The topic of administrations is not one I am totally comfortable with posting on because I’m still studying it out.
[You'd really be better off finishing work on the subject BEFORE
supposedly teaching on it. Otherwise, you'll never get anywhere,
and you'll be revising yourself and saying "I was wrong" when you
just needed to ease off the quick trigger-finger.
Further, you've been hinting about it and asked about it for a few
years now. Kindly either finish up and feel qualified to address the
obvious questions on the subject, or at least stop mentioning it
until you are at that stage.]
I am not yet sure about the difference between Dr’s uses of the word “age” and the word “administration.” I’m also not sure about the clean delineation of all the administrations' beginning and ending points. Some seem to have fuzzy borders, like the beginning of the Christ Administration.
[i'll give you this one for free.
If pfal and vpw are correct, the Christ Administration was the "acceptable YEAR of
the Lord", which confines it to within 365 days (give or take a few days).
Its start begins when Jesus is baptized by John,
and it ends only at the beginning of the next administration,
which is Pentecost, Acts 2:1ff.
Approximately one year, as reckoned by vpw.]
It’s also not yet clear to me if the beginning of some administrations occurs at the same time for everyone. For instance, I see many people going to churches where the people, for all practical purposes, are clearly living in the Christ or Law Administrations.
[i'll give you another for free.
People living in the Grace Administration can exercise their
free will and live as though they are limited beyond God-given limitations.
(That's true of all OTHER Administrations as well.
Eve added "neither shall ye touch it" to God's regulations in the
"Original Paradise Administration".
Whether or not someone acts as if God has subjected them to
ordinances-or believes they ARE subject to ordinances-
has NO bearing as to whether or not God has required
ordinances. For that matter, God has placed a rule, and people
don't believe it applies to them, they're not off the hook, either.]
In my lengthy post I argue that we need to completely revamp our time lines and mind pictures of the Return. I’ve started from scratch and am building an understanding from within PFAL exclusively. I don’t try to fit it into preexisting theologies.
[Mind you,
one of the "preexisting theologies" is the one vpw taught. If you end up with
results that contradict that, you will be raked over the coals again for the
internal contradiction of your supposed doctrine.]
But then again, here he uses the word “major” in the PFAL book quote above, too. If there are 7 major administrations, can there be some “minor” administrations too?
[Consider this a 3rd, final freebie.
If you want to know what vpw considered a "minor administration",
and pfal is supposedly a Bible,
then you are required to use the pfal-mandated rules for determining
the meaning of Scripture. In this case, the answer is as follows:
You will need to look at other occurrences of the term "minor administration"
to know what he meant by it. Somewhere else in the "Bible" MUST
explain it. If it does not, then we will NEVER know. ]
[After reading my comments that BG Leonard has been
reported of sterling character
(as opposed to men who have been reported addicts to
vices, molesters, rapists, plagiarists, and then were held up
as examples of leaders,
WTH said the following:]
I can't speak for you or anyone else, but frankly I am more suspicious of the man (or the woman) claiming to be "of SPOTLESS character". Under that SPOTLESS surface there is always something rotten at the core. Man is inclined and will always judge another man by their actions or behavior - but this is not true of God. The true God judges a man by his words, never by their actions.
Matthew 12:37
"For by thy words (it doesn't say acts) thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned."
Then a few verses earlier Jesus says (in v.34) "O generation of vipers, how can ye being evil speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.
(v.35)
"A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things; and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil."
These scriptures are completely forgotten by the "fruit pickers" - those who mis-lead others into believing righteousness is obtained by a man's holy works or by some "holy" acts - thus producing some SPOTLESS character? They completely miss and forget the "fruit" that Jesus was refering to - and Jeus was not refering to a mans actions or their behavior, but rather a man's word. That is why v.36 says:
"But I say unto you, That every idle word [ it doesn't say act] that men shall speak they shall give account thereof in the day of judgement."
The "fruit pickers" want you to believe "whoever they don't like" will be condemned in the day of judgement for their acts. God's word says different- that one will give account for every word - moreover, every "idle" word. If such is the case, it would be a good idea if some people probably kept their big mouth shut.
[This, of course,
has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with my original point.
Someone invented an objection to BG Leonard, and made a
meritless claim that he had issues. My reply was what is considered
obvious-BG Leonard appears to ALL EYEWITNESSES to have led
as spotless a life as it is possible to do at this time.
