After being throughly or is that thoroughly.....anyway whatever.......lovingly reproved and tenderly corrected by Sir Padre Rafael I am now renewed in my thinking.
Thank you Father Raf for helping me see the error of my evil, independent thought patterns and gently bringing me back to the prevailing idea in the promised land of group togetherness.
My point is that vp taught that Paul was outside the will of the Lord by going to jerusalem. I don't buy it.
I think the will of the Lord is much bigger then Paul going to jerusalem (plus I don't buy the out of fellowship teaching).
Take for instance Moses after breaking those tablets. God didn't want him to do that but they were still talking! Only Moses had to redo the thing. Paul had a little bit more he had to deal with.
For proof of Paul's out of fellowshipness vp cites that Paul didn't win anyone for 2 years. Well if that's an indicator we are all probably in trouble.
Another for instance is that God didn't want us to give twi tons of money (and other things we did) but we did. Does that mean we were outside of the will of the Lord? Not in the way I understand the will of the Lord to be.
We just don't have the understanding needed to do everything God wants us to (see through a glass darkly-KJV).
Take Mike for instance. I think he thinks he is doing the will of the Lord. Does he? Will he? If he is not now that doesn't mean it will not get done, or that he might even have a hand in getting the will of the Lord done.
I might have gone with vp's teaching on that verse if it wasn't for the 2 words "be done" and the other stuff I said about what I think the will of the Lord is.
I don't mind if others have different opinions on that verse-fine with me.
Is it recorded that when everyone said what would happen to Paul if he went that God said NOT to go to Jerusalem OR is it just assumed in the class that that was what God wanted since bad things aren't supposed to happen to God's people who are "in fellowship?"
Could it just have been a recorded incident of people who loved Paul and wanted to protect him from harm simply because they loved Him?
VP says in the class that the believers there were telling Paul..."Do the will of the Lord, Paul....Paul, do the will of the Lord..." VP assuming it was God's will for Paul not to go..but does it say that Paul was NOT to go or is Paul just getting a heads up on what would happen ?
Even if one wants to imply it was God's intention for Paul not to go based on TWI doctrine of bad things don't happen to those in fellowship...it still violates principals of what we were taught in 'interpreting the word", doesn't it..reading into something...letting a difficult verse be twisted to fit into a preset belief? Not reading what is written as it does NOT say not to go...
I don't mind if others have different opinions on that verse-fine with me.
Actually, if I may interject at this point:
This is what I meant in the first post when I said I'm looking for actual errors. If you agree that there can be differences of opinion, no matter how strongly you hold your opinion, that is not the kind of error I am interested in exposing.
I'm looking for 2+2=5 errors.
I'm looking for verifiable, undeniable, indisputable, matter of fact errors.
It's no secret that I think the Law of Believing is a bunch of hooey, but I do not list that as an actual error.
You don't believe Wierwille was right about "they ceased saying the will of the Lord be done." Fine, but that's not what I mean by an actual error.
I think we need to get down to brass tacks, bottom line mistakes: errors that can't be disputed.
"Apistia" is used several times to mean people who do not believe even though they know enough to believe. That is a direct contradiction of Wierwille's statement in PFAL. No room for argument or disagreement.
There is a word "lama" in Aramaic. Period. No room for error or disagreement.
David was called a man after God's own heart BEFORE the Uriah/Bathsheba mess, not afterward as Wierwille wrote.
Let's try to stick with actual errors, ones that are not subject to interpretation. I know it's easier for me to see my rules, seeing as I made them up, but I hope people understand what I'm trying to say here.
I agree, if "winning someone to the Lord" is an or only indication, we are all in deep kimchee.
My thoughts are this:
1. Diciples told Paul not to go through the Spirit (vs.4)
2. Philip's 4 daughters prophesied (what they said we really don't know but in the conext of this scripture..........????????)
3. Agabus, a prophet, said "thus saith the Holy Ghost........."
4. All of the people around Paul at that time heard and saw these events and warned Paul not to go (vs. 12)
Paul went and we know what happened. Was it God's will that Paul go to Jerusalem?......I don't think it was and that is why they (those who were with Paul at the time said to Paul collectively) "we cease saying [to you, Paul] the will of the Lord [don't go to Jerusalem] be done."
Hi, Zixar and Rafael and everyone else. Good thread. I agree with almost everyone, although I think V.P. was blowing hot air when he excised that comma in Acts 21:14:
"And when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, The will of the Lord be done."
That sentence is punctuated perfectly. It has nothing to do with whether it was the will of the Lord for Paul to go to Jerusalem. Obviously it was not. But when Paul kept overruling objections, when he said he was ready to die in Jerusalem if necessary, the disciples finally gave up. "The will of the Lord be done," they said. It's a hopeful wish that what God wants will come to pass. It's a natural thing to say. It doesn't mean it was God's will for Paul to go to Jerusalem. The disciples were just hopeful that God's will would come to pass.
