PFAL: An Unorthodox Translation

[CM]

Testing Mike

Need to Control: A Self-Assessment

DIRECTIONS: Review the following reasons you may feel the need to control people, places, and things in your life. Put an ``X'' next to those reasons usually true for you.

___ 1. If you control other people, they will do what you want them to do.

___ 2. It's a way to keep everything orderly, precise, and predictable, so that you don't go crazy or insane.

___ 3. You hate to be out of control or to lose your control.

___ 4. If things don't go your way, then you feel you'll have to work harder or have to struggle to reorganize and correct them.

___ 5. You have a hard time seeing people you care for hurting because their lives are out of control.

___ 6. You hate to have people see your true feelings especially if they are angry, unpleasant, or negative so you struggle to control them and keep them in so as not to upset others.

___ 7. You are on the watch for being taken advantage of by others.

___ 8. You are afraid of being manipulated or led into doing something you really don't want to do.

___ 9. When you see something or someone who needs to be fixed, you often step in.

___ 10. You came from a dysfunctional or crazy homelife and you have no desire to repeat it in your current homelife.

___ 11. You have an image, dream, or ideal of the way things are supposed to be and you work at trying to get it to be that way.

___ 12. You are afraid that if you don't take care of things, things will never get done.

___ 13. You feel if "you don't do it, then no one will.''

___ 14. You are afraid that everything you have worked for will be lost, so you take control to ensure this doesn't happen.

___ 15. When you feel intimidated, you compensate by taking more control of the situation.

___ 16. You find it difficult not to help when you are presented with a person or thing which appears helpless and out of control.

___ 17. You tend to hold to an "it's my way or the highway'' approach with people who don't do what you want them to do. You hope this will ensure they change their bad behaviors.

___ 18. You are frightened, scared, or nervous when things seem to be crazy or out of control so your first impulse is to take charge.

___ 19. You want everybody in your immediate life to be happy and you'll do whatever it takes to make it so.

___ 20. You know how hard life can be on those who go into it unprepared and unaware, so you do whatever it takes to make sure the people you care for are not taken advantage of.

INTERPRETATION: If you checked 3 or more, you have a tendency to overcontrol the people, places, and things in your life.

Control Mechanisms: A Self-Assessment

DIRECTIONS: Here are some ways in which you control people to do for you the things you could do for yourself. Put an ``X'' next to those behaviors usually true for you.

___ 1. You act helpless, incompetent, or lost.

___ 2. You make the other person feel very important and essential in your life.

___ 3. You tell them reasons which are a lie why you couldn't get things done.

___ 4. You feel self-pity and act out the belief that you have done everything for everyone in your life so it's your turn now to be taken care of.

___ 5. You act tense, anxious, and stressed out and incapable of caring for yourself.

___ 6. You resort to threats of suicide or self-destruction to get others to care for you.

___ 7. You give others a set of conditions they must do for you before you will give them acceptance, care, or approval.

___ 8. You offer them rewards if they will do what you want done.

___ 9. You threaten others with withdrawal of attention, support, affection, or approval if they don't do what you want done.

___ 10. You withhold your involvement, attention, and concern if they don't do what you want done.

___ 11 You play on their sympathy and concern by being a pathetic martyr, overworked and unappreciated victim.

___ 12. You play on your physical or emotional illness, be it real or perceived, to get them to do for you.

___ 13. You play on their need to be needed to get them to take care of you.

___ 14. You play up to their guilt and overresponsible nature to get what you want.

___ 15. You act dependent in order to give the other a sense of importance and value in helping you.

___ 16. You fall apart when faced with having to do something which you would rather not do.

___ 17. You play up to a person who has a need to fix things that things have gotten so "out of control'' for you.

___ 18. You promise to change or reform the behaviors the other wants you to change in order to get what you want out of the other, never meaning to change or reform.

___ 19. When you sense another person is pulling away from you, you feign a problem or need which you believe will get that person involved with you again.

___ 20. You act as if you have forgotten to do something which you know the other will do for you.

INTERPRETATION: If you checked 3 or more items, you overuse control mechanisms to get people to do what you could do for yourself. Now find out if others are controlling you to do things for them they could do for themselves. Go back and put an ``X'' next to those statements true for people in your life. If 3 or more are checked, then you are being overcontrolled by others to do for them what they could do for themselves.

Emotional Response: A Self-Assessment

DIRECTIONS: Here are some ways in which you could control your emotional response to life. Put an ``X'' next to the statements which are usually true for you.

___ 1. You allow yourself to be free, open, and expressive to the feelings you are experiencing at the moment.

___ 2. You usually do not try to hide your feelings, be they positive or negative.

___ 3. You are usually able to accept the consequences of others' response to your positive or negative feelings.

___ 4. You are able to freely express your anger, in an assertive confrontation mode with no raging, yelling, screaming, ranting, or raving at other people.

___ 5. You do not avoid letting others know if you are angry with them and yet you don't blow your cool in the telling.

___ 6. You can show enjoyment, excitement, and enthusiastic feelings when the event appropriately calls for such a response.