(Technically, at the time he lived.)
WTH then went off on an irrelevant tangent about the words
people say being important,
and seems to suggest that the deeds they do have little or
no relevance to God.
I find this so fundamentally moronic, so manifestly stupid,
so easy-for-any-Christian-or-informed-nonChristian to refute
that I'm not even bothering-mainly because WTH still won't
get it when it's written.
The rest of you may feel free to answer it, however.
It's true that you can make a religion out of anything. Your standard is yet another standard I fail to measure up to. Fortunately Jesus Christ handled that one for me as well.
You seem more intent on finding someone who will swallow all that you have to say without question than you are in helping people come unto a knowledge of the truth. I don't equate throwing out speculative "cards" with leading someone to God's Word.
When you're ready to trust in his accomplished works and stop relying on your own you might find the satisfaction your looking for.
Straw dog signing out.
Here's another example that "simple" means "straightforward",
and is not something bad.
The new guy seems to have worked everything out pretty fast. :)
I'm operating with the full awareness that ALL we OLGs disobeyed Dr's urgings to master written PFAL for ten full years, from 1975 to 1985.
I intend to obey Dr's urging to master PFAL as per his last/lost teaching.
I'm always on the lookout for grads who didn’t yet hear of Dr’s last/lost teaching to let them in on this crucial information they missed.
I’m also, sadly, experienced at spotting grads who have no intention of getting serious about obeying Dr’s final instructions, even though they often may have an outward appearance of loving Dr and respecting what he taught.
What he told us to do is simple, yet no one seems to be able to muster the honesty to do it. Many think that they did it enough, and that Dr wasted his final instructions on a triviality as far as they are concerned.
If you want to wing it on what you think you know you will have no problem finding company. I know PFAL is God’s Word even if NOBODY believes it!
See, now, Mike,
THIS is what I was talking about.
I thoroughly disagree with everthing in this post, doctrinally.
HOWEVER,
I find that, among your posts, it is of a higher calibre than you normally
post. It is straightforward, brief, clear, and to-the-point.
You have something to say, and you come right out and say it.
Therefore,
although this is not a perfect post, it sets a standard for well-WRITTEN
posts among your posts.
(That means that-were I you-I would attempt to make my posts more
like this one from now on. As this relates to your posts, and your posts
alone, this is not a recommendation for anyone ELSE to use this post
in that fashion. They have their own standards to live up to.
So, don't make more out of this than I'm saying.)
There certainly is a great difference between what one could term "Amercanized Christianity" and genuine biblical Christianity. The populace of Christian believers in America and even the world today hardly recognize there is any difference, let alone have ever considered the implications between the two. Yet the holy spirit within tells us that something is horribly amiss. Just what is the difference? The biggest difference between typical Americanized Christianity and authentic biblical Christianity lies mainly in our friendship and our fellowship.
If we Christian believers who know the Word of God were to get completely honest, then the greatest burden we carry is for our brother or for our sister in Christ who is essentially living out their faith all alone. Scripture makes it clear that our love for God and our fellowship with Him is really no greater than our love for one another and our fellowship with each other. The epistle of 1 John makes this truth abundantly clear. 1 John 1:7 states: "But if we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin."
The greatest hindrance for a Christian not experiencing authentic biblical Christianity lies in their own pride, selfishness, or just plain busyness with all their "stuff". Because of their love for "stuff" they don't have room in their heart and life for others and this is the primary reason why many Christians today don't experience authentic biblical Christianity. Of course there is another reason - fear. There is something very scary about having an open and an honest relationship with someone - the greatest fear is perhaps having a conflict with them. Just what does one do then with the one who is 'afraid' - with those who are on the outside and are looking in? The Word of God has the answer to that. We love them - because (listen to the promise in 1 John 4:18) "perfect love casteth out fear."
We American Christians love to give, but we hate to share. What do we mean? When someone is truly in need, most of us have very little problem giving of our time and our money to help them. This is a virtue we should never lose. But sharing our life is an equally essential virtue that most Christians know very little about. How often do we share our personal concerns with others and ask them to pray for us? It seems at times that we practically need to be on our death bed before we are willing to share our life with others. How often have you shared a decision (big or little) with another Christian in order to get their counsel? Have you ever confessed a sin to a brother or sister in Christ so they could help you?
