So_crates

Thomas Jefferson once said: "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, He must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." With this in mind, here's my theory: Many people are afraid to die. There's something about our conciousness being snuffed out of existence. Or going into some great unknown, "down a blackhole," as another poster put it. We also see we are surrounded by what we believe to be an unjust universe. Good whithers while what we percive as evil flourishes. I say percive because some of the behaviors that we attribute to evil is nothing more than our animal nature coming out. Being self-aware creatures we find this appalling. Ross McDonald once compared a human life to a bird flying through a lighted corridor placed between two dark corridors. We don't know where we came from, nor where we're going. We wonder if there's any overriding reason for everything we see around us. I'm reminded of Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy were the narrator says there are two theories to the universe. The first says that if we ever figure out what the universe is and why we're here it'll disappear and something even more bizarre and unexplainable will take its place. The other theory says that's already happened. So it only makes sense we would create 1]. an afterlife to assure ourselves that there's some purpose for being here and that our consciousness won't die and 2]. a place where justice is finally meeted out. For many I would think it would be a deal breaker. Why? You gut many of the tenants of Christianity: 1]. Justice wouldn't be serverd. 2]. The universe is a senseless place with no purpose 3]. And there's no eternal life. My opinion? Being skeptical, I don't have enough information to lean one way or the other, so I file it in the "Need More Information" file with Sasquatch and alien autopsies. SoCrates

I was told, by a branch leader that left the ministry, that what lead to the ministry losing its tax exempt status for several years is the Internal Revenue finding out about Saint Vic's and Craigmeister's extracurricular activities and using them as leverage in the negotiations. You know the ol', "Youinns play ball with us or we'll let everyone know who youinns has been playing ball with. We're making you an offer you can't refuse." SoCrates

Paddy's pig rolled the watermelon out of the lake? (see the maslow thread) SoCrates

I think he's asking because Saint Vic's doctrine was once saved always saved and SIT was proof that the individual is saved. Before you flew off the handle, maybe you should have looked at the first word in his post: he said "if"--suggesting possibility, but not absolution--not that you were. And before you start talking about one track minds, don't you think you should reread you last post? You don't think this is displaying a one track mind? To ram your beliefs down a persons throat and claim its love? To dog a person repeatedly, even though they've said no thanks. I understand, you think its a great gift. But you also need to understand, God hasn't even kept promises in a realm I can see, yet you expect me to trust him with things I can't see. SoCrates

But Geshia, isn't the bible one big what if? What if man was fatally flawed from the get-go (original sin)? What if he could be saved? What if there was an afterlife? What if the universe really were just? How would good be rewarded and bad be punished? What if there was a purpose for all this? What if evil had a face? What if the good force in the universe wrote a book? No proof exist on any of this one way or the other, its taken on faith. Its taken from a book that self references itself as truth. Is it truth? (shoulder shrug) Its been added to, had parts taken out, and doctrinized over the generations. Maybe it was truth once, but how can we guarantee that now? Then you add to that charlatins like Saint Vic and JAL teaching out of this book something they know ain't truthful and you have the recipe for a major credibility problem. If its truth for you, that's fine. I just continue to question.... SoCrates

And if you didn't have eduction and still had your own mind, the excuse was "Ego. God doesn't like ego." SoCrates

SoCrates

A blown up version of Operabuff's post: SoCrates

I'd agree with you, mstar1. That or an attempt to water down his contact with the ministry. You know, like when kids try to excuse bad actions: "Yah, I did it, but then so do lots of people." SoCrates

That's one way of looking at it. Another: I can't do someone else's push ups, even though they need to lose weight, I can't eat someone else's food, even though they're starving, I can't go to the bathroom for someone else....no matter how much I love them. Whatever path they choose, hard as it may be, I have to let them learn their own lessons. However, what I've found a the core of all that concern for my well being in most churches is really just a desire to spread their doctrine, inflate their numbers, and fill the churches coffers. I was just ears to fill their doctrine with, a warm body to increase their voting block, and a set of pockets for their collection plates. Most churches have lost the human element and have become filled with paint by the number Christianity. Thanks, but no thanks. SoCrates

Don't you think your insulting alphas? Saint Vic wasn't an alpha, he was a beta masquerading as an alpha. An alpha wannabe, if you will. A true alpha doesn't have to get power, he has it. A true alpha doesn't have to prove his alpha-ness, everybody knows its there. Ditto Craigmeister. SoCrates

Its very possible, BA. People often act the contrary, overcompensating for what they really feel like inside. Anytime you see an overreaction, you should always ask, "What's really going on here?" As for lcm, he always struck me as being out of his league, way ove rhis head. Scaring people through anger probably made him feel more in control of a situation that he felt was spiraling out of control. As far as micromanaging, well that just shows a lack of trust in his people. Nobody can do it right but except for him. And if somebody makes a mistake in a situation spiraling out of control, well disaster can occur. So he had to do it all himself. SoCrates

I wouldn't say its worthless. You could probably use the back of the sheepskin for a scratchpad. Or maybe use the whole sheepskin to line the bottom of a birdcage. SoCrates

