You wrote: "I can answer these questions but I'm not sure I will."
So, you can see that the class answers them, at least?
I don't think the God-breathed issues enters in here.
I'm just amazed that grads would even HAVE these questions or objections or issues or positions regarding this very elementary subject matter to THIS degree.
It's one thing to not believe Session One, and I can even understand it after all we went through, but I can't understand how such complete ignorance of what was taught in Session One can occur in so many people.
Add to this the fact that just weeks ago all this was covered in Round 1, and STILL the issues, questions, objections, and positions remain.
I don't know if I should give up or start all over and re-teach the class.
Maybe I should only discuss this with people who are familiar with the subject matter. Doojable, you say you think you can handle these things, but are not motivated. I wonder if anyone else here has any inkling of what's Session One.
Mike,
oh my oh my oh my-
I have always done things the way I thougth Dr and Walter taught. I remember Dr himself in the JCNG book saying that when he began writing he wanted to prove and understand the trinity - then he ended up with a different conclusion. Walter C. taught that you never start out with a pre-conceived conclusion - you study and gather data as if you are breaking new ground - every time.
So, yes I can give you not only what vpw said in the class - in fact I used to teach session one. I can also give you a gaggle of scripture that comes form session one. I am not "Not motivated," I am hesitant, and distrustful. I always feel like I am being required to jump through hoops to prove my knowledge to you so that you will deem me worthy of conversation, Not only didn't Jesus do this - vpw didn't do this either.
The class anwers only part of these questions because on some level it is rhetorical. Of course you cannot ask for what isn't available. What the class doesn't anwer is the part that TWI was always bad about - GOD CANNOT BE MANIPULATED! So many of us were badgered and condemned and torn to bits and ravaged by wolves because TWI was of the opinion that all you had to do was plop your prayers into this recipe for believing and all would be well. If anything went off in your life - well it was your fault.
Now I won't get personal here Mike - but you know in the depth of your soul that there are some things in your life that went wrong and yes, you bear some responsiblity - but you know you would drop kick anyone who said that you didn't believe enough - or that you were ignorant of what was available.
I think this is what everyone here is trying to communicate. They aren't ignorant, they are holding back and not telling you what you want to hear because they want to re-examine the evidence - not be taught PFAL again.
What I am hearing from everyone is that they want to scrap the class and go back to the scriptures (that we all agree on) and see what turns up.
Can you handle that? Are you motivated?
Since I spoke for a lot of people here, if I got this wrong feel free to correct me.
Like before, I was writing the following to templelady while you were posting and only now have glanced at your post above, not even skim reading it. Even though this is a window cleaner holiday, I have a ton of chores I save up for rainy days like this. Actually the rains haven’t arrived but they have in my customers’ expectations.
Normally I wouldn’t have to explain this kind of normal thing, but the last time this kind of thing happened (only with templelady's post) Tom Strange took it upon himself to be the supervisor of my schedule priorities (and showed his true colors too if you paid attention) scolding and insulting me for not answering you in a timely fashion according to his TWI-2 like schedule scrutiny standards. I hope you noticed how he insulted me there in Post #63. He’s been hiding his venom lately waiting to pounce on me when I try to answer his paste-job questions HIS way and not my way. You stood up for him before, so I want you to see how well he fooled you.
I went back to your Post #56 and following, but also glanced above it for context.
Lest we all forget the grand context of this, dmiller had objected to my casual mention of the phrase “law of believing” with:
“If believing equals receiving -- why don't you believe for World Peace...”
I was shocked that such a question could be asked, and attributed it’s naiveté to sleep deprivation, noting the timestamp. I mentioned that his rendering of the law was an extreme abbreviation of what we were taught (which taken alone can and does cause lots of problems), and I mentioned that his question on world peace seemed to be trampling on concept of “available” that we were taught.
Shortly after that you, templelady, stepped in.
You wrote: “AVAILABLE __ obtainable or accessible and ready for use or service”
WRONG! That’s the dictionary definition, not the PFAL definition we were taught IN RELATION to the law of believing and availability. It’s close, and it’s related, but it leaves out CRUCIAL data.
***
You then wrote: “World peace is available. All that is required is that each individual not ...”
You then went on to matters far from PFAL defined availability. Indicating, like dmiller, a complete unawareness of the matter I brought up.
***
You then asked: “WHO came up with the "available" list __ Chapter and verse (scripture not VPW)”
I later admitted the phrase “available list” was my terminology, describing a hypothetical list of the written promises of God addressed to us. Dr came up (by inspiration, dmiller, lest you launch into back flips again) with the word "available" to describe proximity to us of what these promises entail.
***
You quoted something similar to “I can do all things through Christ” and then said:
“There is no law of believing, there is prayer, there is fasting, there is scripture, there is planning, there is Working toward a goal, But just sitting around"exercising your brain cells and expecting "manna" to fall from the heavens NO.”
This is all agreeable, but lacking specific mention of the promises of God and how special they are to us when addressed to us. You do mention scripture, and the promises are in there, but the context of availability rests so much on promises that I see this agreeable sentence as still lacking somewhat.
***
You then wrote: “One of the most insidious thing I have had to clean from those Little gray cells in my head is the notion that we don't have to ask Heavenly Father for anything, just thank him for it because it is a done deal. NOT!!”
Hey, I’m all for asking when that’s pertinent, and if some part of the latter day (just a pun) TVTs were to forbid asking, that’s nuts. But what bothers me about this sentence is the complete lack of awareness of God’s promises. If there is a promise that is pertinent, then a very good place to start would be to first THANK God for making that promise and bringing it to your attention. THEN asking about specifics is in order.
So far you only asked for scriptures regarding the available list and there are none. From what you have said so far, I was disappointed to see this lack of awareness of promises (scripture) and availability (PFAL) last night when I first read this, and even more now as I focus on detail.
***
You then launched into a hypothetical situation involving receiving a car from God and others not receiving a car, something very specific. Again, no mention (or awareness, I think) of a general promise of God, just people praying and needing and wanting a car, and how some don’t get it.
You concluded this with: “That is devilish and insidious __ More VPW cut from whole cloth”
So, you blame the injustices on VPW, even though you have little idea what he taught in Session One about these matters.
That concluded that post.
***
You came back in Post #58 with a non-sentence: “Written promises of GOD From Scripture”
Are you asking me to list them here? Or is this a title outlining the items below? I’m unsure.
