Mike

That looks much better than the phony type of relationship I have seen people adopt, and just mentioned above. HOWEVER, wouldn't you say that was the kind of relationship the apostles had with him before the Ascension? I would. But God upgraded that on Pentecost with a BETTER kind of relationship, that of an ambassador. I think we ought to accept the kind of ambassador relationship we have been given and that Paul exhibits for our learning. When Christ returns we can have the intimate, personal, parousia relationship as a bonus.

What I have often seen, when people (including x-Way) go off the deep end on having a relationship with Christ himself. A stupid relationship is what I usually see out in the open, and are silly things like tattoos and clothing displaying his name and face, wearing big crucifixes in plain sight, saving a place at the dinner table for Jesus to sit, talking to him as if he was in the room, pretending to hear Jesus respond to talk/prayers like that, exhibiting swooning emotional body language, speaking to and of him with verbal intonations similar to being "in love." I'd call all that a phony relationship with Christ. A genuine relationship with Christ is to study what his attitudes and standards are and adopting them. Representing Christ for those who can't yet "see" him gives us a great way to "relate" to him in this relationship. Imitating the love of Christ is what I see written for our relationship with Christ.

Ok, what DOES fit into your picture of a personal relationship with Christ himself. Prayer to Jesus with your understanding?

Well, at least Voltaire forbade it: "Doubt is uncomfortable, certainty is ridiculous." I'd say certainty is being forbidden there, and we are goaded into accepting the discomfort of doubt. This happens over and over in academia.

Could you please elaborate on this. If this is the MEANING of Christianity, then you should have LOTS of scriptures on it. Could you please supply those scriptures that detail this PERSONAL relationship with Christ HIMSELF. I'd like to see where you get this meaning of Christianity from, and what is our responsibility in building such a relationship. How does one CONDUCT such a relationship? Would SIT fit into this somewhere?

According to me. I was explaining how I was using the phrases. If you had read the context for understanding that may have been obvious to you. Case dismissed.

There is a time for confirmation bias. It is AFTER something has past the tests of critical thinking. (which is considered academically impossible) Why is confirmation bias good at that time, after truth is discerned? To CONFIRM it! To make it more firm, and better able to withstand the attacks of the truth-hating academic world. Every academic insists that error can be discerned. But then they will blanch at the idea of truth being discerned.

I was poking fun, not writing an Appendix of a logic book.

I have mentioned often that academia forbids finding the truth, and routinely mocked for it. Yet, isn't this an example of what I decried?

Do you "have" the truth regarding sentence #1? Do you "possess" the truth regarding sentence #2?

It seems to me there are only a very small number of things where we can "know to the third power" like that. I don't remember the exact context of that phrase in the class. Do you? Should we check? Doubt can be a virtue when truth is being sought. It filters out the false candidates, hopefully. But once that sought truth is FOUND, then doubt is no longer a virtue.

There are some interesting variations on this, that can have validity at times: I know I must be right, because so many known wrong people are objecting to my statements. I know I must be striking a nerve, because so many are spending a lot of time and emotion trying to bury what I say.

So far I only know the local leaders well. HQ is, at the moment, more difficult to get dialogs going with the right people for upper level matters. The work there has shifted to Africa, and I hear they are overloaded, and like me, their time is scarce.

Thanks. Now I think you are right. I'll make a note to point it out to someone in TWI-4.

Add it to the list of "jumping to concussions questions." Spiritual fellowship is fellowship with a spiritual entity. Physical fellowship is fellowship with a physical entity.

Actually, as I changed the bold fonts in your sentence above, the Epistle first mentions our fellowship with John, and (I guess) the other apostles. I think you may have a point, though. Maybe they were super summarizing those statements, where "fellowship with the Father" summarized the SPIRITUAL side of fellowship, so that they could emphasize the PHYSICAL side of fellowship. But if those 2 sentences were supposed to explain it all for "fellowship" then it is clearly missing the Jesus and apostles parts. But I don't want to "jump to concussions" over it. What kind of context did the 2 sentences appear in?

