PFAL: An Unorthodox Translation

[Mike]

WordWolf,

You quoted a portion of my ideas on a topic with: “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.”

You then wrote: “How strange he never actually MENTIONED any of this....”

I’m admitting he never said this with my “I now see....” This is a result of hindsight and seeing what Dr was most successful at. He did also admit to falling short in his life, but I am thankful for what he did do right.

***

You wrote: 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 don’t count this as a deficiency. I do believe that those who were closest to him suffered from that disadvantage if they were prone to dwell on his flesh and not on his more formal teachings, especially the written ones.

***

You wrote:

“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.”

This is not a major point, so that’s why I spend almost zero time on it. I saw he had plenty of fluency in some of the more informal 10:30 am meetings. I know many others were there too, and can remember. As for the ROA I can offer a few possible explanations, but won’t bother. I’m not trying to prove anything here, just offer my recollections. Accept them or reject them, I don’t care. I was a big stickler on fluency and led many T.I.P. excellors meetings during Intermediate classes. When I heard Dr’s fluency I took special note. I also noted many leaders with little fluency, and it bothered me.

***

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

Then you wrote: “Where and when are these "frequent" incidents you're reporting? You were not on staff.”

Yes I was on staff, for a little over two years, from 1976-78. However, the events I reported here were local, in the 70’s, in Long Island, New York. I don’t remember the names and dates, this being over 30 years ago. I remember the problem, and I remember local leaders addressing it.

***

Among other things, including a verse in Hebrews, I wrote: “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.”

You translated (wrongly) this as: “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.”

I’d translate it as: “I am trying to serve the other posters, and deserve some latitude like brevity and skipping some formalities of politeness, that eager learners are usually willing to give me. They are behind in their studies and shouldn’t complain. Though physicaly mature they have forgotten or never absorbed massive amounts of data, just as I did, except I have a chronological advantage of having come back to the books to correct these problems and have been doing so for 8 years now. Their understanding is far deficient compared to mine, but this is just temporary. I look forward to the day when they can help me where I am deficient, because it’s a Body and all can supply. Even if I DID use full blown manners with the reckless and still defiant, it wouldn't matter. And, in the long run, those in this arrogant category, should they come back and receive the full enlightenment available in written PFAL, they'll be thankful I was courageous enough to defy the disapproval heaped on me here for lightly (and only occasionally) slapping them around, rubbing their noses in their own poop, enough to get their attention and showing them where they missed the boat long ago.

***

You mistranslated another passage of mine with: “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.”

This was the passage where I blew it by not supplying the intended “NOT” as I corrected above, which should correct your middle sentence above. The other two look pretty good. When it comes making a necessary and exclusive decision between manners and truth, I’d say that truth can often be the winner, but not always. Sometimes it must understandably wait.

***

I wrote: “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.”

You wrote: “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.”

I don’t think that was the only strategic secret God stuffed up His sleeve.

Some trivial concepts are factual or true yet not supported by scripture. Not all the addition and multiplication tables are documented in scripture, but then again, they don’t need to be in order to be recognized by rational people as worth holding. I think asking for chapter and verse and recognizing that topic studies can be as useful as word studies is another, even though both would be very difficult to derive from scripture. It was these two trivialities that me and templelady were discussing and were the context of my comments.

***

You wrote: “If you're putting forth a concept as GODly, then where did GOD say it was so?”

I agree here, provided we’re not talking about trivial concepts.

***

You wrote: “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.”

It all depends what the “they” refers to. The they were trivially self evident concepts.

You’re expanding the context of my remarks here, to areas I would not make them in.

***

You wrote: “‘Think about it some more’ is tantamount to admitting you can't find it

in Scripture.”

Yes, for trivial things that need not be in scripture.

BTW, what did you think of my remarks about the difficulty of finding foreknowledge and free will (as opposed to mechanical determination) scriptures I made in T-Bone’s thread on “What does it take to change your mind?” ? Here we have some NON-TRIVIAL concepts that are quite elusive to concise scripture definition.

What cannot be found in the ancient scriptures is very interesting.

What about the possibility of lost scriptures? I’ve not brought this up, but have seen others do it. How well God protects the scriptures after He gives them is a large topic, and usually the documented loss of scripture mentioned in the OT is excluded. They were eventually recovered, but what about the period of time they were missing? Who’s to say with certainty that the ancient scriptures we have is the complete set?

