maybe?
IFI am right about PFAL being directly from God via 1942 Promise, then you folks are found guilty of trashing God's biggest work in 2,000 years, the restoration of His Word in written PFAL, then you will soon be knowing how Judas felt at the day of Pentecost. What he felt was GREAT shame at getting it ALL wrong. Of course Jesus forgave him, and somehow Judas stumbled thru the 40 days with the apostles, so the apostles forgave him. They probably were too busy condemning their own unbelief at the crucifixion, especially Peter for 6 denials. Then on Pentecost Jesus ascends and disappears from sight, and two angels appear, promising more goodies not many days hence. And the poor natural man that he was, Judas could not take the self condemnation for missing it all so badly. His whole world was turned upside down. I lost his ALL. Now I trust none of you are natural men. Even Raf. Once with Romans 10:9 and the new car behind the curtain is yours. I imagine you all might be able to handle the shame eventually, but there will also be great frustration at what you missed. What did you miss? Look at the beginning of this paragraph and remember the "IF."
If I am right, and you rejected it, then you missed YEARS where you could have been applying it to your lives and others and finally getting results. That will be a big deal to you. The Word talks of the possibility of us Christians being ashamed before him at his coming. Maybe Jesus or the Father will walk you thru your posts and show you where you were wrong.
Thanks for calling my attention to my error in being too brief to make sense, Rocky. It allowed me to explain it much better.
Mike if you are wrong about this, and multiple brothers and sisters in Christ are telling you that you are misled, then it is you that will review each one of those explanations again at the bema in front of our Lord and it is you that will experience the shame. Rather than painting a picture of our future shame with your deluded ego and refusal to listen to brothers and sisters speaking the truth in love, why don’t you write an expanded paragraph about what your shame is going to look like and whether you will be able to handle it?
Right now you are a pawn troll. God did not visit VP in a snowstorm just like He did not dictate the Book of Mormon to Joseph Smith. But both of those men share similar narcissistic traits that are also a warning to any with eyes to see and ears to hear.
The fruit of both of those mens lives is to draw people away from the true body of Christ with twisted doctrine to the point where people exposed seldom ever unite with other Christians. This is practical and doctrinal error in Corinthians.
God does not produce miracles that have the fruit of the Way International.
The fruit there belongs to the delusional dictators at the top starting with King Con.
Right now you are a pawn troll. God did not visit VP in a snowstorm just like He did not dictate the Book of Mormon to Joseph Smith. But both of those men share similar narcissistic traits that are also a warning to any with eyes to see and ears to hear.
I think one of the big attractions of PFAL is the promise of divine knowledge…special revelations…secret knowledge…Gnosticism incognito. And I believe one of the big retention tactics of TWI is to engender an us-versus-them mentality…which can often lead to a persecution complex… Joseph Smith claimed the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on Earth in History of the Church by Joseph Smith .
The doctrines of Mormonism began with the farm boy, Joseph Smith in the 1820s in Western New York during a period of religious excitement which is known as the Second Great Awakening. After praying about which denomination he should join, Smith said he received a vision in the spring of 1820. Called the "First Vision", Smith said that God the Father and his son Jesus Christ appeared to him and instructed him to join none of the existing churches because they were all wrong. During the 1820s Smith chronicled several angelic visitations, and was eventually told that God would use him to re-establish the true Christian church.
Joseph Smith said the Book of Mormon was translated from writing on golden plates in a reformed Egyptian language, translated with the assistance of the Urim and Thummim and seer stones. He said an angel first showed him the location of the plates in 1823, buried in a nearby hill. With the assistance of Martin Harris, an early follower, Smith began dictating the text of the Book of Mormon on April 12, 1828. Although translation was interrupted by persecution, Smith's continued employment in order to support his family, and Harris's loss of 116 pages, the Book of Mormon manuscript was finished in June 1829. Smith said the plates were returned to the angel after he finished the translation. During the time Smith said he possessed the plates, 15 people were allowed to witness their existence.
Mormons have Joseph Smith’s vision and golden plates…TWI has wierwille’s snow job and plagiarized material with a side order of spiritualism, Gnosticism, and Fundamentalism.
An “us vs. them” mentality is an essential ingredient in the recipe that makes up cults. A persecution complex is optional but common. Both create stronger group cohesion and a group sense of identity. Both support the cult leadership in controlling the narrative and beliefs of members. Both aid the cult leadership in separating their members from the world at large, which in turn, is important in perpetrating cult mind control.
