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?
Funny that is not what I just read, in that PFAL claims to be a tool. PFAL does not claim to be a tool. PFAL (itself) claims to be a set of keys. What's the difference you ask? A key unlocks a door. A tool does not unlock a door. Furthermore, PFAL claims to aquaint the reader with the "basic" keys so that the bible (Genesis to Revelation) will unfold. PFAL claims to be the basic keys. It does not claim to aquaint the reader with the intermediate or the advanced set of keys.
There are many biblical "tools" available (your local bible bookstore probably carries them - concordances, Hebrew/Greek dictionaries, Lexicons etc.) but none of those "biblical tools" unfold the scriptures from Genesis to Revelation. They simply do not make this claim in their prefaces or their introductory pages - to unfold Genesis to Revelation as does PFAL. They simply do not make the same claim that PFAL makes of itself. What is that claim? The claim is - "so that Genesis to Revelation will unfold and so that the abundant life which Jesus Christ came to make available will become evident. To who? To those who want to appropriate His abundance to their lives.
Notice PFAL only claims to be the basic keys to do this, not the intermediate or the advanced set of keys to do this. Likewise PFAL did not claim to be "a tool" - i.e. another biblical concordance, a Greek dictionary, an interlinear, lexicon, etc. Yes, PFAL is more than a tool. PFAL is the basic keys. Any tool can be used wrongly of course, and this can be said of the many biblical tools that are available. One would think with all the biblical tools available today, equally intelligent biblical scholars using the same biblical tools could come to the same conclusion on the meaning of the scriptures - but more often they only diverge futher apart. A key on the other hand, when used wrongly does not open the door or the right set of doors.
If you take away the biblical keys and substitute biblical tools, then just what is one left with? Exactly what it says right thar in Luke 11:52. "Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key (not tool) of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered."
The Scribes and the Pharisees had all the "biblical tools" available to them one could ever hope for. What did they do to Jesus with their "biblical tools"? Just what it says there in Luke 11:53,54. It doesn't sound much different to me today, especially among those who favor their "biblical tools" over the "basic keys." Mike has simply decided to move beyond that basic PFAL key set, that's all. So why are you all so surprised?
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.......
So --- from what I read in the above quote --
pfal is NOT claiming to teach the Word from Genesis to Revelation,
NOR is it a God-breathed set of words,
BUT IT IS giving the reader KEYS to understand the Word --
from Genesis to Revelation.
So that means that even docvic claims NO superiority over the Word, by his *writings*.
Leaving aside the self-evident fact that a key IS a tool,
If one wanted to open a lock with a crowbar I imagine one could use it to do the task just as well. I don't think I'd care for the results afterwards. How did you manage to get in would be the first question I'd ask. (The one who used a crowbar to get in likely didn't belong there, otherwise they would have had a key. In the least you would question their authority as to how they got in.)
PFAL does not even claim to BE the basic keys: it only claims to set them forth.
They have been set forth - but that doesn't imply someone will pick them up and use them. What do you think Mike has been bitchin' about all this time anyway?
They have been set forth - but that doesn't imply someone will pick them up and use them. What do you think Mike has been bitchin' about all this time anyway?
He's been belly-achin cause we (read *I and others*), don't believe that pfal is God-breathed, and the new set of *scripture* for this day and time. :)
If he had stuck with saying that pfal was a set of wonderful KEYS to unlocking the mysteries in the Bible, he would have much more credence than he now does.
The key gets a specific job done. The wrong tool can be used for a job - but that doesnt' make a keey any less a tool. I can use a Screwdriver handle to sink a nail - but that doesn't change the fact that the screwdriver is a tool as is the HAMMER I should be using.
PFAL sets forth keys - these keys are tools.
Now, the tools have been set forth. People HAVE used them. Mike seems to want us to use them differently than they are meant to be used. (AHHH - now we again have the misuse of a tool.)
Speaking of "Keys" thought I would list some of the definitions of "key" from Webster's that I think are relevant to our discussion of PFAL: 1. usually a metal instrument by which the bolt of a lock is turned; 2. a means of gaining or preventing entrance, possession, or control; 3. an instrumental or deciding factor; 4. something that gives an explanation of symbols or abbreviations; 5. an aid to interpretation or identification; 6. the set of instructions governing the encipherment and decipherment of messages…
Quoting from the intro of PFAL, "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…" I think perhaps with the exception of definition number 1, all the definitions of "key" listed above may apply to different aspects of the PFAL book. That's because number 1 is literally a key – a metal key! All the other definitions have an intellectual nature [or non-physical aspect] about them – even definition 2 [a means of gaining or preventing entrance, possession, or control – definition 2 could be used either way, as a physical means of access control or figuratively as a means of intellectual control]. In my opinion, I think some people view the keys of PFAL as definition 1 – in that they are an infallible-opener-thing-a-ma-bob [i'm really embarrassed by that word but that's how it reads in my original draft]. A real, physical key will only work in the lock it was cut to open. My neighbor's front door key shouldn't work in my front door lock. But it should always – without fail – unlock their front door every time!