What we often forget is that while the epistles are specifically addressed to us, in practical application the ministry of reconciliation must be carried out like what was written in the gospel. It was written for our learning - remember? Matthew 5:9 states: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God." While the epistles state the truth in that we are son's of God now (1 John 3:2) how many of us have honestly strived to make peace with one another? Any Christian can make the confession they are what is written in the epistles, yet in practical application we often fail to carry out even less than what was written in the gospel! Therein lies the conflict that we carry into our relationships with one another - this fear - because our actions so often fail to keep pace with our knowledge as to what is the right and the proper thing for us to do.
[Thanks kindly, WTH.
I'm not used to a poster refuting HIMSELF on the same page.
That will save the rest of us some time.
This post here refutes your previous post concerning the irrelevance
Try it any way you want. I'm not debating these points with you.
I posted some simple, clear statements from the collaterals that happened to contradict your speculations about God and His Word. Rather than honestly examine what you wrote and study the materials I offered you've chosen to accuse me of being unfit to speak God's Word. Rather than admit you took something out of context you've chosen to try to debate all around the subject.
This is dishonest. I would think if you really respected the materials with the regard you profess you'd be thankful to see the accuracy of it. Of course that would mean you might have to change your mind. You'd rather stand firm on some vague ideas about what you think these materials say than admit that someone else actually noticed a contradiction in your doctrine. This is ignorant religion at it's most basic form.
It's a good question, where did you learn what you believe? Where did you learn to be such a dishonest workman of God's Word?
If you believe we're in a new administration then show why, using the materials you hold as your standard for truth. If you aren't able to do that yet than be an honest workman of God's Word and wait until you are able to show these things doctrinally. Don't throw out your speculations, ideas and feelings on a subject and get mad when someone actually tries to bring it back to the very standard you profess.
Worse yet, throwing out your speculations, ideas and feelings as "cards" and expecting others to do the work of proving your speculations is not only dishonest but completely contrary to God's Word. We let his Word speak for itself and change our minds according to what it says. We shouldn't come up with preconceived ideas and go to God's Word to prove our thesis, which is what you've doing here.
Time is not something I have to waste, so I will not debate you on your ground either. However, rather than “dissecting” your post for all it’s points, I’ll zero in on one point YOU GOT RIGHT.
***
You wrote: “Rather than honestly examine what you wrote and study the materials I offered you've chosen to accuse me of being unfit to speak God's Word.”
You got that one right!
Yes, and yes!
I agree with BOTH clauses of this sentence.
I do indeed accuse you of being unfit to speak God’s Word.
Because I have made that judgment on your unfit skills,
why should I then waste my time honestly examining closely how you handle ADAN?
It takes a lot of time to honestly AND closely look at something. It’s an investment.
The way you’ve presented yourself, I judge you to be a bad investment of my time if I were to go where you want to go in this discussion. I steer myself in the directions I feel are a worthwhile investment of my time.
***
How do I judge you unfit?
Easy.
You blew off Dr’s last teaching’s instructions
AND you blew off his AC ’79 instructions,
both of which were to master written PFAL materials.
SO, you were twice disobedient to the man of God on these points by the time May, 1985 rolled around.
A few months later Dr’s last magazine articles came out with
the two quotes I posted above, and you blew them off, BOTH of them!
***
Hey, I’m guilty of much the same, if not worse! But I changed when I was shown what I did. You blew off the above points NOT ONLY in 1985, but in 2006 as well, even after you were shown what you did wrong!
You’ve not been fellowshipping nearly as closely with the God Who taught Dr and inspired his ministry as you THINK you have been. You’ve been totally defiant to The Teacher’s instructions for many years now, thinking that your ability to handle KJVs and NIVs and PFAL collaterals is sufficient. I don’t think you ability is sufficient. I think it’s a broken cistern.
You’re as befuddled as Craig and Geer and all the rest of the Corps who blew off Dr’s instructions.
Same disease: defy The Teacher, and do your own thing.
Different symptoms: (I don’t want to go into that here.)
***
I choose to be meek to The Teacher,
not to one of his defiant students.
So why SHOULD I waste my time going through and seriously considering your handling of an ADAN passage?
Besides, it looks from a distance to be IDENTICAL to my handling of it years ago, when I was a defiant student.
***
I gave you lucid explanation of WHY you had to first check out ALL of Dr’s writings on the same subject and you blew it off.