Additionally, promoting the specific behaviors that stimulate opposition in outsiders (which results in a opposition and a persecution complex) also aids the cult leadership in creating separation, and thus empowering the leadership to control minds. An alienated group is an isolated group. Isolation supports information control, and reduces outside social influence.
Yes, cults bring upon themselves the opposition of outsiders by having stimulated that opposition. They do it to serve a dark agenda (aware or not, control is a dark agenda), and the reap the consequences. Cult organizations that violate the standards of the surrounding culture are causing the conflict by having violated cultural standards.
I think most well written articles, text books, and novels will interpret themselves at times to make things clear. In a novel, especially a mystery novel, the clues may be well hidden or may come in late in the story.
For some books there is less need for this. But if the reader is constantly confused, and gets no clarification that book might be considered poor quality.
The reason it was useful to us to hear that the Bible interprets itself, is because we live in a culture where there is so much chaos in Bible doctrines that many people figure the multi author, multi century production of the Bible would NOT be so well coordinated between such widely separated contributors.
But we were taught that the Bible really has only one Author and He wants us to know, where it is appropriate.
Not everywhere does the Bible interpret itself, though. Those who mistakenly think VPW was teaching all the Bible interprets itself really missed the boat. Even smart grad writers have made this silly mistake. God arraigned that some portions of the Bible would interpret itself where we need it. He had us taught other tools when this tool is not the best one to use.
That the Bible does sometimes interpret itself is a Godsend that assures us that there is only one Author.
I think most well written articles, text books, and novels will interpret themselves at times to make things clear. In a novel, especially a mystery novel, the clues may be well hidden or may come in late in the story.
For some books there is less need for this. But if the reader is constantly confused, and gets no clarification that book might be considered poor quality.
The reason it was useful to us to hear that the Bible interprets itself, is because we live in a culture where there is so much chaos in Bible doctrines that many people figure the multi author, multi century production of the Bible would NOT be so well coordinated between such widely separated contributors.
But we were taught that the Bible really has only one Author and He wants us to know, where it is appropriate.
Not everywhere does the Bible interpret itself, though. Those who mistakenly think VPW was teaching all the Bible interprets itself really missed the boat. Even smart grad writers have made this silly mistake. God arraigned that some portions of the Bible would interpret itself where we need it. He had us taught other tools when this tool is not the best one to use.
That the Bible does sometimes interpret itself is a Godsend that assures us that there is only one Author.
Often, the Scripture interprets itself in the verse right where it is written. In fact, the vast majority of God’s Word will interpret itself right in the verse where it is written. Knowing this, we can begin to enjoy reading and understanding the Bible.
I'm hearing "sometimes", "often" and "the vast majority of the time.
I think most well written articles, text books, and novels will interpret themselves at times to make things clear. In a novel, especially a mystery novel, the clues may be well hidden or may come in late in the story.
. . .
I see you've chosen mystery books as your example.
. . .
The reason it was useful to us to hear that the Bible interprets itself, is because we live in a culture where there is so much chaos in Bible doctrines that many people figure the multi author, multi century production of the Bible would NOT be so well coordinated between such widely separated contributors.
. . .
Pretty sure the writers had a very cohesive religion in common . . . Across time . . . Which speaks to the function of the religion . . . Just saying
Where does it say GSC threads are logical discussions?
Presumptuous properly applied and still properly applies. Including that you presume to set the framework for logical discussions.
Of course, Old School is correct. We've known about you in that regard for years.
In a strict sense, I have to agree with you. There are no rigorous proofs outside mathematics. But though they are the only water tight proofs in the known world, they only apply to trivial elements.
So we use different kinds of proofs and logic for things that matter in life.
In most formal settings, such as courtrooms, testimonial proof is the name of the game.
I agree GSC is not in any way a courtroom or a place where logical discussions are the unbreakable rule.
But many times many of us hew out little courtrooms where we try to prove things, and conduct logical discussions.
Anyone for a little chit-chat on the mirror reversal riddle?
But, Rocky here's my protest to your question to me above. I am OFTEN pressed for logical discussion, often even designed to derail my already known (albeit poorly) message. This is so often, that my reflex reaction is to say TO MYSELF, "What is this logical discussion they are demanding of me now?"
Q: Where does it say GSC threads are logical discussions?
A: In the threads of most challengers who very forcefully demand logical discussions from me all the time.
Anyway, I am thankful to you folks who allow me to get my message expressed here.