My point is this – in my opinion VPW presents intellectual keys [and for the sake of brevity I would liken them to interpretive tools] in PFAL. There is a difference. An intellectual key is subject to the limitationsof both the originator and the user of the key. A metal key will always work in a lock - regardless of the mental capacity of the key-holder. You can read the entire Bible and you will not find keys to understanding the Bible listed all together on one page anywhere. It's not written like a textbook, user manual or God's Word for Dummies [although if there was one I'd buy a copy]. I personally believe God is the author of the Bible and wasn't trying to hide His message in a mysterious, unfathomable, impenetrable, esoteric, heavily encrypted piece of literature. I also believe [in other words, my opinion] God expects us to read the Bible as we would any other book. Think about this – it doesn't matter if you read a book on Windows XP, a romance novel, autobiography, or poetry. Don't you have to pay attention to what the author is saying in the immediate verse or sentence, context or previous usage or reference of a character, term, explanation, etc.? Those are keys – basic intellectual keys to understanding a book. Like I indicated before intellectual keys are not perfect because they depend on OUR intellect – I can ignore the context or assume something previously mentioned in a remote context relates to what I'm reading now – in other words I can make mistakes.
During my involvement with TWI - PFAL was never touted as just a Bible study course that followers were encouraged to take. It was considered indispensablein terms of evangelism and even the mainstay of TWI doctrine. I would only give just enough time and energy to non-grads [those who haven't taken the PFAL Class yet] to smoke out the ones interested in taking PFAL. PFAL was a rite of passage – that which initiated people into the household of God. It was a commonly held belief amongst graduates of PFAL that we had more of the rightly-divided Word of God than anyone else on the planet!
I don't think there's anything wrong with having classes or books on how to study the Bible. I do think there's something wrong when a group thinks their way of understanding it is the only way! It reminds me of a problem mentioned in I John 2: 26, 27:
"I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit – just as it has taught you, remain in him." [NIV]
The Zondervan NIV Study Bible has an interesting note on verse 27: "…Since the Bible constantly advocates teaching [Mt 28:20; I Co 12:28; Eph 4:11; Col 3:16; 1 Ti 4:11; 2 Ti 2:2,24], John is not ruling out human teachers. At the time when he wrote, however, Gnostic teachers were insisting that the teaching of the apostles was to be supplemented with the "higher knowledge" that they [the Gnostics] claimed to possess. John's response was that what the readers were taught under the Spirit's ministry through the apostles not only was adequate but was the only reliable truth…The teaching ministry of the Holy Spirit [what is commonly called illumination] does not involve revelation of new truth or the explanation of all difficult passages of Scripture to our satisfaction. Rather, it is the development of the capacity to appreciate and appropriate God's truth already revealed – making the Bible meaningful in thought and daily living…All things necessary to know for salvation and Christian living."
I personally believe God is the author of the Bible and wasn't trying to hide His message in a mysterious, unfathomable, impenetrable, esoteric, heavily encrypted piece of literature. I also believe [in other words, my opinion]God expects us to read the Bible as we would any other book.
YES!! YES!! YES!!
While it may be enlightening and just plain fun to explore and debate the deeper meanings and nuances of scripture along with the more obscure passages, the reality is that GOD wants all his children to have access to his words. He speaks not only to the intelligentsia but to the high school dropout, he speaks not only to the billionaire in his estate but the third world farmer. He speaks clearly and distinctly so that all his creation will know his will
You wrote: “He speaks not only to the intelligentsia but to the high school dropout, he speaks not only to the billionaire in his estate but the third world farmer. He speaks clearly and distinctly so that all his creation will know his will”
This description is apropos for the PFAL collaterals, but hardly of the KJV!
Even modern easier to read versions are fraught with difficulties in addition to some verses being translated into the theology of the publishers and ancient manuscript aberrations like forgeries and mis-coping. Clouding the understanding of a high school dropout are Bible land Geography and History including nations surrounding Israel, that obscure many verses’ meanings. Add to that 212 figures of speech, administrations, applicability to the addressee, Oriental customs, complex overlapping time lines, and long lists of names with even multiple people having the same name.
Some dropouts can catch up a little if they read footnotes, but that interrupts the reading flow and takes time, in addition to being subject to the foibles of the publishers. Many of the above items require a library of research materials, and those dropouts successful in slogging through all this would require of us a long story as to why they shouldn’t skip high school and straight into college.
PFAL was designed so that a 12 year old can take it and begin reading the books, thankfully uncluttered with footnotes until the more advanced volumes of JCNG, JCOP, and JCPS are reached.
***
Don’t give up on me supplying some verses for backing up some PFAL concepts here. Time is a major limitation.
And, on T-Bone’s thread “What does it take to change your mind?” I mentioned scriptures backing up the Bible’s stand against Western man’s self worship in thinking human consciousness is something grand FOR YOU to search out and supply. Yes, I cued you to ask me, but my plan then was to challenge you to do it after you did ask. I mention this here in this way to avoid derailing there.
I also had a HUGE belly laugh when I saw you write this after I wrote of the possible illusion of consciousness:
“That one sentance explains a great deal I have been heretofore unable to grasp in your thought processes, thank you for the enlightenment.”
