There is rain coming later this week, so I’m on the go a lot right now. I did skim read your post and saw a very well constructed set of ideas, ESPECIALLY at the end.
You wrote: “I believe all the tools are there in PFAL to get to the "God-breathed" Word. But then again, they are only tools. If I tried to put a bike together with a hammer and didn't end up caring for the results, I probably did not following the authors instructions very closely or very precisely. I for one think that is the content of Mikes message all along - and nothing really more than that. He believes we tried to put that PFAL bike together with a hammer, and that was not the authors fault.”
This is VERY close to my message!
I would add only that I do believe that this set of tools and instructions are not man-breathed (or heavily man-breathed), like all other Bible aids in the world, but that they are God-breathed MUCH the SAME way the original scriptures were, with SOME possible exceptions.
I’m not sure what I mean about possible exceptions. It’s the frontier of my knowledge. I will outline two.
1) doojable TWICE now has brought up the idea of the difference between the ancient scriptures being addressed to “Jew, Gentile, or the Church of God” in contrast to PFAL being addressed ONLY to grads. I expanded on her statements, because I’ve been working on this understanding for a few years with some difficulty, and she helped me out with it some. I also saw that no one else noticed these two posts of hers and then mine to the extent of commenting, but I wish they would.
2) There is a difference between being factually accurate and true in Dr’s vocabulary.
Most of my critics focus on the factual accuracy of PFAL, and for the most part, this is the realm in which I've engaged them, while yearning to graduate tothe higher realm.
I once had an entire thread on the differences between facts and truths, between the Natural and the Spiritual, the earthly and the heavenly, the human and the divine:
It’s titled “The Ubiquitously Hidden Teaching of VPW” and can be found here:
However, it is damaged right now due to computer glitches. The quotes and apostrophes are quite screwed up. In addition to that there is a botched, partial attempt at the beginning by me to retro-construct a Table of Contents, with all the URLs obsolete.
By skipping that mess at the beginning, and doing some word processing on the text to fix the punctuation it can be read and this idea can be discussed more.
My break time is over and I have to return to work. When the rains come I’ll be able to respond much better to many items here.
***
And for the Umpteenth Ubiquitous time: I do NOT think PFAL replaces the scriptures and never have.
Oh geeze. I haven't read this thread in long time, so pardon me, if my comment is a little late in coming.
But in John 3, I don't believe Jesus is talking to Nicodemus about "the new birth" that we receive since the resurrection.
Ole Nic was somebody who would have known about the prophecies concerning what we now call "the millenial kingdom," when the descendant of David will rule the throne in Israel. That's what Nic was asking Jesus about. And Jesus' reply has to do with the prophecies about the "dry bones" in the OT.
You know, when the OT believers are resurrected and enter into the promised kingdom. The kingdom Nic knew about was the one promised in the OT, when the Messiah would rule from David's throne. He thought maybe it was at hand.
The OT saints missed the lesson of the spring feasts versus the fall feasts. Of course, we know now in hindsight that the spring feasts represented the first coming of the Messiah, and the fall feasts the second. But in Jesus' day, that info was not clear. That's why the jews were confused and some thought there would be 2 messiahs.
Nic is asking Jesus to clear it up for him, I think. :B)
Think about it. This is the subject of their conversation. Not the "new birth" which was still future and not revealed yet.
To shed further light, on John 3, there is an appendix in John Schoenheit's book, "The Christian's Hope, The Anchor of the Soul," in which JS does an excellent job of explaining this section of scripture.
aaahh..except for the point that Jesus many times spoke prophetically and inspired utterances which I believe was one of these occasions. It may even have surprised Jesus at times at what came out of his mouth !!
Allan, check your interlinear. The greek words translated "born again" in John 3 are not the same as used in the church epistles when referring to the new birth. ;)
I want to go back to some things I never really saw handled fully.
Let's look at those two adjacent sentences in BTMS page ix and see what we can see.
The sentences are:
(1) "I know the contents of Volume I of Studies in Abundant Living will not only open up more of God's Word for you, but will also uplift you - mentally and physically and spiritually."
(2) "Let us put God's Word in our hearts and minds for it alone can give us complete deliverance from the darkness of this world."
Sentence (1) says the contents of BTMS will uplift us - mentally and physically and spiritually. That sounds like pretty complete upliftance. Upliftance from what? The world and it's darkness, of course.
Sentence (2) says that ONLY God's Word can give us complete deliverance from the darkness of this world.
Decades ago I would cringe while reading these two sentences. I thought it was poor writing to so strongly associate the contents of BTMS with God's Word. Now I see that it is right and proper.
Mike, this has bothered me for quite a while, but as I stated before, when I first read the post (and many of the subsequent ones) I simply could not really do justice to how I feel about the way you have handled the text. I know I commented briefly - but topoftheworld's most recent post has inpired me anew.
For the sake of argument, let's replace "spiritual' words with every day words and see what we get:
(1) "I know the contents of Volume I of Studies in Abundant Living will not only open up more of God's Word for you, but will also uplift you - mentally and physically and spiritually."