___ 7. You are able to openly cry and grieve a loss event in your life.

___ 8. You are able to do anger workouts over old, unresolved anger in your life so as to free yourself of the emotional burden and drain these repressed and unresolved feelings have on your emotional energy.

___ 9. You are able to express your violent rage and anger outbursts privately so that you can return to people in a more composed way to let them know in a healthy assertive way how angry you are.

___ 10. You are able to analyze your emotions at the time and to see if they are congruent or in synch with your thinking and actions. If they are not, you are able to figure out why and what to do about it.

___ 11. You are able to not allow self-pity to be a driving force in your attitude about freely giving of your time and energy to accomplish what you want out of life.

___ 12. If people in your life are acting out of control, you are able to freely express your feelings of disappointment or disagreement and yet not get hooked into being out of control with them.

___ 13. If you feel intimidated by another person, you freely admit your feelings to yourself and choose not to let this person control the way you feel, think, or act.

___ 14. You are able to admit feeling powerless over those things out of your control to change, fix, or rescue.

___ 15. You are able to feel at ease and have serenity in letting go of the uncontrollables and unchangeables in your life.

___ 16. You do not feel you are alone in having to deal with the pressures of life because you feel you have a Higher Power to whom you can hand the uncontrollables and unchangeables over which you feel powerless.

___ 17. You feel detached from the behaviors, actions, and negative aspects of the people in life for whom you care a great deal and yet are not able to fix, rescue, or change.

___ 18. You are able to feel good about yourself with no guilt or remorse when you feel detached from the people with whom you have had toxic relationships in the past.

___ 19. You do not let fantasies, dreams, traditions, or promises of the way things are supposed to be interfere with your rationally experiencing life the way it really is.

___ 20. You have no need to be invisible or on guard so as not to be vulnerable to feeling hurt or pain, because you feel it is better for you to be vulnerable in life to experience authentic human growth.

INTERPRETATION: If you checked 17 or less, then you need to work on control of your emotional life so that you cease to use overcontrol of other people in your life to feel good about yourself. You need to handle your own feelings and not give others the power to affect the way you feel or express your feelings. Your feelings are something which you have the ability to control and change. They, along with your thinking and actions, are the only controllables and changeables you can influence, alter, or change.

What is locus of control?

Locus of control means where you place the power to influence how you feel about yourself and others. It is important to determine if the locus of control is external or internal to figure out if you are susceptible to being controlled by others.

External Locus of Control

External locus of control is giving other people, places, and things the power to influence your feelings about yourself.

External locus of control places approval, recognition, acceptance, reinforcement, and affirmation of self-worth into the hands of other people, places, and things. Unless others approve, recognize, accept, reinforce, or affirm your worth, then you feel worthless, non-approved, unrecognized, not accepted, and non-reinforced. This makes you susceptible to being controlled by others' thinking, emotions, and actions.

Internal Locus of Control:

Internal locus of control is giving yourself the power to influence your feelings about yourself.

Internal locus of control places self-approval, self-recognition, self-acceptance, self-reinforcement, and self-affirmation of worth into your own hands. In this way it is only up to you and your own efforts at self-love and care to feel worthwhile, valuable, competent, skillful, creative, knowledgeable, and capable of living your life for yourself and not controlled by others. You are then fully responsible for your own thinking, emotions, and actions in life.

Locus of control is a ``power'' issue

Locus of control is a ``power'' issue. If you give others power over you, you overemphasize external locus of control in your life. On the other hand, if you empower yourself, you emphasize internal locus of control in your life.

In order to handle the control issues in your life, it is better to emphasize internal locus of control so that you are able to let go of the need to control and change others and concentrate on controlling and changing yourself.

What are some myths and realities about control?

Myths Realities

1. The more I exercise control on others, the more control I'll have in life. Because others are free to accept or reject your control, the resulting dynamic tension between the controlled and controller creates a circumstance in life which is more out of control than you first desired. The more you let go of control over others, the more control you will have over your internal locus of control.

2. I am not controlling people when I am helping them or trying to fix things for them. You are controlling them, however, when you are fixing or helping them and they are not taking personal responsibility and control of their own lives as a result of your assistance.

3. If I manipulate others to do what I want them to do, this is not controlling them. You are exercising them to do what you want because they are not of their own free will deciding to do what it is you want them to do.

4. I am not controlling others if they are unintentionally intimidated by me and go along with what I want them to do. If you are unintentionally placed in an external locus of control position by others, they have put you in a position of power over them. You are in control over them even though you are not aware of this at the time.

5. I should be in control of everything that is important in my life. Unfortunately you are powerless to control most people, places, and things in your life since you can only be fully in control of your internal locus of control and your own thoughts, emotions, and actions.

6. I should hold onto and help the people in my life whom I see are having problems taking care of themselves in acceptable, self-responsible and self-controlling ways. The more you try to hold onto these people, the harder they will pull away or the weaker and more dependent on you they will become. It is better to become emotionally detached from their problems and let them solve them on their own so that they still can relate to you in a free and open way.