***
Next you wrote: “SO what promises has GOD made that aren;t available to us?”
This dealt with more in a later session, but I think Session One also briefly mentions that the promises of God that are ADDRESSED TO US are available. A PFAL grad should not have to ask this. You might not believe my answer is true to life, but you should know what the PFAL answer is, and thus my answer.
It’s ALSO self evident how this question gets answered. If you have kids and you make a promise to one, that can ONLY be made to one, what would you say to another child who objects? You’d say that you made the promise to the first and that it did not apply to the second. To keep the peace you may compensate, but the PRINCIPLE of a promise only applying to whom it is addressed is universal.
If a congressman makes a promise to his constituency and then fulfills it, who would think it sane if another district complains to him that he didn’t do the same for them?
You see, templelady, you have fallen into the religious way of thinking that all the Bible is DIRECTLY addressed to all people. Religion IS saturated with that form of insanity, but we were taught different, MUCH different, in PFAL. Like availability and having no originals you seem to have forgotten this or never had absorbed it. THINK of how many other things await your coming back to PFAL to hear what it REALLY teaches!
***
You wrote: “And since Praying for our needs/wants is stressed through out scripture , is the available list restricted to just the written promises specifically enumerated above?”
The “available list” was defined by me to be just that, the written promises, but also including “addressed to us.” I assumed that this idea of “availability” and “addressed to” was well known and that my use of that phrase would be obvious. I was wrong. WOW was I wrong! Even WW completely missed this.
***
You wrote: “So is it your position that the only things Available to us are the specific written promises of GOD”
No. If a person receives a specific promise from God BY REVELATION then that too becomes available, but again, ONLY available to the person to whom God addressed that special revelation. Now here’s a tid-bit that most surely will go over the heads of those weak on their PFAL understanding, but this kind of special revelation THEN needs the operation of manifestation of faith/believing in order to finally receive the fruit of a SPECIAL promise like this given by the SPECIAL revelation.
What gets REALLY interesting is if God gives a special revelation like this and then tells the recipient to write it down and give it to others. This is what written PFAL is. This is something I get excited about, and doojable twice stumbled upon for me to celebrate long ago.
What is EVEN MORE interesting is how Dr handled this in Living Victoriously. Those tapes are stunning!
Now to those of you (and there are many) who only read these posts of mind to look for things to jump on in ambush, I just mentioned tapes, not book or magazine form. I just want you to know that I see you crouched up there in the rocks and crevices in the canyon walls above me thinking this is your time to jump and catch me in another supposed contradiction. Dmiller, you are the prime suspect in this kind of activity lately, and I see you there. I dare you to pounce. The reason I dare you is because I am ready to use your attack on this LV citation to launch myself into LV and how Dr says (in muted and hinted form) in the session on hope that PFAL is God-breathed and that we are in a new administration. Go ahead, JUMP! JUMP! JUMP!
***
Back to you templelady.
You next wrote: “And is it further your position that not all the promises of God are available to us?”
AGAIN you exhibit for all the world to see a profound lack of understanding of what was taught in PFAL. Not all of the promises of God are ADDRESSED to us. I’ve never heard in any PFAL teachings (or even TVTs) the association of promises being available. It’s the CONTENTS of the promises that are available to claim by believing, not the promises themselves. Many of your PFAL concepts are either jumbled up in confusion or missing altogether. YOU ARE NOT ALONE.
***
You wrote: “IF this is the case what happens to ‘Ask and ye shall receive?’”
Well what do YOU think happens? Can you ask to BE God. Will God honor such a request of yours for Him to move over and you assume His throne?
No! Of course not. I know you know this too. I purposely used an extreme example of something God never promised anybody. It’s not on the... er... on MY “available list” to become God.
How about asking for a billion bucks. These days, that would hardly be missed if it were to disappear from the Federal budget and suddenly appear in your bank account. How would YOU answer this one?
This morning you suddenly added your request for scriptures, and I have one for this. Have you ever searched your KJV for more light on ‘Ask and ye shall receive?’ When I first took PFAL I searched all over for scriptures to either verify or negate what Dr taught. I was very systematic. Why weren’t you? There’s a verse that appears in the KJV and is cited in several PFAL locations that answers your question here.
We were taught in PFAL that when we have a verse and we think we totally understand it, that we are still responsible for knowing all the other verses on the same subject before we can properly think we are in a position to rightly divide it, rightly understand it. It was called “scripture build-up” in the class, and the 4 crucified with Christ was used to illustrate it’s power and necessity.
When I would see a hot idea I liked OR a scary idea I wasn’t sure of in Dr’s teachings I would make a file (then it files were paper folders) on that topic and search the scriptures to become more sure than just believing Dr on it. I had a file on “heaven bound” because that sounded too good to be true. I had a file on “Jesus Christ is not God” before the book came out and it had more scriptures in it that the book did! I was scared spitless that Dr could be wrong on that one so I searched.
Did anyone else do this?
I had (and still have it) a file on believing. In it was this one scripture that fully answers your question:
I John 5:14, 15
And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us: And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of Him.
There it is: according to his will. That means according to His written promises in His Word (The Word of God is the will of God) addressed to us, OR according to His special revelation to an individual like I described above, and special revelation mentioned in the "LV in Hope" tapes, and that dmiller is trying to decide whether to pounce on or not.
This verse is not only in your KJV for you to have found in your study checking up on Dr's teaching of PFAL long ago, but is also quoted in PFAL p. 21, and PFAL p. 302, and TNDC p. 235.
This verse is also in the film class, Session One, in the second half hour segment. I’ll quote it for you.
... and dmiller, this again is not “book and magazine form.” I’m going to quote from the film class here because that’s what is most familiar to most grads. I want to stimulate their memory, what’s left of it. Most grads heard the film class many times and have even memorized the flow, but barely cracked the books. You need not pounce here. Save it for when I have something juicy to counter your attack with, ok?
PFAL film class, Segment 2:
If your needs are up here and your wants here it will never be parallel. You'll never get it met. If your wants are up here and your needs are down here you'll never get an answer. We get answers to prayer when we believe if we get our need and our want parallel.
Now this is foundational and very, very important. Because there are many people who never get an answer to prayer until in this class on Power For Abundant Living because they've never known the keys on what's available, how to receive, what to do with it, and got their need and want parallel.