You’re not meek. You can’t be taught this Word that God taught Dr and Dr taught IN PRINT to us, because you think you know it already. Dr said in 1979 and 1985 that you didn’t know it well enough.
You think you can coast on your casual understanding of ADAN and discuss it in detail with me here, and I tell you NO!
You have to start at the beginning again, like Dr TWICE urged in writing, his last writings, those two red quotes in post #325 above on this thread.
***
I could delve into all the other points in your post, but why waste the time?
You're accusations of me don't change your own dishonesty toward God's Word.
For someone with so little time to invest in this you sure have a lot to say.
As far as what I've done wrong, I've never professed to having done anything right, quite the contrary. What I did profess was the one who makes us righteous.
Go ahead ignore me, ignore what I've said, make the choice to continue with your dishonesty toward God, you don't hurt me in the process. Ultimately you deny what has been accomplished for you by Jesus Christ.
Given the choice I'd much rather stand approved before him than you.
All who are born again have been given the nature of Jesus Christ. As such we need to make the choice to relegate all of our own nature to the grave and fully accept his identity, his accomplishments and his nature. It’s pretty clear in Romans if you still bother to read Romans. Our own works accomplish nothing that hasn’t already been accomplished in him.
You’ve taken this direction to master these materials and made the accomplishment of mastering them your new identity. In essence your work to master these books has taken precedence over accepting what has already been done by Christ. And now you use this standard to judge your brothers in Christ.
I study God’s Word to learn what’s been done for me, to learn who I am in Christ, not to earn some thing that wasn’t included in the new birth.
You have to fight anyone who points this out to you because you lack confidence spiritually. You just cannot be wrong. The believer who knows they were a sinner doesn’t worry about admitting being wrong, flawed and coming up short. Their identity in Christ is more important to them than working for anything that wasn’t already given in Christ.
What Christ accomplished isn’t enough for you. You have to find some way to make yourself more spiritual than the next guy. You have to find some way of getting closer to God because Christ just wasn’t enough for you.
Your accusation of me not knowing God as well as I think I do is the epitome of this attitude, after all how could God be as close to me as he is to you considering how much harder you’ve worked, how much more you’ve obeyed him, how much more you’ve determined to do his will than I have. Am I unfit to speak God’s Word? Absolutely. I was so dead in sins I didn’t have the right to even speak the name of Jesus Christ. But now with his nature I have God dwelling within, and all your works won’t bring you any closer to him than I already am.
You want to leave this alone, you want to ignore it, you want be confident that you are on the right track but you know that as hard as you try you’re always going to come up short and it drives you nuts to have it pointed out. So you’ll keep fighting, keep accusing and keep condemning others to make yourself feel like you're right.
It’s really a pitiable position to be in. I sorrow for the bondage you will inflict on the immature believer who you manage to get your hooks into.
Ok, I read your post and i can see you're in a ministering-to-me mode and are just as unmeek toward me as I am toward you. Of course, why should you be meek to me? No reason at all. But how about meek toward Dr? That's what I argue below in the text I had alreaady written.
You wrote: “As far as what I've done wrong, I've never professed to having done anything right, quite the contrary. What I did profess was the one who makes us righteous.”
You changed something.
Previously, we were talking about having a correct and accurate understanding of the Word, getting it “right” or correct from obeying The Teacher we were given versus getting it incorrect.
Previously were using the word “right” in the sense of “correct of having right thought patterns.”
Now in this post your usage of “right” switches to spiritual righteousness, and you salute Jesus Christ as if you’re bringing him on your side of the argument.
I don’t think you and I have any disagreement on the finished work of Christ and our completeness in him and our God given righteousness. We don’t have to go there. We’re in agreement on THAT doctrine.
Let’s stick with using “right” in the sense of acting rightly toward the PFAL materials, as per the repeated and final instructions of The Teacher who gave us PFAL.
Dr gave us all, especially Corps and leadership, explicit instructions in ’79 and in ’85, to master written PFAL materials. I’ve noticed that we all snubbed those orders. I’m convinced that it’s the “right” thing to do to not snub Dr’s orders any more.
Of course, I’m assuming here that Dr issued those orders by revelation.
If I’m wrong on that assumption, then my whole approach falls apart.
If I’m “right” on that assumption, then YOUR whole approach falls apart.
***
You wrote: “Go ahead ignore me, ignore what I've said, make the choice to continue with your dishonesty toward God, you don't hurt me in the process. Ultimately you deny what has been accomplished for you by Jesus Christ.”