VP's butchery of Matthew 27:46 is my personal favorite. Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? Every Hebrew I student knows that "lama" is why. It's a quotation of the psalm, "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Before he died VP knew he was wrong on this, and he taught a corrected version to the Corps at Gunnison shortly before he died, but nobody made a tape and distributed it.
KK, the same two points you made here were subjects of questions I asked the "clergy" overseeing my PFAL class. Looking back, he had to know I was right. Instead of an honest answer, he told me to hold my questions "in abeyance." Acquiescence seemed appropriate in the polite company of Way believers. What difference did it make? I wouldn't realize how much hinged on PFAL's errors until long afterward.
I just was reminded, thanks to Karl Kahler's post ,that VP said he was wrong about "Why has't thou forsaken me"
But looking back it was in a self serving way.
Right before he died he spent allot of time with Ralph and Geer in New England. During this time he had several Corps meetings. At the last one, VERY breifly before his death, he was talking about POP and how one of the things that the Trustees did to shut him out was reject the "new research" that needed to be published to correct errors in PFAL. One of those things was "Why has't thou forsaken me"
I cannot believe I forgot about that! I remember it blew my mind that he admitted an error.
But looking back he wasn't , IMO, concerned about correcting doctrine. He was trying to make himself look good and secure loalty and maybe even pitty from us. He spent allot of time subtly dissing the Trustees in those last few weeks.
On a side note, and speaking of self serving, has anyone ever pondered VP's tomb stone inscription?
"I wish I was 1/2 the man I was known to be"
Talk about a cop out. He was repenting in a passive way, I think. Admitting his flaws at long last. Trouble is, no one noticed it in that light. We all took it as "wow how HUMBLE of him"
ha.
I am throughly completly, completly complete. Glory!
Hey QQ, good to see you here, you look so familiar in your steaming blue cup. Do you ever use the glass of Guinness anymore? And Evan, whoever you are, happy to see you.
I actually posted before I read half of what you guys wrote about Acts. I agree (apologies to my man Rafe, and good to see you too) that this is not an indisputable error, but it's still an interesting error.
I bet there are VERY few Christians on VERY few websites who sit up nights debating whether this verse in Acts is punctuated correctly. I suspect this is a Way-only obsession.
Zixar, of all people, the smartest man I ever met on the Internet, is an expert on a great many things, and ordinarily I would recommend him for answering just about any question correctly. Truly, he is a genius, and I'm not being sarcastic, I'm being truthful. But, having said that, I'm wondering if he slept through his Greek lessons. I think any "expert" could look at that verse, study it from every conceivable angle, and conclude that it's punctuated perfectly.
Oakspear, you slay me with those Greek letters. Where do you get those? I used to know hundreds of Greek words. You and me put together probably know twice as much Greek as V.P. and Martindale multiplied together.
Here, as clearly as I can explain it, is Wierwille's error. "And when he could not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, The will of the Lord be done."
VP says you have to remove the comma between "ceased" and "saying." Why? Well, that's a long story. To find out why you have to sit for 30 minutes listening to VP rave about how it was NOT God's will for Paul to go to Jerusalem.
Wait, wait, wait. Rewind. Reread. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER IT WAS THE WILL OF GOD FOR PAUL TO GO TO JERUSALEM.
VP acts like this verse, as punctuated, suggests it was God's will for Paul to go to Jerusalem. Hello! What was he smoking? In what part of the verse did he read this? It does nothing of the sort.
It was a saying. Paul's pals said "The will of the Lord be done" all the time. It was a much more natural expression in the Aramaic, a Jewish saying. It's a hopeful and pious expression of faith, "The will of the Lord be done." It can be translated into any language, and no expert would dispute that it was badly translated OR punctuated. The disciples said "The will of the Lord be done." It was a saying they had. This is the way they talked.
Even if the will of the Lord was about NOT to be done, Wierwille fans, then the people around Paul STILL said, "The will of the Lord be done."
It's that simple.
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER GOD WANTED PAUL TO GO TO JERUSALEM.
Okay, I admit it's not indisputable, but to me it's pretty blatant.
While I'm on the line, I'll give you a personal favorite. "A man's gift maketh room for him, and bringeth him before great men."
"This verse is about gift ministries. Apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. A man's gift makes room for him, and brings him before great men. That's talking about great men of the Word."
Yeah, right, Mr. Flunked Out of Algebra. He went off to college (in Wisconsin) and got his future wife pregnant, a pretty nurse. Then he married her, and while supporting a suckling he managed to get into Princeton, the same Princeton from "A Beautiful Mind," and managed to get a master's degree.
You would think he knew Greek and Hebrew forward and back, but then he went and got a mail-order doctorate. Real colleges would not necessarily have flunked him out, but they would sure as hell not be offering him a doctorate the first summer he showed up. "Doctor" Wierwille. Yeah, right.