I know the contents of "The Joy of Cooking" will not only open up more of the culinary arts world for you, but will also nourish you - deliciously, healthfully, and nutritiously.
(2) "Let us put God's Word in our hearts and minds for it alone can give us complete deliverance from the darkness of this world."
Let us put the culinary arts world in our lives for it alone can give us complete deliverance from boring meals.
Here we see that "The Joy of Cooking" is not equal to the WHOLE culinary arts world - it just opens that world up to the reader. Same claim is made regarding Vol I in Studies in Abundant Living - it OPENS UP the Word of God.
Now the culinary arts (that was opened up but not exhausted) gives deliverance form boring eating.
The Studies in Abundant Living and all of PFAL were meant to get the student started. They were all meant to give tools to study, to understand a huge book that many deemed impenetrable. Like using a hammer and chisel to crack open a coconut. You don't turn around and worship the tools - YOU EAT THE COCONUT. Likewise, the PFAL series was supposed to be a tool - we were supposed to feed on the WORD OF GOD.
Here's another quote:
"It's a remarkable thing that God put His promise in the past tense..I have already given to you..and He still does this today. Many, many times He puts in the past tense what still is the future for us."
You ask where these many many times were/are. They were/are in the manifestations we have heard many, many, many, many, many, times in twigs and branch meetings and limb meetings and sns and on and on ad nauseum - for years.
And I've already noted that I believe that dr's last exhortation for us to think about where we learned our doctrines was the result of him knowing his time was short and wanting to leave a different legacy than he knew he had built.
He had to have known that upon his death the tales of his sexual deviance would hit the fan. He didn't want this, I'm sure. This was a TVT that HE was responsible for. He had passed it on to lcm along with many others. He might have even have wanted it to stop but couldn't very well say this in public - imagine THAT on the last tape from Gartmore: "You leaders, stop screwing all those young women. I know I'm the one who told you that it was the only way you would grow spiritually - but I want you to do as I NOW say and not as I did."
Now concerning Adam and the naming of the animals. All I can say is that we were taught that Orientalisms were HELPFUL but not the Word of God. Knowing the name of a person implied that you had power over them - that is why in the book of Revelation it is said that no man will know the name of the Lord.(my paraphrase)
To shed further light, on John 3, there is an appendix in John Schoenheit's book, "The Christian's Hope, The Anchor of the Soul," in which JS does an excellent job of explaining this section of scripture.
Just in case anybody is interested. ;)
I'd forgotten about that , Ex. Thanks for the reminder!!
(pulled out the book, and it made perfect sense.) :)
Mike, I'm not sure whether to post this on David's "pipe" thread or here - I'm here so here goes: (David if you want I'll post this there as well - but Mike answered here so i'm refuting here.)
You aren't consistent with your claim of which of vpw's words are "God-breathed. Sometimes you quote the collaterals, sometimes you quote the video of the class, sometimes you quote a way mag article, sometimes you quote a sns tape - or the tape from Gartmore.
I’ve explained before that I quote things like Dr’s tapes mostly for ministry history, but I look only Dr’s the “book and magazine form” writings as the doctrine we were given to master that’s God-breathed.
Sometimes I quote the soundtrack of the film class instead of the book because it stimulates memory better.
It’s fine if dmiller wants to quote U of L, but I think the conclusion he drew from it is inaccurate. That’s all I posted.
The U of L quote did not contradict Dr’s claim to have SOMETHING that he did not have to “go back on,” as Dr mentioned in Elena’s book. That something Dr did claim to have that qualified as the final truth on the God-breathed Word was not his U of L teachings.
I just don’t think that U of L quote was saying Dr had NOTHING in print that was final.
***
In an earlier post you wrote: “The Studies in Abundant Living and all of PFAL were meant to get the student started. They were all meant to give tools to study, to understand a huge book that many deemed impenetrable. Like using a hammer and chisel to crack open a coconut. You don't turn around and worship the tools - YOU EAT THE COCONUT.”
I know there’s far more to your post, but two quick points.
I could just as deliberately construct an analogy where the tools ARE eaten. With Mexican food, the chips are like spoons and some salads come in a shell that is like a bowl. The bowl and spoons serve as tools and they are food too!
In this example, the eatable tools correspond to the idea you brought up twice. That idea is that there does seem to be some difference between the ancient scriptures, revelations from God given in writing addressed to Jew, Gentile, and Church of God, and modern revelations from God also written on paper addressed to grads.
But we don’t have the pure ancient scriptures, just an approximation of them. The KJV is a tool too.
PFAL is a God-breathed tool, the KJV is a man-breathed tool. Together they give us and senses understanding of God’s Word. We read both tools with our senses.
More on this later.
****************************************
The other point is that the PFAL tools changed over time, gradually at first, with some spurts, and then a HUGE change around 1982.
***
The early tools helped us to a senses understanding of God’s Word.
The later tools will help us to a spiritual understanding of God’s Word.