GREAT SCOTT! You write too fast. I only read your post as far as I quoted so far. I do not know if that is accurate fact or approximate fact. If you want to talk about weather reports, I will refer you to reams of text of mine in the archives on weather and the resolution of reports. I went down that rabbit hole enough years ago. I lean towards accurate fact, but it's not that important a distinction to me. What is important to me is the heart idea, and its fulfillment. It is not in the collaterals, that is for sure. I wonder if VPW had a chance to see the galleys on that very much much. He always went over things with his name on it many times before printing. That book was comparatively out of his hands. I don't know if his memory in his conversation with Elena Whiteside was accurate that day, because they were driving around in a car. Maybe he was driving? Not sure. I imagine she was busy operating the tape recorder, and he knew the area for driving. Memory is a funny thing. It is so interesting I have done experiments with mine. I did one today, testing my memory against the PFAL book of the strict contextual limitations on the "badness" of sincerity and feelings. One reason I lean toward accurate fact is we have that earlier 1965 tape transcript, with fresher memories in VPW's head by 5 or 6 years. Both accounts agree well in heart, AS EXPRESSED. So, with memory and expression distortions considered to be minimal, I still like quoting from both sources the 1942 Promise's reality, and rate it as fact, BECAUSE of the immense benefit I got and saw others get. If you want to try and take from me the HOT movement of the Word I saw with my own eyes, I will take you by the hand through several of Ralph D’s testimonies here in the archives of what he saw on Long Island, next to Rye, in the early 1970s. We were running classes and loving it all. We saw the Word like it had not been known since the First Century! We saw the practical fulfillment of the factual 1942 Promise in the mid-1970s. What we saw was a fact.

LoL.... Once a month I change my Win11 system clock to 1995, which is an isomorphic year to 2023. I do this to run the dBaseIII DOS program I wrote for my window cleaning business. I use a DOS emulation program called DosBox. This was my fix for the Y2K problem. I had used, in 1984, some standard library subroutines for calendar coding, and they were Y2K non-compliant. FOR ONCE you got me right, a little.

