Goodness! There's so much... but then... that's part of the fun isn't it folks?
(me in bold, except where noted, underline by me)
Todd,
This conversation goes back years. I've explained that I do limit myself in what I will learn and absorb.
If you are willing to state that you know that there are great dangers in some spiritual phenomena and ideas then I’ll be pleasantly surprised. It sounds to me that you still advocate all kinds of experimentation with all sorts of phenomena and ideas. I think that’s dangerous, and self-misleading at best. I’d be happy to be wrong on my perception of your position.
Mike... like THIS phenomena?:
Mike 2/2/04, 12:17am.
"When you see Christ in his glory he will be holding a PFAL book in his hand
and teaching you from it."
Mike 2/3/04 5:22am.
"Jesus Christ appointed Dr his spokesman.
Jesus Christ is VERY interested in PFAL.
He told me so."
Vickles 2/3/04, 7:51pm.
"So, Mike, you weren't kidding about JC coming with a PFAL book in his hand."
Mike, 2/3/04, 7:53pm.
"Totally serious. I've already seen him this way more than once."
...great dangers indeed!
It’s in the AC that Dr teaches the “16 Keys to walking in the Spirit” and key #4 is “Study the Word much. What you can know by the five senses God expects you to know.”
Are you sure it doesn't say "Study PFAL"???
This key #4 is to protect us from error and evil. Many religious people want to skip around the work of five senses, serious study. The reason we were given a written Word is so that we can read about the warnings with our five senses, and so we can see which major ideas and methods are right in God’s eyes.
We need this fives senses text to read from because it takes time and skill to discern good from evil spiritually. Evil will present itself as good and CONVINCINGLY SO, if there isn’t a strong awareness of good and evil from the five senses reading prior to encountering the spiritual counterfeits.
This is so much your private interpretation of this line... veepee said exactly the opposite of what you're espousing here... know by your five senses that 'fire burns' 'if you stay out in the sun too long you'll get sunburned' 'if you don't drink enough water you'll get dehydrated' ...veepee made it a point of saying that was exactly what he was talking about...
This is the whole story of Jesus being tempted in the wilderness just after he received spirit. He had done the five senses study all his life and was ready for spiritual encounters. He was successful at spotting that the devil was a counterfeit because he had done the necessary five senses work. It takes work, and lazy cosmic cadets are sure to be duped sooner or later.
But, I’d prefer here on this thread (largely because I can’t do it elsewhere) to get into the five senses study of PFAL .... leading later to the spiritual...
***
You wrote: "i hope you know i dont ask you those kinds of things because i want to humiliate you
or save anyone from your doctrine"
Yes, I know you well enough to know those are not your motives. I know you're genuinely excited about other stuff, but I must beg off. I've got my mission.
ahh yes... "THE MISSION"...
I'm pleasantly surprised.
...not at you bowing out, but at your stating that there is evil in the spiritual.
why Mike... how surprisingly condescending of you!
***
For this particular thread I'm trying to decide where I want to go next with it, so in the meantime feel free to derail.
oh... I forgot... YOU decide... how silly of me!
...and you say it's not about you... sometimes you're just too modest Mike...
T-Bone, this is what I was looking at in your post on the other thread. You listed a bunch of books you use in your efforts to clean up your KJV, but you didn't mention the loss of surety that emerges from such efforts, especially when two equally bright scholars (like authors of the books you mentioned) disagree on any one point.
If I wanted surety I had to have SOME kind of reference text to help me in my Biblical research that "I'd never have to back up on" to borrow a phrase.
Due to a number of circumstances lining up together in that year of 1998, I decided that I'd take written PFAL as my only rule for faith and practice. Outside obvious printer and proofreader errors, I decided that every word written there is true and everything else gets lined up with it or tossed out.
Mike, perhaps I wasn't clear on referring to those books. I'm not trying to "clean up" my KJV. I refer to them for another viewpoint or perhaps see how they define a Greek or Hebrew word, or mention an historical or cultural tie in...As far as a loss of surety - I personally am confident that: the Bible is true [though I certainly don't understand it all], that Jesus died for my sins, that God answers prayer, that adultery, lying, murder, and stealing are wrong; That I should love God with all my heart,soul, mind and strength & love my neighbor as myself....I continue to study the Bible [in quite a few different translations besides KJV] to hopefully deepen my understanding of the Scriptures and develop my relationship with God as I'm sure you do too....Yeah, there's a lot of neat stuff to study in the Bible - like the Book of Revelation, the Rapture, the Holy Spirit and manifestations, etc. - - I personally don't thinkI've got to figure that all out, work all the kinks out and nail down the "true doctrine" or some doctrinal position so I can have intellectual confidence.....I admit I look into those things, study them - but figure I may never be as confident about what I find as I do about the "simpler" stuff....I think [in my opinion] that in the grand scheme of things - what matters most in Bible study are the things that have a direct bearing on the practical side of Christianity.
But what we are supposed to be "mastering" is following Christ
We master that by living in the real world and upholding the standards of Christian behavior
Are you claiming the Christian religion upholds the standards of Christian behavior? Oh PHBTTTTTT! One only becomes "Christ-like" to the degree the Word of God lives in them. Frankly speaking, I don't see it, especially in the so called: "real world" your talking about.
But it is typical of "Americanized Chrisitanity" today, that separates the written Word from the living Word, Jesus Christ. The great design of the whole Word of God is Jesus Christ. Apart from him the Word of God cannot be understood and it is the scriptures which testify of Christ - not the "real world".
The living Word, Jesus Christ, and the written Word, the Scriptures, cannot be separated. But that is the flavor of "Americanized Christianity" in the so called: 'real world' today. It is a powerless counterfeit, albeit at times it can be a spectacular one ending in nothing but confusion and speculation. Just a lot of sizzle with no steak.
Are you claiming the Christian religion upholds the standards of Christian behavior?
Religion is a set of codified beliefs,
It is the responsibility of the followers to uphold the standards
And you do this by upholding those standards while living in the real world, not burying your nose in a book and claiming by keeping said nose buried you are Upholding the standards
On the “About the Way” thread named “Personal experiences not valid...” I had written: “... prior to 1942 there was no authoritative written Word available.”
You retorted with: “Wierwille would have slapped you silly, had you said that to him.”
I disagree.
We might begin by discussing a little what I meant a little by my use of the word “authoritative.”
By that I mean something above and beyond the human authority of the scholars over the centuries who have participated in reconstructing what they think the scriptures must have said and then translating that into English. Both steps require a massive amount of human, flesh, senses, mental work to produce what was available prior to 1942. The end result is not at all authoritative like the original manuscripts were.
***
Now I don’t base my disagreement with you on this issue solely on this little bit of logic. I see that VPW said some things very similar to what you took issue with me on.
Here’s what Dr said in "The Way - Living In Love" by Elena Whiteside pp. 178-18:
"Then Rosalind left. It was the fall of the year. Kids were back in school already. It must have been September. I was sitting in my office, an old dentist's office just around the corner from the church where I served — I'll show you that too when we get there. I bet you it's still there, though I haven't been back here since I left.
“I was praying. And I told Father that He could have the whole thing, unless there were real genuine answers that I wouldn't ever have to back up on.
"And that's when He spoke to me audibly, just like I'm talking to you now. He said He would teach me the Word as it had not been known since the first century if I would teach it to others.
"Well, I nearly flew off my chair. I couldn't believe that God would talk to me." He shakes his head slowly smiling. "It's just too fantastic. People won't believe it. But He spoke to me just as plainly as I'm talking now to you.