Pretty sure the writers had a very cohesive religion in common . . . Across time . . . Which speaks to the function of the religion . . . Just saying
I can agree,
and to be more specific:
I see the writers as widely separated by their locations on the time line. Other separations were culture, geography, education. Over these spans I see religions of men as tending to divisiveness and chaotic.
But fortunately for us that religion DID have an "only rule" which we inherited, and their religious copying machines were reliable.
Mike if you are wrong about this, and multiple brothers and sisters in Christ are telling you that you are misled, then it is you that will review each one of those explanations again at the bema in front of our Lord and it is you that will experience the shame. Rather than painting a picture of our future shame with your deluded ego and refusal to listen to brothers and sisters speaking the truth in love, why don’t you write an expanded paragraph about what your shame is going to look like and whether you will be able to handle it?
Yes. You are right. It is true of ALL of us that we will have to give account of our every word. I remind myself of that. Thanks for the extra reminder.
I admit I did a poor piece of writing, where you suggested I expand the paragraph. If I ever use that text as boilerplate somewhere else, I'll have to re-write that section.
*/*/*/*/*
With the rest of your post I respectfully disagree, except with the logic that IF i am wrong, then I am in deep doo doo.
In application, when I work written PFAL, I am in a world of KJV verses and I know for MOST OF LIFE, just about any Bible version with our training will steer us pretty right.
It is really the case that when you narrow it all down to just work with a small set of easy to read books, all of the crazy evils we all back then have been burned out of the pages. The Corps was a whole other matter. It is easy to delete it from my perspective. I resisted enough of them to their face that it is just those books that guide me, and they guide me into the KJV thousands of times.
And trust me, I think of how everyone else missed the boat SO OFTEN, that it's inevitable that the possibility I have missed the boat comes up, not often, but regularly.
Since 1998 my understanding of this has hit a glitch at times, and I modify accordingly best I can. I don't have all the answers to some of the logical questions.
In APPLICATION of all this, I made more frequent mistakes. In the love department I'm still learning. It's what we DO with what we got that matters most in the end.
There are no rigorous proofs outside mathematics. But though they are the only water tight proofs in the known world, they only apply to trivial elements.
So we use different kinds of proofs and logic for things that matter in life
Am I reading you correctly? You think mathematics only applies to the trivial elements of life?
In a strict sense, I have to agree with you. There are no rigorous proofs outside mathematics. But though they are the only water tight proofs in the known world, they only apply to trivial elements.
So we use different kinds of proofs and logic for things that matter in life.
In most formal settings, such as courtrooms, testimonial proof is the name of the game.
I agree GSC is not in any way a courtroom or a place where logical discussions are the unbreakable rule.
But many times many of us hew out little courtrooms where we try to prove things, and conduct logical discussions.
Anyone for a little chit-chat on the mirror reversal riddle?
But, Rocky here's my protest to your question to me above. I am OFTEN pressed for logical discussion, often even designed to derail my already known (albeit poorly) message. This is so often, that my reflex reaction is to say TO MYSELF, "What is this logical discussion they are demanding of me now?"
Q: Where does it say GSC threads are logical discussions?
A: In the threads of most challengers who very forcefully demand logical discussions from me all the time.
Anyway, I am thankful to you folks who allow me to get my message expressed here.
So to me this sounds like you are missing most of the point of Guerdjeff. His incompleteness theorems contradict most of the above paragraphs. And this is the underlying math logic you are referring to. I would suggest a deeper review of what you are using as tools to arrive at your conclusion
Mistakes are perfectly normal. Everyone makes them. It's only when your words are held to an impossible standard... say, PFAL's definition of God-breathed... that mistakes undermine a claim to inerrancy.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
65
72
161
71
Popular Days
May 28
50
Apr 30
49
May 2
41
May 10
37
Top Posters In This Topic
Rocky 65 posts
waysider 72 posts
Bolshevik 161 posts
Nathan_Jr 71 posts
Popular Days
May 28 2022
50 posts
Apr 30 2022
49 posts
May 2 2022
41 posts
May 10 2022
37 posts
Popular Posts
Bolshevik
Scripture, The Bible, is not *a* language. "It interprets itself", though.
T-Bone
Excerpts from the first draft for a totally revised burnt orange book “Power For Materialistic Living Today”, page 3, Introduction: The Materialistic Life …This post literally changed my life. My
Raf
It is almost impossible to overstate how much this reeks of bullcrap. I'll be gentle: If Euclidian geometry were wrong on one point, Euclidian geometry would be perfectly content to remove
Posted Images
Mike
Sorry, I forgot to whisper when I posted that.