What was so funny is the timestamps.
Your reading of my post, AND pondering of it, AND writing what you did took a grand total of FORTY MINUTES!
I had pondered that idea for 35 years, the people I had first read of it from had devoted their entire lives to it all through the first half of the 20th Century, and now hundreds of PhD hard core brain scientists have been working it for decades. The co-discoverer of DNA, Nobel Prizewinner Francis Crick, in his very last book (like dying last words) and title thereof describes this same idea similar to that sentence I had written as “The Astonishing Hypothesis!”
But you, templelady, saw through this exceedingly complex and challenging idea in less than FORTY MINUTES! And I'd bet it was actually a lot less from your performance here, more like immediate?
What a laugh!
I must say, mimicking you, that one sentence you posted mocking me explains a great deal I have been heretofore unable to grasp in your thought processes, thank you for the enlightenment.
No wonder you are lacking in so many fundamental PFAL concepts, and great wonder that you call me arrogant, while you criticize what you never absorbed. I suggest you open the PFAL collaterals to see what you are pretty darn ignorant of and change that status. I think you’ll actually like it.
Not only that Mike but along with many 'poor translation' Bible versions, there are also holy books produced by denominationalised churches definitely 'skewered' towards their particular belief system, that need to be waded through and then shown to be a genuine addendum to the words in Gods' Word, or appropriately discarded.
I’m grateful for your presence and support. :) However, let's leave that matter for another thread. That’s not fair to templelady, too, to bait her and make her have to decide whether to answer it here.
Suffice it say that Dr did praise the Mormons for their unusually great application of some of God’s Word, and he totally ignored their extra-biblical offerings.
One constructive criticism I want to offer you is this: go after the good ideas and those who teach them. Going after the “bad” guys is an endless task, there’s so many of them.
I criticize many posters here with the same advice. Their constant focus on the bad and flushing it out for exposure leaves unattended the MUCH greater need to bring the good stuff into the light for all to see.
I have debated this very same thing with people like the John Birch Society. For all their insights on political bad guys, they have little to nothing good to offer as an alternative influence.
We’ve all seen what a fool the devil made of LCM as he turned away from Dr’s instructions involving mastering written PFAL, and then later on he felt the irresistible urge and need to expose all sorts of enemies within his TWI-2. Now where is he? It consumed him.
Exposing bad guys is something Jesus spent very little time on, and he totally ignored the Romans. Once in a while it’s called for and we can see Paul doing it sparingly AND BY REVELATION. You and I have very little handle on the revelation manifestations and that’s why Dr urged us to much to focus on the collaterals and master them. Once we are proficient in those three manifestations we may receive such an assignment, but until then our neglected assignment from God via Dr is to intensely focus on PFAL and talk THAT up as a part of our receive retain release exercise.
You're arguing by analogy, and ignoring the content of the books. Yes, it does have keys and those keys helped us intensely with that very difficult document, the KJV.
That it did this, and in one place declared it to be a Bible aid, does not in any way mean to say that God could not be intimately in the process of its production.
I’m still wondering if anyone remembers or has searched out other areas of PFAL where “keys” are mentioned. I know of one very telling place. Are there any posters who had mastered PFAL long ago that know of the place I am referring to? Any VAGUE ideas where? Any trace of a remembrance from that past mastery of Dr talking about keys?
I’ll give you some time to think about it, or search it out. Opening the books can be a real eye opener.
Mike, you just spent your last two three posts explaining why PFAL is far superior to The Bible.
Good job dude... I'm sure that even as we speak God is clearing out that seat at His right hand to make space for YOU!
dmiller,
You're arguing by analogy, and ignoring the content of the books. Yes, it does have keys and those keys helped us intensely with that very difficult document, the KJV.
Well of course he did Mike... he's just following YOUr lead.
Just maybe, the reason people think the KJV is "hard to understand" that the Bible itself , no matter he translation, is "hard to understand" is because they have been told all their lives that it is "hard to understand"
And the people doing the telling, namely the clergy in all its various forms, have a vested interest in keeping that idea in the forefront of people minds, . Because if the key concepts are understandable --why then anyone, who has read scripture and listened to The Spirit can teach.
If we had all understood that we could grasp God's plan for us in its basic form from reading on our own, then gee, we wouldn't have needed PFAL and VPW would we? Or a good number of other "esoteric disciplines" revealed only to the elect few.
years ago I went to play pool with a male friend. I did a draw shot that was about 2/3's the length of the table.
Male says: what was that?
Me: a draw shot
Male: you can't do a draw shot that far
Me: I guess it's a good thing I learned how to do it before I knew it was impossible
Fear of not understanding is what keeps great number of people from understanding
You're arguing by analogy, and ignoring the content of the books. Yes, it does have keys and those keys helped us intensely with that very difficult document, the KJV.
That it did this, and in one place declared it to be a Bible aid, does not in any way mean to say that God could not be intimately in the process of its production.
I’m still wondering if anyone remembers or has searched out other areas of PFAL where “keys” are mentioned. I know of one very telling place. Are there any posters who had mastered PFAL long ago that know of the place I am referring to? Any VAGUE ideas where? Any trace of a remembrance from that past mastery of Dr talking about keys?