Look at Matthew, chapter 18. Take your Bibles and go to Matthew chapter 18. And in this eighteenth chapter of Matthew, in the nineteenth verse listen to this:
Matthew 18:19: …. “if two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.”
If two agree, the word "agree" is symphonize. If two agree! Like this! Touching anything! You see, the two agree. They have their need and their want parallel. They are in agreement.
In the Gospel of John, the Gospel of John, in the fourteenth chapter of the Gospel of John; here is another tremendous truth that I want to share with you. And I'm sure that it will just bless your heart. Listen to this:
John 14:13: “And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.”
Whatsoever we shall ask in his name, getting our need and our want parallel, then whatsoever you ask he is going to do. That's right! In the fifteenth chapter of the Gospel of John is another one of these wonderful promises familiar to many people. Listen to this:
John 15:16: “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever [whatsoever] ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.”
Whatsoever ye ask, if your need and want are parallel, then whatsoever you ask--if you know what's available, how to receive it, what to do with it, get your need and want parallel--whatsoever ye ask, it shall be what? Done unto you.
Another promise in the Epistle of I John! Way in the back of your Bible! I John! The Epistle of I John! First! Second! Third John!
I John 5:14: “And this is the confidence [this is the confidence] that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, [if we ask any thing according to his will] he heareth us:”
Isn't that wonderful? If we have our need and our want parallel we ask anything according to His will; how can it be His Will if we don't know His Word? His Word is His Will that gets our need and our want parallel. If we know His Word we can parallel it off. And once we get our need and want parallel, whatsoever we ask, we get.
For those grads who were to excited to listen in Session One to Segment 2 the same verse is handled in in Session Eight in the closing words of Segment 42:
I want to challenge you on something. This Book and the Words in here have stood for centuries, right? But men whom I have known and men whom you have known have never stood for centuries. They come and they go. Men blow hot, they blow cold. I'd rather stake my eternal salvation on the accuracy of God's Word than to listen to men and especially men who have a derogatory attitude toward the Word. I'd rather stake my life upon the integrity and accuracy of God's Word and find out that I'm wrong than to stake it upon what some man says and then latter on find out he's wrong too. I'd be sure on this which God has given, that's right. Because if you believe God's Word you've got everything to win and nothing to lose.
Like Rufus Mosley used to say, bless his heart, he'd say, "we're having such a good time going to heaven that if we got to heaven and heaven wasn't there we had the best time going." That's right.
When you really believe God's Word and you walk in the greatness of it you're the best man to your fellow men. You don't cheat him. You don't even steal from him. You don't push them down. You don't try to climb up over the top of them. You're just having the greatest time going. If there wasn't any heaven hereafter you had the glorious time going there. Why you can't beat it!
But let's turn it around the other way. Suppose the Bible is right. Suppose the accuracy of God's Word is true. That's right. And suppose that we do not believe it, we reject it. And there is a heaven we never quite make it. We've got everything to win believing the Word of God, that's right. And nothing to lose. And we've got everything to lose and nothing to win by believing what men say. That's right.
Listen to this:
I John 5:13-15: “These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know [that ye may know, not question, not doubt but that ye may know that ye know that ye know, that ye may know] that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God. And this is the confidence that we have in Him, that if we ask anything according to His will, He heareth us: And if we know that He hear us whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of Him.”
Now, listen to verse 20:
I John 5:20: And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding [he didn't mean for us to be stupid, he came and he gave us an understanding], that we may know Him [not question, not doubt but that we may know Him] That is true, and we are in Him That is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and [this is] eternal life.
Isn't that tremendous! Simple as A-B-C. Plain as day. You've got to be stupider than stupid to miss it. That's right. Because God has set it out and it's just so easy and so perfect. Why is it so easy? Because it cost God everything. God had to give His only begotten Son. It cost God everything this is why it doesn't cost you a thing except to believe. And the man of body and soul can believe. This is that eternal life which is the greatest gift that God has ever given to any man any place at any time.
Your extreme lack of knowledge of what’s inside PFAL, and your willingness to jump on the bandwagon criticizing it anyway, are both well displayed for all the world to see.
doojable,
There's a not to you included above what I addressed to templelady above,
immediately below your post above, in case you didn't see it in the posting flurry.
I’ve been proofreading. THAT’S one of the chores I had in mind when I said I had to go, for all you Mike-contradiction-pouncers out there.
I forgot to mention another way to receive something from God other than claiming things from the “available list.” It’s grace, God’s unmerited favor. Sometimes, many times, God gives in spite of a lack of knowledge and a lack of believing. I mention this because in past dealings with grads with weak PFAL understanding (but strong PFAL hatred) that they often forget the aspect of God’s grace, and how Dr taught us that God can go above and beyond His promises. Remember that teaching in PFAL? I can quote it if you want.
Your extreme lack of knowledge of what’s inside PFAL, and your willingness to jump on the bandwagon criticizing it anyway, are both well displayed for all the world to see.
Coming from you -- perhaps that is a *badge of honor* for me, eh?
With respect to the Law of Believing, it would appear Dr. Wierwille learned this from Albert E. Cliffe. Only Cliffe called it "The Magic of Believing", instead of "The Law of Believing". Sure looks like they were talking about the same thing.
Here is an excerpt from "Let Go and Let God", by Albert E. Cliffe, copyright 1951:
A woman came to see me several months ago suffering from a nervous rash which a dermatologist had been unable to heal. On discussing her problems we discovered what was wrong with her thinking. She gave up that wrong to Christ, and her rash disappeared in twenty-four hours. It has never returned. Her constant fear was of something that had happened years ago; this fear caused the rash. The moment she gained faith in God, through the magic of believing, her "incurable" condition disappeared.
In hospitals today, every recovery from a serious operation depends on this faith, and the person who will not release his or her fears after an operation will make no recovery at all.
Are you afraid of certain things happening to you? Are you afraid that some disease is in store for you, or that later in life you will be left without means to support yourself? Then these things will happen just as you plan them in your own mind, because you are using wrongly your power of believing, you are placing your faith in wrong thoughts, in evil thoughts, instead of the good which God expects of you.
We produce in our lives whatever we think, whatever we fear. A beautiful building, beautiful clothes, any work of art, a radio, a steamship, an airplane -- all had their origins in thought, in the minds of men. No empire, no fortune was ever built without thought. Yet have you ever realized that your thinking patterns today can make you successful, or bring you complete failure?