Sorry also about your need there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
If one person responds you said there's 100 to 1000 others thinking the same thing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Mike if you are wrong about this, and multiple brothers and sisters in Christ are telling you that you are misled, then it is you that will review each one of those explanations again at the bema in front of our Lord and it is you that will experience the shame. Rather than painting a picture of our future shame with your deluded ego and refusal to listen to brothers and sisters speaking the truth in love, why don’t you write an expanded paragraph about what your shame is going to look like and whether you will be able to handle it?
Right now you are a pawn troll. God did not visit VP in a snowstorm just like He did not dictate the Book of Mormon to Joseph Smith. But both of those men share similar narcissistic traits that are also a warning to any with eyes to see and ears to hear.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
The fruit of both of those mens lives is to draw people away from the true body of Christ with twisted doctrine to the point where people exposed seldom ever unite with other Christians. This is practical and doctrinal error in Corinthians.
God does not produce miracles that have the fruit of the Way International.
The fruit there belongs to the delusional dictators at the top starting with King Con.
Edited by chockfullLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
I think one of the big attractions of PFAL is the promise of divine knowledge…special revelations…secret knowledge…Gnosticism incognito. And I believe one of the big retention tactics of TWI is to engender an us-versus-them mentality…which can often lead to a persecution complex… Joseph Smith claimed the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on Earth in History of the Church by Joseph Smith .
The doctrines of Mormonism began with the farm boy, Joseph Smith in the 1820s in Western New York during a period of religious excitement which is known as the Second Great Awakening. After praying about which denomination he should join, Smith said he received a vision in the spring of 1820. Called the "First Vision", Smith said that God the Father and his son Jesus Christ appeared to him and instructed him to join none of the existing churches because they were all wrong. During the 1820s Smith chronicled several angelic visitations, and was eventually told that God would use him to re-establish the true Christian church.
Joseph Smith said the Book of Mormon was translated from writing on golden plates in a reformed Egyptian language, translated with the assistance of the Urim and Thummim and seer stones. He said an angel first showed him the location of the plates in 1823, buried in a nearby hill. With the assistance of Martin Harris, an early follower, Smith began dictating the text of the Book of Mormon on April 12, 1828. Although translation was interrupted by persecution, Smith's continued employment in order to support his family, and Harris's loss of 116 pages, the Book of Mormon manuscript was finished in June 1829. Smith said the plates were returned to the angel after he finished the translation. During the time Smith said he possessed the plates, 15 people were allowed to witness their existence.
From: Wiki - Mormonism
Mormons have Joseph Smith’s vision and golden plates…TWI has wierwille’s snow job and plagiarized material with a side order of spiritualism, Gnosticism, and Fundamentalism.
An “us vs. them” mentality is an essential ingredient in the recipe that makes up cults. A persecution complex is optional but common. Both create stronger group cohesion and a group sense of identity. Both support the cult leadership in controlling the narrative and beliefs of members. Both aid the cult leadership in separating their members from the world at large, which in turn, is important in perpetrating cult mind control.
Additionally, promoting the specific behaviors that stimulate opposition in outsiders (which results in a opposition and a persecution complex) also aids the cult leadership in creating separation, and thus empowering the leadership to control minds. An alienated group is an isolated group. Isolation supports information control, and reduces outside social influence.
Yes, cults bring upon themselves the opposition of outsiders by having stimulated that opposition. They do it to serve a dark agenda (aware or not, control is a dark agenda), and the reap the consequences. Cult organizations that violate the standards of the surrounding culture are causing the conflict by having violated cultural standards.
All cults operate the same way. They differ from one another only in nuance and style. Cult mind control is one thing. Quora – cults have us-versus-them mentality and a persecution complex
Edited by T-Bonerevision of The Book of T-Bone, the most silly poster on Grease Spot
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
You misread.
If you read it again you see I did NOT apply those numbers.
They are radio/TV station numbers.
Mike's word interprets itself OFTEN right where it's written.
That is a good tool you can apply to lots of texts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Mike's word doesn't always interpret itself?
Do we hang on those words?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
That's like magic powers.
When we give something previously undefined a name it's like it is created in our mind. The logos in action.
But your words act on their own.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I think most well written articles, text books, and novels will interpret themselves at times to make things clear. In a novel, especially a mystery novel, the clues may be well hidden or may come in late in the story.
For some books there is less need for this. But if the reader is constantly confused, and gets no clarification that book might be considered poor quality.
The reason it was useful to us to hear that the Bible interprets itself, is because we live in a culture where there is so much chaos in Bible doctrines that many people figure the multi author, multi century production of the Bible would NOT be so well coordinated between such widely separated contributors.