Other possibilities include the changes of administrations, and to whom things are addressed. It should be obvious that any writings addressed to those in the Gathering Together would be purposely excluded by God from the ancient scriptures. Most believers in the Gathering paint it as a picture where everything is zapped into us and there’s no need for written instructions... but “chapter and verse, please.”

***

You wrote: “And claiming others can't "keep up" is not a valid discussion tool-it's an insult. (Ad hominem attack, for those keeping up.)”

No, not necessarily. You are looking at it from the perspective that I have nothing to offer and readers have no need. But if it’s actually the other way around, then things are different.

For example, if I’m teaching calculus and a student who hasn’t memorized his multiplication tables wants to understand me, it’s perfectly proper for me to insist he do some serious catching up if he wants to keep up with me. It would be grossly impolite for him to insist that I cater to him.

***

Now I have some serious catching up myself in responding to much older posts than yours.

[templelady]

The idea is in there, though.

Where????

Dr was taking many scriptures, many words, many ideas and explaining them (by inspiration) with the more modern word of “rights.”

Which ones???

In other words, you are asking me to do your long neglected homework for you in backing up PFAL assertions

It's not my PFAL assertions. They are YOUR PFAL assertions therefore, this is YOUR homework

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.

So let me see if I understand your position correctly:

You have a supply of scripture that backs up your assertions

But you aren't going to post them because if we settle the question of "Rights" in prayer then I might have criticisms of PFAL in other areas

Therefore you would be wasting your time

"me thinks thou dost protest too much"

Having failed to post said citations I will proceed without them since you yourself don't feel it worth your time to post them for my consideration, If they exist at all, which at this point, from my perception based on your posts, is extremely doubtful

That said, it is time for me to stand by my original statement and move on

Of course if at anytime you wish to post the requested citations from the Bible I will reconsider my position

[templelady]

It was these two trivialities that me and templelady were discussing and were the context of my comments

Since you have further clarified that these are Trivialities (of little substance or significance; not large enough to consider or notice)

The error of the concepts of "appropriating" and "legal rights" regarding PFALs position regarding prayer have been clearly demonstrated and I am moving on to other topics.

Edited April 7, 2006 by templelady

[templelady]

And, in the long run, those in this arrogant category, should they come back and receive the full enlightenment available in written PFAL

It's not arrogance Mike, It's a lack of reasons why I should,

Reasons for me to study PFAL again would have to be Scripturally based

I will give you an example of what I mean

from the Book Of MORMON

(yes Allen, I am citing my religious beliefs for clarification of a point, you want further discussion , go to the LDS thread)

Mormon 8

38 O ye pollutions, ye hypocrites, ye teachers, who sell yourselves for that which will canker, why have ye polluted the holy church of God? Why are ye ashamed to take upon you the name of Christ? Why do ye not think that greater is the value of an endless happiness than that misery which never dies—because of the praise of the world?

for this verse there are are footnotes (LDS Scriptures)

Romans 1:16, 3:16; 2 Timothy 1:8; 1 Nephi 8:25, 13:9: Alma 46:21 Mosiah 3:25

Going to Romans 1:16 we find more footnotes

Psalms 119:36; Matthew 10:32-33; 1 Corinthians 1:18; 2 Corinthians 15:2 ; 2 Timothy 1:12, 2:10-15; Peter 1:5; 2 Nephi 31:12-21; Doctrine and Covenants 68:4; 101: 1-5

plus reference to the topical guide for more in depth discussion

You can then go to these scriptures find more footnotes etc. each building, clarifying and expanding on the others until a complete picture is formed. All the scriptures in the LDS Church are thus referenced and cross referenced

Each time I do this I find more to explore, more questions to answer. And I pursue them because I have a scriptural foundation under my feet, Not because My bishop tells me it is there, but because I have held the scriptures in my hand, read them and followed the "scriptural chains" for myself

so far on your side of the fence

I see PFAL

I see the Bible

But in depth Scriptural chains are not there for many claims of PFAL, and, since you don't provide them when pressed to do so, my only conclusion is that they don't exist.

As for studying eight years to "master" PFAL, do you really think God expects us to have to wait eight years before even his most basic truths are revealed to us??? Not hardly, He wants his children to have the knowledge now in clear and understandable form.

Edited April 7, 2006 by templelady

[Tom Strange]

me in bold... what a freaking jerk...

You wrote: 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 don’t count this as a deficiency. I do believe that those who were closest to him suffered from that disadvantage if they were prone to dwell on his flesh and not on his more formal teachings, especially the written ones.

