Rocky

There is a great deal of truth to that. It takes us humans a long time to unlearn. Factors that can mitigate that time frame can include how diligently they challenge the dogma they've allowed to dominate their world view over the decades.

Oh, I don't doubt that you found some of his sources and found that they may have matched up. That alone doesn't mean he or his sources necessarily properly divined the actual will of God. I do believe, however, that God is far bigger than the box Wierwille (and we) put him in.

Not necessarily a valid supposition. I personally wouldn't give the benefit of the doubt.

Wierwille declared it in PFLAP. Of course he didn't admit to plagiarizing and he didn't use the word "enlightenment." But he did make the big fat claim that people should put away their reading material for three months and read only twi books and pflap collaterals.

Now THAT's funny.

Thinking outside the box indeed. That appears to be the bottom line.

All of these "euphemisms" have become, as you (all or most GSC readers) know, cult jargon. The jargon in cults has multiple effects. The group members feel understood because they all use the same words and it generates a sense of camaraderie (and elitism - see below). New people may feel left out and often want to learn what the words and phrases mean, drawing them deeper into the mindset of the cult. Complex situations are often reduced to a few words, and this begins to shut down the critical thinking of the members. The words and phrases can dictate how the members should act in certain situations without having to make decisions. For example, one group had a phrase that meant that seniors in the hierarchy of the group were always right. So if there were any problems or disagreements, the phrase sorted everything out! When the jargon is second nature, talking to outsiders may become tedious and awkward and this keeps group members isolated from outside influences. Elitist mentality The group members feel understood because they all use the same words and it generates a sense of camaraderie (and elitism - see below).New people may feel left out and often want to learn what the words and phrases mean, drawing them deeper into the mindset of the cult.Complex situations are often reduced to a few words, and this begins to shut down the critical thinking of the members.The words and phrases can dictate how the members should act in certain situations without having to make decisions. For example, one group had a phrase that meant that seniors in the hierarchy of the group were always right. So if there were any problems or disagreements, the phrase sorted everything out!When the jargon is second nature, talking to outsiders may become tedious and awkward and this keeps group members isolated from outside influences. The end justifies the means Because they are doing very important things like god's work, or saving the earth, rescuing mankind, or simply doing 'The Work, members are led to believe that lying, cheating, and deceiving outsiders for money or getting them to come along to the group is justified. And remember that many group leaders are psychopaths. This means they have no empathy, guilt or remorse. Ever! Add to this their inflated sense of self worth, grandiosity and sense of entitlement, and they believe they can do whatever they like, take what they want, abuse whoever they please etc. etc. without any consideration for others. For them the end always justifies the means.

Btw, Socks, I appreciate your update with the secret subliminal message. :) Might this be a trailer for the movie you were describing?

Which links? The ones posted in 2005 by WhiteDove don't have anything on them anymore. The ones linking to cortright's website provide a non-working telephone number, even though people can take their phone numbers with them to different telecom carriers. And it doesn't provide an email address for Burke.

I don't think the moderators pre-approve posts (or moderate prior to posting). What a drag if you lost your post. :(

Fret not brother Jimbo. There were plenty of others (of us) who went through one year in residence but didn't return for the second one. Yes, twi was big on the guilt but I got over it and have been thankful for a long time that I didn't go back to graduate from the corpse.

The song, and a comment made by our new friend Pianoman, both have political overtones. I hope this is the end of it.

Fair enough. However, it does have political overtones. I hope you're right about your last point.

Honestly, this thread was started before the GSC ban on political topics/discussion. The topic IS distasteful AND political.

I received an email last night saying they were having a prayer time for John tonight instead.

Hi Grace, Since words matter, I just want to say that it wasn't a matter of how smart you were or are. Looking back, a lot of smart people didn't leave as soon as they think they should have.

I voted that I had read it once. That, obviously, was decades ago (more than three and probably more than four) and wouldn't recall any of it without looking at a copy now..

Poor Mike. Woe is Mike. Unless you bullies stop posting to him, he won't get his taxes done and you will be to blame [/snark]

Look for the Donate button at the top of every page and every forum section. That will take you to PayPal.

It's not style, it's a question of substance or lack thereof. If you think you've accomplished anything on par with Superman, then I'd have to agree with DWBH about your state of mind.

Mike, it's NOT about anyone else's mistakes. YOU have made it about you. EVEN IF I were to "castigate" anyone else, it would do nothing. Your response (above in blue or purple, whichever it is) demonstrates that you are STILL resisting the notion that YOU and YOUR words are at issue. Calming down doesn't seem to be helping you read for understanding, be meek, or learn anything. When it’s not a battle, and not overwhelming volume, and I have lots of time, I can do better than what I have done so far. Help me reduce the volume of target shooting and maybe that can happen faster. NO Mike, you've completely missed the point. The "battle" is between YOUR EARS. When YOU reduce the volume of your resistance to listening to what people are trying to say to you, you MIGHT learn something. Only THEN will you "do better." Frankly those two sentences come across like you're trying to guilt me into bullying other GSC posters for you. IF you're genuinely open for more ideas, there's your answer.

That's disappointing Mike. I HAVE repeated, repeatedly, the point about how the communication process works and that when you resort to telling people that they read you wrong, you fail at communicating YOUR message. My intent is to give you graceful a way out of the predicaments you put yourself in. [see Carnegie, How to Win Friends and Influence People, Part Four, chapter Five] One chapter title is "When you're wrong admit it quickly and emphatically." [Part Two, chapter three] IF your intent is to get people to take your message seriously, wouldn't you have to get honest about your communication mistakes and problems? You've recorded your "thesis" on GSC but you've refused all efforts to get you to clarify your points. Are you an expert communicator? Haven't you admitted that you're not? When you refuse legitimate feedback by saying the reader read you wrong, you're missing a wonderful opportunity to LEARN how to communicate better.

Mike, even though you repeatedly do not respond with integrity when caught in prevarication, if your intent were to convince unconvinced readers you lose because they can plainly see (and read) that when you are caught, you try to squirm out of responsibility for your words with variations on: 1) I didn't say that, or 2) blaming those who caught you for not understanding what you intended to say even though they don't pretend to read your mind. You squirm, but don't quite squirm your way out of it. Mike, by definition you're blaming the reader for YOUR failure to communicate. I've shown you the definition several times. Would you like me to again provide a link? At about 2:10 into the video at this link, "the sender needs to make sure the receiver understood the message." "The receiver's reply to the sender is called feedback." "Feedback allows THE SENDER TO ENSURE that the original message was interpreted correctly by the receiver." Bottom line, Mike, when you blame others for "not reading correctly," you're OFF THE BALL. Regardless of whether you ever get back on the ball, the messages you have posted remain on GSC as you posted them. IF you want to clarify, which is your responsibility, blaming the reader for not reading your mind or for not understanding the message as you originally intended it, misses the target.

Now you're rewriting your comment given that you were caught doing something you know you can't legitimately do? NO, you weren't speaking up for God. Had that been your intent, you'd have to say something to the effect of "my understanding of God's word is ________ , and I'm calling your attention to it." That's NOT what you did. Your claimed assumption, as stated above, is specious.

According to the definition of communication, you're not taking responsibility for your failure to communicate. Who do you think you are, Jesus Christ? Btw, Wierwille's comments to which you refer, contrary to your claim, do NOT indicate he was getting revelation (from God). Properly characterized, he would have been exercising his training in homiletics to claim (and get gullible listeners to accept) that he was getting revelation from God. But said comments were specifically NOT indications that he was getting any such thing from God, even in the event he may have been getting revelation from God to such an end.