Here is my response to T-Bone T-Bone, you wrote: As far as you know = the extent that your knowledge reaches = 20 years on Grease Spot Café of you reaching no further than your confirmation bias. An interesting phrase: “reaching no further” Spoken as if I enrolled for training or therapy here. LoL You don’t understand the timeline I am on. I went through the phases you folks are going through still, here, now. I attended a live, face-to-face version of GreaseSpot in July 1987 when Ralph D visited San Diego. I have reported on this often; maybe you never read it, because of YOUR confirmation bias toward “diagnosing” me. I first saw the Schoenheit Paper there, then. Went through great anguish and mental struggles. They lasted years. I worked it out. Somehow, don’t ask me how, I went through a lot of garbage and struggles related these things decades ahead of you folks. When I post these things they are glossed over and ignored. That’s ok. I’m used to it. You are scoring and rating me as if I came here for help, a deluded refugee. I will not play that game, nor submit to your cautions that I “need to make progress here, or seek help elsewhere.” LoL That is your confirmation bias speaking. */*/*/*/*/* You consistently exhibit a tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports the and PFAL…Confirmation bias cannot be eliminated, but it can be managed, for example, by education and training in critical thinking skills. Let me repeat a parts of my story you may have not processed. My “high regard for Wierwille” has been a roller coaster. I applied ALL SORTS of critical thinking towards that man over the decades. Some years I was more accepting of everything he taught, and other years I was far less accepting. It went way up and way down. Lots and lots of critical thinking. I was trained in science and math and have the skills. I also opine here often of the times and situations where turning off critical thinking is good for a number of things. That could be a whole thread in itself. */*/*/* Another part of my story is that in 1998 things changed for me for a number of reasons. At that time I was also watching my 50th birthday approaching. I had been searching all my life, and it was dawning on me that all that I have found and sorted through with my critical thinking skills, needed to be applied to life more. I had found SO MUCH, and I thought that the second half of my life, should I reach 100, should no longer be devoted to searching for the truth, for more truths, but to applying the truths God had blessed me in love to others in love. That’s the only valid reason to search for the truth: is to apply love to others in truth. Everything in my life pointed NOT to Wierwille, but to the collaterals, as the only solid thing I had found. So I ended my search. I closed my mind. I know that freaks a lot of people out, but everyone does it in fits of emotion. What I did is I closed my mind on very specific issues only, under very controlled and deliberate conditions, after many years of collecting and sorting various truths. I’ve been honest and up front about this here, that written PFAL is my only rule for faith and practice, and that it, of course includes the Bible. No matter how often or how specific I am about this limitation, written PFAL, everyone here will forget it and see in their minds me idolizing VPW, the man. I am constantly correcting people on this. How many times now have I corrected YOU on this, that my “high regard for Wierwille” is a fiction you hold in your mind constantly, no matter how many times I tell you, no, it’s wrong, it’s just written PFAL that is special to me. How many days will you go before you are posting again that I idolize VPW in some way? Let’s count. */*/*/*/*/*/* If you are not aware that your posts reflect someone who has no capacity to distinguish truth from lies or differentiate fact from fiction – perhaps you should seek a communication consultant - - or help from professional mental health personnel. Actually, I am very much aware that my posts reflect that false impression to those who’s bias filters out critical information in my posts, as I described above. I have to constantly fight the false impressions and misrepresentations of my positions here. You folks are as unconsciously set in your ways, as I am consciously (since 1998) set in my ways. Fact and fiction often depend on the wording and the perspective and the bias filters. You are trying to sound authoritative in your recommendation, as if you have objectively diagnosed my problem for not taking up your anti-idol. */*/*/*/*/*/*/*/* If you are not conscious that you often turn a blind eye to the infamous moral depravity of wierwille – perhaps it means your conscience has been cauterized by the hypocritical and callous nature of wierwille / PFAL. Round two of your diagnosis. More like another swing and a miss in a boxing round. I am TOTALLY conscious of turning a blind eye to…. YOUR REPORTS of evil elsewhere and at other times. Get the emphasis? And when I say “your” I mean pretty much every active poster, in varying degrees. My blind eye is towards your whole perspective when you listen to a whistle blower’s account, a true victim’s account. My blind eye is towards your whole regurgitation of same, with your added embellishments, distortions, delusions, allusions, implications, bias, hate, etc. My blind eye is towards your every thought as to what do we do about the many unfortunate acts of the flesh that happened over many decades. My blind eye is towards your suggest actions and attitudes I should take in your solutions to the problems of more than 38 years ago. My blind eye is towards your anti-idle model of VPW as pure evil and no good. I refuse to fall down that devilish hole. Everyone has a heart that is desperately evil above all things. Every believe has holy spirit which cannot sin, and I chose to celebrate that, and magnify THAT about every believer, while you do the opposite. I will not succumb to the ill mind you have succumbed to. I turn a blind eye to your representations