If you look this proverb up in any interlinear, commentary or annotated Bible, it will tell you that the word "gift" means "bribe." A man's bribe makes room for him, and brings him before great men. The "great men" are princes, kings, prime ministers, rich men, robbers, mafiosos, etc., etc. They are not "great men of the Word" like V.P. and Craig and Ralph Dubofsky and Johnny Townsend and the rest of the pantheon.
If you hunt down every usage of the word "gift" (I think it's "mattanah") in the OT, you'll find that it never, ever, ever, ever, ever implies the English meaning of "gift" as something that resides inside you. A "gift" in this verse means a wad of money, some jewelry, a present, something physical, something one person hands to another. It NEVER means "gift" as in English, where you can have the gift of gab or the gift of song or the gift of being an apostle, prophet, pastor, evangelist or teacher.
It's like the word "present." "A man's present makes room for him, and brings him before great men." Meaning money opens doors, you grease the hand that feeds you, you visit a big man and you need to bring a big gift. It's inconceivable for this particular word to mean "gift ministries" or spiritual enablements of any kind.
I wrote to the Research Department about this in 1986, I think, the year I graduated from the 14th Corps. I think it was Bruce Mahone who answered me. He said something like, "Every commentary in the world agrees with your observations. But if the commentaries were always right, we wouldn't need PFAL."
Yeah, right. He insisted that the popular Way version of the verse was accurate. Yeah, right. Need a company yes-man who'll consistently give you wrong answers? Just dial The Way International, Research Department.
Oh, but WAIT.
I hope I'm not the first to mention this, but (drum roll please) my all-time favorite candidate for the list of V.P.'s most blatant errors ........
The original sin was masturbation!
Where he got this idea I DON'T, don't, don't want to know.
I typed my last reply on Microsoft Word, where you can go to the "Insert" menu under "symbols" and get Greek, Cyrillic, Hebrew, Arabic, etc. letters. Cut and pasted it over to reply. Just figured out how to do that and wanted to play :P-->
Oakspear
...goin' down to Rosedale, got my rider by my side...and I'm standin' at the crossroads...
21 When these things were accomplished, Paul purposed in the Spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying, "After I have been there, I must also see Rome."
NKJV
Strong's # 4151 - Spirit
5. universally, the disposition or influence which fills and governs the soul of anyone; the efficient source of any power, affection, emotion, desire, see 2 Cor 12:18
The word spirit in the bible has a diversity of usages. One of these usages from Thayer's Lexicon is clearly stated above. Notice in the context of Acts 19:21 that it does not say purposed in the holy spirit which would have definitely meant that this was a message from God. Instead it says the less definite purposed in the spirit. From the context and usage it sounds like Paul determined himself to go to Jerusalem and that this was not guidance from God.
Here is another biblical version.
Acts 19:21
21 After these things had happened, Paul made up his mind to travel through Macedonia and Achaia and go on to Jerusalem. "After I go there," he said, "I must also see Rome."
Headline: THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER GOD WANTED PAUL TO GO TO JERUSALEM.
That is a circumlocution and error logic injected into tens of thousands of people's brains just like you and me and all our friends.
It's embarrassingly simple. The Jews had a saying in Aramaic, "The will of the Lord be done." Even Wierwille doesn't dispute the translation. But he disputes the PUNCTUATION, for several minutes, acting like the removal of that one comma would separate truth from error.
Well, bull-hockey. What was he drinking the night he came up with this theory? Just read the words, VP, and stop obsessing over the punctuation. Yes, we know, there was no punctuation in the Greek! So what, that means you can repunctuate any sentence in the Bible, including, "Very I say unto you, Today thou shalt be with me in paradise"?
Another one for your list, alert Rafael in Florida if you aren't already nodding off. VP insisted on changing it to "Verily I say unto you today, Thou shalt be with me in paradise."
Oh, yeah, and when?! When? Today? I'm going to be in paradise with you when? Not today? Not until 2 or 3000 years later when you return (yeah, right) to gather all the sleeping corpses and all the live believers?
"Verily I say unto you," however you could translate this ("I'll tell you the truth" is my offering), was one of Jesus's favorite sayings. I'll tell you the truth, he said, and then he did. He told the truth every minute he lived, right down to the last few hours before he died, quoting Psalms about how God had forsaken him and all that.
It's in the BIBLE. You can look it UP. PFAL IS 2/3 BS. Wierwille was full of cow turds, the smell of corn, a mediocre IQ, a very basic Ohio boy's understanding of the book called the Bible and very little else. He didn't know ****, but he still acted like he was the big it, the apostle who would save the 20th century from drowning in ignorance of the "present truth," as Wierwille's best disciple later coined the term.
I hate to dis Wierwille. Hell, I hate to dis anybody, and I encourage anybody to dis me. But I think Wierwille was full of ****, from his eyebrows to his ***hole, and if the blind old man could stand up right now and speak for himself but for once be honest, I think the old cost would have to admit that he really, truly was a fake, that he was horny more than he was studious, that he loved girls and boinked several hundred of them, but he did it in absolute secrecy while maintaining the undisputed position that he was the world's most skilled master of following "The Word."
