Bolshevik

I typically post in "about The Way" . . . context being "About The Way" . . . My interest, generally, is how to deal with Wayfers (a general term for followers of VPW's thinking). That might help narrow things down in the future if topics seem to get too broad.

You were participating on the boards. I do think your input is relevant. All are true. Discussion is for learning. It sounds similar to twisting perception to a new reality. So what IS "spiritual knowledge"? To foster dependence.

I see humor. I don't know why.

If I have doubt and don't trust it's because the Lord hasn't given me spiritual understanding. Do I understand this correctly?

Good stuff TLC. The same mind that uses science can use non-science knowledge, and be perfectly correct. Not everything can be known scientifically, that doesn't make it unknowable to the same mind. (If I restate this enough it will start to make some sense.) That doesn't make it foolishness, mystic, or a fantasy brand. Does that make it spiritual? Not necessarily. If I am willing, but not able, to understand where spiritual understanding comes from, how will I know who to trust on such matters?

I agree we all remember things differently, and have a personal bias toward memories. I believe there's a certain amount that's understandable and forgivable, or at least not necessary to be argued. With Wayfers, whole events are completely forgotten. In recent years, I've often begun conversations with statements like, "Now, I know I'll have to repeat saying this tomorrow, just like I'm repeating yesterday's conversation, since you'll tell me it never happened." As a teenager I got a little more testy that that. I've posted many times how Wayfers don't remember anything when it comes to events I was present for . . . that their minds have a "delete button", as if they are reset each morning . . . how can I trust accounts for events I wasn't present for? Maybe "gaslighting" is what is happening.

This is similar to "you can't change the past", which is a common Wayfer phrase. I've frequently found myself arguing about the past, about the actual facts that happened, with Wayfers. Looking at THIS article, I see the technique Wayfers employ is called "gaslighting". Another LINK. This happens to me with Wayfers with some frequency, to an almost predictable level. It is maddening. . . . Or maybe it never happens . . . I dunno. One time it was a family Limb meeting. Dozens of us were to hike up a short path in the woods, but instructed not to step off the path. At some point, I was asked to wait for others so I stepped to the side (the edge of the path), right onto a yellow jacket nest and got all stung up. I was then stood up before the whole Limb for reproof (I was maybe 13 years old or something). Everyone was very stern. The Adversary can't have an avenue into the Houshold of Gawd. Years later, I pointed out that the event was BS, I was only on the edge of the path and following instructions. I then was told the everyone else could only see the love in the situation. (At which point I'm basically admitting to an un-renewed mind) I believe that's an example of gaslighting by denying experience and twisting perception. Because of the lying involved, examples are kind of hard to articulate. Convenient.

No, I wouldn't catch the satire. Interesting idea about the internet.

I would think hunger would sharpen a person over time, so they won't stay gullible. I don't know about "way back then", if you wouldn't mind elaborating some.

Hi TLC. Thank you for your input. A modern cult or analogous group could make use of the internet. (one doesn't even have to leave the basement and talk to humans to join a cult now)

Waydale = The Way International

edited

edited

Is this right or wrong are we asking? VPW-doctrine seems to work well for some people and their lives. Absolutely awful for other people. Current leadership seems to be rather open (relatively) about that. (Maybe that a deflection argument on leadership's part, maybe not). "Nothing is real" - John Lennon

Get them conditioned . . . then stop . . . That's when leadership asks for A, B, and C. So Joe Believer goes and does A, B, C, and X, Y, and Z and more. Then when Joe Believer complains things are too harsh . . . Leadership can be like "What? I never asked for X, Y and Z. You are the one with the legalism. You haven't renewed your mind yet. No condemnation, now bask in my benevolence." When the conditioned condition others . . . how does one trace it back to anywhere?

I was at HQ post lcm for several years. It was far less controlling than the field experience of the 1990s. IMO. (of course HQ was still BS, they were more crafty, another topic. Also, everyone had experienced so much control prior I think certain behavior was already conditioned) edited for grammar

Oh sheesh . . . can't say I'm surprised. One delusion or another. (There was an actual guy coming around . . . bit of a nut-job . . . marked-and-avoided a long time back . . . Linder was speaking about that guy . . . just to give some context).

Our entire limb/state had to give planned schedules of our entire week in 15-minute increments and turn them over to leadership. Along with that, actual schedules from the previous week, for comparison (did we follow the plan exactly?). Mind you, this was not a root locale, not corps, just regular wayfer trash. This was far from Ohio, and when LCM was in charge. Under LCM, things were so controlling (that and the internet making more a mess of things), I dropped out of school, I could not think straight under all those rules and constant attacks. Under Rosie, I went back to school, and so did others, things calmed down. I agree the argument can go back and forth about what/when was more micromanaged. . . . . . . . . Donn@ taught at an STS years later. She taught the "spirit world is more real than the chair your sitting in". That's a lot of power to give someone . . . letting them dictate to you what's real. Lind@r was the same. An expert on revelation and casting out spirits. "I could caste a spirit out of that guy easy enough . . . but I won't bother . . . it'll just jump right back in because he won't renew his mind." R@sie was passive aggressive as well. I won't quote her here. If you want to see leadership's evilness get quotes from them.

Things seemed less micro-managed under Rosie than LCM. She is less controlling. Less details were required to leadership under her.

Johniam, There's bringing up the past in order to learn from experience, and make informed decisions going forward. There's also bringing up the past to condemn. Life is full of regrets, why not just accept them as that? We learn more from failures then we do from success?

“He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.” ― George Orwell, 1984 (source: Google) It's important to be aware that anyone dismissing the past is really positioning themselves to control the discussion. Asserting that the past is relevant for discussion is necessary when dealing with Wayfers, whoever they are. IMO.

In the context of Wayfers, people don't grieve, because their definition of love is "giving people The Word".

Yes, yes, yes, yes and yes. Piecing together and rethinking what happened before can alter perception of what is going on now, and alter views looking forward. Which of course could lead to actions they prefer would not take place. If you take those new actions, they want to argue that YOU are a FOOL, and not the other way around.

He's more a symbol than a person. Nothing there to confront.

I see what you did there.