of these problems, but I do not turn a blind eye to the problems. My solutions are different than your solutions. */*/*/* My solutions do not include dumping the collaterals from my life. My solutions do include getting the Schoenheit paper aired by TWI-4. My solutions do include discussing possible strategies for writing an unvarnished history that would include the Schoenheit paper. I find it odd that the Schoenheit paper is not often discussed here. I have my hunches. */*/*/*/*/*/*/* Maybe be honest during self-examination – something we should all do periodically in the way of Matthew 7 I agree, but again at least 20 years ahead of that suggestion. VPW’s last magazine article has an amazing section I call a “Spiritual Makeover” that is all about self-examination of everything believed. I first ran across this urging for self-examination about 15 years late, in the year 2000. But I was an expert at already, from my RC childhood. I had really latched onto Confession every Saturday. I had my favorite priests, and considered them counsellors. I even went back and witnessed to my last confessor. Self-examination I did a couple times day sometimes, if not once a week. You could say I was very religious about self-examination. I still do it. */*/*/*/*/* In the 17 years that I have been coming to Grease Spot Café and getting to know your ‘mystifying’ and shape-shifting viewpoint, I suspect there’s more issues than meets the eye – I’m just not sure what they are. How COULD you ever be sure!? And WHO doesn’t have some kind of underlying issues? I have had and still do a VERY odd life. You can not even approach what I’ve been through and accomplished and failed at. No clue. There’s no way you could believe it all. I already strained credibility with my true stories of my many adventures. Maybe I should numb you out with a list someday? Maybe then you’d quit trying to figure me out and just listen a little. */*/*/*/*/*/* Any reasonable person comparing the thought content of your posts and most other Grease Spotters is more likely to come away with the thought that you are utterly confused – Yes, any reasonable person with the same perspectives and negative bias as yours, like almost all the active posters at this time, would think I am confused. HOWEVER, if unlike you, they were to carefully read my posts, and put things together with no ego influences (like always happen here on stage), then THOSE reasonable persons may find I am not so confused. */*/*/*/* exemplifying how detrimental to one’s cognitive skills wierwille / PFAL can be if that is one’s only rule for faith and practice. There it is again: you mixing my only rule (collaterals) with all the teachings of weirwille. I was complaining about this above. It is so deep in your bias you probably cannot get this straight. */*/*/*/*/*/* There is no denying you have some deeply entrenched attitudes that encourage others to accept wierwille and PFAL without serious questions. FALSE ! I am well aware of the need to ask all kinds of questions. If I saw someone doing that accepting “wierwille and PFAL without serious questions,” I would be alarmed as I was when I saw that very thing in the 1970s and 80s. YOU may have lived your early ministry life that way, but I did not. I asked OODLES of questions. People would laugh at me when I pulled out my latest list of questions. VPW didn’t laugh when he saw it at Rock’72. I was very suspicious and careful. If I see someone jump into PFAL fast with no questions I know they can jump out just as fast. I have seen this a lot being a twig leader twice. *//*/*/*/*/*/*/*/* The purpose of this website demands a rational response to such nonsense. I want to assume that rational response includes a very carefully selected set of initial assumptions and acceptable procedures. Most people do not consciously select what they love the most. It is mostly happenstance and emotions that guide major life attitudes. I am open and honest about our differences in fundamental assumptions. */*/*/*/*/*/*/* What does it say about one’s moral compass if they make wierwille’s corruption and hypocrisy like it’s no big deal? I make it a big deal to separate myself from anyone’s corruption that I see first-hand. I find your reports of those flaws in VPW totally untrustworthy. I said that before. I do not recognize your ability to sort through all this mess, let alone make a final judgment on VPW, and certainly not to suggest to me that I alter my work with the collaterals. I do seek solutions to the problems he left behind, even though I disagree with your embellishments of them. Even in their mitigated, realistic descriptions they are a problem that demands some kind of action. I tool action when these problems came up in my twig in 1980, and reported that our action as a twig was to bang out an amateur version of the Schoenheit Paper on Adultery, 6 years before he did his. I am WAY ahead of you guys on dealing with this. My methods and attitudes differ. */*/*/*/*/*/* Sorry to burst your bubble – you so quickly come to the defense of all the lies, illogic, moral depravity, and hypocrisy of wierwille / PFAL... ...you reveal to others what you are unaware of – that you have indeed built your faith on wierwille / PFAL. Once again you lump together what I carefully keep separate. I built my faith on that roller coaster I mentioned earlier all thru the 70s and 80s. I finally separated out the collaterals in 1998, after my faith had been built thru applying the PFAL keys to my Bible. I worked it out with God what to do. I simply committed to what I had learned and to helping others with it. */*/*/*/*/*/* We defend to the hilt whatever is most precious to us. -Yes, so choose wisely what is most precious by what takes up our most precious time and attention. Me: the collaterals. You? The anti-idol, pure evil guy you like thinking and typing about for lots and lots of your time? The First John Epistle ends urging us to guard against idols, which are time soakers that take us away from meditating on God and His Son via His written Word.