***
The early tools have a large component of focus on the KJV, with PFAL in the background.
The later tools have a large component of focus on written PFAL, with KJV in the background.
This is why the early teachings of Dr focus on the KJV, and later he often urged us to focus on PFAL.
***
The early tools are for senses understanding of God’s Word.
The later tools are for spiritual understanding of God’s Word.
***
Add to this mix the problem of many grads getting only a partial grip on the early tools.
Add to this mix the problem of most grads having a non-existent grip on the later tools.
That's merely YOUR opinion, that it's merely my opinion.
When I have time I think I can show that it's NOT merely my opinion, what I posted above, but that by close study of PFAL it emerges as the truth.
I other words I think it can be seen that it's not only my opinion but God's too, which makes it true.
We can start by showing that the later PFAL tools changed as I described. This requires a close look at the before and after. Both the early PFAL writings and the latter must be studied closely, mastered.
That's merely YOUR opinion, that it's merely my opinion.
When I have time I think I can show that it's NOT merely my opinion, what I posted above, but that by close study of PFAL it emerges as the truth.
I other words I think it can be seen that it's not only my opinion but God's too, which makes it true.
We can start by showing that the later PFAL tools changed as I described. This requires a close look at the before and after. Both the early PFAL writings and the latter must be studied closely, mastered.
On page 78, paragraph two of POWER FOR ABUNDANT LIVING, we read the following.
"We have seen from John 4:24 that God is spirit. God being spirit can only speak to what he is. God cannot speak to the natural human mind. The Word could not come by the will of man because the will of man is in the natural realm. God being spirit can only speak to what he is-spirit. Things in the natural realm may be known by the five senses - seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and touching. But God is spirit, and therefore, cannot speak to brain cells; God cannot speak to a person's mind."
VPW slaughtered that section of scripture in PFAL. And it always bothered me.
VP also stunk at teaching the OT, and getting it to fit with the NT, and I remember asking about the "hope of Israel" over and over again and NEVER getting a satisfactory answer.
Then, when my husband and I went to Israel with JS, he was working on that book, and he answered my question in about 2 seconds. It was wonderful, because I finally started to understand so much of the OT and how it relates to the bigger scheme of things. Like I said, it was a weakness of TWI.
Which leads to any interesting point, I think. VPW was the one who asked JS to get into studying the OT, so he could teach it to the corps. VP knew it was a weak area for himself. He recognized a strength in John, and encouraged him to push himself in that area.
I don't think J will mind if I say that. :D It's pretty obvious what his "gift" is.
I would add only that I do believe that this set of tools and instructions are not man-breathed (or heavily man-breathed), like all other Bible aids in the world, but that they are God-breathed MUCH the SAME way the original scriptures were, with SOME possible exceptions.
Are you finally admitting then that there are areas in PFAL that are not God-breathed? > i.e. that there are, as you just stated, SOME possible exceptions? If that is what you are saying, then you and Raf are not in as much complete disagreement as you both pretend to be - there is only disagreement on the areas of PFAL you happen to believe are or aren't God-breathed.
The problem would apparently lie then in determining exactly what constitutes "something" being "God-breathed?" As I stated in an earlier post, does something have to be written in order for it to be considered God-breathed - i.e. the scriptures? I don't think so. My reasoning on this is what is stated in John 21:25 -where John says there are many "other things" Jesus did that were not recorded. John further states that he supposes that if they should be written, every one, even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.
I imagine one could put forth the arguement that because the many "other things" Jesus did were never recorded, this would also imply the many "other things" Jesus did were not God-breathed - based on fact those many "other things" Jesus did were never written down. To put this idea forth in a more modern context, Raf made this statement earlier:
When Wierwille writes "every word I have written to you is true," he is speaking in the immediate context of the instructions he's giving on speaking in tongues. He is not talking about every word from page one of PFAL to the final page of Order My Steps in Thy Word. You have to rip that clause from its context to get it to apply to everything he wrote.
While Raf is correct in the fact VPW was speaking in the immediate context regarding the instructions he was giving on speaking in tongues, he misses the fact that VPW was not necessarily speaking "out of order" when he wrote, "every word I have written to you is true." Now truthfully speaking, not everything VPW ever wrote is/was God-breathed. This is quite evident today even as it was during the time of Jesus Christ. Likewise, there were many writers at the time when Luke was alive who were also attempting to make ... "a declaration of those things which are most suredly believed among us," (Luke 1:1)
[LCM explains in R&E (p16) regarding Luke 1.] In Luke 1:1 "Forasmuch as" can also be translated "since". "Taken in hand" is a phrase that indicates a previous lack of success. Other narratives failed. This does not refer to the Gospels of Mattew, Mark and John, which are also God-breathed revelations. But even in Luke's time, other writers attempted sense-knowledge narratives regarding the life of Jesus Christ. These were fictitious or "apocryphal" records filled with ludicrous stories, and some are still in circulation today.