I’ll give you some time to think about it, or search it out. Opening the books can be a real eye opener.
I opened the pfal books many years ago.
I found KEYS to understanding the bible ---
I think my *analogy* is an apt comparision ---
David Brody got the basic melodies right,
but his transcription of the tunes (over-all) were not correct.
While I can look at the music printed on the page,
I don't treat it as *gospel*, even though it is in print.
Temple Lady talking about being told "the Bible is hard to understand" struck something in me...
I'm gonna come clean here and tell you guys some things that I've never told anyone here before... come to think of it, I haven't ever told anyone this stuff before...
I haven't read the whole Bible (any version/translation).
Of course I've read many parts of it... and I really did understand it... well, except for the Revelation stuff which I admit that I haven't read much of...
Prior to my taking PFAL, I read the entire New Testament (except for Revelation)... and you know what? I understood what it was saying. I read the books in order because that just seemed like the easiest thing to do. When I read the name of a city or an area I'd look in the back at the little maps they had so I could tell where they were talking about.
I found that when I read entire books of the Bible from beginning to end, they were easier to understand. I remember back to when I was a kid reading the Bible. When I just read the way I have described it- like a regular book, in order from the beginning of that book to the end- it usually made sense (again, except for Revelation).
The only times I think I've gotten confused about the Bible was in Church when people would pull verses from here and there, in whatever order suited whatever message they wanted to get across to me. The Bible didn't confuse me, religion did.
In my opinion, PFAL didn't so much teach me how to read and understand the Bible, it taught me that what the other religions were teaching me was wrong and that what veepee (and TWI) were teaching me was right.
Except of course for Revelation. Maybe someday I'll get around to reading it, but I doubt it. But reading the Gospels and Acts (and the rest of the new testament) like they were "regular old books" with stories was pretty easy. They made perfect sense to me.
So my conclusion is, at least for me, that the Bible isn't hard to understand and never has been. The religion associated with it most of the time always has been hard for me to understand (including TWI). PFAL (again JMO) was a class presented under the guise of "unlocking the Bible" but really was just a way to indoctrinate us into TWI and away from the other religions.
Thanks Temple Lady for reminding me... I'll now go back to being my 'usual' self...
You wrote: “He speaks not only to the intelligentsia but to the high school dropout, he speaks not only to the billionaire in his estate but the third world farmer. He speaks clearly and distinctly so that all his creation will know his will”
This description is apropos for the PFAL collaterals, but hardly of the KJV!
Even modern easier to read versions are fraught with difficulties in addition to some verses being translated into the theology of the publishers and ancient manuscript aberrations like forgeries and mis-coping.
[untrue in general, and grossly exaggerated in the specifics.
However, if not for this convenient fiction, this tail to wag the dog,
there'd be no excuse for rewriting the Bible, and thus,
no "pfal is the new Bible" Mikean doctrine.]
Clouding the understanding of a high school dropout are Bible land Geography and History including nations surrounding Israel, that obscure many verses’ meanings.
[This is another exaggeration.
When reading Machiavelli, one frequently funds names of places and historical
figures interrupting explanations. One can choose to go to an encyclopedia and
look them up, (or a history textbook.) One can also simply continue to read,
and let the context make the main points clear. I've never had to look up
the figures to understand the points made.
And Machiavelli's LOADED with names compared to most of the Bible.]
Add to that 212 figures of speech, administrations, applicability to the addressee, Oriental customs, complex overlapping time lines, and long lists of names with even multiple people having the same name.
[None of the former make any difference on the basic understanding,
the basic meanings, a basic reading of Scripture.
Not one figure of speech is needed to be identified to
receive Jesus as one's Lord, know that God is Love, and so on.
As to administrations/dispensations vs covenant theology and
other stuff, the jury's out as to whether they even apply
at all.
Please also correct your numbers.
vpw quoted 212 figures of speech, but he was quoting Bullinger,
and doing so incorrectly. (Or perhaps misread his notes.)
Bullinger identified 217 figures, not 212.]
Some dropouts can catch up a little if they read footnotes, but that interrupts the reading flow and takes time, in addition to being subject to the foibles of the publishers.
[Also misrepresentative, but it's an excuse to drag
out the "I'm thankful vpw failed to footnote any of his
sources!" excuse for vpw's failure to cite sources.]
Many of the above items require a library of research materials, and those dropouts successful in slogging through all this would require of us a long story as to why they shouldn’t skip high school and straight into college.
[if a plain read of a plain version is opaque to you,
then the Orange Book will be equally cryptic.
The Bible's not a laundry list of names and places.]
PFAL was designed so that a 12 year old can take it and begin reading the books, thankfully uncluttered with footnotes until the more advanced volumes of JCNG, JCOP, and JCPS are reached.
***
[And there we have the "footnotes are evil!
Citing sources is evil!" sneaking in the back door as promised.
Please note that a simple NEW King James Version is clearer for the
average person to read than the old KJV,
and vpw insisted on the OLD version despite the availability
of the new. Making this easy on the readers was NOT high on
the list. Nowadays, the New American Standard is even easier
on the modern reader AND retains the italics,
so-to be consistent-a pfal fan should recommend the Bible
student switch to THAT rather than the KJV.