You weren't there with him on a "daily interaction" basis, yet you persist in posting as if you were. The way you phrase things pertaining to veepee would lead the reader to conclude that you were his intimate confidant... and you know it. You deliberately do this to try to give your words added "oomph"... this approach isn't working for you because no one believes it. Every time you phrase things this way it just makes us roll our eyes and wonder what sort of B.S. you'll spout next.

I’d translate it as: “I am trying to serve the other posters, and deserve some latitude like brevity and skipping some formalities of politeness, that eager learners are usually willing to give me.

Even if I DID use full blown manners with the reckless and still defiant, it wouldn't matter. And, in the long run, those in this arrogant category, should they come back and receive the full enlightenment available in written PFAL, they'll be thankful I was courageous enough to defy the disapproval heaped on me here for lightly (and only occasionally) slapping them around, rubbing their noses in their own poop, enough to get their attention and showing them where they missed the boat long ago.

Mike, this is a prime example of you being an arrogant "rick with a p". THERE IS NEVER A GOOD EXCUSE FOR "SKIPPING SOME FORMALITIES OF POLITENESS". And don't give me that krap about "I'm just responding in kind"... because TL , dmiller and dooj haven't done anything to deserve the way you've talked down to them. I started out (long, long ago) simply asking you about your statements and you immediately, from the beginning, treated me like a cur dog.

You're nothing but an arrogant bully and that's the message that comes through loud and clear in your posts... even more than "PFAL is God-breathed". NO ONE who has dealt with you on these threads WILL EVER BE THANKFUL for the way you've treated them.

There is no excuse for your behavior and the way you treat people other than that you're a selfish, mean spirited egotist who thinks that he's got to save the world with his message and he doesn't care who he hurts in the process. (BTW that's the book definition of a 'rick with a p')

You mistranslated another passage of mine with: “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.”

This was the passage where I blew it by not supplying the intended “NOT” as I corrected above, which should correct your middle sentence above. The other two look pretty good. When it comes making a necessary and exclusive decision between manners and truth, I’d say that truth can often be the winner, but not always. Sometimes it must understandably wait.

Oh yeah... here's where you did actually try to supply scripture... to support your justification for being arrogant, rude and condescending... You won't post scripture to support your crazy ideas, but you'll post scripture to support your unacceptable behavior... good use of 'The Word' Mike. Regardless of the typo... that was the message you wanted to get across... and it came across loud and clear.

Some trivial concepts are factual or true yet not supported by scripture. Not all the addition and multiplication tables are documented in scripture, but then again, they don’t need to be in order to be recognized by rational people as worth holding. I think asking for chapter and verse and recognizing that topic studies can be as useful as word studies is another, even though both would be very difficult to derive from scripture. It was these two trivialities that me and templelady were discussing and were the context of my comments.

Another classic example of your 'dodge' Mike. Whenever you do get backed into a corner about something you really cannot prove is anything more than your spewing forth at the mouth... you try to say "it's trivial" or "I was just poking" or "I was just trying to stir things up"... anything but admit that you were just plain and simple being a jerk.

You wrote: “If you're putting forth a concept as GODly, then where did GOD say it was so?”

I agree here, provided we’re not talking about trivial concepts.

Then answer some of the dang questions people have put to you... or are they ALL trivial? They don't seem to be by the way you post them. Answer the questions or STFU.

You wrote: “‘Think about it some more’ is tantamount to admitting you can't find it in Scripture.”

Yes, for trivial things that need not be in scripture.

blah blah blah

BTW, what did you think of my remarks about the difficulty of finding foreknowledge and free will (as opposed to mechanical determination) scriptures I made in T-Bone’s thread on “What does it take to change your mind?” ? Here we have some NON-TRIVIAL concepts that are quite elusive to concise scripture definition.

This has nothing to do with what's being talked about here, but nice of you to try and change the conversation.

What cannot be found in the ancient scriptures is very interesting.

What about the possibility of lost scriptures? I’ve not brought this up, but have seen others do it. How well God protects the scriptures after He gives them is a large topic, and usually the documented loss of scripture mentioned in the OT is excluded. They were eventually recovered, but what about the period of time they were missing? Who’s to say with certainty that the ancient scriptures we have is the complete set?

And how do we know they're lost if they're lost? Would these be 'lost scriptures' that you would use to support your outlandish claims? What difference do they make? If they're lost, you haven't used them to form your opinions so they're not being talked or asked about. Or are you now going to cite 'lost scriptures as your reference since you know they can't be checked?