7. Other people will condemn me if I become detached from the people close to me. It makes no difference what others think about you. What is important is helping the people in your life to become more self-responsible and self-controlling of their own lives.

8. I should never let go of those things I am trying to control and change because if I do I'd be considered a failure. Your struggle to control and change things outside of your internal locus of control is going to wear you down and possibly break you. You will be healthier, happier, and more in control of your life if you let go of the uncontrollables and unchangeables in your life.

9. If I love someone, I should always be there of them even if they become a little dependent on me for a while. You're a person who could possibly love a person so much that you contribute to that person's inability to become self-responsible and in self-control of life. In reality your love may make the person overdependent on you. Love is learning to let go of the uncontrollable and unchangeable people in your life.

10. When people are helpless, I should step in and take over to help them get on their feet. People might appear helpless to helpless to you but they often have inner reserves of competence, skills, and ability to solve their own problems. If you take over their problems for them, this might disable them from being productive problem solvers and agents for their own change. By always taking over, you encourage their overdependence on you.

11. When things are not going the way they should, I should take control of the situation to make it the way it's supposed to be. You are being irrationally led by your dreams, fantasies, tradition, and promises of how life should be. In your idealism you can become so overcontrolling as to ensure opposite desired reality will occur

12. I should take care of things because they will happen the way they are supposed to. A caretaker works hard at being sure that everything is the way it is supposed to be for everyone. This overcontrolling behavior succeeds in disabling people who are being cared for and then things are never the way they are supposed to be. You never get what you really want when you are overcontrolling.

Steps to handling the need to control

In order for you to be better able to handle the need to control, follow these steps.

Step 1: First, identify what control issues you need to work on in order to have the ability to let go of the need to control. To identify the issues, use the topics from this book to help you identify what you need to work on. Put an ``X'' next to those issues you need more work on.

___ Intimidation

___ Idealism

___ Need to fix

___ Caretaker behaviors

___ Accepting powerlessness

___ Letting go of the uncontrollables and unchangeables

___ Developing detachment

___ Unconditional acceptance and love

___ Overdependency

___ Manipulation

___ Dealing with suicide

___ Survival behaviors

___ Developing self-control

Step 2: Identify how you overuse control in your life and identify the irrational reasons why you do this. In your journal review the reasons you checked why you control people, places, and things and then identify what irrational, unhealthy thinking explains why this is so.

Step 3: Next identify how you control others to do for you what you could do for yourself. Identify in your journal the items you checked in Section II of this Chapter and then identify the irrational, unhealthy thinking that explains why this is so.

Step 4: Next identify how others control you to do for them what they could do for themselves. Identify in your journal the items you checked for others in Section II of this Chapter. Then identify your irrational and unhealthy thinking that allows you to let them control you in this way.

Step 5: Next identify how you control your emotional response to life. In your journal respond to the following questions which are based on your responses to Section III of this Chapter.

A. How well do you control your emotional response to life?

B. How much power do you give to other persons, places, and things to affect your thinking, feelings and actions?

C. How often are your feelings out of control? How does it make you feel to recognize your feelings are out of control?

D. What irrational thinking underlies the over or undercontrol of your emotional life?

Step 6: Next you need to determine where you currently place the locus of control in your life. To do this, respond to this inventory by putting an ``X'' next to the statements which are usually true for you.

___ A. You are able to maintain control of your belief in yourself as a good and worthwhile person despite what others tell you about yourself.

___ B. You accept and love yourself unconditionally at all times even in the midst of troubles, problems, failure, and pressure.

___ C. You give no one but you the power to influence how you think, feel and act.

___ D. You do not need other people's approval, recognition, and acceptance in order to believe in yourself as a good and worthy person.

___ E. Your self-esteem is strong enough that you rarely are emotionally affected by what people say to or about you.

___ F. You are not affected emotionally about the response others give you when you assertively let them know how you feel even if the feelings are angry or negative in nature.

___ G. You are able to openly assert your anger and negativity in a constructive way with others.

___ H. You are not intimidated to say how you feel by the loss of approval or loss of acceptance from someone who might not like what you have to say.

___ I. You do not feel dependent financially, emotionally, or physically on any person other than yourself and thus feel free to speak freely and let others know what you think, feel or do.

___ J. You are able to openly admit when you have made an error or mistake or when you have experienced a failure in life.

If you were only able to check 7 or fewer of these items, your locus of control is more external than internal. If you had a healthy internal locus of control, you would have checked all but one or two of the items. If your locus of control is external, then you need to work at strengthening your belief in yourself by self-affirmations and self-esteem enhancement work. Begin to tell yourself:

A. I am a good person who needs only my own approval, recognition, and acceptance.

B. I accept and love myself unconditionally.

C. I am a worthwhile person deserving to be respected and given a chance to succeed in life.

D. I am a good person on my own.

E. I can make it on my own if I need to.

F. I will work at controlling and changing only me and my outlook on life.

G. I am the source of approval and recognition I need to succeed.

H. I think I can be less controlling of others.

I. I know I can be less controlling of others.

J. I know I will be in more control of my own life.

Step 7: Next you need to rid yourself of the myths about control. You need to accept that the less control you exercise over other people, places, and things the more control you will have in your own life.