I like Elizabethan English, but most people aren't big fans
of Shakespeare.
To refuse to do so is to be wedded to TRADITION
("vpw used the outdated KJV, so I will use it too!")
rather than adjusting for superior performance
(the NASB is superior to the KJV in everything but
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
104
50
72
59
Popular Days
May 5
39
May 3
38
Apr 4
34
Apr 3
28
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 104 posts
templelady 50 posts
Tom Strange 72 posts
dmiller 59 posts
Popular Days
May 5 2006
39 posts
May 3 2006
38 posts
Apr 4 2006
34 posts
Apr 3 2006
28 posts
What The Hey
Funny that is not what I just read, in that PFAL claims to be a tool. PFAL does not claim to be a tool. PFAL (itself) claims to be a set of keys. What's the difference you ask? A key unlocks a door. A tool does not unlock a door. Furthermore, PFAL claims to aquaint the reader with the "basic" keys so that the bible (Genesis to Revelation) will unfold. PFAL claims to be the basic keys. It does not claim to aquaint the reader with the intermediate or the advanced set of keys.
There are many biblical "tools" available (your local bible bookstore probably carries them - concordances, Hebrew/Greek dictionaries, Lexicons etc.) but none of those "biblical tools" unfold the scriptures from Genesis to Revelation. They simply do not make this claim in their prefaces or their introductory pages - to unfold Genesis to Revelation as does PFAL. They simply do not make the same claim that PFAL makes of itself. What is that claim? The claim is - "so that Genesis to Revelation will unfold and so that the abundant life which Jesus Christ came to make available will become evident. To who? To those who want to appropriate His abundance to their lives.
Notice PFAL only claims to be the basic keys to do this, not the intermediate or the advanced set of keys to do this. Likewise PFAL did not claim to be "a tool" - i.e. another biblical concordance, a Greek dictionary, an interlinear, lexicon, etc. Yes, PFAL is more than a tool. PFAL is the basic keys. Any tool can be used wrongly of course, and this can be said of the many biblical tools that are available. One would think with all the biblical tools available today, equally intelligent biblical scholars using the same biblical tools could come to the same conclusion on the meaning of the scriptures - but more often they only diverge futher apart. A key on the other hand, when used wrongly does not open the door or the right set of doors.
If you take away the biblical keys and substitute biblical tools, then just what is one left with? Exactly what it says right thar in Luke 11:52. "Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key (not tool) of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered."
The Scribes and the Pharisees had all the "biblical tools" available to them one could ever hope for. What did they do to Jesus with their "biblical tools"? Just what it says there in Luke 11:53,54. It doesn't sound much different to me today, especially among those who favor their "biblical tools" over the "basic keys." Mike has simply decided to move beyond that basic PFAL key set, that's all. So why are you all so surprised?
Edited by What The HeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
tool: (n) A handheld device that aids in accomplishing a task.
Like, for example, opening a lock.
Leaving aside the self-evident fact that a key IS a tool, PFAL does not even claim to BE the basic keys: it only claims to set them forth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Either way PFAL is not what Mike claims it is... the God Breathed Word for our day and time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
So --- from what I read in the above quote --
pfal is NOT claiming to teach the Word from Genesis to Revelation,
NOR is it a God-breathed set of words,
BUT IT IS giving the reader KEYS to understand the Word --
from Genesis to Revelation.
So that means that even docvic claims NO superiority over the Word, by his *writings*.
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
What The Hey
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Let me know when you've returned from the mythical land of Metaphoria and are ready to rejoin us here in the real world, k?
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
He's been belly-achin cause we (read *I and others*), don't believe that pfal is God-breathed, and the new set of *scripture* for this day and time. :)
If he had stuck with saying that pfal was a set of wonderful KEYS to unlocking the mysteries in the Bible, he would have much more credence than he now does.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
That no on will believe HIS version.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
What the Hey:
All keys are tools
Not all tools are keys.
The key gets a specific job done. The wrong tool can be used for a job - but that doesnt' make a keey any less a tool. I can use a Screwdriver handle to sink a nail - but that doesn't change the fact that the screwdriver is a tool as is the HAMMER I should be using.
PFAL sets forth keys - these keys are tools.
Now, the tools have been set forth. People HAVE used them. Mike seems to want us to use them differently than they are meant to be used. (AHHH - now we again have the misuse of a tool.)
Are we done yet?
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I hope so!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I'm not done at all.
Just taking a breather, and doing chores.
There are many unresponded to posts here I am thinking about, and I have tons of new material to cover.
Preview: How many people here have checked out ALL the places Dr mentions keys in the collaterals?