So what is it that seperates all the "fictitious, "apocyphal" records filled with ludicrous stories apart from the "God-breathed" scriptures? ... "to set forth in order a declaration of those things most surely believed among us." That is exact point where all the "sense-knowledge" records failed. They failed the "acid test" - to set forth in order a declaration of the things most surely believed, etc. There is certainly much more to say as to what constitutes something being God-breathed, but right now I am short on my "posting time" today. Just something to mull over and to think more about for now.
Yesterday you wrote: “Oh geeze. I haven't read this thread in long time, so pardon me, if my comment is a little late in coming.”
I’m glad to see you again, even though my time for responding to your points is scarce right now.
Because this thread is hot with activity and growing fast, might I suggest to you and others that an apology for referring back to older material need not be made?
I’m finding that there are several well established sub-topics here, like the one you addressed.
What we all might try doing, if we want to address a well buried sub-topic, is simply place a title describing that sub-topic on top of our post to signify that it is not in response to the recent sub-topic, but to an older one.
If we include with the sub-topic’s title some pertinent post # numbers, showing where it was last discussed, that will also help in managing many topics under this one PFAL thread.
With this new site, the software settings allow everyone to select how large the pages are, so referencing PAGE # numbers is not the best system of referring to an older sub-topic. Different posters can have differing pagination.
The POST # numbers are the same for everyone though... I think.
Maybe we can come to some agreement on naming sub-topic titles, too.
*************************************************
*************************************************
*************************************************
*************************************************
doojable,
I know it got a little confusing with my responding here to dmiller’s “Pipe” thread, but I feel it’s the respectful thing to do in light of Modaustin’s set-up here.
If I confine my PFAL “advertisements” here it is less offensive to other posters who find PFAL too much a reminder of some painful past events. This is not easy, but I am learning to adopt this new style of posting as best I can.
Management has been very generous to me in allowing me to post as much as I do on my proPFAL leanings. The least I can do in return is respect their wishes and steer my proPFAL posting to this one thread. As I learn to better segregate these proPFAL posts of mine here, others who prefer to get away from such notions can learn to simply avoid this one thread.
If that is what you are saying, then you and Raf are not in as much complete disagreement as you both pretend to be - there is only disagreement on the areas of PFAL you happen to believe are or aren't God-breathed.
WTH: I think "pretend" is the wrong word. The appropriate word is "appear."
I'm waiting to see how the rest of the conversation plays out before I decide whether to say anything else on the subject.
I'd also like to point out that I never said VPW was "out of order" when he wrote "every word I write is true," so I'm a bit at a loss as to why you're trying to refute me there (unless I'm misunderstanding you). I believe Mike's interpretation and application of that statement are out of order, not that the statement itself is. I mean, what's he going to write: "If you really believe God, and Jesus is your Lord, you'll see I'm wrong and lying through my teeth"? Of course not.
I imagine one could put forth the arguement that because the many "other things" Jesus did were never recorded, this would also imply the many "other things" Jesus did were not God-breathed - based on fact those many "other things" Jesus did were never written down.
This would be incorrect reasoning. Even if every single thing Christ did was God-breathed, doesn't mean we need to know it. Many of Christ's healings, undoubtedly God-breathed, were truncated and "glossed over" in the gospels, not because they were not God-breathed, but because the details weren't a part of what we need to know.
VPW did not write "every word I write is true"; he wrote "every word I write to you is true," which means the discussion of his laundry list is not relevant. I do not believe every word VPW wrote in the relevant books is true, though I do believe we can find a great deal of truth in them (others may heartily disagree).
This would be incorrect reasoning. Even if every single thing Christ did was God-breathed, doesn't mean we need to know it. Many of Christ's healings, undoubtedly God-breathed, were truncated and "glossed over" in the gospels, not because they were not God-breathed, but because the details weren't a part of what we need to know.
Raf,
I agree with you whole heartedly. There is a lot that is included in the gospels and a lot left out.. You find a lot of important healings - like the healing of the man born blind which was a fulfillment of prophecy that pointed to his truly being the Messiah. (there's so much more I could write - but I won't...)
The Gospels also show Jesus Christ fulfilling the Law and filling the role of the Passover lamb (I know - he was already the Passover lamb - but in the Gospels we see this unfold.)
What we don't see -well who knows - we don't see the everyday life that he undoubtedly live - whether you hold to vpw's teaching that he only lived 6 months after beginning his ministry or the more popular theory that says he lived for three years - those 4 gospels hardly make a dent on a life lived by the only begotten Son of God.
We also don't re the "redundant" healings. There is no telling how many people he raised from the dead, or how many blind men ended up seeing.
Then there are the things that he did because he was a man - human - eating, drinking, toiletries, and the various conversations that went along with that - don't have to be God-breathed to still make him the Son of God.
So I repeat - if a life a great as that of the Lord Jesus Christ doesn't have every word written down ( we don't have any of his written words!)how can anyone say that ALL of vpw's pfal series is true and God-breathed. That's longer than the 5 books of Moses. God is a master of economy - that is not how I describe pfal and the series. There is a lot of repetition in those books - more than in the scriptures.