I've accepted the fact that I'm a mortal creature, so the prospect of eternal death isn't that frightening for me. If I'm dead forever, so what? I'll never know it. Besides, what guarantee can you offer me of eternal life? You can't. It can't be proven one way or the other. Last I checked, nobody's returned from the dead, to verify or refute an afterlife. Further, according to some religious doctrines, its possible to live a totally pious life and still "go into a blackhole." However, that may be the source of anger directed toward Saint Vic: I had only one shot to get done what I wanted to get done during this lifetime. Now, thanks to Saint Vic and his demented circus with its fleabitten acts and moth-eaten tents--not to mention rickety rides that go nowhere--that may never happen. SoCrates

Usually broken people trying to escape abusive situations. The bitter irony is while trying to escape, they traded one abuser for another. SoCrates

Which city? :) SoCrates

I'm thinking Gahagan, in typical politician style got his army to go door to door, so when he lost the election he told Saint Vic, "Thanks, but no thanks." Politicians, like cult leaders, are very self-serving. You know: if it doesn't benefit me, I want nothing to do with it. SoCrates

No surprise here. I could have typed about anything and you would have disagreed. Polarity Response is a behavior unfamiliar in name but not in most everyone’s experience. Whatever the issue or opinion, the polarity responder takes the opposite view. Disagreement is automatic. This can include and goes past the devil’s advocate role some people take on in groups. Most polarity responders seem unaware of their behavior and its impact on others. (source) As a matter of fact, I expect you to disagree with this post. SoCrates

I doubt that johniam is the whipping boy. I do however have reason to believe he's a polarity responder. Polarity Response is a behavior unfamiliar in name but not in most everyone’s experience. Whatever the issue or opinion, the polarity responder takes the opposite view. Disagreement is automatic. This can include and goes past the devil’s advocate role some people take on in groups. Most polarity responders seem unaware of their behavior and its impact on others.(source) Polarity responders are the type of people that if you said something, they disagree with you. No matter what you say, they disagree with you. Request they do something and they'll do the opposite. You could say the sky is blue and they would insist there are shades of green in it. You could tell them water is wet and they would insist in some far off place in Shanghai they've figure out how to make it dry. As you can imagine, this makes for many unneccessary conflicts: I mean, I know few people who would defend a rapist (Saint Vic) saying "Well, he did do some good." Or who would categorize mental abuse as telling people to get their act together (Colon cleanse. Cookies. Accident. Aftermath). In all likelihood, both responses are polarity reponses. Polarity response is neither bad nor good, its just the way a potion of the population's brains are wired. SoCrates

First, highlight what you want italicized or quoted then hit the respective button. SoCrates

As a polarity responder, I'm not surprised you dissented. The above is a list of metabeliefs or overriding beliefs. You have to believe them before you buy into the particular churches doctrine or rituals. The ministry never told you the above? looking at it from a polarity responders perspective, you must have heard it quite a bit, why else would you be denying it? However, I'll play the game. Consider: Saint Vic never said the Word worked with a mathamatical exactness and a scientific precision in PLAF? We were never told we had to take his version of the original sin on faith? You were never told you had to take the fact that Jesus Christ was crucified and raised from the dead three days later on faith? We were never told if we had a great failing (somebody died, lost a job, etc.) it was because of our beliving? And what was all the Greek and Hebrew for, if not to prove through research the conclusions they arrived at? You were never told we were going to teach people the Word like it was taught in the First Century (as it was meant to be taught)? Also, why move something over the world you don't feel is the absolute truth and only you have it? You were never told the Word of God was truth? The original Word was God-breathe? The original Word was perfect and "fits like a hand in a glove?" (Absolute truth) If the ministry's version of the bible isn't absolute truth, what is? If the ministry didn't have absolute truth, who did? If PLAF didn't teach the absolute truth, what did? (I don't buy these. They're rhetorical to prove a point) If you don't believe Saint Vic was teaching you the absolute truth then why make excuses for his ripping people off, his neferious activities, and his bullying? And where did this understanding, that he was teaching the truth, come from? If you don't believe the bible is absolute truth, why quote it in your arguments? And where did that understanding it was absolute truth come from? Since I took the list as statement of fact, it would only follow that you would disagree. Which, of course, tells me how much you actually agree with the list. SoCrates

I would expect a polarity responder to tell me the opposite I was expecting: Rather than saying your wrong and here's why, you insult and get aggressive. Polarity Response is a behavior unfamiliar in name but not in most everyone’s experience. Whatever the issue or opinion, the polarity responder takes the opposite view. Disagreement is automatic. This can include and goes past the devil’s advocate role some people take on in groups. Most polarity responders seem unaware of their behavior and its impact on others. (source) No, I don't wonder why you don't answer questions, I already know. Part of it is you refuse to answer because I expect an answer. Yet on a deeper level, answering questions would require you examining your beliefs, which you don't want to do because you may realize your wrong. Being wrong for you is a frightening thing which would create a lot of anxiety--one example of the pain I'm refering to that your avoiding. A good example is the whole baby and bathwater schtick. As polarity responders do, rather then giving a direct answer as I would have expected, you chose to dodge the question, doing variations on baby and bathwater. Remember? First Tonyzamboni came up with his answer. Which was followed by your proper answer, which was a variation of Tonyzamboni's. I also find it interesting that out of four psychological points you chose "avoiding pain" to attack (perhaps this is the one you most agree with). I assume its because it really annoys you, it hits so close to home. Which gives the reason for the LOL. Nervous laughter. Another sign of how close to home it hits. SoCrates