Suggestion: Open the books and read.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Speaking of "Keys" thought I would list some of the definitions of "key" from Webster's that I think are relevant to our discussion of PFAL: 1. usually a metal instrument by which the bolt of a lock is turned; 2. a means of gaining or preventing entrance, possession, or control; 3. an instrumental or deciding factor; 4. something that gives an explanation of symbols or abbreviations; 5. an aid to interpretation or identification; 6. the set of instructions governing the encipherment and decipherment of messages…
Quoting from the intro of PFAL, "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…" I think perhaps with the exception of definition number 1, all the definitions of "key" listed above may apply to different aspects of the PFAL book. That's because number 1 is literally a key – a metal key! All the other definitions have an intellectual nature [or non-physical aspect] about them – even definition 2 [a means of gaining or preventing entrance, possession, or control – definition 2 could be used either way, as a physical means of access control or figuratively as a means of intellectual control]. In my opinion, I think some people view the keys of PFAL as definition 1 – in that they are an infallible-opener-thing-a-ma-bob [i'm really embarrassed by that word but that's how it reads in my original draft]. A real, physical key will only work in the lock it was cut to open. My neighbor's front door key shouldn't work in my front door lock. But it should always – without fail – unlock their front door every time!
My point is this – in my opinion VPW presents intellectual keys [and for the sake of brevity I would liken them to interpretive tools] in PFAL. There is a difference. An intellectual key is subject to the limitations of both the originator and the user of the key. A metal key will always work in a lock - regardless of the mental capacity of the key-holder. You can read the entire Bible and you will not find keys to understanding the Bible listed all together on one page anywhere. It's not written like a textbook, user manual or God's Word for Dummies [although if there was one I'd buy a copy]. I personally believe God is the author of the Bible and wasn't trying to hide His message in a mysterious, unfathomable, impenetrable, esoteric, heavily encrypted piece of literature. I also believe [in other words, my opinion] God expects us to read the Bible as we would any other book. Think about this – it doesn't matter if you read a book on Windows XP, a romance novel, autobiography, or poetry. Don't you have to pay attention to what the author is saying in the immediate verse or sentence, context or previous usage or reference of a character, term, explanation, etc.? Those are keys – basic intellectual keys to understanding a book. Like I indicated before intellectual keys are not perfect because they depend on OUR intellect – I can ignore the context or assume something previously mentioned in a remote context relates to what I'm reading now – in other words I can make mistakes.
During my involvement with TWI - PFAL was never touted as just a Bible study course that followers were encouraged to take. It was considered indispensable in terms of evangelism and even the mainstay of TWI doctrine. I would only give just enough time and energy to non-grads [those who haven't taken the PFAL Class yet] to smoke out the ones interested in taking PFAL. PFAL was a rite of passage – that which initiated people into the household of God. It was a commonly held belief amongst graduates of PFAL that we had more of the rightly-divided Word of God than anyone else on the planet!
I don't think there's anything wrong with having classes or books on how to study the Bible. I do think there's something wrong when a group thinks their way of understanding it is the only way! It reminds me of a problem mentioned in I John 2: 26, 27:
"I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit – just as it has taught you, remain in him." [NIV]
The Zondervan NIV Study Bible has an interesting note on verse 27: "…Since the Bible constantly advocates teaching [Mt 28:20; I Co 12:28; Eph 4:11; Col 3:16; 1 Ti 4:11; 2 Ti 2:2,24], John is not ruling out human teachers. At the time when he wrote, however, Gnostic teachers were insisting that the teaching of the apostles was to be supplemented with the "higher knowledge" that they [the Gnostics] claimed to possess. John's response was that what the readers were taught under the Spirit's ministry through the apostles not only was adequate but was the only reliable truth…The teaching ministry of the Holy Spirit [what is commonly called illumination] does not involve revelation of new truth or the explanation of all difficult passages of Scripture to our satisfaction. Rather, it is the development of the capacity to appreciate and appropriate God's truth already revealed – making the Bible meaningful in thought and daily living…All things necessary to know for salvation and Christian living."
I have noted some similarities between TWI and Gnosticism on another thread TWI's God. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...ndpost&p=218781
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
YES!! YES!! YES!!
While it may be enlightening and just plain fun to explore and debate the deeper meanings and nuances of scripture along with the more obscure passages, the reality is that GOD wants all his children to have access to his words. He speaks not only to the intelligentsia but to the high school dropout, he speaks not only to the billionaire in his estate but the third world farmer. He speaks clearly and distinctly so that all his creation will know his will
Edited by templeladyLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
templelady,
You wrote: “He speaks not only to the intelligentsia but to the high school dropout, he speaks not only to the billionaire in his estate but the third world farmer. He speaks clearly and distinctly so that all his creation will know his will”
This description is apropos for the PFAL collaterals, but hardly of the KJV!
Even modern easier to read versions are fraught with difficulties in addition to some verses being translated into the theology of the publishers and ancient manuscript aberrations like forgeries and mis-coping. Clouding the understanding of a high school dropout are Bible land Geography and History including nations surrounding Israel, that obscure many verses’ meanings. Add to that 212 figures of speech, administrations, applicability to the addressee, Oriental customs, complex overlapping time lines, and long lists of names with even multiple people having the same name.
Some dropouts can catch up a little if they read footnotes, but that interrupts the reading flow and takes time, in addition to being subject to the foibles of the publishers. Many of the above items require a library of research materials, and those dropouts successful in slogging through all this would require of us a long story as to why they shouldn’t skip high school and straight into college.