One last thing - but I guess it's not all that important. I bet you a shekel that Moses didn't charge the children for a copy of his 5 books of the old tesatament - you know the "Law Series."
ex10 - am I wrong or wasn't JS Jewish before he got involved with twi? This would point even further to why he had so much knowledge and presumably passion for the OT. That Dr asked him to concentrate in this area shows that vpw not only saw JS's strength but had a brief moment of clarity that allowed him to delegate. Thanks for your imput on that subject!
Oh well, thought I knew something. It really doesn't change much other than the fact that I thought he already had a background in OT - but he didn't - he started from scratch.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
89
149
306
85
Popular Days
Feb 10
62
Feb 20
61
Feb 11
46
Mar 2
45
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 89 posts
CM 149 posts
Mike 306 posts
Tom Strange 85 posts
Popular Days
Feb 10 2006
62 posts
Feb 20 2006
61 posts
Feb 11 2006
46 posts
Mar 2 2006
45 posts
Posted Images
Raf
I think you got me beat on this one, Tops.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
What the Hey,
There is rain coming later this week, so I’m on the go a lot right now. I did skim read your post and saw a very well constructed set of ideas, ESPECIALLY at the end.
You wrote: “I believe all the tools are there in PFAL to get to the "God-breathed" Word. But then again, they are only tools. If I tried to put a bike together with a hammer and didn't end up caring for the results, I probably did not following the authors instructions very closely or very precisely. I for one think that is the content of Mikes message all along - and nothing really more than that. He believes we tried to put that PFAL bike together with a hammer, and that was not the authors fault.”
This is VERY close to my message!
I would add only that I do believe that this set of tools and instructions are not man-breathed (or heavily man-breathed), like all other Bible aids in the world, but that they are God-breathed MUCH the SAME way the original scriptures were, with SOME possible exceptions.
I’m not sure what I mean about possible exceptions. It’s the frontier of my knowledge. I will outline two.
1) doojable TWICE now has brought up the idea of the difference between the ancient scriptures being addressed to “Jew, Gentile, or the Church of God” in contrast to PFAL being addressed ONLY to grads. I expanded on her statements, because I’ve been working on this understanding for a few years with some difficulty, and she helped me out with it some. I also saw that no one else noticed these two posts of hers and then mine to the extent of commenting, but I wish they would.
2) There is a difference between being factually accurate and true in Dr’s vocabulary.
Most of my critics focus on the factual accuracy of PFAL, and for the most part, this is the realm in which I've engaged them, while yearning to graduate tothe higher realm.
I once had an entire thread on the differences between facts and truths, between the Natural and the Spiritual, the earthly and the heavenly, the human and the divine:
It’s titled “The Ubiquitously Hidden Teaching of VPW” and can be found here:
http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...150entry35150
However, it is damaged right now due to computer glitches. The quotes and apostrophes are quite screwed up. In addition to that there is a botched, partial attempt at the beginning by me to retro-construct a Table of Contents, with all the URLs obsolete.
By skipping that mess at the beginning, and doing some word processing on the text to fix the punctuation it can be read and this idea can be discussed more.
My break time is over and I have to return to work. When the rains come I’ll be able to respond much better to many items here.
***
And for the Umpteenth Ubiquitous time: I do NOT think PFAL replaces the scriptures and never have.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Oh geeze. I haven't read this thread in long time, so pardon me, if my comment is a little late in coming.
But in John 3, I don't believe Jesus is talking to Nicodemus about "the new birth" that we receive since the resurrection.
Ole Nic was somebody who would have known about the prophecies concerning what we now call "the millenial kingdom," when the descendant of David will rule the throne in Israel. That's what Nic was asking Jesus about. And Jesus' reply has to do with the prophecies about the "dry bones" in the OT.
You know, when the OT believers are resurrected and enter into the promised kingdom. The kingdom Nic knew about was the one promised in the OT, when the Messiah would rule from David's throne. He thought maybe it was at hand.
The OT saints missed the lesson of the spring feasts versus the fall feasts. Of course, we know now in hindsight that the spring feasts represented the first coming of the Messiah, and the fall feasts the second. But in Jesus' day, that info was not clear. That's why the jews were confused and some thought there would be 2 messiahs.
Nic is asking Jesus to clear it up for him, I think. :B)
Think about it. This is the subject of their conversation. Not the "new birth" which was still future and not revealed yet.
Edited by ex10Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
To shed further light, on John 3, there is an appendix in John Schoenheit's book, "The Christian's Hope, The Anchor of the Soul," in which JS does an excellent job of explaining this section of scripture.
Just in case anybody is interested. ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
allan w.
aaahh..except for the point that Jesus many times spoke prophetically and inspired utterances which I believe was one of these occasions. It may even have surprised Jesus at times at what came out of his mouth !!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Allan, check your interlinear. The greek words translated "born again" in John 3 are not the same as used in the church epistles when referring to the new birth. ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
I want to go back to some things I never really saw handled fully.