Other possibilities include the changes of administrations, and to whom things are addressed. It should be obvious that any writings addressed to those in the Gathering Together would be purposely excluded by God from the ancient scriptures. Most believers in the Gathering paint it as a picture where everything is zapped into us and there’s no need for written instructions... but “chapter and verse, please.”

Fine... more blah blah blah... what difference does it make... YOU are being asked to supply scriptural reference to support YOUR outlandish and often arrogant claims. This point has nothing to do with it... 'dodge'

You wrote: “And claiming others can't "keep up" is not a valid discussion tool-it's an insult. (Ad hominem attack, for those keeping up.)”

No, not necessarily. You are looking at it from the perspective that I have nothing to offer and readers have no need. But if it’s actually the other way around, then things are different.

So far, and until you EVER answer a question about scriptural support for your opinions, you don't have anything to offer us but 'your opinion' and we don't have a need for that.

For example, if I’m teaching calculus and a student who hasn’t memorized his multiplication tables wants to understand me, it’s perfectly proper for me to insist he do some serious catching up if he wants to keep up with me. It would be grossly impolite for him to insist that I cater to him.

You should be on 'dancing with the stars' with the way you dance around responsibility.

Now I have some serious catching up myself in responding to much older posts than yours.

Does it make any difference? Really? All you're going to do is continue to insult folks while still not answering any questions.

[Mike]

sheesh!

Tom, you make it sound like I stalk people to hound them, and do nothing but try to hurt them.

They come to me, and I give them something, in spite of lots of resistance I get from them and others.

You insist on making me the subject, and when I finally do get to start answering your questions you shut me off by insisting I skip what I think are necessary preparations and that I answer it your way.

SLAP! SLAP! SLAP!

You can face the corner for a while, buddy, and contemplate your insolence.

I’ll read and respond to your posts after I deal with my backlog.

[Tom Strange]

Mike, you needn't respond to my posts... but I do wish at some point you'd hear what I'm saying...

And now, at the risk of sounding like you, I wonder if your reading comprehension might be part of the problem as to why you don't answer people's questions... I didn't say, nor did I allude to, anything concerning you stalking people.

Maybe that's why you never answer the questions folks ask you... you don't realize we're asking you questions... you only think we're unintelligent, slothful students not worthy of your time... at least that's how you treat us...

So don't respond to my most recent post, just 'hear' it... and respond to the questions you've been asked by all of the folks here... start with the most recent ones... then others will come up I'm sure...

[dmiller]

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."

What I thought. :)

[dmiller]

I’d translate it as: “I am trying to serve the other posters, and deserve some latitude like brevity and skipping some formalities of politeness, that eager learners are usually willing to give me. They are behind in their studies and shouldn’t complain.

Though physicaly mature they have forgotten or never absorbed massive amounts of data, just as I did, except I have a chronological advantage of having come back to the books to correct these problems and have been doing so for 8 years now. Their understanding is far deficient compared to mine, but this is just temporary. I look forward to the day when they can help me where I am deficient, because it’s a Body and all can supply.

Even if I DID use full blown manners with the reckless and still defiant, it wouldn't matter. And, in the long run, those in this arrogant category, should they come back and receive the full enlightenment available in written PFAL, they'll be thankful I was courageous enough to defy the disapproval heaped on me here for lightly (and only occasionally) slapping them around, rubbing their noses in their own poop, enough to get their attention and showing them where they missed the boat long ago.

What a buncha *harmartia* comes to mind. :)

(Ps -- you got my attention a long time ago, and sadly I have since realized ----

You have been at the train station when the *boat came in*).

Since we will never agree, and you consider me (and others here) idiots, unworthy of your discourse --

I'l bid you Adieu!!

Have a good one, see ya at the Bema, and bring your Orange book --

(Jesus mighta worn out His by then.)

[Mike]

Talk about me and me and a little more me, meanwhile the neglected PFAL texts await those who want answers.

The one common characteristic plan of action for the ministry meltdown between Geer, LCM, JAL, and all the other top leaders be they splinter or stump, is to do anything and everything BUT what Dr told them and us to do by re-opening and fully mastering the PFAL texts.

There are strong spiritual forces at work, gale force winds of doctrine,

all blowing radially outward and away from written PFAL.