Step 8: You next need to work through the next 14 chapters of this book.

Step 9: If you find you still are having problems with control issues after completing this entire book, return to Step 1 and begin again.

from-

http://www.coping.org/control/need.htm

[Mike]

CM,

Do you feel a strong urge to control me or to control the flow of this thread? Just wondering.

***********************************************************

***********************************************************

***********************************************************

***********************************************************

As usual I'm pretty far behind in responding to the many posts I'd LIKE to respond to. If anyone feels I'm missing any very important items in my attempts to catch up, or if anything got lost in the shuffle, please bring it back up.

Oh, yeah, and if anyone thinks I'm dodging anything I shouldn't, then highlighting the item and copying it with Crtl C will put it on your clipboard, and then Cntrl V will.... Hey! What am I doing? You already are well practiced at that...

Carry on.

[allan w.]

Thats' the LEAST spiritual thing I've ever seen CM post !

Hang on...maybe that was very spiritual.

[Mike]

templelady,

Way back in Post #56 you 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!!”

This sentence, although I DID respond to it, has been bothering me for the past few days while I’ve been working and doing chores much more than posting.

Is it the case that TWI-2 actually got into squelching the asking of the Father for anything? If so I mourn all the more for how much we grads have drifted from not only written PFAL but even simple KJV verses that were accurately rendered.

Just the opposite of the idea of feeling condemnation for asking God for help, even the KJV says we should have peace when we ask of our heavenly Father.

Philippians 4:6-9

Be careful [anxious] for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus. Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things. Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you.

You see, templelady, both asking AND thanking are encouraged here, and not JUST thanking.

I know we were taught in written PFAL (and KJV) that God knows our requests before we ask them, but this accurate teaching is there to give us peace that we can rest assured that God is so enthusiastic about hearing our requests that He sees them in His foreknowledge. It’s a gross TVT distortion of this is to discourage asking.

Those who were hit with a lack of peace by a teaching that we shouldn’t ask of God seem to have missed not only the Philipians verses but much PFAL teaching.

Here is what is written on thanking AND asking (with my bold fonts) in GMWD pages 90-91:

Psalms 105:43:

And he brought forth his people with joy, and his chosen with gladness.

For God to deliver His people is a joy to Him. You never knew God had joy? He surely does. When He brought Israel out of Egypt, “...he brought forth his people with joy....” It was a joy to God to deliver His people. He brought them out of Egypt with possessions of silver and gold. There wasn’t one feeble person among them. God led them with a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night. He gave them food to eat and water to drink. They had all their needs met. God was pleased that He had the privilege of doing all these things for Israel.

God also has joy today when He delivers people. It brings joy to the heart of God that He has people who come to Him and say, “I need a little help, Father. I thank you for giving it to me according to the promise of Your Word and for remembering the promises that You made to us as Your sons.”

Psalms 105:43-45:

And he brought forth his people with joy, and his chosen with gladness: And gave them the lands of the heathen: and they inherited the labour of the people; That they might observe his statutes, and keep his laws. Praise ye the Lord.

Isn’t that beautiful! God is full of joy to help His children who in turn carry out His Word.

The TVT teaching that all asking is bad is also a distortion of the following where we were taught that SOME TYPES of asking are out of order. It is written in TNDC pages 64,65:

Christians have a delegated authority today which God in Christ has given. But the Church has failed to claim and appropriate its just rights. The Church has not claimed its rights, power and authority because Satan has talked us out of it. My friend the late Rufus Mosley used to say, “God is all the time trying to do the best He can for you and the devil is all the time trying to do the worst for you; the way you vote determines the election.”

There is only one good power in the world – the power of God. Satan also has power, but only destructive power which he can use when people permit him to rule them.

Because of our legal rights in Christ Jesus, we do not approach God like a beggar asking for food. We go to God as sons appropriating, by believing, our legal authority and right. When I go to God in prayer, I know the promises of God and I believe God. God is faithful to His promises and I claim my legal rights before Him as a son.

I wonder who else was oppressed by this admittedly “most insidious” false doctrine that asking is bad, like templelady describes here. I know that by coming back to PFAL, like to the passages quoted above, they and their “little gray cells” can find complete liberation from this “most insidious” false doctrine most easily.

[doojable]

Actually Mike, I was always frustrated that folks thought they were thanking God - but in reality they were asking. Not that asking was bad - but we had all - every one of us stopped saying, God I need a little help here." Instead it became, "Father, I just want to thank you, Father, for just helpiing me. Father. I know what your word says, Father and I just love you Father."

Now that was a request worded as a thankyou. No problem with the request - but the vain repetition, OMG! Then the "justs" and the "Fathers" as if God had altzheiner's and had forgotten who he was.