Excerpted from the Chapter "There Is Magic In Believing"
That's the problem -I reject it because it doesn't tally with the scriptures OR even with regular daily life
ie
You wrote: “AVAILABLE __ obtainable or accessible and ready for use or service”
WRONG! That’s the dictionary definition, not the PFAL definition
The dictionary definition is the right definition--one man cannot redefine the meaning of the English Language for his personal perspective.
Mike honey,
you keep defending PFAL to us by telling us to read PFAL , What we need from you is for you to defend PFAL from the scripture and other writings outside of VPW and PFAL. that means no using PFAL as the proof of itself --See?
There may very well be errors in pfal and there probably are.I have never been in the 'pfal is God breathed camp', however I still propound that it is FAR more informative and enlightening and accurate than ANY other Biblical addendum.
On the other hand...the book of mormon is proclaimed as a 'modern day, God inspired, DIVINELY translated piece of work, so how does one defend it's errors ??
I was able to do my checking out of PFAL in my KJV and other research materials in a relatively calm and supportive atmosphere, and NOT hindered by the ministry meltdown, by LCM’s tyranny, and in an atmosphere of angst and loathing towards the leadership.
I also had the advantage of lots of (receive, retain, release) over a many-year span (including a WOW year) to increase my receiving of the deeper levels of what is taught in PFAL. My checkig was spread out over many years too; another advantage you didn't have.
Instead of a motivational impetus of trying to figure out what went wrong, I was blessed to see the material working well, and sometimes spectacularly.
This is why I’m not surprised at the differing results in our checking.
Normally I wouldn’t have to explain this kind of normal thing, but the last time this kind of thing happened (only with templelady's post) Tom Strange took it upon himself to be the supervisor of my schedule priorities (and showed his true colors too if you paid attention) scolding and insulting me for not answering you in a timely fashion according to his TWI-2 like schedule scrutiny standards. I hope you noticed how he insulted me there in Post #63. He’s been hiding his venom lately waiting to pounce on me when I try to answer his paste-job questions HIS way and not my way. You stood up for him before, so I want you to see how well he fooled you.
Mike, are you referring to these four words in the last line of my post: FAKE, FRAUD, CHARLATAN, POSER?
Is that what you're referring to? Or are you just trying to deflect again by playing the 'poor mistreated poster' while all the rest of your posts are filled with "insults" and "venom" (your words). Why do you think these words referred to you? How do you know I wasn't referring to veepee?
How do you know that I wasn't just giving you a vocabulary assignment (since you like to give out so many assignments)? I looked up the words for you anyway... here are the definitions from dictionary.com:
FAKEadj 1: fraudulent; having a misleading appearance 2: not genuine or real; being an imitation of the genuine article n 1: something that is a counterfeit; not what it seems to be 2: a person who makes deceitful pretenses
FRAUDn 1: intentional deception resulting in injury to another person 2: a person who makes deceitful pretenses 3: something intended to deceive; deliberate trickery intended to gain an advantage
CHARLATANn 1. A person who makes elaborate, fraudulent, and often voluble claims to skill or knowledge; a quack or fraud. 2. a flamboyant deceiver; one who attracts customers with tricks or jokes
POSERn 1: a person who habitually pretends to be something he is not 2: a person who poses for a photographer or painter or sculptor; 3: a particularly difficult or baffling question or problem 4. A wannabee; not hacker slang, but used among crackers, phreaks and warez d00dz.. Not as negative as lamer or leech. Probably derives from a similar usage among punk-rockers and metalheads, putting down those who "talk the talk but don't walk the walk".
But... all that being said... I probably did slip a little there and stoop to your level... it happens to the best of us.
What we need from you is for you to defend PFAL from the scripture and other writings outside of VPW and PFAL. that means no using PFAL as the proof of itself --See?
And You replied
templelady,
I did that very thing long ago for myself. It seems very few here did likewise.
Let me clarify further
What we need from you is for you to defend PFAL from the scripture and other writings outside of VPW and PFAL
NOW, here, on this THread and on this forum
You are the one trying to get your point across therefore, the responsibily lies on your shoulders to provide the evidence we seek. You can't expect us to prove your thesis. That is YOUR JOB
Last night after hanging with a few brain surgeon buddies.... no wait, that was last week. It was after my alien abductee support group meeting (and a couple of bowls of chili and onions), so it must have been after the poker game with my my astronaut friends .... Anyway, I had few beers and fell asleep in my chair after speed-reading my PFAL book - for the millionth time.
In a dream( vision?) I saw Jesus in the clouds with a PFAL book in his right hand. VPW was on his right side and Mike was on his left. He was standing on what appeared to be a glowing stack of Way Magazines supported by columns of SNS Tapes.
Jesus then spoke to me and said "Pay no attention. It's the chili."
(BTW he was wearing faded Wrangler jeans, and a University of Texas T- shirt. )
Last night after hanging with a few brain surgeon buddies.... no wait, that was last week. It was after my alien abductee support group meeting (and a couple of bowls of chili and onions),
Hey, Hey, Hey !!!!
(don't cha go speaking badly about chile, and onions!!)
"...she had a need. And her need was, they might as well be
red drapes..." Sound familiar?
According to vpw, the woman received "FIRE-ENGINE-RED"
curtains.
If she received it, it was-by definition-available TO be received.
Since she received it, it was available.
The same can be said of the woman who succeeded in killing
her kid.
(I can break this one down slowly if you need it,
but it's exactly the same steps.)
Now, that those were in the class were a matter of public
record. If you dispute that these people received,
you call vpw a liar-for he asserted that both most
definitely DID receive.
Perhaps the problem lies in the fact that the so-called
"law" of believing is deficient and has errors,
thus defending it leads to problems.
That's how we ended up with the red drapes and
dead kid "examples to begin with.
I may explain later. I’m sure you won’t learn from it though. You do NOT have the correct understanding of what Dr meant by available nor me, judging from the short post I cited last night, and even more from your more expanded post this morning.
So far, I understand you both better than you understand
me and vpw. I got the ramifications of what he said as well
as just the wording. Seems you're unable to see the concepts
without the exact wording.
Either that, or you wish to pretend it's not what he said.
If so, it's intellectually dishonest, to begin with.
I’m seeing that the need to come back to PFAL and master it was much greater than I had previously thought. People here seem not to even be able to recall the most fundamental of ideas.