On the Absent Christ thread:

No. You are confusing the process of me rightly dividing the Word, with the OTHER process of me celebrating (good feelings), which occurred a little later in time. Yes they were related, but not by the causal connection you accused me of. LoL I should have saved time, and just pleaded guilty to your silly charge of hypocrisy. It would have saved me time, and only a micro-loss in audience credibility ratings. Why did you want to waste time on this? Why did I want to waste time on this? It occurred to me to ignore it, which is like pleading no contest in court. I'm serious, though. Why not let's talk about something serious, sometime? I see you have an new post in this flurry that just arrived as I am typing this. I wonder if it will be something silly or serious. BTW, that was HALF of my shtick when I did the Open Mic circuit; I did topics that were Science, Silly, Serious, and Sixties. Anyway, let's go see what new post you have for me.

Here is my best effort to find every passage in the PFAL BOOK that uses the words sincere or sincerity. My hunch/memory was correct. The only times sincerity is depicted as a negative is for right dividing the Word and heavy decisions. Otherwise sincerity is good. A few quotes you will find below: "Naturally I will be sincere on both salvation and the Holy Spirit..." "Sincerity is wonderful..." "I like sincere people..." PFAL page 119 The English words “rightly dividing” are the Greek word orthotomounta. Orthos means “perfectly right” or “perfectly straight” Temno means “to cut.” Putting these two words together in the word orthotomounta, translated “rightly dividing” in the King James Version, literally means “a perfectly right cutting.” Its intricate nuance of meaning is that there is only one way to rightly cut The Word; all other ways are wrong cuttings. The teaching that many people give – that as long as you are sincere everything is wonderful – is not the teaching of The Word. II Timothy 2:15 says that we are to “study to show ourselves approved unto God by rightly dividing.” There is only one way to rightly cut The Word; all other ways are wrong cuttings. Sincerity and sincere Page 122-124 The Word of God is the true Word only when it is rightly divided. When it is wrongly divided we have error at the particular place where it is wrongly divided. To illustrate, if I rightly divide the Word of Truth on salvation, I will have the true Word on salvation. But if I wrongly divide the Word of Truth on the subject of the Holy Spirit, then at that place I do not have the true Word. Naturally I will be sincere on both salvation and the Holy Spirit; but sincerity is absolutely no guarantee for truth. Sincerity is wonderful, but it is not synonymous with truth. I like sincere people, but I have also been hoodwinked by them. The insincere people have never deceived me, but the sincere people have. Sincerity or insincerity is not the determining factor for truth. The Word of God is Truth. When we rightly divide it, we have the true Word; when we wrongly divide it, we have error. In the matter of standing approved before God, people are again in disagreement. Sincere, sincerity Page 137 Verse 23, Save that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me [if I go to Jerusalem]. Verse 24, But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God. Doesn’t that sound wonderful, sincere, devout? But what good was Paul’s sincerity in going to Jerusalem when the spirit had already told him not to go there? Acts 21:3, Now when we had discovered Cyprus, we left it on the left hand, and sailed into Syria, and landed at Tyre: for there the ship was to unlade her burden. Page 140 Verse 13, Then Paul answered, What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart Paul moaned, so-to-speak, “Don’t you people know that I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus?” Doesn’t that sound magnanimous and sincere! But Paul was totally wrong. The will of the Lord was for him not to go to Jerusalem. After translators accurately gave The Word thus far, they reached verse 14. The translators tried to help Paul save face in the modern translations by simply putting in commas. Page 253 Genesis 3:3: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. God never said anything about touching the fruit. Now what had Eve done? She had added to the Word of God. When one adds to the Word of God, is it still the Word of God? Again, it becomes private interpretation. The moment a word is deleted or added, one no longer has The Word. God never said what Eve quoted Him as saying. But was she sincere? She was sincere, but she was totally wrong. What else did Eve do to God’s Word? “Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.” God had said, “For in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” There was no equivocating about it. Eve changed the truth of God’s Word from “the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die,” to “lest [maybe, perhaps] ye die.” She questioned the integrity of God’s Word.

T-Bone You wrote: Ah but it WAS the collaterals, PFAL, the programs WOW, Fellow Laborers, Way Corps, etc., that taught us to ignore feelings...to suppress intuition...to disengage cognitive skills - - How about some page numbers for including collaterals in that list */*/*/* You wrote: “Something that is always puzzling to me is the contempt that Mike exhibits toward the way corps. Mike was NEVER in the way corps so it always baffles me how he finds the audacity to speak so authoritatively about them.” As I have explained often, my contempt is where the Corps went wrong, and that was mostly in the upper management. I can include VPW here. If he made a big mistake planning PFAL’77 to be the new class, he could make big mistakes with the Corps program. I didn’t have to be in the Corps to suffer under them a few times, and watch many others suffer under them often. AGAIN, the perpetrators were the vast minority, but a very vocal and influential minority. You were never president of a big religious company, so HOW DARE you criticize President VPW???? See how stupid that sounds? I saw error in the Corps, and I saw them promulgate it verbally. */*/*/*/* You wrote: One theory I have suggests that Mike was envious of the intimate relation he imagined way corps had with their “father in the Word”, wierwille. That is funny. One of the reasons I left HQ is because I actually experienced the verse “A prophet is not without honor…” in that in looking back on my life, my respect for VPW actually dipped when I was much closer to him at HQ, compared to 800 miles away in New York. Then when I left for California, my respect rose some. It had other roller coaster ups and downs as well, but I know that being at HQ, it seemed to be no big deal to be around him. I knew because of his time restraints, that when he was nearby, like at lunch, he was not really open to hanging out with me and discussing lots of things. I had that kind of time with him at Rock 1972, so my hunger to admire him was dimed by seeing him a lot at HQ. I saw him lose his temper there much more than anywhere else. That wasn’t fun, because I think some of those times he didn’t have all the facts, and was jumping to concussions. (had to bring it back on topic. ) You look like you really want to have all kinds of psychology theories and conspiracy theories about me. Let’s play a game. See what kind of theory you can come up with as to why my posting is always changing from one format to another. Maybe I am a committee and not an individual? WoW! I can’t wait to see how you spin that one. */*/*/*/*/*/*/* You wrote: I think a lot of people really believed in wierwille – and believed he could do no wrong… Yup. I saw that often, and in the early 1970s. It alarmed me. One reason I did not go WoW or into the Corps. After 11 years I decided it would be good to go out Wow and it was a good decision. I learned tons. */*/*/*/* You wrote: Recalling my time in residence, it was extremely laser-focused on knowing The Power For Abundant Living class material backwards and forwards. I am NOT exaggerating! During the three meals we had each day in the dining room, we were randomly called upon to give a five-minute teaching - right there on the spot – and immediately critiqued right after that. Even back then I was disturbed by one fact (which at the time was another one of those things I relegated to the back burner) - that people who quoted PFAL material verbatim or with very little deviation from that, received the highest praise with little or no criticism... -That is a good insight. The new ChatGPT software A.I. can do the same quality of parroting many did. It really got bad when parroted lines were used by Corps on the field, and they misapplied them, or the situation did not call for those lines.