PFAL was designed so that a 12 year old can take it and begin reading the books, thankfully uncluttered with footnotes until the more advanced volumes of JCNG, JCOP, and JCPS are reached.
***
Don’t give up on me supplying some verses for backing up some PFAL concepts here. Time is a major limitation.
And, on T-Bone’s thread “What does it take to change your mind?” I mentioned scriptures backing up the Bible’s stand against Western man’s self worship in thinking human consciousness is something grand FOR YOU to search out and supply. Yes, I cued you to ask me, but my plan then was to challenge you to do it after you did ask. I mention this here in this way to avoid derailing there.
I also had a HUGE belly laugh when I saw you write this after I wrote of the possible illusion of consciousness:
“That one sentance explains a great deal I have been heretofore unable to grasp in your thought processes, thank you for the enlightenment.”
What was so funny is the timestamps.
Your reading of my post, AND pondering of it, AND writing what you did took a grand total of FORTY MINUTES!
I had pondered that idea for 35 years, the people I had first read of it from had devoted their entire lives to it all through the first half of the 20th Century, and now hundreds of PhD hard core brain scientists have been working it for decades. The co-discoverer of DNA, Nobel Prizewinner Francis Crick, in his very last book (like dying last words) and title thereof describes this same idea similar to that sentence I had written as “The Astonishing Hypothesis!”
But you, templelady, saw through this exceedingly complex and challenging idea in less than FORTY MINUTES! And I'd bet it was actually a lot less from your performance here, more like immediate?
What a laugh!
I must say, mimicking you, that one sentence you posted mocking me explains a great deal I have been heretofore unable to grasp in your thought processes, thank you for the enlightenment.
No wonder you are lacking in so many fundamental PFAL concepts, and great wonder that you call me arrogant, while you criticize what you never absorbed. I suggest you open the PFAL collaterals to see what you are pretty darn ignorant of and change that status. I think you’ll actually like it.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
allan w.
Not only that Mike but along with many 'poor translation' Bible versions, there are also holy books produced by denominationalised churches definitely 'skewered' towards their particular belief system, that need to be waded through and then shown to be a genuine addendum to the words in Gods' Word, or appropriately discarded.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Hi allan,
I’m grateful for your presence and support. :) However, let's leave that matter for another thread. That’s not fair to templelady, too, to bait her and make her have to decide whether to answer it here.
Suffice it say that Dr did praise the Mormons for their unusually great application of some of God’s Word, and he totally ignored their extra-biblical offerings.
One constructive criticism I want to offer you is this: go after the good ideas and those who teach them. Going after the “bad” guys is an endless task, there’s so many of them.
I criticize many posters here with the same advice. Their constant focus on the bad and flushing it out for exposure leaves unattended the MUCH greater need to bring the good stuff into the light for all to see.
I have debated this very same thing with people like the John Birch Society. For all their insights on political bad guys, they have little to nothing good to offer as an alternative influence.
We’ve all seen what a fool the devil made of LCM as he turned away from Dr’s instructions involving mastering written PFAL, and then later on he felt the irresistible urge and need to expose all sorts of enemies within his TWI-2. Now where is he? It consumed him.
Exposing bad guys is something Jesus spent very little time on, and he totally ignored the Romans. Once in a while it’s called for and we can see Paul doing it sparingly AND BY REVELATION. You and I have very little handle on the revelation manifestations and that’s why Dr urged us to much to focus on the collaterals and master them. Once we are proficient in those three manifestations we may receive such an assignment, but until then our neglected assignment from God via Dr is to intensely focus on PFAL and talk THAT up as a part of our receive retain release exercise.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I have this book here at my house, and it is supposedly *the bible*,
when it comes to fiddle tunes.
Sadly -- the author (David Brody) misrepresents many tunes and the notation given,
is not correct -- however he DID compile the list, etc.
Docvic did the same with pfal.
The fiddler's fake book, shows the way to how tunes are played,
but it is not the ULTIMATE AUTHORITY ---
Kinda like pfal. :)
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
dmiller,
You're arguing by analogy, and ignoring the content of the books. Yes, it does have keys and those keys helped us intensely with that very difficult document, the KJV.
That it did this, and in one place declared it to be a Bible aid, does not in any way mean to say that God could not be intimately in the process of its production.
I’m still wondering if anyone remembers or has searched out other areas of PFAL where “keys” are mentioned. I know of one very telling place. Are there any posters who had mastered PFAL long ago that know of the place I am referring to? Any VAGUE ideas where? Any trace of a remembrance from that past mastery of Dr talking about keys?
I’ll give you some time to think about it, or search it out. Opening the books can be a real eye opener.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Mike, you just spent your last two three posts explaining why PFAL is far superior to The Bible.
Good job dude... I'm sure that even as we speak God is clearing out that seat at His right hand to make space for YOU!
Well of course he did Mike... he's just following YOUr lead.
Edited by Tom StrangeLink to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
Just maybe, the reason people think the KJV is "hard to understand" that the Bible itself , no matter he translation, is "hard to understand" is because they have been told all their lives that it is "hard to understand"
And the people doing the telling, namely the clergy in all its various forms, have a vested interest in keeping that idea in the forefront of people minds, . Because if the key concepts are understandable --why then anyone, who has read scripture and listened to The Spirit can teach.