Now we learned that from example - and Dr allowed it to continue. He heard it all the time - at HQ, at Emporia, at the ROA. He even did it himself - well maybe with not so many "Fathers" and "justs." Why didn't we just learn to make a request? - plain and simple? -My kids ask me for stuff, they don't thank me for what I am going to do for them instead of asking.

Seems to me that if they came to me and said, "thanks Mom for taking me to the Mall tomorrow - in the Name of (substitute something here for Jesus Christ) I'd feel manipulated.

And that is what I feel we were taught to believe - that if you dotted all your "i's" and crossed all your "t's" and got all your needs and wants parallel, and were clear and concerned and knew what was available, and used the magic words: "In the Name of Jesus Christ," that you could manipulate God into doing what you asked - um er - demanded (cuz we were taught that as well.)

Now we became God and God became a puppet. Dr taught this because he never corrected it. He allowed doctrinal error to become practical error. He was supposed to be the main watchman - cuz he was the MOG., (or at least he enjoyed the position.)

Formulas aren't what God is all about. If you try to squeeze Him in a box - you'll soon be finding yourself disappointed and wanting.

Ultimately, God has the privilege of saying,"NO!" because He's God.

Edited April 6, 2006 by doojable

[templelady]

We go to God as sons appropriating, by believing, our legal authority and right. When I go to God in prayer, I know the promises of God and I believe God. God is faithful to His promises and I claim my legal rights before Him as a son.

Appropriating = a deliberate act of acquisition. Acquisition= the act of contracting or assuming or acquiring possession of something.

The use of Appropriating puts all the authority on the acquirer-It is as if God is denied the power to say NO

legal rights????

there are only three places in the entire Bible that use the word "right" as it is used in this context

the word "geullah" in the Old Testament

Ruth 4

[6] And the kinsman said, I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I mar mine own inheritance: redeem thou my right to thyself; for I cannot redeem it.

and the word "exousia" (in the sense of ability); privilege, i.e. (subjectively) force, capacity, competency, freedom, or (objectively) mastery (concretely, magistrate, superhuman, potentate, token of control), delegated influence:--authority, jurisdiction, liberty, power, right, strength

in the New Testament

Hebrews 13

[10] We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle.

Revelation 22

[14] Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Other places we find Exousia

“Exousia” describes

first the freedom of God to act (Luke 15:5; Acts 1:7)

Second, it signifies the divinely given power and authority of Jesus Christ as deriving from the Father (Matthew 28:18; John 10:18; John 17:2), enabling Him to forgive sin (Mark 2 :10), and signifying His [Jesus Christ] power to heal and to expel demons, which He gave His disciples (Mark 13:15)

Third, it describes the freedom God gives His people for salvation (John 1:12) and from legalism (1 Corinthians 6:12).

Fourth, it denotes the authority God imparted to the leaders to build up the church (2 Corinthians 10:8; 13:10).

Fifth, “exousia” signifies the power God displayed through agents of destruction in the last days (Revelation 6:8; 9:3; 9:10; 9:19; 14:18;16:9; 18:1)

Sixth, the word denotes the dominion God allows Satan to exercise (Acts 26:18; Ephesians 2:2).

Seventh, it describes the “authorities” created by God, both heavenly (Colossians 1:16) and secular (Romans 13:1; Titus 3:1).

http://www.studylight.org/dic/hbd/view.cgi?number=T566

None of these instances even hint that we have legal right or authority to expect our request to be automatically granted

[Mike]

templelady,

You're assuming that the translators of just one version got every word translated properly. How do you know other translations do not contain more instances of the word "right" ?

Besides, when the KJV was translated the word "right" was a relatively new concept in Western civilization, especially to the upper class intelegencia that did the translating. It was also relatively missing in the ancient world, HOWEVER, you may want to check in Acts where Paul asserted his rights as a Roman citizen, even though that more modern word may not be used.

You need to check the Bible not only for the word "rights" but also for the IDEA of rights, and it looks like you did not look nearly this thoroughly.

************************************************************************

************************************************************************

************************************************************************

************************************************************************

doojable,

Dr often and repeatedly, increasing it by the year, URGED us to get back to the Word, back to printed PFAL and that's where the reproof is.

Since we just blew off his urging to just re-open the books for many matters, we'd have just blown off his urging to just deal with specific matters like this that you just just just mentioned.

Edited April 6, 2006 by Mike

[Mike]

templelady,

I confess to another late edit addition above, and hope you haven't missed it.

[templelady]

Actually Mike, Study Lights, which is where I acquired the further info on Exousia uses the American Standard Translation

The "idea" of rights??

Chapter and verse please since you are the one who brought this into play.

us to get back to the Word, back to printed PFAL and that's where the reproof is.

the "Word" is the Bible

PFAL is PFAL

[Mike]

It's pretty simple.

Sometimes an idea has a modern word to describe it but no ancient words. Sometimes it's the other way around. This is also often the case with comparing any two languages, leaving out the ancient versus modern notion.

I think it's pretty self evident. Just like "chapter and verse, please" is pretty self evident.

