Bolshevik

There Sowers seal has an open bible and some wheat within a green circle. It is written Sowers. No pentagon. No star. Clearly, no strength and real direction.

See, strawman argument. You're taking God from the perspective of evolution, and then switching in the Fundamentalist Viewpoint to make your argument. That's dishonest. Dishonesty is not moral.

Our brains are designed to look for patterns. That is a great tool. Sometimes it can trick us, though. You might consider pareidolia. We see faces in random objects. It's something our brain does automatically. It is a good tool for scanning for something like a predator or enemy or even a loved one. But it can play tricks on us if you let it. Maybe when you look at an electrical outlet, you see a face? That's pareidolia. Or do you see shapes in clouds? Everyone does. That's just an example. We do the same thing with data. That includes numbers and scripture. So it's important to break your reasoning down further. Some of it may be perfectly correct. Some of it may be simple, normal, mind tricks that feel correct, but are not. You've got a lot of information there. Maybe break it down slowly, step by step, from the beginning, one point at a time?

It looks like you've noted a lot of patterns in the scripture and astronomy and between the two?

No, that's the argument of a child. The green goblin served no role in human evolution.

Ok I think I gotcha. Wierwille was playing on already generated fear. He was not big enough make it himself. But he could twist the current structure of the day. Hilter, for example, did the same thing. He didn't invent fear or hate of the Jews. It was already there in the culture.

See if you throw this into the category of "not real" it is just propaganda. Like Superman. Propaganda is short-term. The Bible and other stories are long term. Because they are in a category of real. You yourself used David as evidence that people today are more moral. While at the same time probably don't believe they really happened?

Another comment about Superman. Someone came up with the idea of Superman. Those types of stories can be thought up by and written by a single person, then given to other people. It might become popular. I think that's something like Dawkins' idea of a Meme. God is not that. You don't arrive at that in your own head. It happens with groups of people, deciding the best course of the group, and idealizing those ideas over generations. From those ideals comes an image of a god. Those gods can fuse as groups of people do. And yes, I think someone drew inspiration for Superman from older characters. I don't think that's the same as how gods fuse. Gods arise from the need to survive. Superman is propaganda.

Matthew 6 also says to seek something. So there's a goal in mind. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there was a "baseline fear" that was totally reasonable. The Soviets were a real threat. Preserving the Nation and culture are important? Wierwille hyped/exaggerated the fear and gave a solution. I can only relate post-9/11. We had to check the local state-funded university for possible materials that a terrorist might use. So the joke became, as we opened each drawer and cabinet in every room, was to look inside, appear very concerned, and say "Nope, no terrorists in here, next drawer" *marks clipboard* . . . It did remind me of looking for debil spurts. Matthew 7 says to be watch out, Matthew 6 says to seek. Maybe mixing those up is the technique VPW used?

I believe I completely relate to this. I came to the same conclusion. Probably for the same reasons. Which I think is perfectly sensible. Because I think "God" is usually introduced, assumed to be true, and used to explain everything there is, was, and will be. Holes in logic are found almost immediately. And they just grow, and grow, and grow . . . and the people who believe this you feel more and more distant from. That form of God can't possibly exist. I know I have no sensible reason to think it does exist. But if we try and begin without any conception of God, and reason through what we know about reality, we might find we can come to the conclusion that there is one, but one that is not at all like the one we'd previously assumed to exist. I also know we tend to think someone is trying to prank us into the fold. Have you explored DesCartes's reasoning?

Not only do I recognize that Heirs But the "Way of Holiness Walk Ye in it" song just popped into my head loud and clear Must be decades since I thought of those thank you

LCM constantly pushed "The Attack of The Adversary" . . . I do not know if VPW did the same . . . but is was using fear (while saying not to have fear at the same time) If many groups were pushing "The USSR was going to attack" and promoting fear, Any chance you think those two, The Adversary and The USSR, well, the fear of one led to the fear of the other? The Adversary took the place of the Absent USSR?

Lots of numbers and verses. My gut would suggest statistical fallacy. https://flowingdata.com/2012/05/03/common-statistical-fallacies/

Ha, I don't know about that. GSC is here to tell the other side of the Story. It should having meaning, too.

Maybe you would have. Everyone does say that. It's just not what actually happened. Which is why I ask. I'm not sure that the internet ended the Cold War, or will it stop the next war. Nor has the internet altered the DNA of human beings. Maybe it has. There will be more uncertain times. Internet, or no internet.

My understanding is that there were nukes pointed as the United States and many other countries. And these nukes were not imaginations. Were these the times TWI originally thrived?

Grace This was still during the time of The Cold War? Maybe you did have a gun to your head. A nuclear warhead. You had no choice in that. TWI and the events and people within it makes more sense, in hindsight, in light of knowing that VPW was malicious from the start. I have wondered if the environment that allowed him to do this was uncertainty created by The Cold War. It would affect everyone directly and indirectly. Maybe a stretch. Just a thought.

You have your Father in The Word instead of God the Father. Christ is absent, so there is no hero to fight the unknowns of life. You know, like and adult. And we are more than super-conquerors ready for our eternal rewards! Vegas Baby! No work to be done either! Except for all the work. Cause, you know, reality.

Isn't the whole draw of a cult the idea that you can remain a child?

God is an abstract concept. That is real. I'm not sure that we argue with something like that. The story, or the abstract message within it, is what is important. Not what actually happened. Since it's the story that connects people both geographically and in time. The story survived. Historical facts do not. Useless stories also don't survive. This one did. Exactly what the message is? I don't know. Stories with no perfect solution usually carry the best message. I mentioned Personal Justice vs State Survival. Maybe there's a better idea besides that, or just saying it's a terrible old book, and how we couldn't fathom David's behavior. (BTW - God is dead. God is also real. Descriptions of abstract contradict and don't contradict at the same time. Take that VPW and your hand in your glove)

Relating back to the opening post. There WAS good reason to leave David in place, in spite of the obvious need for justice that is instinctively felt by any normally functioning human from any millennia. For the sake of the nation, which had more value than any individual. Victor Paul Wierwille and Loy Craig Martindale where not leaders of anything of value.

If I used "awe inspiring" instead of "miraculous", might be semantics here. I'm not conjuring the supernatural to solve problems. DNA is a miracle because I just think it is. Evolution is an amazing process. Societies evolving is the same. That gods were conceptualized and formed God later is also important to note. I think your conception of God is too strict. Yes, people think that way. I'm not trying to push that. Collective wisdom is greater than the sum of the individuals, and isn't easy to articulate. That's where God lives.

I'm not going to argue that there where talking snakes. Our ancestors co-evolved with snakes. It's in our DNA to recognize them. Coincidence the devil is represented by a snake?

I understand the impulsive thought to call God less moral. (Maybe this can be moved to another thread). Humans organize themselves to benefit the most people in the most efficient manner known. These systems have evolved over time. God is part of those systems (technically apart from, for a purpose). So the concept of God evolves as the system people organize themselves in evolves. To benefit everyone, as a group. I think that is moral. To look back in disgust is to not appreciate march of time forward. To not understand our place in history. That we have the systems we do today is a miracle. To not appreciate previous methods as a step above what was before, to simply look down on them, is ego, and immoral. I think a person today and a person 10,000 years ago would have the same impulse, or emotional response, to David's actions concerning Uriah. If modern humans would simply act on impulse, than we have de-evolved.