If we had all understood that we could grasp God's plan for us in its basic form from reading on our own, then gee, we wouldn't have needed PFAL and VPW would we? Or a good number of other "esoteric disciplines" revealed only to the elect few.
years ago I went to play pool with a male friend. I did a draw shot that was about 2/3's the length of the table.
Male says: what was that?
Me: a draw shot
Male: you can't do a draw shot that far
Me: I guess it's a good thing I learned how to do it before I knew it was impossible
Fear of not understanding is what keeps great number of people from understanding
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I opened the pfal books many years ago.
I found KEYS to understanding the bible ---
I think my *analogy* is an apt comparision ---
David Brody got the basic melodies right,
but his transcription of the tunes (over-all) were not correct.
While I can look at the music printed on the page,
I don't treat it as *gospel*, even though it is in print.
Docvic has some stuff in print --
but it isn't the *gospel* (as you claim),
just like David Brody's work is NOT
the definitive work on fiddle tunes. :)
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Temple Lady talking about being told "the Bible is hard to understand" struck something in me...
I'm gonna come clean here and tell you guys some things that I've never told anyone here before... come to think of it, I haven't ever told anyone this stuff before...
I haven't read the whole Bible (any version/translation).
Of course I've read many parts of it... and I really did understand it... well, except for the Revelation stuff which I admit that I haven't read much of...
Prior to my taking PFAL, I read the entire New Testament (except for Revelation)... and you know what? I understood what it was saying. I read the books in order because that just seemed like the easiest thing to do. When I read the name of a city or an area I'd look in the back at the little maps they had so I could tell where they were talking about.
I found that when I read entire books of the Bible from beginning to end, they were easier to understand. I remember back to when I was a kid reading the Bible. When I just read the way I have described it- like a regular book, in order from the beginning of that book to the end- it usually made sense (again, except for Revelation).
The only times I think I've gotten confused about the Bible was in Church when people would pull verses from here and there, in whatever order suited whatever message they wanted to get across to me. The Bible didn't confuse me, religion did.
In my opinion, PFAL didn't so much teach me how to read and understand the Bible, it taught me that what the other religions were teaching me was wrong and that what veepee (and TWI) were teaching me was right.
Except of course for Revelation. Maybe someday I'll get around to reading it, but I doubt it. But reading the Gospels and Acts (and the rest of the new testament) like they were "regular old books" with stories was pretty easy. They made perfect sense to me.
So my conclusion is, at least for me, that the Bible isn't hard to understand and never has been. The religion associated with it most of the time always has been hard for me to understand (including TWI). PFAL (again JMO) was a class presented under the guise of "unlocking the Bible" but really was just a way to indoctrinate us into TWI and away from the other religions.
Thanks Temple Lady for reminding me... I'll now go back to being my 'usual' self...
Edited by Tom StrangeLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
[untrue in general, and grossly exaggerated in the specifics.
However, if not for this convenient fiction, this tail to wag the dog,
there'd be no excuse for rewriting the Bible, and thus,
no "pfal is the new Bible" Mikean doctrine.]
[This is another exaggeration.When reading Machiavelli, one frequently funds names of places and historical
figures interrupting explanations. One can choose to go to an encyclopedia and
look them up, (or a history textbook.) One can also simply continue to read,
and let the context make the main points clear. I've never had to look up
the figures to understand the points made.
And Machiavelli's LOADED with names compared to most of the Bible.]
[None of the former make any difference on the basic understanding,
the basic meanings, a basic reading of Scripture.
Not one figure of speech is needed to be identified to
receive Jesus as one's Lord, know that God is Love, and so on.
As to administrations/dispensations vs covenant theology and
other stuff, the jury's out as to whether they even apply
at all.
Please also correct your numbers.
vpw quoted 212 figures of speech, but he was quoting Bullinger,
and doing so incorrectly. (Or perhaps misread his notes.)
Bullinger identified 217 figures, not 212.]
[Also misrepresentative, but it's an excuse to dragout the "I'm thankful vpw failed to footnote any of his
sources!" excuse for vpw's failure to cite sources.]
[if a plain read of a plain version is opaque to you,
then the Orange Book will be equally cryptic.
The Bible's not a laundry list of names and places.]
[And there we have the "footnotes are evil!
Citing sources is evil!" sneaking in the back door as promised.
Please note that a simple NEW King James Version is clearer for the
average person to read than the old KJV,
and vpw insisted on the OLD version despite the availability
of the new. Making this easy on the readers was NOT high on
the list. Nowadays, the New American Standard is even easier
on the modern reader AND retains the italics,
so-to be consistent-a pfal fan should recommend the Bible
student switch to THAT rather than the KJV.
I like Elizabethan English, but most people aren't big fans
of Shakespeare.
To refuse to do so is to be wedded to TRADITION
("vpw used the outdated KJV, so I will use it too!")
rather than adjusting for superior performance
(the NASB is superior to the KJV in everything but
popularity.)]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.