Otherwise I'd ask you where you got that idea to ask me "chapter and verse."

Can you find "chapter" in your Bible text?

Can you find "verse" in your Bible text?

Can you find "chapter and verse, please" in your Bible text?

[Tom Strange]

Mike, you're treating folks like scolded children again. Please take care not to.

We assume that we have to put up with some attitude from you, please don't overstep.

[doojable]

doojable,

Dr often and repeatedly, increasing it by the year, URGED us to get back to the Word, back to printed PFAL and that's where the reproof is.

Since we just blew off his urging to just re-open the books for many matters, we'd have just blown off his urging to just deal with specific matters like this that you just just just mentioned. biglaugh.gif

Mike - Dr NEVER lead by example on this matter. He himself never changed how he prayed in public. This is something I would have done - if nothing else, because I realized the error of my habits in my prayer life - as a matter of fact I DID change how I prayed. Dr could have done the same.

i'm just not buying your reasoning - which is conjecture at best. Sorry.

[Mike]

doojable,

It took a long time, and I’m not totally done with it yet, but I have shed the idea that the ministry, especially HQ and the root activities with Corps, was supposed to be a big babysitter/provider for us all. I now see the root levels as providing materials like books, magazines, classes, tapes, major events, and training as well as overall supervision.

I now see Dr’s job was to give us what we could receive at the time and allow us to help him get what God taught him distributed around the world in printed form.

It was to be the limb-to-twig level where the specific details you brought up were dealt with. I did see some HQ guidance for some of these specifics, but a lot more was supposed to and did take place on the local levels.

I did see Dr handle some local specifics in the early years, but there was just too much of this for him to handle in the last ten years, from 1975-85. Answering a false charge on some other thread a few weeks ago (forget which), I once saw Dr urge some more fluency in the SIT that was going on, and I also did see and took special note of his SIT being MUCH more fluent than what we heard in the film class. There were some familiar sounds, but he had a rich and beautiful way of SIT. I frequently saw the filler word method (just, just, just, Father, Father, Father) of prayer dealt with, and Earl Burton dealt with repetitious and flesh filled T.I.P. tendencies.

*******************************************************************

*******************************************************************

*******************************************************************

*******************************************************************

Tom,

I think what you are wincing at has several sources. One is I am human and I sometimes respond too tough and too quick. On this source I try to constantly upgrade. THAT source you are quick to see, but I think you miss the others.

I am dealing with some of people who need tough talk at times. You completely overlook them. I think those who are very apt to criticize PFAL with vicious glee, but who have little understanding or memory of what’s actually in that material need to be fed a dose of their own medicine at times.

But by far the biggest source of difficulty here is the massive error held and projected by PFAL critics here.

No matter how soft and slow an polite I am, the sheer volume of corrections I offer is sure to be taken like a slap in their faces. No matter how well phrased, for a normal human being to be told that they are wrong on a massive number of points is sure to hurt. However that hurt should only be temporary for those who want to learn.

Hebrews 12:5-11

And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.

I’m claiming to be the Father here, merely a supplier of His words. The effects are the same on the hearers, first humiliation and then later peaceful learning. Nobody likes to be told they are wrong, but a wise man loves reproof in the long run.

[Tom Strange]

Mike, without posting bunches of words as backup... take what dooj said about the way we were 'supposed' to pray, then your answer that it's meant that way as instructed in written pfal, then her response that that's how "he" and "they" did it, then your response about how that's not the way written pfal handles it...

BUT the point it Mike... THEY, HE were our examples... and yes we were led (therefore taught) to believe that's how it was supposed to be... whether or not it was in written pfal

[doojable]

Mike,

You seem to conveniently redeem vpw on a regular basis. In the epistles, Paul takes responsiblity for what he teaches - both in word and in deed. He says< "Be ye followers of me....."

Dr took the MOG perks but not the responsibility!!!!????? He sure didn't mind getting into our faces when we didn't write our "The Way For Me From Birth to the Corps" papers in a timely manner! Then he was the MAN OF GAWDDD! We had to obey him. A suggestion was tantamount to an order! But he couldn't suggest that prayer wasn't supposed to be a bunch of "gimmes" disguised and thank you's? He couldn't start that correct action as a suggestion? He certainly couldn't admit he was wrong. Part of being a leader is teaching by example.

No they weren't supposed to be our providers ( they wanted US to provide for them.) And they weren't supposed to be our babysitters. There WERE on the other hand supposed to be our examples. Besides, VPW, HQ et al were very good and very prolific at telling us what to do. Heck, I was new to the ministry and at a branch meeting and the leader was telling us not to even associate with a certain person , I think it was Peter Wade, it might have been someone associated with him. That was down from HQ.

I'm sorry Mike - but sometimes it sure seems like you have blinders on.

[Tom Strange]

Oh... and I know that you're human... and no one expects perfection... just civility and to have the golden rule applied... we all fall short at times, we just try not to make it a practice...

