TLC

Well, probably stuff from before 77. Some things are just hard to pinpoint an exact time or place for. Might have been rumors in the EOB building. So many "secret things," it's really hard to get anyone to remember, much less keep track of them all. But I suspect very little of it didn't start with vpw, as some of the JBS stuff must have worked its way into his thinking by 73, or 72.

All of the Corps ("they" had our names already - supposedly) were earmarked for concentration camps.

So, you didn't hear and weren't privy to the "too many key people" (of those that were heading up the takeover) suddenly died, and that's why it didn't happen?

Well, I'm more specifically referring to the event of 40 years ago.

Speaking of conspiracy theories and the John Birch Society, I'm curious is anyone (perhaps DWBH has some untold insight into this question) happens to know the specifics of who all might have "suddenly passed away" after "the meeting that wasn't" in the spring of '76. After all, that was the reason touted as to why none of the dire prospects for our country came to pass (being a result of our combined efforts of prayer and believing)... Just wondering if there was any basis whatsoever as to why the "get ready for it" never happened

If that first part of that's true, then I suppose you should vote for Hillary.

Well, you're a downright Jack Frost now, aren't you? Opps... there I go again, talkin' bout the people posting. (some weatherman you are...)

Okay, open forum. Right? So here's the next "vote on" question I gots. Without regard for any difference in what spirit is or can be... is there any discernible biblical difference between "spirit upon" and "spirit in"? YES? Or, maybe... NO. (And yeah, I knows what was taught in TWI. But what do the scriptures really say?)

Unless there really was an original sin. In which case, there's little doubt that there's been some notion of it ever since. Are you suggesting or purporting that there's no such thing (and never has been)? Evidently you also don't think the devil is real. That's pure speculation bs. Fine by me if you want to accept it as that, but certainly not worth promoting as anything more than that. But from my view of things, it's not a good rendering of Gen.3:22 that it appears to be remotely related to. Did you think and/or write this stuff (or any of the rest of it) yourself, or is it (what I suspect) a cut and paste of someone else's thoughts? Maybe we can VOTE on that, eh?

The title of this thread doesn't mean shinola.

Quite frankly, I can barely understand your English, your sentence structure, or what you are possibly trying to say about half the time, and not at all the other half. Is English not your first language? (Because I've honestly tried to assess why your speech is so bloody incoherent much, if not most, of the time.) Furthermore, I don't think you've yet sincerely answered a question I've asked you, on any thread. So, no, I'll freely admit that I'm really not that interested in talking to you elsewhere unless and until you start making more sense. And btw, cut the crap that your "research" is somehow "over the heads" of anyone (or everyone) else here, because it's not. You evidently enjoy thinking it's some puzzle you've taken apart, but whatever it is, it's shoddily strewn into bits and half missing pieces onto the floor, which you are then either incapable (which is what I suspect) or unwilling to explain.

So you learned egotism elsewhere, or it just came naturally?

lol... that'd be funny if it wasn't so typical of anyone perfidiously aggrandized by TWI and their own bluster.

So what does that have to do with the price of eggs? (because whatever you said, you're sure not communicating.)

Sure. Why not? see Philippians 3:20; 1Timothy 1:1; and Titus 1:4. What are you supposing we get?

Beats me. I still can't figure out what he's talkin' 'bout, trying to say, or voting on...

What sort of hokey poo is that? Or what are you "voting" on, and why? And in case you hadn't noticed before (I'd presumed most here knew this already), "Christianity" (as a label) evidently first appeared in Antioch, shortly after Paul began teaching there (Acts 11:26.) So, it's not rocket science to make the connection between Christianity and the teachings of Paul.

You're probably right. As mentioned previously, I've probably long since "grown away" from some number of things...

Well, considering that you brought it up, would you mind elaborating a bit on what those "high expectations" were? (Because I'm getting the impression that the expectations for it not only varied greatly, but probably changed significantly over the years.) Perhaps a new thread for it, eh?

Not "particular"ly. (yuk, yuk...) I'm not a physicist, and probably way under qualified to do much explaining of it. (But I was sorta curious what DWBH might have to say in response to my inquiry over in this thread.)

Quantum physics might disagree with you.

There's much in your post (most of it, it seems) that I'm just not relating well to. Maybe it's old(er) age and my thinking and perspective has changed so much on some things, that certain less critical or important things have faded. This line, for instance, escapes me: VP taught that God can't speak to our brain cells. If he said it, I evidently took it to mean something far different than how you seem to have heard it. If someone were to call us on the telephone, would they be speaking directly to our brain cells? Maybe yes, maybe not. Depends upon what we think it means. There has to be some channel of communication opened. Likewise for the above statement. In the context of receiving revelation or hearing from God, some avenue or means of communication has to be open. With either the mouth of the donkey or the eyes of Balaam, it was the Lord that first opened it. Off topic, I'm sure, but one of the first explanations I recall hearing of the advanced class wasn't that it would really teach you how to receive revelation, but that it would help explain what you've already been doing. (Just a thought, for some to ponder...) Who sold that kind of stuff, or when did it start? That sounds like lcm talking. Easy enough, I suppose. But holy cow... a replacement for walking by the spirit? No wonder there is a thread here discussing corps(e) as victims or oppressors. No wonder the (few) research papers I reviewed were so crappy. catch the brass ring, and... opps. I mean, catch the gold dove, and get ordained! (sorry... I couldn't resist a bit of cynicism.) sadly, it seems the "I have a class to offer" syndrome still carries on through many of the offshoots (or at least those that "have a class" to offer.) run 'em again. over and over and over and over...

Nor had I. Actually, I've come to the point of seeing it as much more than that. Does the basic design of "the Way Tree" have any biblical basis for it? Like many others, I used to think it did. Then, (not so long ago) not so much. But more recently, yeah, maybe it does... but definitely not in the way I used to think, nor in accordance with what Paul reveals concerning the body of Christ. I'm actually inclined to think that with how legalistic the church at Jerusalem is said to have been, it may very well have developed a somewhat similar structure. What might they have patterned it after? Perhaps after how the Jewish religion may have operated, given its system of priests and its many synagogues spread around the world. But the Way Tree very quickly developed a life of its own, and an all too powerful means of control and financial gain. Regardless of whether it's called or thought of as "magical thinking" or a "law," there is a latent power resident within how anyone disciplines their mind to think. And yes, it certainly can change what our perception of reality is (or isn't.) http://www.amazon.com/The-Magic-Thinking-David-Schwartz/dp/0671646788 (But this is also properly noted as being different than prayer.)

For as much effort as was put into trying to differentiate "critical thinking" from... well, from "less critical," or "non-critical," thinking I suppose (lol).... I'm almost surprised that there's been nothing else said or aimed towards what "direct revelation" is or isn't. I kinda presumed from what T-bone said the conditioning became such that when there was none, there was blind obedience to the rules. And when there was some (revelation) claimed, it was actually little more than folk rubber stamping what they did with an excuse for not being "blindly obedient." Am I seeing what was intended to be said right, or am I still missing something?

Please don't misunderstand the reason for my posts. I'm not upset or offended in any way, I merely sought what was only fair and honest in what was being said. Okay?