"But really, why is it so strange? When you think about it, you see in the Bible that all through the ages God talked to people. God talked to Moses, to all the prophets. God talked to Paul. All through the centuries, God has talked to people in times of great need. And that's what we have today — a terrific need. People are just so far from hearing and believing the Word of God.
“You don't get it in the theological schools. The Word is buried, just like it was in the time of Jeremiah. Oh, they had their priests, their higher echelons, their temples, their rituals. It all looked so religious, you know. But the Word of God was buried. Oh, they were teaching the people something -- they called it the Word of God maybe, but the Word was buried. God spoke directly to Jeremiah.
"The Word is buried today. If there's no one around to teach it, God has to teach it Himself. You see, I am a product of my times. God knew me before the foundations of the world, just like He knew you and everyone else. We were all in God's foreknowledge from the beginnings.
“God knew I would believe His Word. And every day I am more and more deeply convinced of this ministry which teaches people the accuracy and integrity of God's Word. Without this ministry the world would be in far greater spiritual darkness about His Word. There would be less light in the world. Where else but in this ministry do you find the Word of God so living and real? This is truly a time of terrific need." Doctor nods his head abruptly, as if to punctuate his urgency.”
I highlighted portions that indicate Dr believed that prior to 1942 there was no authoritative Word to hear. It wasn’t in print. Oh, SOMETHING was in print, and they dressed it up as the Word, but it wasn’t. It had pieces of the Word, but it also had error, crucial error.
***
I think Dr would be very disappointed that we didn’t pay good attention to what he taught us, and that we all refused to take his final instructions seriously. Leadership didn’t even pass on his final instructions to non-Corps grads and it was lost.
No, I’m not at all worried about Dr not liking what I posted. I think he’d have some things to say to you, though. What actions did you take regarding his Last/Lost Teaching and his final instructions? If ANY actions at all were taken by you in obedience to that last teaching, how long did they last? What kind of obedience did you show and how did you inspire others to follow suit to do what Dr EXPLICITLY told us to do?
Mike, please don't be rude to the folks who have been down here dealing with you on a daily basis. Respond to LG in the thread that he addressed you... please show others the courtesy you would want shown to you and respond to things within this thread. Thank you.
The end result is not at all authoritative like the original manuscripts were.
There are no ORIGINAL manuscripts for the New Testament, at best what we have are copies of copies of some of the letters of Paul and other believers (some not included at all in the New Testament) not to mention those that are forever lost to us. The Gospels were written much later than the letters
So right there there is a big ALERT sign on VPW's teachings, he couldn't have read it in the "Original" because the "Original" is long gone
Suggest you read "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart D Ehrman on this subject.
Oops, sorry that would mean something not written by VPW --just forget I mentioned it.
On that same “all nine” thread you wrote: “Since you were mentioning tapes (while having castigated a few of us in the past for doing the exact same thing), I just thought I might bring that to your attention, and you say I didn't *resist*?”
You gottat read context, man.
Raf had seen a hot line I wrote. He posted a quote of it. He then resisted commenting any more to avoid derailing the thread any more. There was context prior to that complaining that it was I who had derailed the thread.
You did not resist the urge to go off on a wild tangent. You were the chief derailleur, but of course I got blamed. Templelady also said far more than she had to keep the thread rolling.
***
Since we’re at a quote from you, can you point out one place where I castigated someone for mentioning tapes. I want you to find the place so I can show you that I was gentle in my correction. If I wasn’t gentle it was because someone was dragging my foot.
You were even more off the wall in your accusations earlier on the thread where you wrote: “There you go mentioning tapes again. Why?????? Everytime one of us does so, you relegate it to the gutter ---“
So, if I do that EVERYTIME, then it should be easy for you to find proof, if your accusation is accurate. But I think it’s not, and I think you will not do the work to prove me right. Your credibility is sagging.
I wonder how much *credibility I have ever had, on threads like this? Seems to me, that every time someone mentions something from a tape -- you are quick to shoot it down, thus my use of the word *castigate*.
And no -- I am NOT going to search past threads for proof of what I claim you have said.
I don't have time, I don't care, and you would refute whatever I might offer as evidence.
Now -- while we are the subject of tapes, I just received the latest one from CES/STFI in the mail the other day, and John Schoenheit happens to be teaching this one about relationships.
I won't bore you with the details of all that was on it, but I would like to tell you about an astute statement he made, concerning what someone believes, as pertains to doctrine.
He said (paraphrased):
The doctrine I hold, should be the engine that drives me to loving others unconditionally,
yet so often, it is that very doctrine that constructs a wall between me and others.
Thus, that which should connect me with others in love,
is actually a divisive, rather than a connecting belief.
Why do I mention this?? It suits a lot of us here at GSC to the *T*. You, me, and others also.
The rest of the tape showed how to get out of the ~~~~~
*Me, me, me, My doctrine over all* --- and learning to accept other's viewpoints.
Hey --- I'll be the first to admit. I'm guilty of that, but then again so are you.
After hearing what was said on that tape, I decided to try a little more humility in my life.
I've always admitted that I haven't got all the answers,
even though some of my posts have indicated otherwise.
How about you?? Willing to make your doctrine an *engine* that gets folks to listen?
Yikes! Things got pretty slow here for a while and now I’m far behind in responding again. Tomorrow looks to be a rainy day, so I expect to catch up by then. Maybe I’ll stay up late.
I saw your short post and decided to start with it.
You wrote: “Mike, please don't be rude to the folks who have been down here dealing with you on a daily basis. Respond to LG in the thread that he addressed you... please show others the courtesy you would want shown to you and respond to things within this thread. Thank you.”
Well Tom, if the only place you think I was rude was to LG, then I may get off this hook easy. However, you did use the word “folks” so I suspect you have other incidents in mind. If you do think I was rude other places, it’s better to be specific than general, and it’s best to speak up in private first, as Jesus once taught.
I admit I was tough at the end of my post to LG, but he indicated that he could take it by being a bit rough with me. Instead of saying that Dr would slap me silly, LG could have spoken in kinder tones and said the Dr would have disapproved. If the end of my post was something you thought was rude, did you also think LG was rude to me?
***
Ok, now for the easy part.
One minute after responding to LG here I sent him a PM informing him that I had responded to his remark in this “official” PFAL thread. You seemed to get all bent out of shape when I mentioned in another post that I haven’t decided where to go with this thread, as if it were mind to decide. There’s a connection between these two items.
In a sense this is my thread. It was set up by Modaustin for me so that I can confine my main message here. We both discussed this when doojable’s thread “OK for once and for all” thread got a little heated and generating complaints. Pawtucket and the moderators get way too many complaints about me and my message being splashed all over the board. Things get too heated too easily, and too many complaints hassle the moderators too much, so hence this thread was set up.
Modaustin’s name is on this thread because if it were my name it would generate more complaints, and because then it would lack Modaustin’s Preface forbidding complaints and the authority behind it.
I have ventured out to a small number of other threads a tiny bit, and with extreme care to not disrupt things and to confine my main message here. I’m only venturing out of this thread to post on subjects I think I can keep the commotion down on, and where I think I can offer small contributions to the mix. When things do heat up, I’m trying to bow out quickly.
If I had responded to LG on the thread where he made his remarks then things would have gotten quickly out of hand, the complaint buttons would be pressed by many, and I would be in trouble again with management. They have done much to keep this place an open discussion site with as few rules as possible. One of the rules is I need to post in places and in ways where management is least hassled by complaints. This is the reason for the Modaustin’s Preface on page one of this thread.