Edited April 8, 2006 by Mike

[Tom Strange]

Methinks thou dost protest too much... Mike, of course it's about YOU... this whole PFAL God Breathed Jesus Teaching from the Orange Book etc etc etc IS ALL about YOU... because they're all your ideas.

And that's fine... but don't try to pretend it's not something that it is...

IF (and this is a huge gigantic IF) you really were truly concerned about getting your message out and believed... you would answer questions when folks had them AND you wouldn't treat people like dirt. IF you really wanted your message "out" and "believed".

But this is what folks have been telling you for the almost three years I've "known" you and you haven't changed a bit. IF there were anyone here to hear you've turned them off...

There are strong spiritual forces at work, gale force winds of doctrine,

all blowing radially outward and away from written PFAL.

That's just "hot air" coming from your own mouth...

[dmiller]

Naw -- I will add no more.

And I'm guessing that you would say I have added nothing.

Everything I have asked you about pfal, has been relegated back to me,

and my *lack of the understanding thereof*.

I've been accused of not understanding docvic's dying wish.

I've been accused of not understanding *the material* of pfal.

I ask honest questions, and get *lambasted*,

because I haven't read what you have written in many, many posts before.

When I have asked directly, I've been accused of attacking, mis-interpretting, etc.

When you mention tapes, and I question that (due to your own posts)

I am subject to ridicule, for not differentiating between history, and doctrine.

I'm done. :)

I have tried to interact, and you have refused, Mike.

You made it VERY EASY for me to make negative personal comments about you

(for which I apologize -- profusely, even).

Your *zeal* exceeds your wisdom (as does mine).

It has always been your lack of willingness to address questions directly,

that leads to this. (Trying to be kind here -- even at the end.)

Like I say -- I am now out of the picture you have painted.

It's a *work of art*. You've already got the frame picked out, -- and it will never change.

God bless, take care, and may you find --- whatever.

This is one OLG saying sayonara.

IMO -- there is a stairway to heavan -- but it surely isn't pfal,

and docvic isn't the person ushering folks to that stairway.

(and THAT is something you refuse to discuss rationally. (just IMO).

Edited April 8, 2006 by dmiller

[Mike]

dmiller,

Try opening the books someday.

***

Tom,

I'm not interesed in changing my fundamental point of view.

I'm only discussing what is in PFAL, and not me.

Edited April 8, 2006 by Mike

[dmiller]

dmiller,

Try opening the books someday.

Like I said ---- sayonara!

pfal is a tool, nothing more.

Edited April 8, 2006 by dmiller

[Mike]

Try opening the books to see if it's more than a tool.

[templelady]

Try opening the books to see if it's more than a tool.

After eight years of study, you are UNABLE to provide requested scripture references. Face it, If they aren't there after eight years of study, they aren't there--so why should I open the books to look for something that you have so clearly demonstrated isn't available because it isn't there???

[WordWolf]

WordWolf,

You quoted a portion of my ideas on a topic with: “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.”

You then wrote: “How strange he never actually MENTIONED any of this....”

I’m admitting he never said this with my “I now see....” This is a result of hindsight and seeing what Dr was most successful at. He did also admit to falling short in his life, but I am thankful for what he did do right.

[And everyone else can see that this is a "job" that was never

claimed even by a man with an inflated view of himself,

and is a concept ADDED LATER by someone.]

***

You wrote: 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 don’t count this as a deficiency. I do believe that those who were closest to him suffered from that disadvantage if they were prone to dwell on his flesh and not on his more formal teachings, especially the written ones.

[Of course you count your deficiencies as strengths.

You weren't privy to his private meetings, his private

thoughts, his private councils, his corps, even.

All your hidden messages disregard what all those

who WERE there said. They said vpw said his books

weren't God-breathed. Now, your speculation contradicts

their eyewitness account. Then the editors said their

work was editing, not God-breathed, just the best effort

they could do. Now, your speculation contradicts THEIR

first-person account of what they actually DID.

And you don't count this as a deficiency in your method.]

***

You wrote:

“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.”

This is not a major point, so that’s why I spend almost zero time on it.

I saw he had plenty of fluency in some of the more informal 10:30 am meetings.

[Well, YOU brought it up.

Interesting how YOUR eyewitness account is valid,

but everyone ELSE'S is invalid...]

***

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

Then you wrote: “Where and when are these "frequent" incidents you're reporting? You were not on staff.”

Yes I was on staff, for a little over two years, from 1976-78. However, the events I reported here were local, in the 70’s, in Long Island, New York. I don’t remember the names and dates, this being over 30 years ago. I remember the problem, and I remember local leaders addressing it.

