So_crates

JavaJane. There's never an excuse for abuse. SoCrates

Good to see I'm keeping you on your toes. :) In that spirit: First, Saint Vic contradicts himself. What happened to God has a purpose for everything he says, where he says it, and how he says it? Remember, theif and malifactor? How about body, soul, spirit? Or how about thouroughly and throughly (I know, just trying to make a point). How about all those long passages according to context. How many times were we told: soup is soup and apple butter is apple butter? Then, suddenly, when it benefits his narrative, Saint Vic pulls a rabbit out of the hat and claims things equal to the same thing are equal to each other. In math, obviously, in language, not always so. Did Saint Vic ever offer his premises supporting God breathed = moved by the holy ghost, which = revelation? I don't recall them. WQhat are his premises? Or is it like many things with him, we were to trust it was divine revelation? Saint Vic's first rookie mistake was he was trying to apply mathematical logic to language (soup is soup, apple butter is apple butter, remember?). It doesn't work: Numbers and language are two seperate spheres of human consciousness. You can fudge with language, you can't fudge with numbers. Numbers are black and white, they're true or they're not. Language is just a tad trickier, there's a lot of greys. That's why when you get to math and science you no longer use words, but equasions to communicate. Equasions are the specialized language of math and science. That's also why there's a whole seperate branch of logic applied to language called Propositional calculus (definition)(definition, elements). For somebody who insisted on being called Doctoryou do know he wasn't a doctor don't you? Here's one of many thing that prove it, it is a glaring error. But then when did Saint Vic ever let glaring errors get in the way of his narrative? Check PLAF sometime, its riddled with glaring errors and contradictions for the sake of narrative. However, who knows? Saint Vic may have fell down a rabbithole... SoCrates

Is that like Calgon? SoCrates

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm probably the ministries last angry man. Saint Vic cheated me and I didn't care for it one bit. Consider what the ministry told us: This is the absolute truth Only we have it We've reached our conclusions through extensive research This works with a mathematical exactness and a scientific percision You have to have faith that the things we tell you are true. If its not working for you its because you don't have enough faith No matter which religion you go to, all their doctrine and rituals boil down to the above list--a list of metabeliefs, if you will. So, how does one know when he's found the truth, considering they all carry the same metabeliefs? How do you sort out 12,000 Christian religions, all making the same claims, yet there's only one true one. Seems to me the odds are stacked a little against me: 11,999 tigers to one lady. Look how long it took for me to figure out the Way was a pack of lies. I've wasted the more productive years of my life buying into the way's line of bull and what do I have to show for it? Nothing. I'm in exactly the same place I was back in the early 70s when I started into the ministry. I've been spinning my wheels for nearly 40 years. Only now I'm hearing people getting aggressive with me over the ministries failure. "You fail because you blame God" So tell me, what of all those years I didn't blame God? Why did it fail then? Also, I had doubts when I started into the ministry. I asked my twig leader, "If I fall flat on my face following this, whose fault is it?" His response to me was: "God's." (mathematical exactness and scientific percision, remember?) So, if I seem to kick Christianity to the curb, its because the whole thing is too overwhelming for me, and I personally don't want to waste what I have left in my life believing in another Santa Claus. SoCrates

Further translation: The Way served my purpose, I no longer need it, so I don't care about all the evil it done. SoCrates

[quote name='pawtucket' date='10 April 2011 - 09:43 AM' timestamp='1302443008' post='527243'. My involvement with The Way Ministry began in 1974 and ended quite abruptly in 1978, almost within hours after I had the privilege of running and losing a campaign as an Independent Conservative for the U.S. Senate. I find it interesting his affiliation with the ministry ended hours after he lost the elsction. Didn't he have WAy people going dooor to door for his campaign. I wonder who cut the ties. Saint Vic? Him? SoCrates

These are hyper realistic human sculptures

No, that was what was commonly called an opinion. I often feel the same thing when I heard somebody spout off the same rhetoric I've heard from 30 other people. It shows people don't want to think for themselves, they want to be told what to think. Don't I? You'd be surprised how much you have told me about your belief system. You don't move toward things, you move away. Rather than moving toward pleasure, you life centers around avoiding pain. You avoid answering direct questions because some of the answers may be painful. Your more reactive than proactive. Calling people who disagree with you butt kissers and bitter. Or they speak with a forked tongue. You respond to stress with feeling, as recently seen with Wordwolf's post. Rather than choosing to use both feelings and reason, you go on the attack, accusing and talking down to people. You prefer a don't-do-as-I-do-do-as-I-say style: accusing others of being morally superior, then acting morally superior yourself (As I said before: why are "tripped out" Christians a "Problem"? Who gave you the authority to deem it a problem? If they have no problem with it, why do you you?) Close? Here's an interesting contradiction: on one hand, your the self appointed protector of all that is Saint Vic, and on the other hand, you only believe parts of Saint Vic's doctrine. Interestingly, the parts you've defended has been his right to rip people off by charging for PLAF, his right to victimize (your playing down of his neferious activities and the God delivers bit), and his right to bully people (remember the corps person that was killed during the colon cleanse and his bullying aftermath?). Interesting. Very interesting. SoCrates

As you can see, ladies and gentlemen, once again he dodges the real issue. Why won't you answer the above questions? The whole thing is apparently important enough to you for you to snap back at Wordwolf, yet you don't know what the issue is. Hmmmm. This proves Wordwolf's point: you have no idea what the baby or the bathwater is, its just the talking points of a common source. SoCrates