I’m somewhat in awe of Pawtucket’s dedication to the idea of free speech, and his generosity in allowing me to post. He does this in spite of the extreme differences between his and my philosophy of what PFAL was all about. He does this in spite of the load of complaints he and moderators get from posters who seem to want censorship for ideas they don’t like, especially mine. I am doing my best to respect Paw’s wishes and confine the bulk of my posts and hopefully ALL of the commotion generating ones here.
It get’s complicated when I see another thread topic I think I can contribute on because although I can gage my efforts to lessen outrage (knowing the buzz words), I cannot control other posters who want to strike up the band and get the food fight started on those other threads I venture out to.
Dmiller, you have gotten caught up in this process a couple of times. It’s occurred to me that you and others are not as aware of the behind the scenes issues I’m describing here as I had hoped, so that’s why I’m taking this time now to explain.
When you, dmiller, started that thread on the U of L syllabus, the fact that it was about me AND it had my name in the title meant all the red flags were waving.
I saw it was sure to invite a huge set of complaints, yet I felt some answer from me was demanded. I tried my best to steer it back to this thread, but you weren’t getting it, so modcat5 stepped in with some explanation that I was doing the right thing in that steerage and then locked the thread down.
Then on the “all nine all the time” thread you were making comments to drag in the usual on-going conversations you and I have, but that had nothing to do with the thread topic. Then templelady chimed in with a little more of the same, and the calls for my removal started. I’m just hoping the complaint button wasn’t pushed. It seemed to straighten out, but I wanted you to know why I said what I said about it.
***
Dmiller, I haven’t had time yet to read your most recent posts carefully but I will. I was able to see the overture you gave there and am willing to work it out with you. I can see that it deserves more reading, thought, and discussion.
I am constantly seeing that most of the squabbles you and I have had (others too) revolve around misunderstandings. It’s hard for me to keep track of who has heard what about the details of my position. I was genuinely surprised to see that you thought you had me over a barrel with the U of L syllabus quote. I thought I had fully explained that aspect of my looking to tapes and other ministry teachings for secondary benefits, such as ministry history instead of doctrine, so I was surprised when you posted on that.
Maybe you didn’t see or attach enough significance to my previous posts on how I look at differing materials. I feel that many posters here look at a post of mine, get angry or excited about some ONE thing in it, and fail to see and/or remember the details of the post. I’m constantly repeating those details, but they are constantly getting lost.
Doojable’s urging me to write up a treatise has some merit when it comes to these lost details. I will not try to write up a some kind of proof on why PFAL is God-breathed, but I may try to write up a general set of items describing where I’m coming from. One plan I am thinking over is to slowly read all of my posts, and organize them into categories. From there I can boil them down to a general treatise. Just a thought.
***
Ok, now that the background information has been explained maybe we can discuss better ways I can post to cause less commotion, both on this thread and others. It’s the folks who too easily hit the complaint buttons that need to be dealt with or at least anticipated.
It’s just a matter of time and this thread’s length will be a source of antagonism for some complaint button pushers. It happened before with the “Masters of the Word” thread where MANY people complained about that thread’s length, even on the board in posts, so this one is surely next. Maybe we can ask a moderator to lock this one and start another similar one, labeling it Session Two, as a comedy relief... or would THAT cause complaints too? Oh well, life involves risks.
Thank you for your post on the oneness of Jesus Christ with the Word.
You wrote:
“But it is typical of "Americanized Chrisitanity" today, that separates the written Word from the living Word, Jesus Christ. The great design of the whole Word of God is Jesus Christ. Apart from him the Word of God cannot be understood and it is the scriptures which testify of Christ - not the "real world".
“The living Word, Jesus Christ, and the written Word, the Scriptures, cannot be separated. But that is the flavor of "Americanized Christianity" in the so called: 'real world' today. It is a powerless counterfeit, albeit at times it can be a spectacular one ending in nothing but confusion and speculation. Just a lot of sizzle with no steak.”
Yes, the Hollywood nice-guy Jesus is a counterfeit, yet that’s all many can hold in mind who eschew a deep knowledge of the scriptures... and of course PFAL which unfolds the scriptures for us.
Sure there can be a huge imbalance when all someone does is study books and never gets out there to apply the books. But if someone genuinely studies and understands PFAL and acts on it, then this imbalance does not happen.
When you, dmiller, started that thread on the U of L syllabus, the fact that it was about me AND it had my name in the title meant all the red flags were waving.
No Mike -- you missed my point entirely. I was quoting you something that was printed by twi (you DO like print over tape -- eh??.
What I quoted you from the U of L, was from the syllabus, printed by twi, and not from the tapes themselves.
Shucks -- scuze me for *fooling* you. I just figured that if you could call pfal and the way rag, *God's Word Re-Issued*, simply because twi had it in print -- I figured you could do the same, with something else that they also printed -- IE -- from what I've seen you saying in many earlier posts.
If ya want to *duck and dodge* (like we've seen you do in the past), have at it. It won't be anything new. :( My ONLY POINT about the U of L syllabus was that it was something that twi PRINTED --- (not once did I quote the tapes -- in deference to your *written* specifications)
Geeezzz -- I try and accomodate ya -- and this is what I get. :unsure:
My comment was on posting "down here" for something going on "up there"... I didn't know that you had been "confined to quarters" but I'll take your word for it...
Now... about the "your thread" claim... I don't agree with that. Just because this is where you've been told to confine your message doesn't mean that you get to decide 'where it goes'... granted, most of the time it probably does go where you want it to because that's just the way it happens... but the thread was established as a "free fall zone" for folks to interact with you and should be able to "roam where it will" as decided by all of the folks who participate...
I did only say that IN A SENSE it was my thread, and I did give the qualifications. I’m not trying to claim it in any way. I’m not going to get on anyone’s case if it get’s derailed. Heck, it has no focused track in the first place.
Here are my comments again that seemed to tick you off: “For this particular thread I'm trying to decide where I want to go next with it, so in the meantime feel free to derail.”
Your response was: “oh... I forgot... YOU decide... how silly of me!”
But I contend that you misread my intentions. I was only deciding MY OWN course of actions on this thread, not everyone else’s.
I think we are in agreement on this, it’s just a matter of communicating it.
You wrote: “My ONLY POINT about the U of L syllabus was that it was something that twi PRINTED --- (not once did I quote the tapes -- in deference to your *written* specifications)”
Again, it’s a simple communications glitch.
In all my specifying of where I see something super special in the entire TWI output, it’s ONLY in VPW’s printed output that I focus. I am thankful for all the other contributions in the Way Magazine and on rare occasions even cited some, but it’s only Dr’s articles that I focus on as special. This detail has been posted but evidently not often enough or loud enough.
Case in point: There was a Way Magazine article by Peter Berneger in the 70's on the Star of Bethlehem. It was printed before the work by Martin of Pasedena was discovered and later incorporated into JCPS. The book and that magazine article totally contradict each other. That article would fit into the bucket that U of L syllabus quote was talking about... the article was not the last word on the Star of Bethlehem... it was wrong, yet it was printed. VPW did not put his name on that article.
I know some may think I'm making up these things as I go, but I'm not. That would be a real fast way to tie myself up into knots. I can find previous posts on the VPW name having to be on the printed material to have it qualify as the final end product of the 1942 promise.
BTW, this "vpw in print" focus is a relatively new thing in my life. I first started hearing of it in 1998, but having an extensive tape background, I resisted it for a couple of years, and then accepted it, but still had the tape habit patterns. I may still have some internal contradictions on these matters and may still rely too heavily on some taped items for doctrine. As I see these I work them in my mind, but I don’t think I’m totally done yet. I am human and make mistakes, but find them fun to correct.