I wrote just above that I DON’T deny what Jesus Christ did for me. I also don’t deny the job that God gave us grads to do, but YOU are!
What you deny is the great gift God gave us in PFAL by your snubbing Dr’s instructions as to how to work with those materials.
I didn’t totally ignore what you said, I simply refused to discuss it with you in detail because you are not qualified to offer an “answer” from one and only one passage.
I said I looked at your handling of ADAN there from a distance (fast skimmy read) and it looked just like how I would have handled it when I was a defiant student of Dr’s years ago, when I too was only casually and occasionally referring to PFAL instead of MASTERING IT!
You wanted to jump the gun on what I was saying is a MASSIVE research project by skipping around the “all passages” method I was insisting on with your “one passage” method.
***
You wrote: “Given the choice I'd much rather stand approved before him than you.”
Let’s AGAIN stop switching the soul/mind/thoughts category to the spiritual and confusing the argument.
I agree you stand approved before God based on YOUR rightly dividing of His Word. But that wasn’t what i was getting at in our discussion.
We were talking about whether or not I could approve of you being fit to handle a passage in ADAN to deal with a complex issue. I was explaining to you why I refused to go with you in the direction you wanted to discuss it with me.
I explained that you were disqualified in my eyes as worthy of handling these matters, in any sort of teaching or leading role because of:
(1) your snubbing, along with me and all the OLGs, of Dr’s final instructions to master PFAL, and to start all over with a whole theology at the same time in 1985, AND
(2) your re-snubbing of the same things in 2006 after becoming aware of them for a second time.
The way you strut with a “thus saith the lord” attitude AND comfortably cite a passage from ADAN gives me cause to believe that you believe, or at one time did believe, that Dr taught us by revelation.
So, how do you deal with the passages and tapes I quote here?
How do you deal with that AC segment 5 quote where he said we had to almost memorize RHST?
Do you think Dr wasted his final words on a triviality that doesn’t apply to you?
Are those two nearly identical magazine article quotes, from the same issue, from his LAST written messages to us grads, ... are those two quotes new to you? How did you conduct your theological makeover Dr suggested in those two quotes? How long did it take? Did you use mastery of the PFAL materials in the process like Dr urged in his last gasps into a tape recorder?
Why are you a defiant student of Dr’s?
Why not try it HIS way, Dr’s way.
Dr’s way is God’s Way if He taught him by revelation so he could teach us grads.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
45
44
64
30
Popular Days
Feb 9
42
Dec 12
39
Dec 8
35
Dec 13
33
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 45 posts
WordWolf 44 posts
Mike 64 posts
doojable 30 posts
Popular Days
Feb 9 2006
42 posts
Dec 12 2005
39 posts
Dec 8 2005
35 posts
Dec 13 2005
33 posts
WordWolf
[WordWolf in boldface and brackets.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
[After reading my comments that BG Leonard has been
reported of sterling character
(as opposed to men who have been reported addicts to
vices, molesters, rapists, plagiarists, and then were held up
as examples of leaders,
WTH said the following:]
[This, of course,
has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with my original point.
Someone invented an objection to BG Leonard, and made a
meritless claim that he had issues. My reply was what is considered
obvious-BG Leonard appears to ALL EYEWITNESSES to have led
as spotless a life as it is possible to do at this time.
(Technically, at the time he lived.)
WTH then went off on an irrelevant tangent about the words
people say being important,
and seems to suggest that the deeds they do have little or
no relevance to God.
I find this so fundamentally moronic, so manifestly stupid,
so easy-for-any-Christian-or-informed-nonChristian to refute
that I'm not even bothering-mainly because WTH still won't
get it when it's written.
The rest of you may feel free to answer it, however.
A little variety in posting is good for us all.]
Edited by WordWolfLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Here's another example that "simple" means "straightforward",
and is not something bad.
The new guy seems to have worked everything out pretty fast. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
See, now, Mike,
THIS is what I was talking about.
I thoroughly disagree with everthing in this post, doctrinally.
HOWEVER,
I find that, among your posts, it is of a higher calibre than you normally
post. It is straightforward, brief, clear, and to-the-point.
You have something to say, and you come right out and say it.
Therefore,
although this is not a perfect post, it sets a standard for well-WRITTEN
posts among your posts.
