It's easy to separate the ideas in the books from the man. The plagiarism fans think those ideas are not his to begin with. I like the ideas. I like how they fit together. I don't get fooled into abusing women at all from the collaterals. From a few Corps leaders I COULD have picked up that attitude, but I resisted each time.
Yeah, it's easy for YOU to believe you can separate the ideas from the man. But that's not really how life works. In the actual bible, doesn't it say something about (and I know it's been covered by several posters posting it to you over the last weeks and months) being able to tell by the person's fruit?
When you adamantly hold that Wierwille's writings were of God but his life wasn't, who exactly are you deceiving?
Of course you do. Your hero did too. It brought HIM the attention. Just like you so desperately crave. Sell your brand of snake oil to someone else will ya’?
It wasn't a part of an argument for me to mention that.
I just wondered how many posters here could actually think I'd have such a cartoon mentality as to post here 5000 times 10 years ago, to come back here still on fire with positive reports on how I spent my summer vacation for 10 years, only to drop my working, functioning, delightful core belief system from reading a hundred posts, and then adopting the Pure Evil model, to then shut down my computer and live with my new CreaseGod. At least Rocky got it, that that was never going to happen. Geeeesh!
There's the same FALSE DILEMMA again. My offer to help you was a sincere one. I think you really don't see it.
Think I have to disagree a little with you on that, Waysider. The orange book and the white book not completely filled with inaccuracies, in fact some of the information in them is good and solid. That's because they were poached from people who understood. But throughout, the real words of truth have been so meddled with, smeared and tarnished by the thief who stole them (ie, VPW) yet who didn't understand what he'd stolen, that it's difficult to untangle truth from error - despite the purported aim of the "class."
The orange book and the white book and the other PFAL books are inconsistent with each other (esp the collaterals) - in fact, the collaterals are poorly written folksy stories with no real meat.
For myself, knowing what I know now, if I can't trust the man, how can I trust his words? He didn't trust the words himself !!! The only way to work out the truth from error is to ascertain what the Bible really says. If it doesn't say so, anything in PFAL is suspect.
Growth occurs when one is able to look at what PFAL might purport to state, and REJECT the false premises, the lies, the contradictions against scripture. And this, Mike cannot do because, in his opinion, the Bible is merely "background."
Rejection of the false and holding fast to what is good
1 Thess 5:21 -
But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good
flourishes best in a heart that
rejoices and is thankful to God, see earlier in the same chapter.
Anyone who cares to look can see that there has been a lot of growth in the lives of many of the posters here. We have rejected the lies, we have looked for ourselves, and most do our best to align our hearts with God's heart. And that growth allows, nay demands, reaching out to help others.
I had written: .Depends on where you look. Look in the collaterals, like I did mostly, and it's a different world.
I think I can claim with some authority that my world is VERY different from most here. I've been free of TWI interference for a full 30 years now. I've had 20 years of good times in the collaterals and almost nothing else. I will tell you, YES, my world is pretty darn positive and free of the baloney people wrestle with here.
I can see that. Your world is so positive and free of baloney that every other sentence you spout is some fear of what somone is going to do to you. You fear people pouncing on you, you accuse people of trying to trick you. You whine about people judging you.
You have more fears than Hefner has Bunnies. Now, how are these part of that positive lifestyle you have? How do they fit into everything PLAF has done for you?
And oddly enough, you leave that positive baloney free life to come here where you claim people are negative, judge you, pounce on you and try to trick you.
You did claim you were honest, didn't you? Then why the dishonesty?
9 hours ago, Mike said:
Whoa! Cafe Noir here.
No, you guesses wrong. I think about him when I'm here, but I prefer the ideas.
Don't try to make a living as a poker player. You read like the morning paper.
Your only interest in ideas is to try and pettifog all the evil Saint Vic did. That's probably why you get no takers on the ideas bandwagon.
Quote
I was talking about the absent Christ benefits on another thread. Ever think Christ being absent or not personally present would have benefits attached? Think on it a little, and get back to me if you can't think of any benefits.
You can be sure I won't waste my time thinking about it. Why should I? Do you think I can't see its your attempting to derail me from the fact you don't quote PLAF and the bible.
When you start giving straight answers, then maybe I'll consider thinking about it.
Now we'll see how important ideas really are to you.
Quote
I like these ideas much more than talking of recent dreary history.
People may be more willing to discus ideas when they get straight answers. But then your unwilling to give straight answers, so..