But the "vpw only" tag on the printed items is about 5 or 6 years old now, well posted, and pretty consistently applied.
BTW, PFAL page 83 places an additional qualifier on "vpw in print" because it says that NOT ALL that vpw writes will necessarily be God-breathed.
I'll admit it's hard for an outsider to remember all these qualifications, but if you become a player, open the books, and dive into them headlong (instead of trying to defeat them) then it gets much easier to remember.
Yes, I decide what qualifies for intense focus by me, and I try to decide based on what I’ve been taught in the record, and I try to inspire others to join me and others who are doing this.
Yes, I decide what I’m going to point to.
I think this is ANOTHER communications glitch. Maybe if you tried to think that I am sane, an OK guy, and somewhat right on then some (or a lot) of communications glitches will stop happening.
For the record, what I saw you do was miniscule compared to some others, but it did add to the mix.
In addition to saying what you please, I am urging you and others to please consider the extra commotion that just seems to happen when I post. This is not because I am anything special, but because the topic I choose to post on is THE hot button of the century and more.
I’m asking you to please consider Pawtucket and his moderators. This involves more than refraining from hitting the complaint button, but also avoiding stimulating others to do so. I asking you to just think through things a little more when the issue is this very hot topic of PFAL and the associations many here make now between me and PFAL.
The more you folks rail on me in other threads the more it drags in others to fight and complain. Do your railing on me here and it will work better for all.
You wrote: “Mike, perhaps I wasn't clear on referring to those books. I'm not trying to "clean up" my KJV. I refer to them for another viewpoint or perhaps see how they define a Greek or Hebrew word, or mention an historical or cultural tie in...”
But this is what I mean when I say “clean up” your KJV. It’s figurative. It works for the NIV too.
We all know that our KJV is lacking in many areas. It was a valiant human attempt to re-issue the original scriptures in modern English (or was it Middle English?) but it has errors and poorly translated words. When you look for “another viewpoint” that’s part of a clean up process. you may not literally transfer this other viewpoint to your wide margin, but at least in your head the other viewpoint is fixing, expanding, offering a better rendering... than what is printed in your KJV or any other version. Ditto for scratching out a word of phrase, or bringing in an Orientalism or a Figure of Speech. It’s all to obtain a better Bible Version than the KJV.
***
You wrote: “As far as a loss of surety - I personally am confident that: the Bible is true [though I certainly don't understand it all], that Jesus died for my sins, that God answers prayer, that adultery, lying, murder, and stealing are wrong; That I should love God with all my heart,soul, mind and strength & love my neighbor as myself....I continue to study the Bible [in quite a few different translations besides KJV] to hopefully deepen my understanding of the Scriptures and develop my relationship with God as I'm sure you do too....”
Ok, so you are obtaining a better than the KJV version for your practical living. I think that’s admirable and fine. I even think you have probably nearly totally succeeded in your efforts to obtain something MUCH better than the standard KJV. I can imagine that with this goal in mind you probably think I’m nuts for going after what I am going after and how I’m doing it.
However, my goals are different than yours. I include all that you describe, but I add in the idea that we are supposed to be doing all that Jesus Christ did. I want to live more than a moral life. I want to see God’s power at work like Jesus Christ had it working in his life and said we should have it too.
To live a moral life with surety is very possible with the methods you describe, but the surety and the detail necessary to face down the devil on his turf requires more. I believe PFAL provides that necessary extra insight we will need to do all the things Jesus Christ did.
***
You wrote: “Yeah, there's a lot of neat stuff to study in the Bible - like the Book of Revelation, the Rapture, the Holy Spirit and manifestations, etc. - - I personally don't think I've got to figure that all out, work all the kinks out and nail down the "true doctrine" or some doctrinal position so I can have intellectual confidence.....I admit I look into those things, study them - but figure I may never be as confident about what I find as I do about the "simpler" stuff....I think [in my opinion] that in the grand scheme of things - what matters most in Bible study are the things that have a direct bearing on the practical side of Christianity.”
Yes, the normal everyday solutions to practical matters of life don’t require the full revelation that is in PFAL, but the power filled life God and His Son worked hard to make available to us will require more than you have embraced and described.
It’s one thing to be accepted by God, it’s another thing to work as His partner within the Body of Christ in building the Third Heavens and Earth. I think this is our calling as grads.
It has been pleasant discussing these things with you. I think you will do well with your present course, but I also am convinced that MUCH more is available to us.
Yes, I decide what qualifies for intense focus by me, and I try to decide based on what I’ve been taught in the record, and I try to inspire others to join me and others who are doing this.
Yes, I decide what I’m going to point to.
I think this is ANOTHER communications glitch. Maybe if you tried to think that I am sane, an OK guy, and somewhat right on then some (or a lot) of communications glitches will stop happening.
FINALLY!!!! --- We get a definitive answer!!
Ya know what?? As much as I disagree with the premises that you come up with, I respect your right to do so, and I don't think I have EVER questioned that. :)
You are coming from the opposite end of the spectrum than I am. But regardless of that -- I don't think I have ever called you insane (although I was tempted to at times).
Now -- if I can say this (and have you listen) --- there are lots of folks here talking to you. OK?
Can you understand/realize that fact??
I'm sure you do -- but if you are talking about a communication glitch,
perhaps you should start looking where it comes from,
and meebe (perhaps) you should start from your end, instead of ours.
Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
I did only say that IN A SENSE it was my thread, and I did give the qualifications. I’m not trying to claim it in any way. I’m not going to get on anyone’s case if it get’s derailed. Heck, it has no focused track in the first place.
Here are my comments again that seemed to tick you off: “For this particular thread I'm trying to decide where I want to go next with it, so in the meantime feel free to derail.”
Your response was: “oh... I forgot... YOU decide... how silly of me!”
But I contend that you misread my intentions. I was only deciding MY OWN course of actions on this thread, not everyone else’s.
I think we are in agreement on this, it’s just a matter of communicating it.
Mike, it really doesn't matter... but it's NOT "just a matter of communicating it"... it is what you said. it is what your words communicated. What you claim it meant, "MY (your) OWN course of actions" is not what you said.
But it doesn't really matter... except that it's a good example of the frustration that I (and I'm sure others feel when you "say" one thing, get called on it, and then claim that it's not what you said.
IF there is any problem in the communication, it's with you the 'communicator' not me, the 'communicatee'...
It would just be nice if you would own up to it as you have done maybe once every thousand times...
Yes, I decide what qualifies for intense focus by me, and I try to decide based on what I’ve been taught in the record, and I try to inspire others to join me and others who are doing this.
Yes, I decide what I’m going to point to.
I think this is ANOTHER communications glitch. Maybe if you tried to think that I am sane, an OK guy, and somewhat right on then some (or a lot) of communications glitches will stop happening.
Mike, how can we 'try to think that you're sane' if you keep insisting that YOU are the one that decides what qualifies and what doesn't? I know that you said 'intense focus by me' (so you don't have to point that out)... but the implication of your post, the implication of ALL of your posts to others is that YOU will decide for THEM/US as well... anytime anyone brings up a valid and logical point that doesn't agree with yours you cook up some reason to invalidate it based upon what YOU decide qualifies... and that's NOT SANE.
Please don't take any space up trying to deny or refute what I've posted because what you've already posted substantiates my position.
templelady,
For the record, what I saw you do was miniscule compared to some others, but it did add to the mix.
In addition to saying what you please, I am urging you and others to please consider the extra commotion that just seems to happen when I post. This is not because I am anything special, but because the topic I choose to post on is THE hot button of the century and more.
when you post on other threads you're going to get responded to on that thread. That's the way it works.