What a bunch of crap. He was a drunk old lecher and we are his progeny. Well, hurray for us. At least God favored Zixar with a 150+ IQ to set us straight on what the truth is on most subjects. Just don't listen to him on the Book of Acts and you'll be fine.
Gang, I just spent about an hour of my precious time on a Friday night to write you a note, but then I hit the wrong button and my iMac said, “WRONG BUTTON. DELETE NOTE.” So I thought my note got deleted. It simply vanished. It simply fled into the night without being recorded or celebrated in any way at all.
Ah, well. I’m a Buddhist. No, wait, I’m a Christian Hindu like that Indian dude Bishop Pillai. “If I come home and my house is burning down, I'll say to myself, I will build another house.”
I think I may be a Zen Buddhist. Back when I was in college I read a book about Zen Buddhism, and apparently in their religion you’re not allowed to believe in anything. I’ve been a Zen Buddhist ever since.
Zen and the art of sending e-mail. Such a new art, and so rarely mastered. “Do not aim the arrow at the bullseye. Let the arrow fly itself.” Zen and the Art of Target Shooting.
I wrote for the longest time about how that verse in Acts is punctuated perfectly. I wish you could have read it, but I’m afraid it vanished. (Now I think it actually survived the jourey.) I also wrote about my personal favorite, the verse in Proverbs that says “A man’s gift maketh room for him.”
I guess I might have to rewrite this stuff, if you’re ever going to see it. Whatever else happens, don’t forget about the original sin being masturbation. That’s an “actual error,” Rafe with your fine-tuned sense of same. It’s possible, I guess, but there’s absolutely nothing in the text to support the idea. Apparently VP came up with it while he was masturbating. Walker, do you have any ideas on the subject?
While we’re on the subject, the word “available” does not appear anywhere in the Bible. “What’s available, how to receive it, what to do with it after you’ve got it, keeping your needs and wants parallel, I forget the fifth point but I think it was pretty lame, God will answer all your prayers or something like that — all of this is Wierwille’s invention or something he stole from somebody else. It isn’t in the Bible. “What’s available” is simply not, Wierwille fans, in the Bible. (Nor is “athletes,” LCM fans.)
I better write short in case I crash the system. Cheers to all, and please don’t stop until you’ve found 100 errors in Wierwille’s work. Don’t make me submit my list of favorites again, starting with those incredibly nimble Athletes!
1.The more "THAN" abundant life. John 10:10 says more abundantly, which I feel is different then more THAN abundant. He was such a stickler for getting everthing exact so why wasn't this said exact.
2.God will never test you. They always brought out that scripture about God not tempting you. Well test is different than tempt. In my view.
Did someone already bring up Athlete's o' the spirit?
I know it's not technically PFAL...okay, it's not PFAL period!
I can see that there are athletic references in spots, but that whole section in Ephesians...I have never been able to find where he decided that those words were actually ahletic terms. It looks like they are the normal words for helmet, breastplate, shod, etc.
Oakspear
...goin' down to Rosedale, got my rider by my side...and I'm standin' at the crossroads...
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
208
62
95
53
Popular Days
Jan 3
56
Jan 28
53
Jan 17
52
Jan 27
46
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 208 posts
Jbarrax 62 posts
Zixar 95 posts
Mike 53 posts
Popular Days
Jan 3 2003
56 posts
Jan 28 2003
53 posts
Jan 17 2003
52 posts
Jan 27 2003
46 posts
Popular Posts
Raf
Clear as the difference between all with a distinction and all without distinction. See, to those unaware of the circumstances that brought about this thread, I look like I'm nitpicking to prove Wier
Raf
I'm not talking about errors that are subject to interpretation. Whether you believe the dead are alive now, for example, really depends on your worldview and your interpretation of scripture. Whether
Larry P2
And let's not forget the one about "All the women in the Kingdom belong to the King." Which proves that he was a lecherous piece of sh!t communicating his desire for a steady stream of young, gullibl
firebee
After being throughly or is that thoroughly.....anyway whatever.......lovingly reproved and tenderly corrected by Sir Padre Rafael I am now renewed in my thinking.
Thank you Father Raf for helping me see the error of my evil, independent thought patterns and gently bringing me back to the prevailing idea in the promised land of group togetherness.
Where do I send the check?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vertical Limit
My point is that vp taught that Paul was outside the will of the Lord by going to jerusalem. I don't buy it.
I think the will of the Lord is much bigger then Paul going to jerusalem (plus I don't buy the out of fellowship teaching).
Take for instance Moses after breaking those tablets. God didn't want him to do that but they were still talking! Only Moses had to redo the thing. Paul had a little bit more he had to deal with.
For proof of Paul's out of fellowshipness vp cites that Paul didn't win anyone for 2 years. Well if that's an indicator we are all probably in trouble.
Another for instance is that God didn't want us to give twi tons of money (and other things we did) but we did. Does that mean we were outside of the will of the Lord? Not in the way I understand the will of the Lord to be.