Mike, this has bothered me for quite a while, but as I stated before, when I first read the post (and many of the subsequent ones) I simply could not really do justice to how I feel about the way you have handled the text. I know I commented briefly - but topoftheworld's most recent post has inpired me anew.
For the sake of argument, let's replace "spiritual' words with every day words and see what we get:
(1) "I know the contents of Volume I of Studies in Abundant Living will not only open up more of God's Word for you, but will also uplift you - mentally and physically and spiritually."
I know the contents of "The Joy of Cooking" will not only open up more of the culinary arts world for you, but will also nourish you - deliciously, healthfully, and nutritiously.
(2) "Let us put God's Word in our hearts and minds for it alone can give us complete deliverance from the darkness of this world."
Let us put the culinary arts world in our lives for it alone can give us complete deliverance from boring meals.
Here we see that "The Joy of Cooking" is not equal to the WHOLE culinary arts world - it just opens that world up to the reader. Same claim is made regarding Vol I in Studies in Abundant Living - it OPENS UP the Word of God.
Now the culinary arts (that was opened up but not exhausted) gives deliverance form boring eating.
The Studies in Abundant Living and all of PFAL were meant to get the student started. They were all meant to give tools to study, to understand a huge book that many deemed impenetrable. Like using a hammer and chisel to crack open a coconut. You don't turn around and worship the tools - YOU EAT THE COCONUT. Likewise, the PFAL series was supposed to be a tool - we were supposed to feed on the WORD OF GOD.
Here's another quote:
"It's a remarkable thing that God put His promise in the past tense..I have already given to you..and He still does this today. Many, many times He puts in the past tense what still is the future for us."
You ask where these many many times were/are. They were/are in the manifestations we have heard many, many, many, many, many, times in twigs and branch meetings and limb meetings and sns and on and on ad nauseum - for years.
And I've already noted that I believe that dr's last exhortation for us to think about where we learned our doctrines was the result of him knowing his time was short and wanting to leave a different legacy than he knew he had built.
He had to have known that upon his death the tales of his sexual deviance would hit the fan. He didn't want this, I'm sure. This was a TVT that HE was responsible for. He had passed it on to lcm along with many others. He might have even have wanted it to stop but couldn't very well say this in public - imagine THAT on the last tape from Gartmore: "You leaders, stop screwing all those young women. I know I'm the one who told you that it was the only way you would grow spiritually - but I want you to do as I NOW say and not as I did."
Now concerning Adam and the naming of the animals. All I can say is that we were taught that Orientalisms were HELPFUL but not the Word of God. Knowing the name of a person implied that you had power over them - that is why in the book of Revelation it is said that no man will know the name of the Lord.(my paraphrase)
Can you tell it's Spring Break.....[/color]
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
topoftheworld
Hey, Dooj-you cook pretty darn good. And your "food" presentation is very pleasing. :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I'd forgotten about that , Ex. Thanks for the reminder!!
(pulled out the book, and it made perfect sense.) :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Mike, I'm not sure whether to post this on David's "pipe" thread or here - I'm here so here goes: (David if you want I'll post this there as well - but Mike answered here so i'm refuting here.)
You aren't consistent with your claim of which of vpw's words are "God-breathed. Sometimes you quote the collaterals, sometimes you quote the video of the class, sometimes you quote a way mag article, sometimes you quote a sns tape - or the tape from Gartmore.
So - if you can do it so can David.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
doojable,
I’ve explained before that I quote things like Dr’s tapes mostly for ministry history, but I look only Dr’s the “book and magazine form” writings as the doctrine we were given to master that’s God-breathed.
Sometimes I quote the soundtrack of the film class instead of the book because it stimulates memory better.
It’s fine if dmiller wants to quote U of L, but I think the conclusion he drew from it is inaccurate. That’s all I posted.
The U of L quote did not contradict Dr’s claim to have SOMETHING that he did not have to “go back on,” as Dr mentioned in Elena’s book. That something Dr did claim to have that qualified as the final truth on the God-breathed Word was not his U of L teachings.
I just don’t think that U of L quote was saying Dr had NOTHING in print that was final.
***
In an earlier post you wrote: “The Studies in Abundant Living and all of PFAL were meant to get the student started. They were all meant to give tools to study, to understand a huge book that many deemed impenetrable. Like using a hammer and chisel to crack open a coconut. You don't turn around and worship the tools - YOU EAT THE COCONUT.”
I know there’s far more to your post, but two quick points.
I could just as deliberately construct an analogy where the tools ARE eaten. With Mexican food, the chips are like spoons and some salads come in a shell that is like a bowl. The bowl and spoons serve as tools and they are food too!
In this example, the eatable tools correspond to the idea you brought up twice. That idea is that there does seem to be some difference between the ancient scriptures, revelations from God given in writing addressed to Jew, Gentile, and Church of God, and modern revelations from God also written on paper addressed to grads.
But we don’t have the pure ancient scriptures, just an approximation of them. The KJV is a tool too.