I’m asking you to please consider Pawtucket and his moderators. This involves more than refraining from hitting the complaint button, but also avoiding stimulating others to do so. I asking you to just think through things a little more when the issue is this very hot topic of PFAL and the associations many here make now between me and PFAL.
They are made because YOU make them in the first place. Physician heal thyself: i.e. "just think through things a little more" when YOU post to another.
The more you folks rail on me in other threads the more it drags in others to fight and complain. Do your railing on me here and it will work better for all.
Oh please don't tell anyone else... please...
C'mon Mike.. why don't you "please consider pawtucket and his moderators"???
DID IT EVER OCCUR TO YOU THAT THE REASON YOU GET COMPLAINED ON, REPORTED, PUNISHED IS NOT BECAUSE OF YOUR MESSAGE, IT IS BECAUSE OF YOUR METHOD? There are a lot of people with different ideas on things at GSC and YOU are the only one that gets put on "house arrest". IT'S YOUR BEHAVIOR, NOT YOUR MESSAGE.
As has been brought up before... this is a DISCUSSION board and as such people want to discuss, they do not want to be lectured, talked to in a condescending manner or just outright called idiots. These (and more) are the things you do.
T-Bone,
You wrote: “Mike, perhaps I wasn't clear on referring to those books. I'm not trying to "clean up" my KJV. I refer to them for another viewpoint or perhaps see how they define a Greek or Hebrew word, or mention an historical or cultural tie in...”
But this is what I mean when I say “clean up” your KJV. It’s figurative. It works for the NIV too.
We all know that our KJV is lacking in many areas. It was a valiant human attempt to re-issue the original scriptures in modern English (or was it Middle English?) but it has errors and poorly translated words. When you look for “another viewpoint” that’s part of a clean up process. you may not literally transfer this other viewpoint to your wide margin, but at least in your head the other viewpoint is fixing, expanding, offering a better rendering... than what is printed in your KJV or any other version. Ditto for scratching out a word of phrase, or bringing in an Orientalism or a Figure of Speech. It’s all to obtain a better Bible Version than the KJV.
***
You wrote: “As far as a loss of surety - I personally am confident that: the Bible is true [though I certainly don't understand it all], that Jesus died for my sins, that God answers prayer, that adultery, lying, murder, and stealing are wrong; That I should love God with all my heart,soul, mind and strength & love my neighbor as myself....I continue to study the Bible [in quite a few different translations besides KJV] to hopefully deepen my understanding of the Scriptures and develop my relationship with God as I'm sure you do too....”
Ok, so you are obtaining a better than the KJV version for your practical living. I think that’s admirable and fine. I even think you have probably nearly totally succeeded in your efforts to obtain something MUCH better than the standard KJV. I can imagine that with this goal in mind you probably think I’m nuts for going after what I am going after and how I’m doing it.
However, my goals are different than yours. I include all that you describe, but I add in the idea that we are supposed to be doing all that Jesus Christ did. I want to live more than a moral life. I want to see God’s power at work like Jesus Christ had it working in his life and said we should have it too.
To live a moral life with surety is very possible with the methods you describe, but the surety and the detail necessary to face down the devil on his turf requires more. I believe PFAL provides that necessary extra insight we will need to do all the things Jesus Christ did.
See Mike... YOU CAN DO IT! Polite discourse, no put downs. Very good
***
You wrote: “Yeah, there's a lot of neat stuff to study in the Bible - like the Book of Revelation, the Rapture, the Holy Spirit and manifestations, etc. - - I personally don't think I've got to figure that all out, work all the kinks out and nail down the "true doctrine" or some doctrinal position so I can have intellectual confidence.....I admit I look into those things, study them - but figure I may never be as confident about what I find as I do about the "simpler" stuff....I think [in my opinion] that in the grand scheme of things - what matters most in Bible study are the things that have a direct bearing on the practical side of Christianity.”
Yes, the normal everyday solutions to practical matters of life don’t require the full revelation that is in PFAL, but the power filled life God and His Son worked hard to make available to us will require more than you have embraced and described.
It’s one thing to be accepted by God, it’s another thing to work as His partner within the Body of Christ in building the Third Heavens and Earth. I think this is our calling as grads.
It has been pleasant discussing these things with you. I think you will do well with your present course, but I also am convinced that MUCH more is available to us.
Again... IF all of your posts were along the lines of how you just answered T-Bone I'm thinking that you wouldn't have any problems at GSC at all. You politely disagreed and stated your opinions. That's how it's supposed to work...
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
Tom Strange
Goodness! There's so much... but then... that's part of the fun isn't it folks?
(me in bold, except where noted, underline by me)
Mike... like THIS phenomena?:
Mike 2/2/04, 12:17am.
"When you see Christ in his glory he will be holding a PFAL book in his hand
and teaching you from it."
Mike 2/3/04 5:22am.
"Jesus Christ appointed Dr his spokesman.
Jesus Christ is VERY interested in PFAL.
He told me so."
Vickles 2/3/04, 7:51pm.
"So, Mike, you weren't kidding about JC coming with a PFAL book in his hand."
Mike, 2/3/04, 7:53pm.
"Totally serious. I've already seen him this way more than once."
...great dangers indeed!
Are you sure it doesn't say "Study PFAL"???
This is so much your private interpretation of this line... veepee said exactly the opposite of what you're espousing here... know by your five senses that 'fire burns' 'if you stay out in the sun too long you'll get sunburned' 'if you don't drink enough water you'll get dehydrated' ...veepee made it a point of saying that was exactly what he was talking about...
ahh yes... "THE MISSION"...
why Mike... how surprisingly condescending of you!
***
oh... I forgot... YOU decide... how silly of me!
...and you say it's not about you... sometimes you're just too modest Mike...
I am humbled in your presence!
Edited by Tom StrangeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I replied to something Mike said here, but it's really not worth the time or argument.
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Probably not Raf... but sometimes it is fun!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Mike, perhaps I wasn't clear on referring to those books. I'm not trying to "clean up" my KJV. I refer to them for another viewpoint or perhaps see how they define a Greek or Hebrew word, or mention an historical or cultural tie in...As far as a loss of surety - I personally am confident that: the Bible is true [though I certainly don't understand it all], that Jesus died for my sins, that God answers prayer, that adultery, lying, murder, and stealing are wrong; That I should love God with all my heart,soul, mind and strength & love my neighbor as myself....I continue to study the Bible [in quite a few different translations besides KJV] to hopefully deepen my understanding of the Scriptures and develop my relationship with God as I'm sure you do too....Yeah, there's a lot of neat stuff to study in the Bible - like the Book of Revelation, the Rapture, the Holy Spirit and manifestations, etc. - - I personally don't think I've got to figure that all out, work all the kinks out and nail down the "true doctrine" or some doctrinal position so I can have intellectual confidence.....I admit I look into those things, study them - but figure I may never be as confident about what I find as I do about the "simpler" stuff....I think [in my opinion] that in the grand scheme of things - what matters most in Bible study are the things that have a direct bearing on the practical side of Christianity.
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
What The Hey
Are you claiming the Christian religion upholds the standards of Christian behavior? Oh PHBTTTTTT! One only becomes "Christ-like" to the degree the Word of God lives in them. Frankly speaking, I don't see it, especially in the so called: "real world" your talking about.
But it is typical of "Americanized Chrisitanity" today, that separates the written Word from the living Word, Jesus Christ. The great design of the whole Word of God is Jesus Christ. Apart from him the Word of God cannot be understood and it is the scriptures which testify of Christ - not the "real world".