We just don't have the understanding needed to do everything God wants us to (see through a glass darkly-KJV).
Take Mike for instance. I think he thinks he is doing the will of the Lord. Does he? Will he? If he is not now that doesn't mean it will not get done, or that he might even have a hand in getting the will of the Lord done.
I might have gone with vp's teaching on that verse if it wasn't for the 2 words "be done" and the other stuff I said about what I think the will of the Lord is.
I don't mind if others have different opinions on that verse-fine with me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mandii
Is it recorded that when everyone said what would happen to Paul if he went that God said NOT to go to Jerusalem OR is it just assumed in the class that that was what God wanted since bad things aren't supposed to happen to God's people who are "in fellowship?"
Could it just have been a recorded incident of people who loved Paul and wanted to protect him from harm simply because they loved Him?
VP says in the class that the believers there were telling Paul..."Do the will of the Lord, Paul....Paul, do the will of the Lord..." VP assuming it was God's will for Paul not to go..but does it say that Paul was NOT to go or is Paul just getting a heads up on what would happen ?
Even if one wants to imply it was God's intention for Paul not to go based on TWI doctrine of bad things don't happen to those in fellowship...it still violates principals of what we were taught in 'interpreting the word", doesn't it..reading into something...letting a difficult verse be twisted to fit into a preset belief? Not reading what is written as it does NOT say not to go...
just my thoughts....
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Actually, if I may interject at this point:
This is what I meant in the first post when I said I'm looking for actual errors. If you agree that there can be differences of opinion, no matter how strongly you hold your opinion, that is not the kind of error I am interested in exposing.
I'm looking for 2+2=5 errors.
I'm looking for verifiable, undeniable, indisputable, matter of fact errors.
It's no secret that I think the Law of Believing is a bunch of hooey, but I do not list that as an actual error.
You don't believe Wierwille was right about "they ceased saying the will of the Lord be done." Fine, but that's not what I mean by an actual error.
I think we need to get down to brass tacks, bottom line mistakes: errors that can't be disputed.
"Apistia" is used several times to mean people who do not believe even though they know enough to believe. That is a direct contradiction of Wierwille's statement in PFAL. No room for argument or disagreement.
There is a word "lama" in Aramaic. Period. No room for error or disagreement.
David was called a man after God's own heart BEFORE the Uriah/Bathsheba mess, not afterward as Wierwille wrote.
Let's try to stick with actual errors, ones that are not subject to interpretation. I know it's easier for me to see my rules, seeing as I made them up, but I hope people understand what I'm trying to say here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
firebee
I agree, if "winning someone to the Lord" is an or only indication, we are all in deep kimchee.
My thoughts are this:
1. Diciples told Paul not to go through the Spirit (vs.4)
2. Philip's 4 daughters prophesied (what they said we really don't know but in the conext of this scripture..........????????)
3. Agabus, a prophet, said "thus saith the Holy Ghost........."
4. All of the people around Paul at that time heard and saw these events and warned Paul not to go (vs. 12)
Paul went and we know what happened. Was it God's will that Paul go to Jerusalem?......I don't think it was and that is why they (those who were with Paul at the time said to Paul collectively) "we cease saying [to you, Paul] the will of the Lord [don't go to Jerusalem] be done."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vertical Limit
2 or more people can have different opinions that they hold to be truth yet still be doing the will of the Lord.
I know - actual errors.
Kinda good though ain't it Raf?
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
No complaints here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
firebee
Rafael............
I hope you know my above post was made in jest
There is plenty of wiggle room for this particular topic in Acts, but not much wiggle at all in the list that started this thread.
VPW some made outragious statements and claims in PFAL, some of which hurt and harmed innocent prople.
VT I'm glad you said that, it is very true
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
In Colossians 3:5, the word “mortify” does not mean “to blow apart”; it is the Greek word ?????? (nekro?) which means to make dead.
Strong's Number 3499 ?????? {nek-ro'-?}
1) to make dead, to put to death, slay
2) worn out
2a) of an impotent old man
3) to deprive of power, destroy the strength of
Even in English, it doesn't mean to "blow apart"
Merriam-Webster On-Line Dictionary:
Main Entry: mor·ti·fy
Pronunciation: 'mor-t&-"fI
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -fied; -fy·ing
Etymology: Middle English mortifien, from Middle French mortifier, from Late Latin mortificare, from Latin mort-, mors
Date: 14th century
transitive senses
1 obsolete : to destroy the strength, vitality, or functioning of
2 : to subdue or deaden (as the body or bodily appetites) especially by abstinence or self-inflicted pain or discomfort
3 : to subject to severe and vexing embarrassment : SHAME
intransitive senses
1 : to practice mortification
2 : to become necrotic or gangrenous
...PFAL...more God-breathed every day
:D-->
Oakspear
...goin' down to Rosedale, got my rider by my side...and I'm standin' at the crossroads...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Karl Kahler
Hi, Zixar and Rafael and everyone else. Good thread. I agree with almost everyone, although I think V.P. was blowing hot air when he excised that comma in Acts 21:14:
"And when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, The will of the Lord be done."