(That means that-were I you-I would attempt to make my posts more
like this one from now on. As this relates to your posts, and your posts
alone, this is not a recommendation for anyone ELSE to use this post
in that fashion. They have their own standards to live up to.
So, don't make more out of this than I'm saying.)
[Thanks kindly, WTH.
I'm not used to a poster refuting HIMSELF on the same page.
That will save the rest of us some time.
This post here refutes your previous post concerning the irrelevance
of good conduct to the Christian.
It is appreciated richly.
Really.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bliss
Welcome Simple Guy!
Nothing like coming out swingin!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
A simple guy
Mike,
Try it any way you want. I'm not debating these points with you.
I posted some simple, clear statements from the collaterals that happened to contradict your speculations about God and His Word. Rather than honestly examine what you wrote and study the materials I offered you've chosen to accuse me of being unfit to speak God's Word. Rather than admit you took something out of context you've chosen to try to debate all around the subject.
This is dishonest. I would think if you really respected the materials with the regard you profess you'd be thankful to see the accuracy of it. Of course that would mean you might have to change your mind. You'd rather stand firm on some vague ideas about what you think these materials say than admit that someone else actually noticed a contradiction in your doctrine. This is ignorant religion at it's most basic form.
It's a good question, where did you learn what you believe? Where did you learn to be such a dishonest workman of God's Word?
If you believe we're in a new administration then show why, using the materials you hold as your standard for truth. If you aren't able to do that yet than be an honest workman of God's Word and wait until you are able to show these things doctrinally. Don't throw out your speculations, ideas and feelings on a subject and get mad when someone actually tries to bring it back to the very standard you profess.
Worse yet, throwing out your speculations, ideas and feelings as "cards" and expecting others to do the work of proving your speculations is not only dishonest but completely contrary to God's Word. We let his Word speak for itself and change our minds according to what it says. We shouldn't come up with preconceived ideas and go to God's Word to prove our thesis, which is what you've doing here.
Edited by A simple guyLink to comment
Share on other sites
A simple guy
Hi Bliss,
Thanks again for the warm welcome.
It wasn't my desire to come out swinging but I guess sometimes that's what happens.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
It's been my habit to get the new people here a cup of coffee, but after seeing this post...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
A simple guy
Raf,
Much thanks, that one even has a real cork, probably is a good glass of champagne.
Of course my preference leans toward cognac.
A good glass of Hennesy XO :-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
What, no drambuie? Don't you know where you are? :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
A simple guy
Ughhh... stuff always reminded me of what anifreeze must take like.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
A simple guy,
Time is not something I have to waste, so I will not debate you on your ground either. However, rather than “dissecting” your post for all it’s points, I’ll zero in on one point YOU GOT RIGHT.
***
You wrote: “Rather than honestly examine what you wrote and study the materials I offered you've chosen to accuse me of being unfit to speak God's Word.”
You got that one right!
Yes, and yes!
I agree with BOTH clauses of this sentence.
I do indeed accuse you of being unfit to speak God’s Word.
Because I have made that judgment on your unfit skills,
why should I then waste my time honestly examining closely how you handle ADAN?
It takes a lot of time to honestly AND closely look at something. It’s an investment.
The way you’ve presented yourself, I judge you to be a bad investment of my time if I were to go where you want to go in this discussion. I steer myself in the directions I feel are a worthwhile investment of my time.
***
How do I judge you unfit?
Easy.
You blew off Dr’s last teaching’s instructions
AND you blew off his AC ’79 instructions,
both of which were to master written PFAL materials.
SO, you were twice disobedient to the man of God on these points by the time May, 1985 rolled around.
A few months later Dr’s last magazine articles came out with
the two quotes I posted above, and you blew them off, BOTH of them!
***
Hey, I’m guilty of much the same, if not worse! But I changed when I was shown what I did. You blew off the above points NOT ONLY in 1985, but in 2006 as well, even after you were shown what you did wrong!
You’ve not been fellowshipping nearly as closely with the God Who taught Dr and inspired his ministry as you THINK you have been. You’ve been totally defiant to The Teacher’s instructions for many years now, thinking that your ability to handle KJVs and NIVs and PFAL collaterals is sufficient. I don’t think you ability is sufficient. I think it’s a broken cistern.
You’re as befuddled as Craig and Geer and all the rest of the Corps who blew off Dr’s instructions.
Same disease: defy The Teacher, and do your own thing.