The living Word, Jesus Christ, and the written Word, the Scriptures, cannot be separated. But that is the flavor of "Americanized Christianity" in the so called: 'real world' today. It is a powerless counterfeit, albeit at times it can be a spectacular one ending in nothing but confusion and speculation. Just a lot of sizzle with no steak.
Edited by What The HeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
Religion is a set of codified beliefs,
It is the responsibility of the followers to uphold the standards
And you do this by upholding those standards while living in the real world, not burying your nose in a book and claiming by keeping said nose buried you are Upholding the standards
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
time to look eastward wth
christian believing has it's roots there
and they are still there
no matter what label it appears under
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
LG,
On the “About the Way” thread named “Personal experiences not valid...” I had written: “... prior to 1942 there was no authoritative written Word available.”
You retorted with: “Wierwille would have slapped you silly, had you said that to him.”
I disagree.
We might begin by discussing a little what I meant a little by my use of the word “authoritative.”
By that I mean something above and beyond the human authority of the scholars over the centuries who have participated in reconstructing what they think the scriptures must have said and then translating that into English. Both steps require a massive amount of human, flesh, senses, mental work to produce what was available prior to 1942. The end result is not at all authoritative like the original manuscripts were.
***
Now I don’t base my disagreement with you on this issue solely on this little bit of logic. I see that VPW said some things very similar to what you took issue with me on.
Here’s what Dr said in "The Way - Living In Love" by Elena Whiteside pp. 178-18:
"Then Rosalind left. It was the fall of the year. Kids were back in school already. It must have been September. I was sitting in my office, an old dentist's office just around the corner from the church where I served — I'll show you that too when we get there. I bet you it's still there, though I haven't been back here since I left.
“I was praying. And I told Father that He could have the whole thing, unless there were real genuine answers that I wouldn't ever have to back up on.
"And that's when He spoke to me audibly, just like I'm talking to you now. He said He would teach me the Word as it had not been known since the first century if I would teach it to others.
"Well, I nearly flew off my chair. I couldn't believe that God would talk to me." He shakes his head slowly smiling. "It's just too fantastic. People won't believe it. But He spoke to me just as plainly as I'm talking now to you.
"But really, why is it so strange? When you think about it, you see in the Bible that all through the ages God talked to people. God talked to Moses, to all the prophets. God talked to Paul. All through the centuries, God has talked to people in times of great need. And that's what we have today — a terrific need. People are just so far from hearing and believing the Word of God.
“You don't get it in the theological schools. The Word is buried, just like it was in the time of Jeremiah. Oh, they had their priests, their higher echelons, their temples, their rituals. It all looked so religious, you know. But the Word of God was buried. Oh, they were teaching the people something -- they called it the Word of God maybe, but the Word was buried. God spoke directly to Jeremiah.
"The Word is buried today. If there's no one around to teach it, God has to teach it Himself. You see, I am a product of my times. God knew me before the foundations of the world, just like He knew you and everyone else. We were all in God's foreknowledge from the beginnings.
“God knew I would believe His Word. And every day I am more and more deeply convinced of this ministry which teaches people the accuracy and integrity of God's Word. Without this ministry the world would be in far greater spiritual darkness about His Word. There would be less light in the world. Where else but in this ministry do you find the Word of God so living and real? This is truly a time of terrific need." Doctor nods his head abruptly, as if to punctuate his urgency.”
I highlighted portions that indicate Dr believed that prior to 1942 there was no authoritative Word to hear. It wasn’t in print. Oh, SOMETHING was in print, and they dressed it up as the Word, but it wasn’t. It had pieces of the Word, but it also had error, crucial error.
***
I think Dr would be very disappointed that we didn’t pay good attention to what he taught us, and that we all refused to take his final instructions seriously. Leadership didn’t even pass on his final instructions to non-Corps grads and it was lost.
No, I’m not at all worried about Dr not liking what I posted. I think he’d have some things to say to you, though. What actions did you take regarding his Last/Lost Teaching and his final instructions? If ANY actions at all were taken by you in obedience to that last teaching, how long did they last? What kind of obedience did you show and how did you inspire others to follow suit to do what Dr EXPLICITLY told us to do?
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Mike, please don't be rude to the folks who have been down here dealing with you on a daily basis. Respond to LG in the thread that he addressed you... please show others the courtesy you would want shown to you and respond to things within this thread. Thank you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
There are no ORIGINAL manuscripts for the New Testament, at best what we have are copies of copies of some of the letters of Paul and other believers (some not included at all in the New Testament) not to mention those that are forever lost to us. The Gospels were written much later than the letters
So right there there is a big ALERT sign on VPW's teachings, he couldn't have read it in the "Original" because the "Original" is long gone
Suggest you read "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart D Ehrman on this subject.
Oops, sorry that would mean something not written by VPW --just forget I mentioned it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I wonder how much *credibility I have ever had, on threads like this? Seems to me, that every time someone mentions something from a tape -- you are quick to shoot it down, thus my use of the word *castigate*.
And no -- I am NOT going to search past threads for proof of what I claim you have said.
I don't have time, I don't care, and you would refute whatever I might offer as evidence.
Now -- while we are the subject of tapes, I just received the latest one from CES/STFI in the mail the other day, and John Schoenheit happens to be teaching this one about relationships.
I won't bore you with the details of all that was on it, but I would like to tell you about an astute statement he made, concerning what someone believes, as pertains to doctrine.
He said (paraphrased):
The doctrine I hold, should be the engine that drives me to loving others unconditionally,
yet so often, it is that very doctrine that constructs a wall between me and others.
Thus, that which should connect me with others in love,
is actually a divisive, rather than a connecting belief.
Why do I mention this?? It suits a lot of us here at GSC to the *T*. You, me, and others also.
The rest of the tape showed how to get out of the ~~~~~
*Me, me, me, My doctrine over all* --- and learning to accept other's viewpoints.
Hey --- I'll be the first to admit. I'm guilty of that, but then again so are you.
After hearing what was said on that tape, I decided to try a little more humility in my life.
I've always admitted that I haven't got all the answers,
even though some of my posts have indicated otherwise.
How about you?? Willing to make your doctrine an *engine* that gets folks to listen?
Or are you content with the alienation process??
Your choice. I've made mine. :)
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Yikes! Things got pretty slow here for a while and now I’m far behind in responding again. Tomorrow looks to be a rainy day, so I expect to catch up by then. Maybe I’ll stay up late.
*****************************************************
*****************************************************
*****************************************************
*****************************************************
Tom Strange (and later dmiller),
I saw your short post and decided to start with it.
You wrote: “Mike, please don't be rude to the folks who have been down here dealing with you on a daily basis. Respond to LG in the thread that he addressed you... please show others the courtesy you would want shown to you and respond to things within this thread. Thank you.”
Well Tom, if the only place you think I was rude was to LG, then I may get off this hook easy. However, you did use the word “folks” so I suspect you have other incidents in mind. If you do think I was rude other places, it’s better to be specific than general, and it’s best to speak up in private first, as Jesus once taught.
I admit I was tough at the end of my post to LG, but he indicated that he could take it by being a bit rough with me. Instead of saying that Dr would slap me silly, LG could have spoken in kinder tones and said the Dr would have disapproved. If the end of my post was something you thought was rude, did you also think LG was rude to me?
***
Ok, now for the easy part.
One minute after responding to LG here I sent him a PM informing him that I had responded to his remark in this “official” PFAL thread. You seemed to get all bent out of shape when I mentioned in another post that I haven’t decided where to go with this thread, as if it were mind to decide. There’s a connection between these two items.