That sentence is punctuated perfectly. It has nothing to do with whether it was the will of the Lord for Paul to go to Jerusalem. Obviously it was not. But when Paul kept overruling objections, when he said he was ready to die in Jerusalem if necessary, the disciples finally gave up. "The will of the Lord be done," they said. It's a hopeful wish that what God wants will come to pass. It's a natural thing to say. It doesn't mean it was God's will for Paul to go to Jerusalem. The disciples were just hopeful that God's will would come to pass.
VP's butchery of Matthew 27:46 is my personal favorite. Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? Every Hebrew I student knows that "lama" is why. It's a quotation of the psalm, "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Before he died VP knew he was wrong on this, and he taught a corrected version to the Corps at Gunnison shortly before he died, but nobody made a tape and distributed it.
Thanks for the memories,
Karl
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheEvan
Karl!!! HaHa, the "Man of the Book" returns!
I have another one. Ridiculous & obvious.
Wierwille taught that repentance is only for the unsaved and forgiveness for the saved to "get back into fellowship" (another stupid concept, imo).
Good God, no wonder there were so many hard people in Stalag Weg...nobody could bring themselves to repent of sins.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
QamiQazi
KK, the same two points you made here were subjects of questions I asked the "clergy" overseeing my PFAL class. Looking back, he had to know I was right. Instead of an honest answer, he told me to hold my questions "in abeyance." Acquiescence seemed appropriate in the polite company of Way believers. What difference did it make? I wouldn't realize how much hinged on PFAL's errors until long afterward.
QQ
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
Georgio Jessio
Holy Flashback!
I just was reminded, thanks to Karl Kahler's post ,that VP said he was wrong about "Why has't thou forsaken me"
But looking back it was in a self serving way.
Right before he died he spent allot of time with Ralph and Geer in New England. During this time he had several Corps meetings. At the last one, VERY breifly before his death, he was talking about POP and how one of the things that the Trustees did to shut him out was reject the "new research" that needed to be published to correct errors in PFAL. One of those things was "Why has't thou forsaken me"
I cannot believe I forgot about that! I remember it blew my mind that he admitted an error.
But looking back he wasn't , IMO, concerned about correcting doctrine. He was trying to make himself look good and secure loalty and maybe even pitty from us. He spent allot of time subtly dissing the Trustees in those last few weeks.
On a side note, and speaking of self serving, has anyone ever pondered VP's tomb stone inscription?
"I wish I was 1/2 the man I was known to be"
Talk about a cop out. He was repenting in a passive way, I think. Admitting his flaws at long last. Trouble is, no one noticed it in that light. We all took it as "wow how HUMBLE of him"
ha.
I am throughly completly, completly complete. Glory!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Karl Kahler
Hey QQ, good to see you here, you look so familiar in your steaming blue cup. Do you ever use the glass of Guinness anymore? And Evan, whoever you are, happy to see you.
I actually posted before I read half of what you guys wrote about Acts. I agree (apologies to my man Rafe, and good to see you too) that this is not an indisputable error, but it's still an interesting error.
I bet there are VERY few Christians on VERY few websites who sit up nights debating whether this verse in Acts is punctuated correctly. I suspect this is a Way-only obsession.
Zixar, of all people, the smartest man I ever met on the Internet, is an expert on a great many things, and ordinarily I would recommend him for answering just about any question correctly. Truly, he is a genius, and I'm not being sarcastic, I'm being truthful. But, having said that, I'm wondering if he slept through his Greek lessons. I think any "expert" could look at that verse, study it from every conceivable angle, and conclude that it's punctuated perfectly.
Oakspear, you slay me with those Greek letters. Where do you get those? I used to know hundreds of Greek words. You and me put together probably know twice as much Greek as V.P. and Martindale multiplied together.
Here, as clearly as I can explain it, is Wierwille's error. "And when he could not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, The will of the Lord be done."
VP says you have to remove the comma between "ceased" and "saying." Why? Well, that's a long story. To find out why you have to sit for 30 minutes listening to VP rave about how it was NOT God's will for Paul to go to Jerusalem.
Wait, wait, wait. Rewind. Reread. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER IT WAS THE WILL OF GOD FOR PAUL TO GO TO JERUSALEM.
VP acts like this verse, as punctuated, suggests it was God's will for Paul to go to Jerusalem. Hello! What was he smoking? In what part of the verse did he read this? It does nothing of the sort.
It was a saying. Paul's pals said "The will of the Lord be done" all the time. It was a much more natural expression in the Aramaic, a Jewish saying. It's a hopeful and pious expression of faith, "The will of the Lord be done." It can be translated into any language, and no expert would dispute that it was badly translated OR punctuated. The disciples said "The will of the Lord be done." It was a saying they had. This is the way they talked.
Even if the will of the Lord was about NOT to be done, Wierwille fans, then the people around Paul STILL said, "The will of the Lord be done."