[templelady]

Sometimes an idea has a modern word to describe it but no ancient words. Sometimes it's the other way around. This is also often the case with comparing any two languages, leaving out the ancient versus modern notion.

I think it's pretty self evident.

NO it's not self evident, as you put it, unless you offer citations (chapter and Verse) of what passages you are referring too. You can't just airily proclaim its in the Bible unless you can demonstrate where in the Bible

Just like "chapter and verse, please" is pretty self evident.

Otherwise I'd ask you where you got that idea to ask me "chapter and verse."

Mike you can't compare tth two and you know it. Some portions of the OT were divided into Verses as early as 586 BC and the Bible divided as we know it was in about 1524. The whole purpose of dividing it was so as to be able to refer to specific passages as needed. This is completely different from claiming that the Bible says "chapter and Verses"

Unless, please tell me you don't, you think that chapter and Verse was a concept the VPW "discovered'????

[Mike]

templelady,

Asking for "chapter and verse please" is a very useful tool I'm sure has been around for a while, and the IDEA behind is it even older than the chapter and verse divisions were made.

However, there are ways in which that tool can be abused, like trying to apply it where it cannot apply. I think you were doing this with me. If the concepts I brought up were not self evident to you, then I suggest you think about them some more if you want to keep up with me in conversation.

[templelady]

[quote]Sometimes an idea has a modern word to describe it but no ancient words. Sometimes it's the other way around. This is also often the case with comparing any two languages, leaving out the ancient versus modern notion.

Mike, Don't chance the topic to Concepts

Re read what you posted above.

I want a Specific verse where, when dealing with Sonship legal rights in regards to the obtaining of needs in prayer,

A modern word was used because there were no ancient words

I want a specific verse where, when dealing with Sonship legal rights in regards to the obtaining of needs in prayer,

an ancient word was used because there are no modern words

This is really simple

Either they exist , in which case You'll post them

or they don't exist , evidenced by your not posting them

If they don't exist, clearly I won't have to consider the non-existent in further conversations on this subject

[Mike]

templelady,

I’m glad you brought us back to the origin of this latest tangent.

I’m all for exploring verses behind Dr’s handling of sonship rights. The way I’d proceed, if I had the time right now, would be FIRST to simply re-read the sections that it comes up in PFAL and follow his cited scriptures. In those sections would also be some extra-biblical self evident logic that would need some pondering. Then I’d check my KJV for more places where identical words and similar ideas come up. I don’t have that much time right now, though.

That we use SOME extra-biblical self evident logic is unavoidable, but it IS good to try and minimize it. Your use of the “chapter and verse, please” tool was just such an appeal to extra-biblical self evident logic, because you can’t find anyplace in the Bible where it’s suggested, at least not in those exact words. The idea is in there, though.

Very few of us in TWI got past the idea of doing word studies and took up topic studies, where the same idea but non-identical words were used. The latter is less sure, but more far reaching.

I was explaining several posts ago to you that the study of sonship rights shouldn’t rest solely on the word “rights” because the idea is bigger (and older) than that word. Dr was taking many scriptures, many words, many ideas and explaining them (by inspiration) with the more modern word of “rights.”

Again, I’m all for backing up PFAL presentations with scriptures. I have engaged in that all thorough my years in the ministry. We all should have. In the early 80’s some Corps people did a real neat research project where they searched for alternate scriptures to teach the whole class with. I think I have the “Alternate Verse PFAL Syllabus” they produced, and I’ll look for it. Had you ever heard of that project? It was very revealing to see how many verses Dr could have used but didn’t.

For instance, when he taught body/soul/spirit he did some elaborate hand-stands to appeal to our perceptions of self evident logic to see that soul and spirit were NOT synonymous in the Bible, like they are often treated in other circles, but totally different. It always fascinated me that Dr did not use the following verse:

Hebrews 4:12

For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

I think Dr deliberately did not use this verse to reward those of us who would later find it as we “searched the scriptures daily whether those things were so” after taking PFAL, much like the noble Bereans in Acts 17. If you or any others didn’t do this way back then, then I’d suggest you never really finished the class, and are in no noble position to reject it, much less criticize it.

When I found this verse in my early years it told me that whenever we saw Dr appeal to our perceptions of self evident logic to see some point, there could ALSO be tons of backup in the scriptures.

In other words, you are asking me to do your long neglected homework for you in backing up PFAL assertions. I am willing to help you to a degree here, but only to help you get started in this. If I perceive that you will blow off my supply of backup on one topic like “rights” and move on to other criticisms, then I feel I’d be wasting my time.

I am close to that perception already.

Edited April 7, 2006 by Mike

[WordWolf]

I now see Dr’s job was to give us what we could receive at the time and allow us to help him get what God taught him distributed around the world in printed form.

How strange he never actually MENTIONED any of this....

It was to be the limb-to-twig level where the specific details you brought up were dealt with. I did see some HQ guidance for some of these specifics, but a lot more was supposed to and did take place on the local levels.