Different symptoms: (I don’t want to go into that here.)
***
I choose to be meek to The Teacher,
not to one of his defiant students.
So why SHOULD I waste my time going through and seriously considering your handling of an ADAN passage?
Besides, it looks from a distance to be IDENTICAL to my handling of it years ago, when I was a defiant student.
***
I gave you lucid explanation of WHY you had to first check out ALL of Dr’s writings on the same subject and you blew it off.
You’re not meek. You can’t be taught this Word that God taught Dr and Dr taught IN PRINT to us, because you think you know it already. Dr said in 1979 and 1985 that you didn’t know it well enough.
You think you can coast on your casual understanding of ADAN and discuss it in detail with me here, and I tell you NO!
You have to start at the beginning again, like Dr TWICE urged in writing, his last writings, those two red quotes in post #325 above on this thread.
***
I could delve into all the other points in your post, but why waste the time?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
A simple guy
You're accusations of me don't change your own dishonesty toward God's Word.
For someone with so little time to invest in this you sure have a lot to say.
As far as what I've done wrong, I've never professed to having done anything right, quite the contrary. What I did profess was the one who makes us righteous.
Go ahead ignore me, ignore what I've said, make the choice to continue with your dishonesty toward God, you don't hurt me in the process. Ultimately you deny what has been accomplished for you by Jesus Christ.
Given the choice I'd much rather stand approved before him than you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Be meek to The Teacher...
Defy The Teacher...
Geez, and they wonder why I use the word "idolatry."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bliss
Thus far I have allowed myself access to Mikes posts and have not put him on IGNORE..........
I thought they were interesting to read, and as a fellow brother in Christ, I was going to give him some long-suffering.............
I changed my mind
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Does that mean you've suffered long enough? :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Bliss, trust me on this one....You'll be soooooo glad you did!
Welcome, Simple Dude! May I offer you something yummy to eat? Hmmmmmm.....what goes with champagne that we might have here at the cafe?
Some fresh strawberries, maybe?
or Caviar?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
A simple guy
Mike,
All who are born again have been given the nature of Jesus Christ. As such we need to make the choice to relegate all of our own nature to the grave and fully accept his identity, his accomplishments and his nature. It’s pretty clear in Romans if you still bother to read Romans. Our own works accomplish nothing that hasn’t already been accomplished in him.
You’ve taken this direction to master these materials and made the accomplishment of mastering them your new identity. In essence your work to master these books has taken precedence over accepting what has already been done by Christ. And now you use this standard to judge your brothers in Christ.
I study God’s Word to learn what’s been done for me, to learn who I am in Christ, not to earn some thing that wasn’t included in the new birth.
You have to fight anyone who points this out to you because you lack confidence spiritually. You just cannot be wrong. The believer who knows they were a sinner doesn’t worry about admitting being wrong, flawed and coming up short. Their identity in Christ is more important to them than working for anything that wasn’t already given in Christ.
What Christ accomplished isn’t enough for you. You have to find some way to make yourself more spiritual than the next guy. You have to find some way of getting closer to God because Christ just wasn’t enough for you.
Your accusation of me not knowing God as well as I think I do is the epitome of this attitude, after all how could God be as close to me as he is to you considering how much harder you’ve worked, how much more you’ve obeyed him, how much more you’ve determined to do his will than I have. Am I unfit to speak God’s Word? Absolutely. I was so dead in sins I didn’t have the right to even speak the name of Jesus Christ. But now with his nature I have God dwelling within, and all your works won’t bring you any closer to him than I already am.
You want to leave this alone, you want to ignore it, you want be confident that you are on the right track but you know that as hard as you try you’re always going to come up short and it drives you nuts to have it pointed out. So you’ll keep fighting, keep accusing and keep condemning others to make yourself feel like you're right.
It’s really a pitiable position to be in. I sorrow for the bondage you will inflict on the immature believer who you manage to get your hooks into.
Hi Belle,
I'll take lots of both, thanks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
A simple guy,
I was writing to you and then when it was done saw you posted again.
So, I've withdrawn my post to read yours and then respond accordingly.
***********************************************************
***********************************************************
***********************************************************
Ok, I read your post and i can see you're in a ministering-to-me mode and are just as unmeek toward me as I am toward you. Of course, why should you be meek to me? No reason at all. But how about meek toward Dr? That's what I argue below in the text I had alreaady written.