It's that simple.
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER GOD WANTED PAUL TO GO TO JERUSALEM.
Okay, I admit it's not indisputable, but to me it's pretty blatant.
While I'm on the line, I'll give you a personal favorite. "A man's gift maketh room for him, and bringeth him before great men."
"This verse is about gift ministries. Apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. A man's gift makes room for him, and brings him before great men. That's talking about great men of the Word."
Yeah, right, Mr. Flunked Out of Algebra. He went off to college (in Wisconsin) and got his future wife pregnant, a pretty nurse. Then he married her, and while supporting a suckling he managed to get into Princeton, the same Princeton from "A Beautiful Mind," and managed to get a master's degree.
You would think he knew Greek and Hebrew forward and back, but then he went and got a mail-order doctorate. Real colleges would not necessarily have flunked him out, but they would sure as hell not be offering him a doctorate the first summer he showed up. "Doctor" Wierwille. Yeah, right.
If you look this proverb up in any interlinear, commentary or annotated Bible, it will tell you that the word "gift" means "bribe." A man's bribe makes room for him, and brings him before great men. The "great men" are princes, kings, prime ministers, rich men, robbers, mafiosos, etc., etc. They are not "great men of the Word" like V.P. and Craig and Ralph Dubofsky and Johnny Townsend and the rest of the pantheon.
If you hunt down every usage of the word "gift" (I think it's "mattanah") in the OT, you'll find that it never, ever, ever, ever, ever implies the English meaning of "gift" as something that resides inside you. A "gift" in this verse means a wad of money, some jewelry, a present, something physical, something one person hands to another. It NEVER means "gift" as in English, where you can have the gift of gab or the gift of song or the gift of being an apostle, prophet, pastor, evangelist or teacher.
It's like the word "present." "A man's present makes room for him, and brings him before great men." Meaning money opens doors, you grease the hand that feeds you, you visit a big man and you need to bring a big gift. It's inconceivable for this particular word to mean "gift ministries" or spiritual enablements of any kind.
I wrote to the Research Department about this in 1986, I think, the year I graduated from the 14th Corps. I think it was Bruce Mahone who answered me. He said something like, "Every commentary in the world agrees with your observations. But if the commentaries were always right, we wouldn't need PFAL."
Yeah, right. He insisted that the popular Way version of the verse was accurate. Yeah, right. Need a company yes-man who'll consistently give you wrong answers? Just dial The Way International, Research Department.
Oh, but WAIT.
I hope I'm not the first to mention this, but (drum roll please) my all-time favorite candidate for the list of V.P.'s most blatant errors ........
The original sin was masturbation!
Where he got this idea I DON'T, don't, don't want to know.
= )
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Karl:
I typed my last reply on Microsoft Word, where you can go to the "Insert" menu under "symbols" and get Greek, Cyrillic, Hebrew, Arabic, etc. letters. Cut and pasted it over to reply. Just figured out how to do that and wanted to play
:P-->
Oakspear
...goin' down to Rosedale, got my rider by my side...and I'm standin' at the crossroads...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Acts 19:21
21 When these things were accomplished, Paul purposed in the Spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying, "After I have been there, I must also see Rome."
NKJV
Strong's # 4151 - Spirit
5. universally, the disposition or influence which fills and governs the soul of anyone; the efficient source of any power, affection, emotion, desire, see 2 Cor 12:18
(from Thayer's Greek Lexicon, Electronic Database. Copyright © 2000 by Biblesoft)
The word spirit in the bible has a diversity of usages. One of these usages from Thayer's Lexicon is clearly stated above. Notice in the context of Acts 19:21 that it does not say purposed in the holy spirit which would have definitely meant that this was a message from God. Instead it says the less definite purposed in the spirit. From the context and usage it sounds like Paul determined himself to go to Jerusalem and that this was not guidance from God.
Here is another biblical version.
Acts 19:21
21 After these things had happened, Paul made up his mind to travel through Macedonia and Achaia and go on to Jerusalem. "After I go there," he said, "I must also see Rome."
TEV
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
What if C-A-T really spells dog?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Karl Kahler
Headline: THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER GOD WANTED PAUL TO GO TO JERUSALEM.
That is a circumlocution and error logic injected into tens of thousands of people's brains just like you and me and all our friends.
It's embarrassingly simple. The Jews had a saying in Aramaic, "The will of the Lord be done." Even Wierwille doesn't dispute the translation. But he disputes the PUNCTUATION, for several minutes, acting like the removal of that one comma would separate truth from error.
Well, bull-hockey. What was he drinking the night he came up with this theory? Just read the words, VP, and stop obsessing over the punctuation. Yes, we know, there was no punctuation in the Greek! So what, that means you can repunctuate any sentence in the Bible, including, "Very I say unto you, Today thou shalt be with me in paradise"?
Another one for your list, alert Rafael in Florida if you aren't already nodding off. VP insisted on changing it to "Verily I say unto you today, Thou shalt be with me in paradise."