[Then this side-trip into what the locals did-the people you accuse of

forgetting things, of adding things, of getting them wrong-

is a NON-ISSUE and a SMOKESCREEN.

I notice how your "proof" suddenly took a hard turn into LOCAL

events all of a sudden...]

***

Among other things, including a verse in Hebrews, I wrote: “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.”

You translated (wrongly) this as: “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.”

I’d translate it as: “I am trying to serve the other posters, and deserve some latitude like brevity and skipping some formalities of politeness, that eager learners are usually willing to give me. They are behind in their studies and shouldn’t complain. Though physicaly mature they have forgotten or never absorbed massive amounts of data, just as I did, except I have a chronological advantage of having come back to the books to correct these problems and have been doing so for 8 years now. Their understanding is far deficient compared to mine, but this is just temporary. I look forward to the day when they can help me where I am deficient, because it’s a Body and all can supply. Even if I DID use full blown manners with the reckless and still defiant, it wouldn't matter. And, in the long run, those in this arrogant category, should they come back and receive the full enlightenment available in written PFAL, they'll be thankful I was courageous enough to defy the disapproval heaped on me here for lightly (and only occasionally) slapping them around, rubbing their noses in their own poop, enough to get their attention and showing them where they missed the boat long ago.

[And you'd be wrong.

"Skipping some formalities of politeness" means RUDENESS,

and there's no excuse for it. Furthermore, you don't have a roomful of "eager learners."

You have a bunch of people who you walked in on and announced you were

an authority. When honest questions were asked, you accused people of

being ignorant. When honest criticism was raised, you spewed insults.

"They are behind in their studies and shouldn't complain."

This is not Mike University.

They are adults who are engaging you in dialogue, NOT your students.

You PUSHED your way in. They did not seek you out.

You STILL don't understand this simple concept.

If they sought you out, then perhaps you could make judgements

and they would accept them. Since none of them has, these delusionary

tales of other posters being

"less mature"

(especially with YOU spewing the insults)

and "FAR DEFICIENT" understanding

(when they quote directly)

undermine your message even further than the content does.]

***

You mistranslated another passage of mine with: “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.”

This was the passage where I blew it by not supplying the intended “NOT” as I corrected above, which should correct your middle sentence above. The other two look pretty good. When it comes making a necessary and exclusive decision between manners and truth, I’d say that truth can often be the winner, but not always. Sometimes it must understandably wait.

[Actually, you were claiming your rudeness was analogous to Paul

and Hebrews, and that you were superior to the other posters here.

So, my commentary "translation" was correct.

Of course, you can't see it, even when it's pointed out.

Then again, I've gotten the impression already that whatever

we post is filtered HEAVILY before it reaches your comprehension,

like English translated to Spanish, then to French, then to Italian,

then back to English.]

***

I wrote: “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.”

You wrote: “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.”

I don’t think that was the only strategic secret God stuffed up His sleeve.

[True-you believe that. vpw never taught it, but you believe it.

That's one of the problems.

Of course, your inability to demonstrate your position is supposedly

concealed by your "I am the professor" rants and

"you are all lazy students" rants.

I sometimes wonder now if you hallucinate a lecture hall and podium

when you post.]

Some trivial concepts are factual or true yet not supported by scripture. Not all the addition and multiplication tables are documented in scripture, but then again, they don’t need to be in order to be recognized by rational people as worth holding. I think asking for chapter and verse and recognizing that topic studies can be as useful as word studies is another, even though both would be very difficult to derive from scripture. It was these two trivialities that me and templelady were discussing and were the context of my comments.

[That you can't tell the self-evident difference between mathematical equations

and Bible doctrine speaks poorly of your own skills of discernment.

Unless you CAN tell the difference but are too intellectually DIShonest

to speak it-and deliberately MISused it to smokescreen the absence

of your doctrines in Scripture AND the pfal books.]

***

You wrote: “If you're putting forth a concept as GODly, then where did GOD say it was so?”

I agree here, provided we’re not talking about trivial concepts.

***

You wrote: “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.”

It all depends what the “they” refers to. The they were trivially self evident concepts.

You’re expanding the context of my remarks here, to areas I would not make them in.

[You made claims about God.

You failed to substantiate those claims.

You were told to do so, as required in intelligent dialogue.

You REFUSED to do so,

and threw up an elaborate obfuscation to

draw attention to your failure to back up your own claims.