That's how it "seems" to you.
Oddly enough, the rest of us can see this quite clearly-
and you and reality had a disconnect.
There's a difference between "they don't understand" and
"they see it differently than me",
and until you can make that fundamental distinction,
you'll forever MIScommunicate with "your audience."
Maybe I should go through the transcript here in a way that honors the fair use rules.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
104
50
72
59
Popular Days
May 5
39
May 3
38
Apr 4
34
Apr 3
28
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 104 posts
templelady 50 posts
Tom Strange 72 posts
dmiller 59 posts
Popular Days
May 5 2006
39 posts
May 3 2006
38 posts
Apr 4 2006
34 posts
Apr 3 2006
28 posts
doojable
Mike,
oh my oh my oh my-
I have always done things the way I thougth Dr and Walter taught. I remember Dr himself in the JCNG book saying that when he began writing he wanted to prove and understand the trinity - then he ended up with a different conclusion. Walter C. taught that you never start out with a pre-conceived conclusion - you study and gather data as if you are breaking new ground - every time.
So, yes I can give you not only what vpw said in the class - in fact I used to teach session one. I can also give you a gaggle of scripture that comes form session one. I am not "Not motivated," I am hesitant, and distrustful. I always feel like I am being required to jump through hoops to prove my knowledge to you so that you will deem me worthy of conversation, Not only didn't Jesus do this - vpw didn't do this either.
The class anwers only part of these questions because on some level it is rhetorical. Of course you cannot ask for what isn't available. What the class doesn't anwer is the part that TWI was always bad about - GOD CANNOT BE MANIPULATED! So many of us were badgered and condemned and torn to bits and ravaged by wolves because TWI was of the opinion that all you had to do was plop your prayers into this recipe for believing and all would be well. If anything went off in your life - well it was your fault.
Now I won't get personal here Mike - but you know in the depth of your soul that there are some things in your life that went wrong and yes, you bear some responsiblity - but you know you would drop kick anyone who said that you didn't believe enough - or that you were ignorant of what was available.
I think this is what everyone here is trying to communicate. They aren't ignorant, they are holding back and not telling you what you want to hear because they want to re-examine the evidence - not be taught PFAL again.
What I am hearing from everyone is that they want to scrap the class and go back to the scriptures (that we all agree on) and see what turns up.
Can you handle that? Are you motivated?
Since I spoke for a lot of people here, if I got this wrong feel free to correct me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
doojable,
Like before, I was writing the following to templelady while you were posting and only now have glanced at your post above, not even skim reading it. Even though this is a window cleaner holiday, I have a ton of chores I save up for rainy days like this. Actually the rains haven’t arrived but they have in my customers’ expectations.
Normally I wouldn’t have to explain this kind of normal thing, but the last time this kind of thing happened (only with templelady's post) Tom Strange took it upon himself to be the supervisor of my schedule priorities (and showed his true colors too if you paid attention) scolding and insulting me for not answering you in a timely fashion according to his TWI-2 like schedule scrutiny standards. I hope you noticed how he insulted me there in Post #63. He’s been hiding his venom lately waiting to pounce on me when I try to answer his paste-job questions HIS way and not my way. You stood up for him before, so I want you to see how well he fooled you.
Anyway, I’ll be back.
**************************************************************************
**************************************************************************
**************************************************************************
**************************************************************************
templelady,
I went back to your Post #56 and following, but also glanced above it for context.
Lest we all forget the grand context of this, dmiller had objected to my casual mention of the phrase “law of believing” with:
“If believing equals receiving -- why don't you believe for World Peace...”
I was shocked that such a question could be asked, and attributed it’s naiveté to sleep deprivation, noting the timestamp. I mentioned that his rendering of the law was an extreme abbreviation of what we were taught (which taken alone can and does cause lots of problems), and I mentioned that his question on world peace seemed to be trampling on concept of “available” that we were taught.
Shortly after that you, templelady, stepped in.
You wrote: “AVAILABLE __ obtainable or accessible and ready for use or service”
WRONG! That’s the dictionary definition, not the PFAL definition we were taught IN RELATION to the law of believing and availability. It’s close, and it’s related, but it leaves out CRUCIAL data.
***
You then wrote: “World peace is available. All that is required is that each individual not ...”
You then went on to matters far from PFAL defined availability. Indicating, like dmiller, a complete unawareness of the matter I brought up.
***
You then asked: “WHO came up with the "available" list __ Chapter and verse (scripture not VPW)”
I later admitted the phrase “available list” was my terminology, describing a hypothetical list of the written promises of God addressed to us. Dr came up (by inspiration, dmiller, lest you launch into back flips again) with the word "available" to describe proximity to us of what these promises entail.
***
You quoted something similar to “I can do all things through Christ” and then said:
“There is no law of believing, there is prayer, there is fasting, there is scripture, there is planning, there is Working toward a goal, But just sitting around"exercising your brain cells and expecting "manna" to fall from the heavens NO.”
This is all agreeable, but lacking specific mention of the promises of God and how special they are to us when addressed to us. You do mention scripture, and the promises are in there, but the context of availability rests so much on promises that I see this agreeable sentence as still lacking somewhat.
***
You then wrote: “One of the most insidious thing I have had to clean from those Little gray cells in my head is the notion that we don't have to ask Heavenly Father for anything, just thank him for it because it is a done deal. NOT!!”
Hey, I’m all for asking when that’s pertinent, and if some part of the latter day (just a pun) TVTs were to forbid asking, that’s nuts. But what bothers me about this sentence is the complete lack of awareness of God’s promises. If there is a promise that is pertinent, then a very good place to start would be to first THANK God for making that promise and bringing it to your attention. THEN asking about specifics is in order.
So far you only asked for scriptures regarding the available list and there are none. From what you have said so far, I was disappointed to see this lack of awareness of promises (scripture) and availability (PFAL) last night when I first read this, and even more now as I focus on detail.
***
You then launched into a hypothetical situation involving receiving a car from God and others not receiving a car, something very specific. Again, no mention (or awareness, I think) of a general promise of God, just people praying and needing and wanting a car, and how some don’t get it.
You concluded this with: “That is devilish and insidious __ More VPW cut from whole cloth”
So, you blame the injustices on VPW, even though you have little idea what he taught in Session One about these matters.
That concluded that post.