In a sense this is my thread. It was set up by Modaustin for me so that I can confine my main message here. We both discussed this when doojable’s thread “OK for once and for all” thread got a little heated and generating complaints. Pawtucket and the moderators get way too many complaints about me and my message being splashed all over the board. Things get too heated too easily, and too many complaints hassle the moderators too much, so hence this thread was set up.
Modaustin’s name is on this thread because if it were my name it would generate more complaints, and because then it would lack Modaustin’s Preface forbidding complaints and the authority behind it.
I have ventured out to a small number of other threads a tiny bit, and with extreme care to not disrupt things and to confine my main message here. I’m only venturing out of this thread to post on subjects I think I can keep the commotion down on, and where I think I can offer small contributions to the mix. When things do heat up, I’m trying to bow out quickly.
If I had responded to LG on the thread where he made his remarks then things would have gotten quickly out of hand, the complaint buttons would be pressed by many, and I would be in trouble again with management. They have done much to keep this place an open discussion site with as few rules as possible. One of the rules is I need to post in places and in ways where management is least hassled by complaints. This is the reason for the Modaustin’s Preface on page one of this thread.
I’m somewhat in awe of Pawtucket’s dedication to the idea of free speech, and his generosity in allowing me to post. He does this in spite of the extreme differences between his and my philosophy of what PFAL was all about. He does this in spite of the load of complaints he and moderators get from posters who seem to want censorship for ideas they don’t like, especially mine. I am doing my best to respect Paw’s wishes and confine the bulk of my posts and hopefully ALL of the commotion generating ones here.
It get’s complicated when I see another thread topic I think I can contribute on because although I can gage my efforts to lessen outrage (knowing the buzz words), I cannot control other posters who want to strike up the band and get the food fight started on those other threads I venture out to.
Dmiller, you have gotten caught up in this process a couple of times. It’s occurred to me that you and others are not as aware of the behind the scenes issues I’m describing here as I had hoped, so that’s why I’m taking this time now to explain.
When you, dmiller, started that thread on the U of L syllabus, the fact that it was about me AND it had my name in the title meant all the red flags were waving.
I saw it was sure to invite a huge set of complaints, yet I felt some answer from me was demanded. I tried my best to steer it back to this thread, but you weren’t getting it, so modcat5 stepped in with some explanation that I was doing the right thing in that steerage and then locked the thread down.
Then on the “all nine all the time” thread you were making comments to drag in the usual on-going conversations you and I have, but that had nothing to do with the thread topic. Then templelady chimed in with a little more of the same, and the calls for my removal started. I’m just hoping the complaint button wasn’t pushed. It seemed to straighten out, but I wanted you to know why I said what I said about it.
***
Dmiller, I haven’t had time yet to read your most recent posts carefully but I will. I was able to see the overture you gave there and am willing to work it out with you. I can see that it deserves more reading, thought, and discussion.
I am constantly seeing that most of the squabbles you and I have had (others too) revolve around misunderstandings. It’s hard for me to keep track of who has heard what about the details of my position. I was genuinely surprised to see that you thought you had me over a barrel with the U of L syllabus quote. I thought I had fully explained that aspect of my looking to tapes and other ministry teachings for secondary benefits, such as ministry history instead of doctrine, so I was surprised when you posted on that.
Maybe you didn’t see or attach enough significance to my previous posts on how I look at differing materials. I feel that many posters here look at a post of mine, get angry or excited about some ONE thing in it, and fail to see and/or remember the details of the post. I’m constantly repeating those details, but they are constantly getting lost.
Doojable’s urging me to write up a treatise has some merit when it comes to these lost details. I will not try to write up a some kind of proof on why PFAL is God-breathed, but I may try to write up a general set of items describing where I’m coming from. One plan I am thinking over is to slowly read all of my posts, and organize them into categories. From there I can boil them down to a general treatise. Just a thought.
***
Ok, now that the background information has been explained maybe we can discuss better ways I can post to cause less commotion, both on this thread and others. It’s the folks who too easily hit the complaint buttons that need to be dealt with or at least anticipated.
It’s just a matter of time and this thread’s length will be a source of antagonism for some complaint button pushers. It happened before with the “Masters of the Word” thread where MANY people complained about that thread’s length, even on the board in posts, so this one is surely next. Maybe we can ask a moderator to lock this one and start another similar one, labeling it Session Two, as a comedy relief... or would THAT cause complaints too? Oh well, life involves risks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
What the Hey,
Thank you for your post on the oneness of Jesus Christ with the Word.
You wrote:
“But it is typical of "Americanized Chrisitanity" today, that separates the written Word from the living Word, Jesus Christ. The great design of the whole Word of God is Jesus Christ. Apart from him the Word of God cannot be understood and it is the scriptures which testify of Christ - not the "real world".
“The living Word, Jesus Christ, and the written Word, the Scriptures, cannot be separated. But that is the flavor of "Americanized Christianity" in the so called: 'real world' today. It is a powerless counterfeit, albeit at times it can be a spectacular one ending in nothing but confusion and speculation. Just a lot of sizzle with no steak.”
Yes, the Hollywood nice-guy Jesus is a counterfeit, yet that’s all many can hold in mind who eschew a deep knowledge of the scriptures... and of course PFAL which unfolds the scriptures for us.
Sure there can be a huge imbalance when all someone does is study books and never gets out there to apply the books. But if someone genuinely studies and understands PFAL and acts on it, then this imbalance does not happen.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
No Mike -- you missed my point entirely. I was quoting you something that was printed by twi (you DO like print over tape -- eh??.
What I quoted you from the U of L, was from the syllabus, printed by twi, and not from the tapes themselves.
Shucks -- scuze me for *fooling* you. I just figured that if you could call pfal and the way rag, *God's Word Re-Issued*, simply because twi had it in print -- I figured you could do the same, with something else that they also printed -- IE -- from what I've seen you saying in many earlier posts.
If ya want to *duck and dodge* (like we've seen you do in the past), have at it. It won't be anything new. :( My ONLY POINT about the U of L syllabus was that it was something that twi PRINTED --- (not once did I quote the tapes -- in deference to your *written* specifications)
Geeezzz -- I try and accomodate ya -- and this is what I get. :unsure:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
nah Mike...
My comment was on posting "down here" for something going on "up there"... I didn't know that you had been "confined to quarters" but I'll take your word for it...
Now... about the "your thread" claim... I don't agree with that. Just because this is where you've been told to confine your message doesn't mean that you get to decide 'where it goes'... granted, most of the time it probably does go where you want it to because that's just the way it happens... but the thread was established as a "free fall zone" for folks to interact with you and should be able to "roam where it will" as decided by all of the folks who participate...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Tom,
I did only say that IN A SENSE it was my thread, and I did give the qualifications. I’m not trying to claim it in any way. I’m not going to get on anyone’s case if it get’s derailed. Heck, it has no focused track in the first place.
Here are my comments again that seemed to tick you off: “For this particular thread I'm trying to decide where I want to go next with it, so in the meantime feel free to derail.”
Your response was: “oh... I forgot... YOU decide... how silly of me!”
But I contend that you misread my intentions. I was only deciding MY OWN course of actions on this thread, not everyone else’s.
I think we are in agreement on this, it’s just a matter of communicating it.
****************************************************
****************************************************
****************************************************
****************************************************
dmiller,
You wrote: “My ONLY POINT about the U of L syllabus was that it was something that twi PRINTED --- (not once did I quote the tapes -- in deference to your *written* specifications)”
Again, it’s a simple communications glitch.