I think my 2 cents with twi publications, at least pfal, collatetals, and the others ive read is they need to be read like any other commentary type publications and thats considering that vpw lifted from many sources. In other words theres biblically sound concepts intertwined with opinion and error, or erroneous opinion....opiniated error too....lol
The reader should beware and endeavor to seperate truth from error, hold fast to the good.
I have not had time to read anything posted since last night, but I look forward to it.
Meanwhile I heard an interesting radio show last night while driving. It was on football, one of my least favorite topics. But this discussion was on the Pure Evil model as it exists in modern society. I found a recording of the show and am extracting points and links. This discussion was on hating evil and the Pure Evil model that is emerging in modern culture. This confirmed a lot of the hunches I’ve been developing on how VPW is viewed here. Food for thought.
This radio discussion started in football, then went into fairy tales for models of evil in olden times, then politics. I’m extracting links and names.
So far:
ThePatriots Aren't Evil. They're Just Losers. – Bloomberg
steals others work word for word then claims them as his own
Mike has made it clear he does not accept this premise. According to his methodology, the ideas belong to God and, thus, are available for all to use without citation. Unless Mike is willing to dispense with this misguided notion, all other discussion is in vain.
Mike has made it clear he does not accept this premise. According to his methodology, the ideas belong to God and, thus, are available for all to use without citation. Unless Mike is willing to dispense with this misguided notion, all other discussion is in vain.
I'm aware of that.
But, Mike invalidated his own argument.
He did so when it was sprovrn that all physical things belong to God. As all physical things belong to God, too, then it's okay to steal a car or his PLAF book. As you recall, Mike scoffed at that, yet he couldn't explain why stealing was okay in one realm but not the other.
So his argument is invalid.
He can refuse to accept all he wants. Until he can give me a valid argument why theft is acceptable in one realm and not the other, I do not accept his rationalization.
The books are filled with inaccuracies and falsehoods, regardless of who wrote them.
How am I doing?
Waysider an Twinky both make some very important points!
I just wanted to add my 2 cents ....
Regarding the verse Twinky referenced (I’m using the ESV of I Thessalonians 5:21 ) “but test everything; hold fast what is good.” is some good practical advice - - and in my opinion it’s talking about developing critical thinking skills...
but I have noticed that scriptural advice doesn’t work very well if certain folks insist on using the twisted doctrine, practice and frame of thought of an incompetent plagiarist (wierwille) as a yardstick to check anything....
the PFAL / wierwille yardstick is a very malleable measuring device: the Bible says committing adultery is sin - but with wierwille’s self-adjusting yardstick you’ll find it doesn’t really measure up to sin because it falls somewhere between “anything done in the love of god is ok” and “technically all the women of the kingdom belong to the king / cult-leader.”
And there’s another sin-adaptive tool forged in wierwille’s delusional factory: one can always ignore the seriousness of any sin by simply declaring it “broken fellowship”. ...”yeah, no big deal...no serious harm done to anyone - just a temporary lapse in my really tight relationship with God”...
I think wading thru PFAL to sort out what’s useful is a waste of time and would take too much work...and I don’t care for some of the stuff he stole from others anyway....like Bullinger’s ultra-dispensationalism (which ignores the importance of the Gospels and promotes an absent Christ) or BG Leonard’s Holy Spirit class - cuz the only thing I ever saw in TWI was a bunch of folks faking the utterance manifestations - never witnessed anyone “operating” the revelation or power manifestations - - you can’t fake those!...besides now I’m a cessationist anyway - until it’s PROVEN otherwise.
....a lot of wierwille’s stuff is geared to suppressing critical thinking and lends support to an abusive and manipulative cult with copious amounts of feel-good pablum peppered throughout to help mask the symptoms one experiences while being in an abusive and manipulative cult.
Sorry to be so blunt - but I’m not a big fan of beating around the bush or coddling anyone who is an apparent huge admirer of wierwille and his bull$hit.
Mike, my Christ is present inside of me, and in the sacrament of Holy Communion/Eucharist. So He isn't absent, no matter what Wierwille, Bullinger, or other Christian authors say. Touche!
How do you fix cognitive dissonance? I have no idea.
You don't try to fix cognitive dissonance.
Rather, you give people a clear choice.
The word of Saint Vic says it makes the bible perfect so "it fits like a hand in a glove."
Many of those pro-PLAF grads Mike keep alluding to believe that.
Yet, Paul, in Eph 4:28, tells us not to steal. He doesn't say don't steal physical property, but intellectual property steal all you want.