PFAL is a God-breathed tool, the KJV is a man-breathed tool. Together they give us and senses understanding of God’s Word. We read both tools with our senses.
More on this later.
****************************************
The other point is that the PFAL tools changed over time, gradually at first, with some spurts, and then a HUGE change around 1982.
***
The early tools helped us to a senses understanding of God’s Word.
The later tools will help us to a spiritual understanding of God’s Word.
***
The early tools have a large component of focus on the KJV, with PFAL in the background.
The later tools have a large component of focus on written PFAL, with KJV in the background.
This is why the early teachings of Dr focus on the KJV, and later he often urged us to focus on PFAL.
***
The early tools are for senses understanding of God’s Word.
The later tools are for spiritual understanding of God’s Word.
***
Add to this mix the problem of many grads getting only a partial grip on the early tools.
Add to this mix the problem of most grads having a non-existent grip on the later tools.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
CM
***
Mike's opinion
Edited by CMLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
CM,
That's merely YOUR opinion, that it's merely my opinion.
When I have time I think I can show that it's NOT merely my opinion, what I posted above, but that by close study of PFAL it emerges as the truth.
I other words I think it can be seen that it's not only my opinion but God's too, which makes it true.
We can start by showing that the later PFAL tools changed as I described. This requires a close look at the before and after. Both the early PFAL writings and the latter must be studied closely, mastered.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
you have been saying that for years
and still nothing
you are welcome to your opinion as well as I am
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
This eliminates all books.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Dmiller, you are welcome.
VPW slaughtered that section of scripture in PFAL. And it always bothered me.
VP also stunk at teaching the OT, and getting it to fit with the NT, and I remember asking about the "hope of Israel" over and over again and NEVER getting a satisfactory answer.
Then, when my husband and I went to Israel with JS, he was working on that book, and he answered my question in about 2 seconds. It was wonderful, because I finally started to understand so much of the OT and how it relates to the bigger scheme of things. Like I said, it was a weakness of TWI.
Which leads to any interesting point, I think. VPW was the one who asked JS to get into studying the OT, so he could teach it to the corps. VP knew it was a weak area for himself. He recognized a strength in John, and encouraged him to push himself in that area.
I don't think J will mind if I say that. :D It's pretty obvious what his "gift" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
What The Hey
Are you finally admitting then that there are areas in PFAL that are not God-breathed? > i.e. that there are, as you just stated, SOME possible exceptions? If that is what you are saying, then you and Raf are not in as much complete disagreement as you both pretend to be - there is only disagreement on the areas of PFAL you happen to believe are or aren't God-breathed.
The problem would apparently lie then in determining exactly what constitutes "something" being "God-breathed?" As I stated in an earlier post, does something have to be written in order for it to be considered God-breathed - i.e. the scriptures? I don't think so. My reasoning on this is what is stated in John 21:25 -where John says there are many "other things" Jesus did that were not recorded. John further states that he supposes that if they should be written, every one, even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.
I imagine one could put forth the arguement that because the many "other things" Jesus did were never recorded, this would also imply the many "other things" Jesus did were not God-breathed - based on fact those many "other things" Jesus did were never written down. To put this idea forth in a more modern context, Raf made this statement earlier:
While Raf is correct in the fact VPW was speaking in the immediate context regarding the instructions he was giving on speaking in tongues, he misses the fact that VPW was not necessarily speaking "out of order" when he wrote, "every word I have written to you is true." Now truthfully speaking, not everything VPW ever wrote is/was God-breathed. This is quite evident today even as it was during the time of Jesus Christ. Likewise, there were many writers at the time when Luke was alive who were also attempting to make ... "a declaration of those things which are most suredly believed among us," (Luke 1:1)
[LCM explains in R&E (p16) regarding Luke 1.] In Luke 1:1 "Forasmuch as" can also be translated "since". "Taken in hand" is a phrase that indicates a previous lack of success. Other narratives failed. This does not refer to the Gospels of Mattew, Mark and John, which are also God-breathed revelations. But even in Luke's time, other writers attempted sense-knowledge narratives regarding the life of Jesus Christ. These were fictitious or "apocryphal" records filled with ludicrous stories, and some are still in circulation today.
So what is it that seperates all the "fictitious, "apocyphal" records filled with ludicrous stories apart from the "God-breathed" scriptures? ... "to set forth in order a declaration of those things most surely believed among us." That is exact point where all the "sense-knowledge" records failed. They failed the "acid test" - to set forth in order a declaration of the things most surely believed, etc. There is certainly much more to say as to what constitutes something being God-breathed, but right now I am short on my "posting time" today. Just something to mull over and to think more about for now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Ex10,
Yesterday you wrote: “Oh geeze. I haven't read this thread in long time, so pardon me, if my comment is a little late in coming.”
I’m glad to see you again, even though my time for responding to your points is scarce right now.
Because this thread is hot with activity and growing fast, might I suggest to you and others that an apology for referring back to older material need not be made?
I’m finding that there are several well established sub-topics here, like the one you addressed.