So_crates Mike said: feelings can't be trusted in matters of doctrines and decisions on the Word. You mean like that feeling of elation you got when you thought Raf supported your position? No guarantee for truth, right? That elation had nothing to do with me rightly dividing the Word or making a heavy decision, so it was “legal” for me to have those feelings. But I understand you and can relate to your sincerity here. */*/*/*/* So_crates Mike said: feelings can't be trusted in matters of doctrines and decisions on the Word. You mean like that feeling of elation you got when you thought Raf supported your position? No guarantee for truth, right? That elation had nothing to do with me rightly dividing the Word or making a heavy decision, so it was “legal” for me to have those feelings. But I understand you and can relate to your sincerity here. 2 hours ago, Mike said: if it lowers my petty rating I'll allow you to come over here and berate me. So, Mike, where's you believing? If you believe people will berate you... -Where’s my believing? In the promises of God. I don’t think there is a promise of God that will insulate me from berating. I learned this in “Paul’s Thorn in the Flesh,” one of our collaterals. */*/*/*/*/* So_crates Mike said: feelings can't be trusted in matters of doctrines and decisions on the Word. You mean like that feeling of elation you got when you thought Raf supported your position? No guarantee for truth, right? That elation had nothing to do with me rightly dividing the Word or making a heavy decision, so it was “legal” for me to have those feelings. But I understand you and can relate to your sincerity here. 2 hours ago, Mike said: I think you ought to think long and hard about everything he said. Says the guy that reads a post until he finds something disagreeable then he stops reading. -No. Sometimes I stop responding at a point, but I usually read all the way, unless it’s real long. That happens too. If I wanted to avoid the disagreeable I would not be here. Just where do YOU get off telling anybody to think long and hard about anything? -When I see a need I try to help. I think you ought to think long and hard about that. -I did too. I did it in the 1970s, mostly.

chockfull 2 hours ago, Mike said: I think if you look hard for us being taught widespread emotion suppression in classes and the collaterals, you wont find that kind of teaching. What you will find there is the teaching that if we are trying to work the Word for doctrine, THAT'S when we should be suppressing our feelings. Feelings and sincerity are NOT good for discerning truth. Another area where we should suppress our emotions is when we are trying to make a complex, difficult decision on important matters, especially if it involves asking for revelation. Outside of that feelings and sincerity are WONDERFUL! But that is not what the Corps led TVTs taught us. For the sake of Corps discipline, feelings and sincerity were OVERLY suppressed in the verbal traditions that developed. It leaked out to us non-Corps as well. THAT is how we were taught to suppress our humanity in TWI. It was not the collaterals that were responsible for that. Funny I just don’t see that playing out in Jesus life and example in any fashion. He portrayed a lot of emotion as well as sharp logic. What I most certainly do see suppressed all the time is common logic due to emotional attachment. When you make a habit of suppressing things it leaks out in other areas. -I agree that feelings and sincerity got the short end of the stick at TWI, but it was in the TVT’s (and maybe from the film transcript?) that I see that sadness originate.