In all my specifying of where I see something super special in the entire TWI output, it’s ONLY in VPW’s printed output that I focus. I am thankful for all the other contributions in the Way Magazine and on rare occasions even cited some, but it’s only Dr’s articles that I focus on as special. This detail has been posted but evidently not often enough or loud enough.
Case in point: There was a Way Magazine article by Peter Berneger in the 70's on the Star of Bethlehem. It was printed before the work by Martin of Pasedena was discovered and later incorporated into JCPS. The book and that magazine article totally contradict each other. That article would fit into the bucket that U of L syllabus quote was talking about... the article was not the last word on the Star of Bethlehem... it was wrong, yet it was printed. VPW did not put his name on that article.
I know some may think I'm making up these things as I go, but I'm not. That would be a real fast way to tie myself up into knots. I can find previous posts on the VPW name having to be on the printed material to have it qualify as the final end product of the 1942 promise.
BTW, this "vpw in print" focus is a relatively new thing in my life. I first started hearing of it in 1998, but having an extensive tape background, I resisted it for a couple of years, and then accepted it, but still had the tape habit patterns. I may still have some internal contradictions on these matters and may still rely too heavily on some taped items for doctrine. As I see these I work them in my mind, but I don’t think I’m totally done yet. I am human and make mistakes, but find them fun to correct.
But the "vpw only" tag on the printed items is about 5 or 6 years old now, well posted, and pretty consistently applied.
BTW, PFAL page 83 places an additional qualifier on "vpw in print" because it says that NOT ALL that vpw writes will necessarily be God-breathed.
I'll admit it's hard for an outsider to remember all these qualifications, but if you become a player, open the books, and dive into them headlong (instead of trying to defeat them) then it gets much easier to remember.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
So how come you keep trying to sell the notion it is???
For the record
I don't push the complaint button
I dont ask for people to be banned
I'll say what I please, when I please, on any thread I please,--deal with it
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Lovely! Wonderful! And even exquisite! :)
(and you decide what qualifies --- right?????) <_<
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
dmiller,
Yes, I decide what qualifies for intense focus by me, and I try to decide based on what I’ve been taught in the record, and I try to inspire others to join me and others who are doing this.
Yes, I decide what I’m going to point to.
I think this is ANOTHER communications glitch. Maybe if you tried to think that I am sane, an OK guy, and somewhat right on then some (or a lot) of communications glitches will stop happening.
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
templelady,
For the record, what I saw you do was miniscule compared to some others, but it did add to the mix.
In addition to saying what you please, I am urging you and others to please consider the extra commotion that just seems to happen when I post. This is not because I am anything special, but because the topic I choose to post on is THE hot button of the century and more.
I’m asking you to please consider Pawtucket and his moderators. This involves more than refraining from hitting the complaint button, but also avoiding stimulating others to do so. I asking you to just think through things a little more when the issue is this very hot topic of PFAL and the associations many here make now between me and PFAL.
The more you folks rail on me in other threads the more it drags in others to fight and complain. Do your railing on me here and it will work better for all.
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
T-Bone,
You wrote: “Mike, perhaps I wasn't clear on referring to those books. I'm not trying to "clean up" my KJV. I refer to them for another viewpoint or perhaps see how they define a Greek or Hebrew word, or mention an historical or cultural tie in...”
But this is what I mean when I say “clean up” your KJV. It’s figurative. It works for the NIV too.
We all know that our KJV is lacking in many areas. It was a valiant human attempt to re-issue the original scriptures in modern English (or was it Middle English?) but it has errors and poorly translated words. When you look for “another viewpoint” that’s part of a clean up process. you may not literally transfer this other viewpoint to your wide margin, but at least in your head the other viewpoint is fixing, expanding, offering a better rendering... than what is printed in your KJV or any other version. Ditto for scratching out a word of phrase, or bringing in an Orientalism or a Figure of Speech. It’s all to obtain a better Bible Version than the KJV.
***
You wrote: “As far as a loss of surety - I personally am confident that: the Bible is true [though I certainly don't understand it all], that Jesus died for my sins, that God answers prayer, that adultery, lying, murder, and stealing are wrong; That I should love God with all my heart,soul, mind and strength & love my neighbor as myself....I continue to study the Bible [in quite a few different translations besides KJV] to hopefully deepen my understanding of the Scriptures and develop my relationship with God as I'm sure you do too....”
Ok, so you are obtaining a better than the KJV version for your practical living. I think that’s admirable and fine. I even think you have probably nearly totally succeeded in your efforts to obtain something MUCH better than the standard KJV. I can imagine that with this goal in mind you probably think I’m nuts for going after what I am going after and how I’m doing it.
However, my goals are different than yours. I include all that you describe, but I add in the idea that we are supposed to be doing all that Jesus Christ did. I want to live more than a moral life. I want to see God’s power at work like Jesus Christ had it working in his life and said we should have it too.
To live a moral life with surety is very possible with the methods you describe, but the surety and the detail necessary to face down the devil on his turf requires more. I believe PFAL provides that necessary extra insight we will need to do all the things Jesus Christ did.
***
You wrote: “Yeah, there's a lot of neat stuff to study in the Bible - like the Book of Revelation, the Rapture, the Holy Spirit and manifestations, etc. - - I personally don't think I've got to figure that all out, work all the kinks out and nail down the "true doctrine" or some doctrinal position so I can have intellectual confidence.....I admit I look into those things, study them - but figure I may never be as confident about what I find as I do about the "simpler" stuff....I think [in my opinion] that in the grand scheme of things - what matters most in Bible study are the things that have a direct bearing on the practical side of Christianity.”
Yes, the normal everyday solutions to practical matters of life don’t require the full revelation that is in PFAL, but the power filled life God and His Son worked hard to make available to us will require more than you have embraced and described.
It’s one thing to be accepted by God, it’s another thing to work as His partner within the Body of Christ in building the Third Heavens and Earth. I think this is our calling as grads.
It has been pleasant discussing these things with you. I think you will do well with your present course, but I also am convinced that MUCH more is available to us.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
FINALLY!!!! --- We get a definitive answer!!
Ya know what?? As much as I disagree with the premises that you come up with, I respect your right to do so, and I don't think I have EVER questioned that. :)
You are coming from the opposite end of the spectrum than I am. But regardless of that -- I don't think I have ever called you insane (although I was tempted to at times).
Now -- if I can say this (and have you listen) --- there are lots of folks here talking to you. OK?
Can you understand/realize that fact??
I'm sure you do -- but if you are talking about a communication glitch,
perhaps you should start looking where it comes from,
and meebe (perhaps) you should start from your end, instead of ours.
Just a *thot*. ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
Yes Mike you decide.
Who is Lord.
#
%
^
*
----------------------------------------------------------------
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Edited by CMLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Mike, it really doesn't matter... but it's NOT "just a matter of communicating it"... it is what you said. it is what your words communicated. What you claim it meant, "MY (your) OWN course of actions" is not what you said.
But it doesn't really matter... except that it's a good example of the frustration that I (and I'm sure others feel when you "say" one thing, get called on it, and then claim that it's not what you said.
IF there is any problem in the communication, it's with you the 'communicator' not me, the 'communicatee'...
It would just be nice if you would own up to it as you have done maybe once every thousand times...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Again... IF all of your posts were along the lines of how you just answered T-Bone I'm thinking that you wouldn't have any problems at GSC at all. You politely disagreed and stated your opinions. That's how it's supposed to work...
Edited by Tom StrangeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Tom,
T-Bone came on polite to me and it was easy to respond in kind.
Link to comment
Share on other sites