But we were taught that the Bible really has only one Author and He wants us to know, where it is appropriate.
Not everywhere does the Bible interpret itself, though. Those who mistakenly think VPW was teaching all the Bible interprets itself really missed the boat. Even smart grad writers have made this silly mistake. God arraigned that some portions of the Bible would interpret itself where we need it. He had us taught other tools when this tool is not the best one to use.
That the Bible does sometimes interpret itself is a Godsend that assures us that there is only one Author.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I'm having deja vu
https://thewayinternational.com/the-scripture-interprets-itself-in-the-verse-right-where-it-is-written/
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Gee wiz, did I make a mistake?
How do you want to handle that?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I see you've chosen mystery books as your example.
Very enticing.
Edited by BolshevikLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
You chose "sometimes". Run with it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Pretty sure the writers had a very cohesive religion in common . . . Across time . . . Which speaks to the function of the religion . . . Just saying
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I'm assuming this is sentence where the dance begins.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Where does it say GSC threads are logical discussions?
Presumptuous properly applied and still properly applies. Including that you presume to set the framework for logical discussions.
Of course, Old School is correct. We've known about you in that regard for years.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
In a strict sense, I have to agree with you. There are no rigorous proofs outside mathematics. But though they are the only water tight proofs in the known world, they only apply to trivial elements.
So we use different kinds of proofs and logic for things that matter in life.
In most formal settings, such as courtrooms, testimonial proof is the name of the game.
I agree GSC is not in any way a courtroom or a place where logical discussions are the unbreakable rule.
But many times many of us hew out little courtrooms where we try to prove things, and conduct logical discussions.
Anyone for a little chit-chat on the mirror reversal riddle?
But, Rocky here's my protest to your question to me above. I am OFTEN pressed for logical discussion, often even designed to derail my already known (albeit poorly) message. This is so often, that my reflex reaction is to say TO MYSELF, "What is this logical discussion they are demanding of me now?"
Q: Where does it say GSC threads are logical discussions?
A: In the threads of most challengers who very forcefully demand logical discussions from me all the time.
Anyway, I am thankful to you folks who allow me to get my message expressed here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I can agree,
and to be more specific:
I see the writers as widely separated by their locations on the time line. Other separations were culture, geography, education. Over these spans I see religions of men as tending to divisiveness and chaotic.
But fortunately for us that religion DID have an "only rule" which we inherited, and their religious copying machines were reliable.
I am thankful we can enjoy a perspective where
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Yes. You are right. It is true of ALL of us that we will have to give account of our every word. I remind myself of that. Thanks for the extra reminder.
I admit I did a poor piece of writing, where you suggested I expand the paragraph. If I ever use that text as boilerplate somewhere else, I'll have to re-write that section.
*/*/*/*/*
With the rest of your post I respectfully disagree, except with the logic that IF i am wrong, then I am in deep doo doo.
In application, when I work written PFAL, I am in a world of KJV verses and I know for MOST OF LIFE, just about any Bible version with our training will steer us pretty right.
It is really the case that when you narrow it all down to just work with a small set of easy to read books, all of the crazy evils we all back then have been burned out of the pages. The Corps was a whole other matter. It is easy to delete it from my perspective. I resisted enough of them to their face that it is just those books that guide me, and they guide me into the KJV thousands of times.
And trust me, I think of how everyone else missed the boat SO OFTEN, that it's inevitable that the possibility I have missed the boat comes up, not often, but regularly.
Since 1998 my understanding of this has hit a glitch at times, and I modify accordingly best I can. I don't have all the answers to some of the logical questions.
In APPLICATION of all this, I made more frequent mistakes. In the love department I'm still learning. It's what we DO with what we got that matters most in the end.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Am I reading you correctly? You think mathematics only applies to the trivial elements of life?
Wow! ...just...Wow!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
So to me this sounds like you are missing most of the point of Guerdjeff. His incompleteness theorems contradict most of the above paragraphs. And this is the underlying math logic you are referring to. I would suggest a deeper review of what you are using as tools to arrive at your conclusion
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I don't quite understand why someone would devote 20 years of self study to a subject they deemed trivial.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Mistakes are perfectly normal. Everyone makes them. It's only when your words are held to an impossible standard... say, PFAL's definition of God-breathed... that mistakes undermine a claim to inerrancy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Apparent contradictions . . . mistakes only appear to be made . . . . but not by some
We still haven't gone over the other tools. Always sometimes never. What where they?
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.