What we all might try doing, if we want to address a well buried sub-topic, is simply place a title describing that sub-topic on top of our post to signify that it is not in response to the recent sub-topic, but to an older one.
If we include with the sub-topic’s title some pertinent post # numbers, showing where it was last discussed, that will also help in managing many topics under this one PFAL thread.
With this new site, the software settings allow everyone to select how large the pages are, so referencing PAGE # numbers is not the best system of referring to an older sub-topic. Different posters can have differing pagination.
The POST # numbers are the same for everyone though... I think.
Maybe we can come to some agreement on naming sub-topic titles, too.
*************************************************
*************************************************
*************************************************
*************************************************
doojable,
I know it got a little confusing with my responding here to dmiller’s “Pipe” thread, but I feel it’s the respectful thing to do in light of Modaustin’s set-up here.
If I confine my PFAL “advertisements” here it is less offensive to other posters who find PFAL too much a reminder of some painful past events. This is not easy, but I am learning to adopt this new style of posting as best I can.
Management has been very generous to me in allowing me to post as much as I do on my proPFAL leanings. The least I can do in return is respect their wishes and steer my proPFAL posting to this one thread. As I learn to better segregate these proPFAL posts of mine here, others who prefer to get away from such notions can learn to simply avoid this one thread.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
WTH: I think "pretend" is the wrong word. The appropriate word is "appear."
I'm waiting to see how the rest of the conversation plays out before I decide whether to say anything else on the subject.
I'd also like to point out that I never said VPW was "out of order" when he wrote "every word I write is true," so I'm a bit at a loss as to why you're trying to refute me there (unless I'm misunderstanding you). I believe Mike's interpretation and application of that statement are out of order, not that the statement itself is. I mean, what's he going to write: "If you really believe God, and Jesus is your Lord, you'll see I'm wrong and lying through my teeth"? Of course not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
This would be incorrect reasoning. Even if every single thing Christ did was God-breathed, doesn't mean we need to know it. Many of Christ's healings, undoubtedly God-breathed, were truncated and "glossed over" in the gospels, not because they were not God-breathed, but because the details weren't a part of what we need to know.
VPW did not write "every word I write is true"; he wrote "every word I write to you is true," which means the discussion of his laundry list is not relevant. I do not believe every word VPW wrote in the relevant books is true, though I do believe we can find a great deal of truth in them (others may heartily disagree).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Raf,
I agree with you whole heartedly. There is a lot that is included in the gospels and a lot left out.. You find a lot of important healings - like the healing of the man born blind which was a fulfillment of prophecy that pointed to his truly being the Messiah. (there's so much more I could write - but I won't...)
The Gospels also show Jesus Christ fulfilling the Law and filling the role of the Passover lamb (I know - he was already the Passover lamb - but in the Gospels we see this unfold.)
What we don't see -well who knows - we don't see the everyday life that he undoubtedly live - whether you hold to vpw's teaching that he only lived 6 months after beginning his ministry or the more popular theory that says he lived for three years - those 4 gospels hardly make a dent on a life lived by the only begotten Son of God.
We also don't re the "redundant" healings. There is no telling how many people he raised from the dead, or how many blind men ended up seeing.
Then there are the things that he did because he was a man - human - eating, drinking, toiletries, and the various conversations that went along with that - don't have to be God-breathed to still make him the Son of God.
So I repeat - if a life a great as that of the Lord Jesus Christ doesn't have every word written down ( we don't have any of his written words!)how can anyone say that ALL of vpw's pfal series is true and God-breathed. That's longer than the 5 books of Moses. God is a master of economy - that is not how I describe pfal and the series. There is a lot of repetition in those books - more than in the scriptures.
One last thing - but I guess it's not all that important. I bet you a shekel that Moses didn't charge the children for a copy of his 5 books of the old tesatament - you know the "Law Series."
ex10 - am I wrong or wasn't JS Jewish before he got involved with twi? This would point even further to why he had so much knowledge and presumably passion for the OT. That Dr asked him to concentrate in this area shows that vpw not only saw JS's strength but had a brief moment of clarity that allowed him to delegate. Thanks for your imput on that subject!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Dooj, he was raised aetheist. No Jewish blood in him. ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
no response mike?
thinkin it over? don't even want any kind of clarification?
btw-didn't Paul have Jesus talking to him before vp says he got born again?
and Cornelius and his household heard from God before Peter came?
.......
how bout this one
"either there is no interpretation or it must interpret itself"
both are wrong
the Lord opens the eyes and ears to the scriptures
first opening the eyes and ears of the spirit that is within
and things will come together
most likely not when you are reading them
---
good post doojable because that is where it is at
in the every day living and listening and doing
keeping the ears and eyes open to hear the Lord
comes from unlikely sources sometimes
from people like us loving and living and looking
now is the day of salvation
the words are there from living people
all through Acts this is seen
Edited by CMLink to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Oh well, thought I knew something. It really doesn't change much other than the fact that I thought he already had a background in OT - but he didn't - he started from scratch.
Link to comment
Share on other sites