waysider

I think it was in the Advanced Class that VPW claimed some guy tried to cast out a spirit without having been given revelation to do so. The spirit supposedly smacked the guy silly and laid him out on the floor.The lesson we were supposed to get from this was that you are not supposed to act without guidance to do so.But, of course, you still have the whole deal with VP dying from cancer. You probably recall that he also taught in the Advanced Class that cancer is a devil spirit. So, the guy who we followed because we thought he was the spiritual guru of the entire world was either possessed or (more likely) full of beans on this whole subject of devil spirits and a whole lot of other stuff. And, now we have people like this R&R group who want us to believe them when they perpetuate this regurgitated sort of rubbish.

Then again, maybe it's you who missed my point. If you had taken a few minutes to look at what I suggested you would have seen that Campbell's work is not explicitly about Jesus or any other specific narrative.It's about Man's need to give meaning to the seemingly unexplainable.

It's like herpes. It never really goes away.

Social isolation puts you at a much higher risk for developing dementia, as well. Something to think about.

All these spin-off groups kinda remind me of those radio stations that still play Freebird 10 times a day. edit: I'm not talking about one of those oldies stations. I'm talking about the ones who have been playing it for the last 40+ years.

It's the desire or need for it to be true that's hardwired in us. That's not really what this thread is looking at. This thread is considering the reality of it being an actual, historic event.

Thanks, Mr. B.

Campbell goes into great detail, explaining what it is that people are seeking, as well as the whys and hows. Trying to summarize it with a few posts on this thread would do great injustice to him and his work. Are you not at least interested enough to look at Campbell's work yourself and offer a personal observation? edit: Youtube has dozens, maybe hundreds of clips with Campbell. Some are as short as 3-4 minutes. The ones with Bill Moyer are especially good.

Well, I think that is the crux of what Campbell was saying, though he went on to expound on the reasoning.

You always say it better than me. You should probably think about a career in journalism when you grow up .

That the concepts didn't originate with Campbell. He assembled aggregated them.

Yes, I agree. I may have stated it poorly when I said they were Campbell's concepts. The concepts exist, with or without Campbell. What he did was identify them and assemble them into a form that could be understood. Not a small task, by any means.

Lucas drew heavily and openly from Campbell's concepts. This is a whole other subject to explore.

If you are asking this question in earnest, you might want to consider exploring the works of Joseph Campbell.... The Power of Myth/The Hero's Journey/ etc. etc. etc. The Hero With A Thousand Faces

Yeah, that's my point. If there really is such a thing as speaking in tongues, what we learned in PFAL is not it. We placed an awful lot of expectation on something that wasn't real. But, I'm getting off topic here. Any discussion of speaking in tongues, specifically, would probably be better suited for one of the threads that already exists.

Relating to the concept of understanding spiritual matters on a higher level: We were taught in the PFAL series of classes that the more we speak in tongues, the more we will be able to understand spiritual matters. However, now that we have exhaustively examined the Way version of speaking in tongues and determined it to be fraudulent, where does that leave us with this concept of enhanced spiritual understanding?

I'm going out on a limb here and assume that, by a *higher level of reasoning*, you're referring to revelation.This is a contradiction of terms.Revelation, according to the definitions we were supplied, does not rely on reasoning. By its very nature, it defies reasoning.

Maybe i misunderstood your meaning. You said something to the effect of never hearing that inerrancy is the lynchpin. What I demonstrated is that if you ever sat through PFAL you must have been bombarded with the general concept. So, yes, I think my comment is relevant to the discussion.

Surely you jest. This was the main thrust of the first four sessions of PFAL. "If one section doesn't fit, the whole thing falls apart." (or something to that effect) Inerrancy was the single most critical factor in making Way theology congruent. And in other news, it's just been discovered that water is wet.

Step 4: Tell Straw Man to have a seat and wait for Sir Q. L' Reasoning to arrive.

CLICK

Oops. We're teetering on the edge. (no politics at GSC) Chalk it up as dry humor instead. (obligatory chuckle)

Looking at this as a purely academic exercise, the answer to that question lies in The Advanced Class. According to the definitions Wierwille swiped from somebody (might have been B.G. Leonard), if something is revelation, it would be impossible to ascertain said information via the five senses. If you need the exact definitions from the class, I have them here somewhere. Probably using the syllabus to prop up a wobbly table leg or something.

Just a guess on my part. I'm thinking the red is supposed to symbolize the blood. But who knows? Maybe Wierwille got them on the cheap and didn't want to waste them.