***
You came back in Post #58 with a non-sentence: “Written promises of GOD From Scripture”
Are you asking me to list them here? Or is this a title outlining the items below? I’m unsure.
***
Next you wrote: “SO what promises has GOD made that aren;t available to us?”
This dealt with more in a later session, but I think Session One also briefly mentions that the promises of God that are ADDRESSED TO US are available. A PFAL grad should not have to ask this. You might not believe my answer is true to life, but you should know what the PFAL answer is, and thus my answer.
It’s ALSO self evident how this question gets answered. If you have kids and you make a promise to one, that can ONLY be made to one, what would you say to another child who objects? You’d say that you made the promise to the first and that it did not apply to the second. To keep the peace you may compensate, but the PRINCIPLE of a promise only applying to whom it is addressed is universal.
If a congressman makes a promise to his constituency and then fulfills it, who would think it sane if another district complains to him that he didn’t do the same for them?
You see, templelady, you have fallen into the religious way of thinking that all the Bible is DIRECTLY addressed to all people. Religion IS saturated with that form of insanity, but we were taught different, MUCH different, in PFAL. Like availability and having no originals you seem to have forgotten this or never had absorbed it. THINK of how many other things await your coming back to PFAL to hear what it REALLY teaches!
***
You wrote: “And since Praying for our needs/wants is stressed through out scripture , is the available list restricted to just the written promises specifically enumerated above?”
The “available list” was defined by me to be just that, the written promises, but also including “addressed to us.” I assumed that this idea of “availability” and “addressed to” was well known and that my use of that phrase would be obvious. I was wrong. WOW was I wrong! Even WW completely missed this.
***
You wrote: “So is it your position that the only things Available to us are the specific written promises of GOD”
No. If a person receives a specific promise from God BY REVELATION then that too becomes available, but again, ONLY available to the person to whom God addressed that special revelation. Now here’s a tid-bit that most surely will go over the heads of those weak on their PFAL understanding, but this kind of special revelation THEN needs the operation of manifestation of faith/believing in order to finally receive the fruit of a SPECIAL promise like this given by the SPECIAL revelation.
What gets REALLY interesting is if God gives a special revelation like this and then tells the recipient to write it down and give it to others. This is what written PFAL is. This is something I get excited about, and doojable twice stumbled upon for me to celebrate long ago.
What is EVEN MORE interesting is how Dr handled this in Living Victoriously. Those tapes are stunning!
Now to those of you (and there are many) who only read these posts of mind to look for things to jump on in ambush, I just mentioned tapes, not book or magazine form. I just want you to know that I see you crouched up there in the rocks and crevices in the canyon walls above me thinking this is your time to jump and catch me in another supposed contradiction. Dmiller, you are the prime suspect in this kind of activity lately, and I see you there. I dare you to pounce. The reason I dare you is because I am ready to use your attack on this LV citation to launch myself into LV and how Dr says (in muted and hinted form) in the session on hope that PFAL is God-breathed and that we are in a new administration. Go ahead, JUMP! JUMP! JUMP!
***
Back to you templelady.
You next wrote: “And is it further your position that not all the promises of God are available to us?”
AGAIN you exhibit for all the world to see a profound lack of understanding of what was taught in PFAL. Not all of the promises of God are ADDRESSED to us. I’ve never heard in any PFAL teachings (or even TVTs) the association of promises being available. It’s the CONTENTS of the promises that are available to claim by believing, not the promises themselves. Many of your PFAL concepts are either jumbled up in confusion or missing altogether. YOU ARE NOT ALONE.
***
You wrote: “IF this is the case what happens to ‘Ask and ye shall receive?’”
Well what do YOU think happens? Can you ask to BE God. Will God honor such a request of yours for Him to move over and you assume His throne?
No! Of course not. I know you know this too. I purposely used an extreme example of something God never promised anybody. It’s not on the... er... on MY “available list” to become God.
How about asking for a billion bucks. These days, that would hardly be missed if it were to disappear from the Federal budget and suddenly appear in your bank account. How would YOU answer this one?
This morning you suddenly added your request for scriptures, and I have one for this. Have you ever searched your KJV for more light on ‘Ask and ye shall receive?’ When I first took PFAL I searched all over for scriptures to either verify or negate what Dr taught. I was very systematic. Why weren’t you? There’s a verse that appears in the KJV and is cited in several PFAL locations that answers your question here.
We were taught in PFAL that when we have a verse and we think we totally understand it, that we are still responsible for knowing all the other verses on the same subject before we can properly think we are in a position to rightly divide it, rightly understand it. It was called “scripture build-up” in the class, and the 4 crucified with Christ was used to illustrate it’s power and necessity.
When I would see a hot idea I liked OR a scary idea I wasn’t sure of in Dr’s teachings I would make a file (then it files were paper folders) on that topic and search the scriptures to become more sure than just believing Dr on it. I had a file on “heaven bound” because that sounded too good to be true. I had a file on “Jesus Christ is not God” before the book came out and it had more scriptures in it that the book did! I was scared spitless that Dr could be wrong on that one so I searched.
Did anyone else do this?
I had (and still have it) a file on believing. In it was this one scripture that fully answers your question:
I John 5:14, 15
And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us: And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of Him.
There it is: according to his will. That means according to His written promises in His Word (The Word of God is the will of God) addressed to us, OR according to His special revelation to an individual like I described above, and special revelation mentioned in the "LV in Hope" tapes, and that dmiller is trying to decide whether to pounce on or not.
This verse is not only in your KJV for you to have found in your study checking up on Dr's teaching of PFAL long ago, but is also quoted in PFAL p. 21, and PFAL p. 302, and TNDC p. 235.
This verse is also in the film class, Session One, in the second half hour segment. I’ll quote it for you.
... and dmiller, this again is not “book and magazine form.” I’m going to quote from the film class here because that’s what is most familiar to most grads. I want to stimulate their memory, what’s left of it. Most grads heard the film class many times and have even memorized the flow, but barely cracked the books. You need not pounce here. Save it for when I have something juicy to counter your attack with, ok?
PFAL film class, Segment 2:
If your needs are up here and your wants here it will never be parallel. You'll never get it met. If your wants are up here and your needs are down here you'll never get an answer. We get answers to prayer when we believe if we get our need and our want parallel.
Now this is foundational and very, very important. Because there are many people who never get an answer to prayer until in this class on Power For Abundant Living because they've never known the keys on what's available, how to receive, what to do with it, and got their need and want parallel.