Of course, this "perception" allows you to cover 2 deficiencies:

A) not interacting with vpw daily

B) the disconnect between your doctrine and what vpw said/did daily,

as reported by eyewitnesses

I also did see and took special note of his SIT being MUCH more fluent than what we heard in the film class. There were some familiar sounds, but he had a rich and beautiful way of SIT.

How strange, then...

If you review the ROA '79 tapes,

you'll hear vpw bring up speaking in tongues, and doing it at one point.

The syllables were not merely "familiar"-they're almost verbatim from the class.

Odd how what can be CHECKED seems the opposite of

what you've said....

....and how you spent almost no time with vpw,

but you supposedly have an opposite report with nothing

to base it on but convictions.

I frequently saw the filler word method (just, just, just, Father, Father, Father) of prayer dealt with..

Where and when are these "frequent" incidents you're

reporting? You were not on staff.

I am dealing with some of people who need tough talk at times. You completely overlook them. I think those who are very apt to criticize PFAL with vicious glee, but who have little understanding or memory of what’s actually in that material need to be fed a dose of their own medicine at times.

But by far the biggest source of difficulty here is the massive error held and projected by PFAL critics here.

No matter how soft and slow an polite I am, the sheer volume of corrections I offer is sure to be taken like a slap in their faces. No matter how well phrased, for a normal human being to be told that they are wrong on a massive number of points is sure to hurt. However that hurt should only be temporary for those who want to learn.

Translation:

I am entitled to be insulting to the other posters. They deserve it and

are not adults who reason. Their maturity level is less than mine.

Their understanding is far deficient compared to mine.

And even if I DID use manners, it wouldn't matter.

And-in the long run-they'll be thankful I was rude and abusive with them.

Hebrews 12:5-11

And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.

I’m claiming to be the Father here, merely a supplier of His words. The effects are the same on the hearers, first humiliation and then later peaceful learning. Nobody likes to be told they are wrong, but a wise man loves reproof in the long run.

Translation:

See how God endorses my rudeness with them?

I'm the same as Paul here in Hebrews, and you all are the

same as Timothy here. You should all be thankful I'm

making the effort.

[WordWolf]

templelady,

Asking for "chapter and verse please" is a very useful tool I'm sure has been around for a while, and the IDEA behind is it even older than the chapter and verse divisions were made.

However, there are ways in which that tool can be abused, like trying to apply it where it cannot apply. I think you were doing this with me. If the concepts I brought up were not self evident to you, then I suggest you think about them some more if you want to keep up with me in conversation.

If the concepts you purport are of God,

then-according to vpw-they will be documented in Scripture.

The exception was The Great Mystery-and that was revealed

2 millenia ago.

If you're putting forth a concept as GODly,

then where did GOD say it was so?

You claimed they were "self-evident." This is a poor, poor answer from someone

supposedly following techniques in pfal of understanding and applying Scripture.

You-of course-were challenged on this. NOBODY gets an exemption on this.

JESUS CHRIST didn't get an exemption on this one.

So, make your case.

"Think about it some more" is tantamount to admitting you can't find it

in Scripture.

And claiming others can't "keep up" is not a valid discussion tool-it's an insult.

(Ad hominem attack, for those keeping up.)

[Mike]

WW,

Sorry to have so little time right now, but you alerted me to a major typo at the end of my last post.

When I wrote: "I’m claiming to be the Father here, merely a supplier of His words," I blew it in typing and proofreading.

It should read:

"I’m NOT claiming to be the Father here, merely a supplier of His words."

Now the word "merely" makes sense and readers' perceptions of my ego have at least a chance of being accurate.

Edited April 7, 2006 by Mike

[WordWolf]

I recognized the obvious typo and disregarded it,

so my post took that into consideration-in case you were wondering.

[WordWolf]

In other words, you are asking me to do your long neglected homework for you in backing up PFAL assertions. I am willing to help you to a degree here, but only to help you get started in this. If I perceive that you will blow off my supply of backup on one topic like “rights” and move on to other criticisms, then I feel I’d be wasting my time.

I am close to that perception already.

Mike,

I'll explain this yet again, although you've been hearing this for years now.

You showed up and have spent years making assertions,

and have consistently showed pride in REFUSING to support them.

"Dodge", "distract", or spew insults in every direction.

Any suggestion that this is not your private podium-or that

DISCUSSION goes BOTH WAYS- seems repulsive to you.

You're free to feel that way. Lots of self-appointed teachers

feel that way-and don't post their doctrines here.

(You'll notice I don't push MY doctrines here, for that matter.)

HOWEVER,

when you post here, you have de facto accepted that you will

be engaging in a DISCUSSION.

(In fact, given the introduction to the forums, I'd say it's

a de jure acceptance as well.)

That means that YOU YOURSELF are REQUIRED to support YOUR

CLAIMS.

What it does NOT mean is that you can make claims with no or

little or insufficient evidence,

and when someone calls for more evidence,

you are entitled to respond "that's your job."

However, that's PRECISELY what you're doing here.

You're also not our teacher, instructor, or anything along those

lines. You are STILL not entitled to assign homework or anything

else.