They seem to be all the rage nowadays, but all they do is annoy me. Strawman arguments, that is. We've been discussing how many posts about whether or not people are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. This is a strawman argument which leads nowhere. We could continue discussing it another 100 posts and still not touch on the real issue. Tonyzamboni, what in your mind does the baby represent? And what in your mind does the bathwater represent? Johniam, same with you, what in your mind does the baby represent and what in your mind does the bathwater represent? Lets have that conversation. At least its about the real issue. SoCrates

Leadership probably had everyone plan their life in 15 minute intervals, because leadership planned their lives in 15 minute intervals. Saint Vic, Craigmeister, and Rip-N-Bark couldn't let their minds wander. They were too small to be left alone. SoCrates

Proper words of language? You mean say what you mean and mean what you say? (Where have I heard that before?) Rather than tiptoeing around idioms involving babies and bathwater, why don't they say directly and honestly what they think this valuable thing is that we're throwing out with the expendables? There's your better way to communicate the same thing. SoCrates

I also find it amusing that they'll scold the tripped out Christians on this site, yet they fail to see the tripped out non-christian behavior of twi leadership. SoCrates

Yah, waysider, we're just trippin' on the drug of reality. Did you know reality's for people who can't handle Saint Vic's doctrine? SoCrates

First off, I don't read any aggression in his post. He made a simple observation. Second, there aggression everywhere in your post: accusing, talking down to, taking sides. Third, even if you want to rationalize by saying he was bullying you: two wrongs don't make a right Finally, in this area: Do I have to repeat it? Okay, everybody: according to your chosen belief system, if you believe he's trying to bully you into silence, he's trying to bully you into silence. It's not that he is trying to bully you into silence, but that your belief is making him seem to be trying to bully you into silence. Damage control has nothing to do with it. I didn't say: don't present your side, or imply anything that suggested I wanted you to not to state your side. I asked if there was a better non-aggressive way to present your side--you know, without accusing, talking down to, or taking sides? Also, on this front: according to your chosen belief system, if you believe I'm attempting damage control, then I'm attempting damage control. Its not due to any effort on my part, but due to your believing. Why is it a problem? It doesn't seem to be bothering them. Why is it bothering you? You really overreacted to Wordwolf's post. Why is it triggering one of your insecurities? Again we go back to your believing making it a problem. However, if I were to hazard a guess: You think these tripped out Christian seen the same bullying you just displayed and tripped out? Nah, that can't possibly be the answer can it? Maybe they got tired of being abused by bullies. Nah, that couldn't be it either. After all people enjoy being sworn at, accused, being called names, being talked down to...(where is that sarcastic smiley?) As I said before Saint Vic was a bully, he taught others to be bullys. Look at Martindale. 'Nuff said. Then you add to it the trickle down theory...and you have a ministry of bullies bullying people because they think that normal behavior. As in my previous post, when I get a whole bunch of people using similar methaphors and idioms, I can bet my press card they're coming from a common source. But then, just because you read it on GSC its immediately one sided. Once again: according to your chosen belief system: if you believe everything on GSC is one-sided, then its one-sided. Its not that it is one-sided, but that your belief is making it one-sided. Have you ever considered Wordwolf's side? You seem to want everyone to consider your side but you don't want to consider anyone elses. So we once again get back to my original questions:(which you continuously dodge) What do you want? How will you know when you have it? To which I'll add: do you think bullying and talking down to people will help you to get it? To put it in ministry terms: I think its time you checked your believing and renewed your mind. SoCrates

There is a difference between language and buzz words: one everyone has a common understanding, the other may or may not be understood by everyone and also helps identify members of a certain group. Now when you get people reading off the same talking points, you get the same similes, metaphors, ,and idioms. When people say the exact same thing over and over again, its almost a dead givaway that whatevers being said came from a common source. Look at politicians, you can tell they're going by talking points because everyone of them will say almost the same thing. And that bleeds down right to the rank and file. I do, however, think you could have expressed that in a little less confrontive way to Wordwolf. Do you think he doesn't understand the dynamics of language? Do you think he doesn't know what a cliche is? Instead of trying to bully him into silence, maybe you should have asked him for clearification? SoCrates

And, naturally, being the great MOG he was, he couldn't disern between being spiritual angry and being possesed by a spirit of anger. SoCrates

SoCrates

The class, grasshopper, the class has it all: Believing = recieving, psychology Recieve, Retain, Release, philosophy Battle of the Senses, physiology Four Crucified, Math Giving = Recieving, advanced math Love is Giving, advanced physiology Giver and the Gift, English All that and mangled Greek to boot... Oh, wait, you mean in the real world. Uh, well, uh... Carry on. SoCrates

@ Waysider I understand what your saying. Even though I left the ministry in the mid 80s, I didn't give up teaching the materials until a couple of years ago. I look back on my life (I got in the ministry when I was 19-20) and I just think it was a titanic waste of time. I'd be hard pressed to find a teaching I could apply to real life. This, of course, leads me to the conclusion I've expressed earlier: Saint Vic was actually an evil, evil man disguised as an angel of light. SoCrates

I'd say it was a combination of all of the above. The biggie being as we get older we become wiser to how manipulation works and the tactics fail. Think of it as a guy on a ledge threatening to jump. The first couple times you fall into his trap and tell him,"Oh, no, don't do that." But by the tenth time of threatening to jump your looking at you watch and rolling your eyes and making bets with the other bystanders where he's going to land. SoCrates

The more I consider it the more I'm convinced Saint Vic was an evil, evil man. Consider: The only thing he was concerned about was his self gratification and adoration. And what did he give in return? Lies, bromides, platitudes, and general bull. The more I recall PLAF, the more I see what a steaming load of bull it was. SoCrates