Rocky

And speaking of missed (deliberate or not) irony, 9. Gurwinder's Theory of Bespoke ....: Many don’t have an opinion until they’re asked for it, at which point they cobble together a viewpoint from whim and half-remembered hearsay, before deciding that this two-minute-old makeshift opinion will be their new hill to die on. Solution: Discard all the opinions you thought of instinctively. Resist the reflex to offer impromptu answers, and become comfortable with saying “I don’t yet have enough information.”

Your theory? Really? As if it's not, instead, what you've come to believe as a result of what someone has taught you? Your "theory" would suggest you did actual academic research on neurobiology, psychology, social psychology and related disciplines. If you've read other people's research, bravo. But that wouldn't make any of it "your theory." It COULD make it something you've come to believe through having read the works of actual academicians. I do that kind of thing. But I don't self-aggrandize and call any of it "my theory" or even "my hypothesis."

Btw, Mike, Victor Wierwille MAY have thought or considered that he even asked HIMSELF that/those question(s) EVERY single damn day of his ministry. But evidence recorded in Undertow by Charlene L Edge strongly suggests to me that if he did ask himself those questions, he deceived himself into believing contrary to the reality of his practices. Was he lying? I can't say. However, I've learned enough about emotional and psychological defense mechanisms (tactics) to lead me to believe he could not bring himself to honestly answer those questions in the way he wanted "his Way Corps(e)" to answer them.

Do you have any documentation to back up your conjecture about to whom he referred? I know, that's your story and you're sticking to it. But it has nothing to do with anything on the topic of this thread.

This is NOT a statement of fact. It's a story. "Eve considered some bunk info..." Not only did the developer(s) of the AC on PFLAP NOT have any legitimate data upon which to make a true statement, but it is structured as a story. The conclusion, "what we can know by the 5 senses God expects us to know" is not founded either on scripture or anything that could be reasonably taken as factual. It's something Victor Wierwille decided God had meant and he taught it as such. IOW, he conjured it up. That's essentially what I meant by characterizing the paragraph as a story.

No. I don't input your posts into my mental database, sorry.

It's not anything but a story you told. No qualification as to whether it's true or not.

The stronger your beliefs, the stronger your reasons to question them regularly. Don’t simply believe everything you think you believe. Kelly, Kevin. Excellent Advice for Living (p. 161). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

Btw, Mike, that is a story.

aka subterfuge. It has been what, nearly 40 years since he died? In that time, a heck of a lot of increase of available knowledge has become available and obvious. Three books shining bright lights on the growth of knowledge are (and no doubt there are many more) include: Especially chapter 2. and To me, what our good friend wordwolf described represents a sort of second renaissance out of superstition. The first was possibly spurred on by Thomas Paine's essay, The Age of Reason.

By whom?

As if Mike is capable of excellence?

T-Bone, I'll echo Waysider's sentiment.

Doesn't look like you posted it way back when...

Then again, excellence was and is not Mike's forté.

By MIKE. Perhaps a direct message to him might get his attention. But then again, it has been about 18 years since he mentioned it, so he may not remember.

https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/gmir ??

Yes, >20k some years.

He is playing the role of troll. Probably counterproductive to attempt to reason with him at all anymore.

The entire third chapter of Mama's Last Hug discusses empathy and sympathy. I go back in my mind to reflect on the lack of concern both Wierwille and Martindale consistently (at least in the open) demonstrated toward those outside of the "in group." They, of course, defined the "in group" as the Household." Further defined as those who "took the class and stood with twi." I have long viewed that position as callous and lacking in the care necessary to properly exercise the Ministry of Reconciliation. See II Cor 5:17-19. Personally, I can almost understand how/why those two (Victor and Loy) wouldn't be able to grasp the ministry of reconciliation because so much has been studied and written about empathy since the end of the personal ministries (inside of twi) of both of them. Then again, had either or both of them actually been "tapped in" to the love of God, instead of being more concerned about using their personal position (power/authority) to satisfied their own old nature passions, they might have been able to figure it out without Frans de Waal or Dacher Keltner.

That IS a profound realization. My latest reading adventure, Mama's Last Hug, has likewise profound insight related to things GSCers have reflected on, including but not limited to "going farther than one has been led;" and learning by imitation, IOW how did we get there in the first place. It also highlights what Augustin Fuentes has said in YouTube shorts that rather than "we are what we eat," instead, we are (or become like) WHO WE MEET. (he says this at the 5:05 point in this video)