Look at Matthew, chapter 18. Take your Bibles and go to Matthew chapter 18. And in this eighteenth chapter of Matthew, in the nineteenth verse listen to this:
Matthew 18:19: …. “if two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.”
If two agree, the word "agree" is symphonize. If two agree! Like this! Touching anything! You see, the two agree. They have their need and their want parallel. They are in agreement.
In the Gospel of John, the Gospel of John, in the fourteenth chapter of the Gospel of John; here is another tremendous truth that I want to share with you. And I'm sure that it will just bless your heart. Listen to this:
John 14:13: “And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.”
Whatsoever we shall ask in his name, getting our need and our want parallel, then whatsoever you ask he is going to do. That's right! In the fifteenth chapter of the Gospel of John is another one of these wonderful promises familiar to many people. Listen to this:
John 15:16: “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever [whatsoever] ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.”
Whatsoever ye ask, if your need and want are parallel, then whatsoever you ask--if you know what's available, how to receive it, what to do with it, get your need and want parallel--whatsoever ye ask, it shall be what? Done unto you.
Another promise in the Epistle of I John! Way in the back of your Bible! I John! The Epistle of I John! First! Second! Third John!
I John 5:14: “And this is the confidence [this is the confidence] that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, [if we ask any thing according to his will] he heareth us:”
Isn't that wonderful? If we have our need and our want parallel we ask anything according to His will; how can it be His Will if we don't know His Word? His Word is His Will that gets our need and our want parallel. If we know His Word we can parallel it off. And once we get our need and want parallel, whatsoever we ask, we get.
For those grads who were to excited to listen in Session One to Segment 2 the same verse is handled in in Session Eight in the closing words of Segment 42:
I want to challenge you on something. This Book and the Words in here have stood for centuries, right? But men whom I have known and men whom you have known have never stood for centuries. They come and they go. Men blow hot, they blow cold. I'd rather stake my eternal salvation on the accuracy of God's Word than to listen to men and especially men who have a derogatory attitude toward the Word. I'd rather stake my life upon the integrity and accuracy of God's Word and find out that I'm wrong than to stake it upon what some man says and then latter on find out he's wrong too. I'd be sure on this which God has given, that's right. Because if you believe God's Word you've got everything to win and nothing to lose.
Like Rufus Mosley used to say, bless his heart, he'd say, "we're having such a good time going to heaven that if we got to heaven and heaven wasn't there we had the best time going." That's right.
When you really believe God's Word and you walk in the greatness of it you're the best man to your fellow men. You don't cheat him. You don't even steal from him. You don't push them down. You don't try to climb up over the top of them. You're just having the greatest time going. If there wasn't any heaven hereafter you had the glorious time going there. Why you can't beat it!
But let's turn it around the other way. Suppose the Bible is right. Suppose the accuracy of God's Word is true. That's right. And suppose that we do not believe it, we reject it. And there is a heaven we never quite make it. We've got everything to win believing the Word of God, that's right. And nothing to lose. And we've got everything to lose and nothing to win by believing what men say. That's right.
Listen to this:
I John 5:13-15: “These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know [that ye may know, not question, not doubt but that ye may know that ye know that ye know, that ye may know] that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God. And this is the confidence that we have in Him, that if we ask anything according to His will, He heareth us: And if we know that He hear us whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of Him.”
Now, listen to verse 20:
I John 5:20: And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding [he didn't mean for us to be stupid, he came and he gave us an understanding], that we may know Him [not question, not doubt but that we may know Him] That is true, and we are in Him That is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and [this is] eternal life.
Isn't that tremendous! Simple as A-B-C. Plain as day. You've got to be stupider than stupid to miss it. That's right. Because God has set it out and it's just so easy and so perfect. Why is it so easy? Because it cost God everything. God had to give His only begotten Son. It cost God everything this is why it doesn't cost you a thing except to believe. And the man of body and soul can believe. This is that eternal life which is the greatest gift that God has ever given to any man any place at any time.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I don't know why I should answer this question,
since we have never received answers for ours,
but I will say what I've always said ----
There is no law of believing, that works for saint and sinner alike.
You were correct that God will deliver on that which He has promised.
Docvic's *law of believing* is is mind over matter ---
not God honouring His promises.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
That's ok, dmiller.
Your extreme lack of knowledge of what’s inside PFAL, and your willingness to jump on the bandwagon criticizing it anyway, are both well displayed for all the world to see.
doojable,
There's a not to you included above what I addressed to templelady above,
immediately below your post above, in case you didn't see it in the posting flurry.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
templelady,
I’ve been proofreading. THAT’S one of the chores I had in mind when I said I had to go, for all you Mike-contradiction-pouncers out there.
I forgot to mention another way to receive something from God other than claiming things from the “available list.” It’s grace, God’s unmerited favor. Sometimes, many times, God gives in spite of a lack of knowledge and a lack of believing. I mention this because in past dealings with grads with weak PFAL understanding (but strong PFAL hatred) that they often forget the aspect of God’s grace, and how Dr taught us that God can go above and beyond His promises. Remember that teaching in PFAL? I can quote it if you want.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Coming from you -- perhaps that is a *badge of honor* for me, eh?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
With respect to the Law of Believing, it would appear Dr. Wierwille learned this from Albert E. Cliffe. Only Cliffe called it "The Magic of Believing", instead of "The Law of Believing". Sure looks like they were talking about the same thing.
Here is an excerpt from "Let Go and Let God", by Albert E. Cliffe, copyright 1951:
Excerpted from the Chapter "There Is Magic In Believing"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
dmiller,
Yes. A badge of honor but ONLY among other critics who don't understand what they criticize.
To honest students of PFAL they are getting a good idea where all the negativity comes from and it's not from within PFAL or from the True God.
*******************************************************
*******************************************************
*******************************************************
*******************************************************
Hi oldiesman, haven't seen yo in a while.
Have you been reading all the many pages that have transpired?
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
No.
But I'm happy to visit Mike's Basement Playroom.
so much fun
Edited by oldiesmanLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
There's a ton of stuff to play with in the back pages.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
MIKE,
I know what I was taught in PFAL
That's the problem -I reject it because it doesn't tally with the scriptures OR even with regular daily life
ie
The dictionary definition is the right definition--one man cannot redefine the meaning of the English Language for his personal perspective.