***********************************************************
***********************************************************
***********************************************************
A simple guy,
You wrote: “As far as what I've done wrong, I've never professed to having done anything right, quite the contrary. What I did profess was the one who makes us righteous.”
You changed something.
Previously, we were talking about having a correct and accurate understanding of the Word, getting it “right” or correct from obeying The Teacher we were given versus getting it incorrect.
Previously were using the word “right” in the sense of “correct of having right thought patterns.”
Now in this post your usage of “right” switches to spiritual righteousness, and you salute Jesus Christ as if you’re bringing him on your side of the argument.
I don’t think you and I have any disagreement on the finished work of Christ and our completeness in him and our God given righteousness. We don’t have to go there. We’re in agreement on THAT doctrine.
Let’s stick with using “right” in the sense of acting rightly toward the PFAL materials, as per the repeated and final instructions of The Teacher who gave us PFAL.
Dr gave us all, especially Corps and leadership, explicit instructions in ’79 and in ’85, to master written PFAL materials. I’ve noticed that we all snubbed those orders. I’m convinced that it’s the “right” thing to do to not snub Dr’s orders any more.
Of course, I’m assuming here that Dr issued those orders by revelation.
If I’m wrong on that assumption, then my whole approach falls apart.
If I’m “right” on that assumption, then YOUR whole approach falls apart.
***
You wrote: “Go ahead ignore me, ignore what I've said, make the choice to continue with your dishonesty toward God, you don't hurt me in the process. Ultimately you deny what has been accomplished for you by Jesus Christ.”
I wrote just above that I DON’T deny what Jesus Christ did for me. I also don’t deny the job that God gave us grads to do, but YOU are!
What you deny is the great gift God gave us in PFAL by your snubbing Dr’s instructions as to how to work with those materials.
I didn’t totally ignore what you said, I simply refused to discuss it with you in detail because you are not qualified to offer an “answer” from one and only one passage.
I said I looked at your handling of ADAN there from a distance (fast skimmy read) and it looked just like how I would have handled it when I was a defiant student of Dr’s years ago, when I too was only casually and occasionally referring to PFAL instead of MASTERING IT!
You wanted to jump the gun on what I was saying is a MASSIVE research project by skipping around the “all passages” method I was insisting on with your “one passage” method.
***
You wrote: “Given the choice I'd much rather stand approved before him than you.”
Let’s AGAIN stop switching the soul/mind/thoughts category to the spiritual and confusing the argument.
I agree you stand approved before God based on YOUR rightly dividing of His Word. But that wasn’t what i was getting at in our discussion.
We were talking about whether or not I could approve of you being fit to handle a passage in ADAN to deal with a complex issue. I was explaining to you why I refused to go with you in the direction you wanted to discuss it with me.
I explained that you were disqualified in my eyes as worthy of handling these matters, in any sort of teaching or leading role because of:
(1) your snubbing, along with me and all the OLGs, of Dr’s final instructions to master PFAL, and to start all over with a whole theology at the same time in 1985, AND
(2) your re-snubbing of the same things in 2006 after becoming aware of them for a second time.
The way you strut with a “thus saith the lord” attitude AND comfortably cite a passage from ADAN gives me cause to believe that you believe, or at one time did believe, that Dr taught us by revelation.
So, how do you deal with the passages and tapes I quote here?
How do you deal with that AC segment 5 quote where he said we had to almost memorize RHST?
Do you think Dr wasted his final words on a triviality that doesn’t apply to you?
Are those two nearly identical magazine article quotes, from the same issue, from his LAST written messages to us grads, ... are those two quotes new to you? How did you conduct your theological makeover Dr suggested in those two quotes? How long did it take? Did you use mastery of the PFAL materials in the process like Dr urged in his last gasps into a tape recorder?
Why are you a defiant student of Dr’s?
Why not try it HIS way, Dr’s way.
Dr’s way is God’s Way if He taught him by revelation so he could teach us grads.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
A simple guy
Mike,
I've already said my piece with you. Perhaps you should reread what I wrote since you're confused regarding the content.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Modaustin
Mike: Check your PM
Edited by ModaustinLink to comment
Share on other sites
A simple guy
Modaustin,
I apologize if I've contributed to the squandered bytes here. Edit anything you see fit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Modaustin
Post away, Asg. You haven't caused any problems.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Ok. I've said my peace too.
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.