Oh, yeah, and when?! When? Today? I'm going to be in paradise with you when? Not today? Not until 2 or 3000 years later when you return (yeah, right) to gather all the sleeping corpses and all the live believers?
"Verily I say unto you," however you could translate this ("I'll tell you the truth" is my offering), was one of Jesus's favorite sayings. I'll tell you the truth, he said, and then he did. He told the truth every minute he lived, right down to the last few hours before he died, quoting Psalms about how God had forsaken him and all that.
It's in the BIBLE. You can look it UP. PFAL IS 2/3 BS. Wierwille was full of cow turds, the smell of corn, a mediocre IQ, a very basic Ohio boy's understanding of the book called the Bible and very little else. He didn't know ****, but he still acted like he was the big it, the apostle who would save the 20th century from drowning in ignorance of the "present truth," as Wierwille's best disciple later coined the term.
I hate to dis Wierwille. Hell, I hate to dis anybody, and I encourage anybody to dis me. But I think Wierwille was full of ****, from his eyebrows to his ***hole, and if the blind old man could stand up right now and speak for himself but for once be honest, I think the old cost would have to admit that he really, truly was a fake, that he was horny more than he was studious, that he loved girls and boinked several hundred of them, but he did it in absolute secrecy while maintaining the undisputed position that he was the world's most skilled master of following "The Word."
What a bunch of crap. He was a drunk old lecher and we are his progeny. Well, hurray for us. At least God favored Zixar with a 150+ IQ to set us straight on what the truth is on most subjects. Just don't listen to him on the Book of Acts and you'll be fine.
Love you all,
No, really, I do, but where is Walker?
Karl
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Karl Kahler
Gang, I just spent about an hour of my precious time on a Friday night to write you a note, but then I hit the wrong button and my iMac said, “WRONG BUTTON. DELETE NOTE.” So I thought my note got deleted. It simply vanished. It simply fled into the night without being recorded or celebrated in any way at all.
Ah, well. I’m a Buddhist. No, wait, I’m a Christian Hindu like that Indian dude Bishop Pillai. “If I come home and my house is burning down, I'll say to myself, I will build another house.”
I think I may be a Zen Buddhist. Back when I was in college I read a book about Zen Buddhism, and apparently in their religion you’re not allowed to believe in anything. I’ve been a Zen Buddhist ever since.
Zen and the art of sending e-mail. Such a new art, and so rarely mastered. “Do not aim the arrow at the bullseye. Let the arrow fly itself.” Zen and the Art of Target Shooting.
I wrote for the longest time about how that verse in Acts is punctuated perfectly. I wish you could have read it, but I’m afraid it vanished. (Now I think it actually survived the jourey.) I also wrote about my personal favorite, the verse in Proverbs that says “A man’s gift maketh room for him.”
I guess I might have to rewrite this stuff, if you’re ever going to see it. Whatever else happens, don’t forget about the original sin being masturbation. That’s an “actual error,” Rafe with your fine-tuned sense of same. It’s possible, I guess, but there’s absolutely nothing in the text to support the idea. Apparently VP came up with it while he was masturbating. Walker, do you have any ideas on the subject?
While we’re on the subject, the word “available” does not appear anywhere in the Bible. “What’s available, how to receive it, what to do with it after you’ve got it, keeping your needs and wants parallel, I forget the fifth point but I think it was pretty lame, God will answer all your prayers or something like that — all of this is Wierwille’s invention or something he stole from somebody else. It isn’t in the Bible. “What’s available” is simply not, Wierwille fans, in the Bible. (Nor is “athletes,” LCM fans.)
I better write short in case I crash the system. Cheers to all, and please don’t stop until you’ve found 100 errors in Wierwille’s work. Don’t make me submit my list of favorites again, starting with those incredibly nimble Athletes!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
If Wierwille said it does, you'd probably believe it.
Karl,
Great to see you, lad. You definitely deserve credit for helping with the list.
Athletes of the spirit, indeed.
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
Steve!
5. God's willingness equals His ability. (He's got a jack, and He'll help you change your tire)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RottieGrrrl
Two things that bugged me.
1.The more "THAN" abundant life. John 10:10 says more abundantly, which I feel is different then more THAN abundant. He was such a stickler for getting everthing exact so why wasn't this said exact.
2.God will never test you. They always brought out that scripture about God not tempting you. Well test is different than tempt. In my view.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Did someone already bring up Athlete's o' the spirit?
I know it's not technically PFAL...okay, it's not PFAL period!
I can see that there are athletic references in spots, but that whole section in Ephesians...I have never been able to find where he decided that those words were actually ahletic terms. It looks like they are the normal words for helmet, breastplate, shod, etc.
Oakspear
...goin' down to Rosedale, got my rider by my side...and I'm standin' at the crossroads...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
QamiQazi
Karl, at a cafe all the mugs look the same. I prefer Bass.
Edited by GuestLink 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.