Nathan_Jr

Charlene isn’t the only former member of the “research” department who has posted her unvarnished, accurate, historical record here at GSC. If I retember correctly, real, actual, honest research was being done. HOWEVER, the accurate, honest results and conclusions flew in the painted face of victor paul wierwille’s own imagined and dishonest “research.” The REAL research didn’t support Vic’s man-made, false, asserted claims. The honest, REAL research was squashed, buried, stifled by victor paul wierwille. The narcissist’s greatest fear is being found out for the fraud that he is. This is what one means when one says the department wasn’t doing real research — they weren’t allowed to do real research.

Don’t let yourself be confused by facts, evidence, rational thought, common sense.

I found these quotes embedded in the Wiki article on confirmation bias. I love Russian literature, and these two sentences from Tolstoy articulate with such exquisite eloquence the inherent problem of confirmation bias. In his essay (1897) What Is Art?, Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy wrote: I know that most men—not only those considered clever, but even those who are very clever, and capable of understanding most difficult scientific, mathematical, or philosophic problems—can very seldom discern even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as to oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions they have formed, perhaps with much difficulty—conclusions of which they are proud, which they have taught to others, and on which they have built their lives. In his essay (1894) The Kingdom of God Is Within You, Tolstoy had earlier written: The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.

Yeah. It’s rhetorical. Like so many of my questions. Here are a few other rhetorical questions that can’t nor should be answered here: When it comes to spiritual matters or that which is eternal or that which has no name, why are we so eager to be taught, to be trained? What does it mean to be taught? What does it mean to teach? Who is the teacher?

So, not unlike “spiritual anger.”

Who was the trainer? Why did you have to have righteous anger? And how does that justify mistreating others? Can one be righteously angry without behaving like a sadistic a$$hole?

You should expect a yield of about 80%. But almost all of that “loss” is water. European style butter has a higher butterfat content than American butter. The higher the butterfat, the higher the yield. I don’t think yield is the point, though. Even when using the best organic grass-fed butter you can afford, it’s still cheaper and and more wholesome than store bought ghee. Ghee is SOOOO easy to make. Store bought ghee is SOOOO expensive and has additives like ethyl butyrate… WTF? Buying a jar of ghee is like buying a jar of roux. It makes no sense to me. It just seems a silly marketing trick, like labeling orange juice “gluten free.”

I presume FL was a “commitment.” What was the term? Three months, six months, one year…? CORPS promised the development of “in depth spiritual perception…” What was the stated goal or mission of FL?

Last year, when I first read this article, I was mildly disappointed that victor paul wierwille and TWI were mentioned as a mere side note, an incidental triviality. Tonight, after a more careful second reading, it seems to me Steve and Sandi Heefner’s summer on the farm in Ohio with victor paul wierwille is no incidental plot ornament. It is the critical turning point, the beginning of the end, for the House of Acts. When the Heefner’s return from Ohio, the ministering and generosity end, and the “teaching,” accusations of legalism and divisions begin. Gross.

Wow. A trigger for a flood of images. Wooden spoons... CF&S... That photo of LCM, Don, Greer(?) in their western shirts, blue jeans and cowboy boots... the submissive, compliant women/girls forcibly shown what the "love of god" is all about... "The evangelical consumer marketplace." What a phrase! Thanks for sharing Du Mez, Rocky.

Very interesting! Thank you, Word Wolf. Now that you mention it, two messiah doctrine sounds vaguely familiar to me. I presume this group is awaiting BOTH messiahs? Except the sub group that privately believes the first came 2000 years ago?

Jesus was a Jew. His flowers were Jews. The early Jesus movement was comprised mostly of Jews. Which Jews believed Jesus to be a liar and a con artist? The Jews depicted and characterized by the authors of the NT Gospels? Did these authors, writing in Greek two generations after Jesus' death, have an agenda? Were they, intentionally or not, advancing a narrative about Jews and their rebellion in the context of the War in 70CE?

Weren’t the Pharisees, and other sects, expecting the messiah to be a kingly figure like David who would lead a military revolution to defeat the enemy (Romans?) and unite Israel? And it will be obvious to everyone who the messiah is when he appears? The NT tells a story of a completely different messiah. Jesus is not depicted as a military statesman leading a revolution to defeat a geopolitical enemy and unite a nation. He’s depicted as an itinerant, peasant preacher, who is not apparent as messiah, even to his own followers. I can agree that most Jews reject Jesus as messiah because they reject the NT.

Funny and sad. Martindale, Corps and Corps Nazis are of the seed of victor paul wierwille. There is no Corps or Martindale without victor paul wierwille. PERIOD. I've read accounts from people who knew LCM before he was inseminated by vpw. The difference is a white-heart-black-heart kind of difference. LCM, the Corps, and everyone else were spiritually raped by vpw. Even the hippies of Rye and the House of Acts were spiritually raped by victor's wicked phallus. I wonder how far they might have gone. I wonder what kind of continued impact they might have had, if they had not been stolen by the thief who came to steal, kill and destroy. Mike has admitted on other threads that bias is a good thing. He has also admitted to not understanding confirmation bias. He has admitted to clutching and clinging to his bias. He beleeves in his bias.

“Hold my beer,” say physicists Donald Hoffman, Wolfgang Smith, Bernardo Kastrup, Tom Campbell… Why? Which scriptures? Are you sure? How do you know?

Yikes!

No! Criminy! Doors are time. How many times do I have to explain it? Not rules. Laws. LAWS. His hands are tied. He's a law maker not a law breaker. He's not strong enough or courageous enough or creative enough to break his own laws. Hey! He's willing, but he's unable. But, boy, oh boy, is he willing. But not able. Just like it sounds: A-B-L-E. He's a pun-kass simp of a god. A construct of mortal thought. Got ta make it fit. Golly gee whiz!

God was willing but unable due to legal constraints, and, presumably, budget cuts (aka little boy killers). This is not the same god victor “taught.”

Poor victor "taught" that his bit-chass god's ability is equal to his willingness. But in Job a conceptual, allegorical god's ability and willingness are not equal, rather, they are contingent upon this god teaching Job to beleeeve rightly? I'm sure this contradiction is merely apparent, and with enough fudging and logical magic, it all can be made to fit... like a hand in a

MIKE: ...in science the idea is to control experiments so that the many other forces that at work are eliminated, and then one particular force can be studied in isolation. Do you mean controlled experiments? Forces aren't eliminated, rather, variables are controlled. Experiments need not be performed in a vacuum. This is scientific method 101. How could you be so far off the mark with this? Didn't you spend years fetching coffee, cleaning toilets and washing windows for "super star scientists"? (Rhetorical questions. Bullshonta answers are not solicited.)

What more could be said? What a fountain of ignorance! What abject contempt for sound mind! Wow. Just... wow... "There's not a pill you can take, there's not a class you can go to... stupid is forever." -- R. White

Were WOW burgers stretched like the coffee? (Real question.)

If an analogy must be inexhaustibly explained, decoded or clarified, then it's an ineffectual analogy. It's not REALLY an analogy at all. An analogy is a comparison of two things for the purpose of clarification. The analogy itself is the clarifier. Same goes for metaphors. If one must perform acrobatic logical leaps and imaginative jumps to hyper space to explain a metaphor, it's a poorly constructed and ineffectual metaphor.

Amen and amen.