Unless you're now claiming your claims are

"trivially self-evident concepts".

I'll agree on the "trivial", but pronouncing them

"self-evident" no more makes them so than

pronouncing myself the Prince of Wales would

entitle me to the royal treatment in England.]

***

You wrote: “‘Think about it some more’ is tantamount to admitting you can't find it

in Scripture.”

Yes, for trivial things that need not be in scripture.

[so you're admitting your doctrine is "trivial" and not in Scripture.

Ok, just so we're clear on that.]

BTW, what did you think of my remarks about the difficulty of finding foreknowledge and free will (as opposed to mechanical determination) scriptures I made in T-Bone’s thread on “What does it take to change your mind?” ? Here we have some NON-TRIVIAL concepts that are quite elusive to concise scripture definition.

What cannot be found in the ancient scriptures is very interesting.

[i haven't been reading the thread, but we HAVE discussed

that concept before. You and a few others had expressed

some surprise that this subject has been rather intelligently

discussed by Christians for CENTURIES, and have been

demonstrated FROM Scripture.

If you're still claiming they're not, then not only are you

deficient, you're a poor learner, because we saw this movie

before.]

What about the possibility of lost scriptures? I’ve not brought this up, but have seen others do it. How well God protects the scriptures after He gives them is a large topic, and usually the documented loss of scripture mentioned in the OT is excluded. They were eventually recovered, but what about the period of time they were missing? Who’s to say with certainty that the ancient scriptures we have is the complete set?

[i'd get into this with you, but it's obvious that you-

Mr "You're Drawing Attention from pfal"-

does NOT want to know this,

but is using this as another smokescreen,

as if whatever Mike comes up with is equal to

the discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus.]

Other possibilities include the changes of administrations, and to whom things are addressed. It should be obvious that any writings addressed to those in the Gathering Together would be purposely excluded by God from the ancient scriptures. Most believers in the Gathering paint it as a picture where everything is zapped into us and there’s no need for written instructions... but “chapter and verse, please.”

[so you're saying that Christians IN the Gathering Together

will need "written instructions?"]

***

You wrote: “And claiming others can't "keep up" is not a valid discussion tool-it's an insult. (Ad hominem attack, for those keeping up.)”

No, not necessarily.

[it is on this discussion board.

We're communicating on this discussion board.

This is the GSC.]

You are looking at it from the perspective that I have nothing to offer and readers have no need. But if it’s actually the other way around, then things are different.

[Wrong.

You are a poster. They are posters. Common courtesy is expected.]

For example, if I’m teaching calculus and a student who hasn’t memorized his multiplication tables wants to understand me, it’s perfectly proper for me to insist he do some serious catching up if he wants to keep up with me. It would be grossly impolite for him to insist that I cater to him.

[Hallucinations aside,

this is not a calculus class,

you are not a professor,

we are not your class nor your students.

You showed up and announced you were teaching us.

It is grossly impolite for you to insist WE cater to YOU.]

***

Edited April 8, 2006 by WordWolf

[WordWolf]

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.

Mike, you needn't respond to my posts... but I do wish at some point you'd hear what I'm saying...

And now, at the risk of sounding like you, I wonder if your reading comprehension might be part of the problem as to why you don't answer people's questions... I didn't say, nor did I allude to, anything concerning you stalking people.

Maybe that's why you never answer the questions folks ask you... you don't realize we're asking you questions... you only think we're unintelligent, slothful students not worthy of your time... at least that's how you treat us...

So don't respond to my most recent post, just 'hear' it... and respond to the questions you've been asked by all of the folks here... start with the most recent ones... then others will come up I'm sure...

Hm.

Tom came to a similar conclusion as I did.

Try opening the books to see if it's more than a tool.

This will be quick.

PFAL, page 4, pfal on what pfal is good for.

"This is a book containing Biblical keys.

The contents herein do not teach the Scriptures from Genesis 1:1

to Revelation 22:21; rather, it is designed to set before the

reader the basic keys in the Word of God so that Genesis to

Revelation will unfold and so that the abundant life which Jesus

Christ came to make available will become evident to those who

want to appropriate His abundance to their lives."

According to pfal, pfal is a tool.

According to Mike, pfal is more than a tool.

Who you gonna believe?