Mike honey,
you keep defending PFAL to us by telling us to read PFAL , What we need from you is for you to defend PFAL from the scripture and other writings outside of VPW and PFAL. that means no using PFAL as the proof of itself --See?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
templelady,
I did that very thing long ago for myself. It seems very few here did likewise.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Or maybe we just came to a sane conclusion once we DID do that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
allan w.
There may very well be errors in pfal and there probably are.I have never been in the 'pfal is God breathed camp', however I still propound that it is FAR more informative and enlightening and accurate than ANY other Biblical addendum.
On the other hand...the book of mormon is proclaimed as a 'modern day, God inspired, DIVINELY translated piece of work, so how does one defend it's errors ??
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Raf,
I was able to do my checking out of PFAL in my KJV and other research materials in a relatively calm and supportive atmosphere, and NOT hindered by the ministry meltdown, by LCM’s tyranny, and in an atmosphere of angst and loathing towards the leadership.
I also had the advantage of lots of (receive, retain, release) over a many-year span (including a WOW year) to increase my receiving of the deeper levels of what is taught in PFAL. My checkig was spread out over many years too; another advantage you didn't have.
Instead of a motivational impetus of trying to figure out what went wrong, I was blessed to see the material working well, and sometimes spectacularly.
This is why I’m not surprised at the differing results in our checking.
This is why I mostly only expect OLGs to hear me.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Mike, are you referring to these four words in the last line of my post: FAKE, FRAUD, CHARLATAN, POSER?
Is that what you're referring to? Or are you just trying to deflect again by playing the 'poor mistreated poster' while all the rest of your posts are filled with "insults" and "venom" (your words). Why do you think these words referred to you? How do you know I wasn't referring to veepee?
How do you know that I wasn't just giving you a vocabulary assignment (since you like to give out so many assignments)? I looked up the words for you anyway... here are the definitions from dictionary.com:
But... all that being said... I probably did slip a little there and stoop to your level... it happens to the best of us.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Tom,
Was a character slip, or a disguise slip?
“Wardrobe malfunction” and "boob" come to mind.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
MIke I posted
And You replied
Let me clarify further
What we need from you is for you to defend PFAL from the scripture and other writings outside of VPW and PFAL
NOW, here, on this THread and on this forum
You are the one trying to get your point across therefore, the responsibily lies on your shoulders to provide the evidence we seek. You can't expect us to prove your thesis. That is YOUR JOB
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Well -- OK -- I'll try to answer it from your perspective then.
(Geez -- here I answer two of your questions,
and you keep blowing me/us off,
but I digress.)
I am NOT a student of pfal. Yes -- at one time I was, but no longer.
Now -- what is all this *negativity* you are seeing???
Folks are asking questions about YOUR interpretation,
and you refuse to give answers.
And any question somone here might have posed to you,
is labeled as *dodging* the issue.
If I were to take the time to go back over all the previous posts,
I'm willing to bet that all the *negativity* would be because you won't answer.
If you have to -- please refer back to my analogy of the student and teacher discourse.
That told this story --- in spades.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Given all you have posted --- I think this is what you are looking for ---
MIKE --- MASTER OF PFAL!
(Just an IMO --- don't cha know!) ;)
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Last night after hanging with a few brain surgeon buddies.... no wait, that was last week. It was after my alien abductee support group meeting (and a couple of bowls of chili and onions), so it must have been after the poker game with my my astronaut friends .... Anyway, I had few beers and fell asleep in my chair after speed-reading my PFAL book - for the millionth time.
In a dream( vision?) I saw Jesus in the clouds with a PFAL book in his right hand. VPW was on his right side and Mike was on his left. He was standing on what appeared to be a glowing stack of Way Magazines supported by columns of SNS Tapes.
Jesus then spoke to me and said "Pay no attention. It's the chili."
(BTW he was wearing faded Wrangler jeans, and a University of Texas T- shirt. )
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Dangit Goey! I had that same vision... wonder what that means?
(although I'm sure Mike will tell us)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Hey, Hey, Hey !!!!
(don't cha go speaking badly about chile, and onions!!)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
You are not qualified to judge me, and you are not my
teacher. You are not qualified to issue me homework or exams.
If that was your idea of an exam-let alone an incorrect answer-
your exams are woefully deficient.
You were doing some posturing about the so-called "law" of
believing, which fails to perform as promised since it's not a "law"
nor reliable. You harped on the "what is available" step of
receiving anything from God, in Session One.
I made a passing comment that-according to Session One-
red drapes and killing your kid were available.
You claimed it did not make such a claim.
I then broke down-for those of you having difficulty understanding
the ramifications of Session One- how it DOES make such a claim.
Session One claims that receiving is dependent FIRST on what is
available-which is the SAME point you YOURSELF were making.
Therefore, to receive something, it must be available.
If it is not available, you will not be able to receive it.
That's stuff any 12-year old can easily follow.
(Which seems to have eluded you anyway.)
Right in Session One, two things that are mentioned as having
been received are the red drapes, and the dead kid.
Everybody ELSE remembers them-perhaps you've FORGOTTEN.
"...she had a need. And her need was, they might as well be
red drapes..." Sound familiar?
According to vpw, the woman received "FIRE-ENGINE-RED"
curtains.
If she received it, it was-by definition-available TO be received.
Since she received it, it was available.
The same can be said of the woman who succeeded in killing
her kid.
(I can break this one down slowly if you need it,
but it's exactly the same steps.)
Now, that those were in the class were a matter of public
record. If you dispute that these people received,
you call vpw a liar-for he asserted that both most
definitely DID receive.
Perhaps the problem lies in the fact that the so-called
"law" of believing is deficient and has errors,
thus defending it leads to problems.
That's how we ended up with the red drapes and
dead kid "examples to begin with.
So far, I understand you both better than you understandme and vpw. I got the ramifications of what he said as well
as just the wording. Seems you're unable to see the concepts
without the exact wording.
Either that, or you wish to pretend it's not what he said.
If so, it's intellectually dishonest, to begin with.
That's how it "seems" to you.
Oddly enough, the rest of us can see this quite clearly-
and you and reality had a disconnect.
There's a difference between "they don't understand" and
"they see it differently than me",
and until you can make that fundamental distinction,
you'll forever MIScommunicate with "your audience."
Only what I suggested above.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.