[CM]

mike is just happy he has all of you responding to his non-sense

this is what he wants-and he has it

of course you are all free to do as you please

mike of course is not free and wants to

lock up as much feedom as he can

that others enjoy

[CM]

mike

"if God has something to say to me, He is Big enough to tell me Himself"

VPW PFAL

stick that in your nut and crunch it

[Mike]

templelady,

You wrote: “After eight years of study, you are UNABLE to provide requested scripture references. Face it, If they aren't there after eight years of study, they aren't there...”

Maybe you aren’t counting all the other posters who engage me here, but there are a several and they write a lot of material to take up my time.

I'd love to have the time to show you many scriptures, but I do have other things going on in my life besides this large posting activity on GSC. There are several MORE people, some even originating from here, with whom I correspond by e-mail and phone. This second batch of people are grads who are very eager to open the books and follow-up on what we discuss. You have not shown this inclination, and therefore cannot claim as big a chunk of my schedule as you would like.

I’ve repeatedly mentioned that you seem to have totally neglected this most logical activity of searching your KJV long ago to see if Dr was right in your earlier days of PFAL acceptance, but you seem to have no shame about it.

I have found that many, many grads took the PFAL class as part of a bandwagon social activity, and not as part of a deep hunger for righteousness and a relentless searching for God and His truth.

Many, many grads blew into PFAL when it was socially convenient for them. When it became inconvenient they were blown away from PFAL. Now many of them have blown in here to this very rich social setting, and again it’s a bandwagon’s of activity they jump on. This new bandwagon’s direction is to p i s s on PFAL instead of praise it as the former bandwagon did. In all of these social settings, within the ministry and without, there is little deep inquiry of the subject matter for these grads. This lack of mental engagement with the contents of PFAL both past and present is impossible to hide from me.

Like I did for dmiller, about the only thing I can say to help you (and that’s why I’m here: to help) is that you ought to open those PFAL books someday and see what you forgot or missed altogether. I’ve already given you some big examples of this here.

If my schedule permits, and if I think my response will help others eavesdropping, I may supply you with some scriptures for some of the areas you have brought up, but I can also bet money you will not appreciate them, and then you will either quickly forget them or pay zero attention to them, just like when you did when you were on the “Praise PFAL Bandwagon.”

Edited April 8, 2006 by Mike

[Bramble]

Wow, I can't believe I read this, I need to go to the library. Or therapy.

Mike, if your message is so important, shouldn't you quit wasting your time on this forum, where people interupt your teaching with comments etc, and set out to write the revelation down in an orderly manner? There are free websites you could then post it on. You could post links and never have to engage in dialogue.

Wouldn't that make more sense?

[CM]

lol! Bramble!!!

i have mike on ignore

so whatever he says the answer is

74

[diazbro]

Mike, if your message is so important, shouldn't you quit wasting your time on this forum, where people interupt your teaching with comments etc, and set out to write the revelation down in an orderly manner? There are free websites you could then post it on. You could post links and never have to engage in dialogue.

Mike, like lots of Way die-hards, would rather receive negative attention than no attention at all. Since society in general has no particular knowlwege of VPW or PFAL he has no other place to go to get attention except this online forum. Its not like he can start a conversation about "Doctor's gift ministies" down at the local barbershop because no one would know what the hell he was talking about or even care. So this is his only outlet and place "to shine". But He is not alone - there are other posters here like him who think that they are going to get more rewards at the bema because they stick up for VPW and his "perfect" class (that was assembled from stolen sources and 50's pop psychology).

[Tom Strange]

Tom,

I'm not interesed in changing my fundamental point of view.

I'm only discussing what is in PFAL, and not me.

Mike,

IF you were only interested in discussing what was in PFAL there probably wouldn't be a problem.

The fact is, you're only interested in discussing what you think is in PFAL that nobody else has ever seen.

The reason that nobody has seen it is because it isn't there.

If these bizarre ideas of YOURS were really there, you'd supply 'chapter and verse' from either the Bible (pick whichever translation you want to use) or veepees God Breathed PFAL.

But you don't.

Because you can't.

Instead (going on three years now that I know of) you tell people you could post them, but they won't understand them.

Then you post something either from the Bible or from PFAL that you say supports your opinion.

Then we all point out to you that what you cited either flat out does not support it, or only partially supports it and you have to take the rest "on faith".

Then you tell us "see, I told you that you wouldn't understand".

Mike, YOU are the only one that understands. Like I said, you are only interested in discussing what you think is in PFAL and what you think PFAL is as opposed to what it actually is and actually contains.

Mike, think on this for this is truth. (oh, and you're rude as well)