Further, by claiming it's acceptable to steal in the intellectual realm. but not in the physical realm, your showing those pro-PLAF grads how irrational Saint Vic's word is.
After all, didn't Saint Vic, in discussing the Garden of Eden and the transfer of earth from man to the devil, imply that God was "logically logical"?
So, tell me pro-PLAF grads what's so logical about accepting intellectual theft but not physical theft?
Has anyone thought through how stupid it would be if I dropped PFAL because of the posts here?
The collaterals have worked fine for me all my life. How dumb for me to drop them and then ask for guidance as to what do I replace them with? Think it through. Pretend I repented of PFAL. What would you tell me next?
What positives do you all have cooking?
On 2/10/2018 at 2:19 PM, Rocky said:
I see the dilemma. Nobody who invests so much time and energy into developing a belief system is going to give it up willy nilly. That's why sociologists have recognized that it takes a significant emotional event for adult humans to change their values/beliefs.
What you have, Mike, as you yourself described, is a system of belief based solely on intellectual pursuit and near academic rigor. Until you realize that's not the genuine basis for that system, you'll trudge along happily alone in that belief... perhaps.
I've noted that you have indicated your reason for participating at GSC is nostalgia-based and that you long for fellowship with likeminded believers. (If that is not a correct understanding of what you've posted, please clarify) But you've also said that you KNOW (not "knew") plenty of pro-pflap believers. Is that really the case?
Lest you think I'm trying to trap you, that's not the case. I'm just interested in you clarifying your situation.
.Hi Rocky. My comments to your post in blue.
I see the dilemma. Nobody who invests so much time and energy into developing a belief system is going to give it up willy nilly. That's why sociologists have recognized that it takes a significant emotional event for adult humans to change their values/beliefs.
In Kuhn’s philosophy of science nobody who invests time and energy into developing a paradigm is going to give it up willy nilly, ESPECIALLY if that paradigm WORKS pretty good. It takes a significant laboratory-wrong prediction for scientists to change their paradigm.
What you have, Mike, as you yourself described, is a system of belief based solely on intellectual pursuit and near academic rigor. Until you realize that's not the genuine basis for that system, you'll trudge along happily alone in that belief... perhaps.
The “genuine basis” you refer to is a contestable item. You and others here over think that written PFAL was tainted by its handler. I do not. It’s completely sanitized IMO.
I've noted that you have indicated your reason for participating at GSC is nostalgia-based and that you long for fellowship with likeminded believers. (If that is not a correct understanding of what you've posted, please clarify)
.On returning here I was not sure of the reasons. At one point I listed several, and at the end I suddenly realized nostalgia should be on there.What I meant by that is anything grad and grad talk. Stories from grads long ago that I knew certain slices of.
It wasn’t nostalgia for like minded believers.I gave up on a lot of that years ago. I was yearning enough for any grad talk that I’d tolerate non-likeminded grads. I was also searching Facebook and YouTube for PFAL grads, and finding some.
Then a few weeks later, and learning more of the horror stories, and how recent some were, and all that got me thinking deeper on WHY was I here stirring up people who are already stirred up?THAT’s when I figured that nostalgia was pretty much the biggest reason and not bottom on the list.
But you've also said that you KNOW (not "knew") plenty of pro-pflap believers. Is that really the case?
Lest you think I'm trying to trap you, that's not the case. I'm just interested in you clarifying your situation.
.Yes to the above. What I mean by “proPFAL” is NOT that they are totally proPFAL like me. In some degree they liked it before and they like it now. They may run a fellowship, and have some collaterals on the shelf, but hardly ever brought out. Maybe once in a while they will do a teaching that mirrors what they learned in a collateral. Next week they may do a teaching that contradicts a collateral.
Another way they are proPFAL is that if I were to bring up something from PFAL they would not blanch. They do not entertain the Pure Evil model at all. They often agree with me that in fellowship: VPW did great for us. But out of fellowship: he screwed things up for us. We differ a little on what he did great, and what that quality it was, but it is generally positive. Unlike here.
Hi folks greeting Twinkster et al. Of things related to King David, Mrs Bathshebah and her sadly deceased husband Uriah -
There's a few things askew in the PFAL representation of the story as well as how others have related it's implications later....
1. The record itself says nothing to make us think there was some form of kingly rights to unmarried or virgin women, and of course nothing like that covering married women. Doesn't mean it wasn't so, it does sound like the kind of thing a male ruler might come up with but I don't really see it in the Bible and history around a "David" is kind of scant, so....
2. This is easily seen in the way David is written to have handled his hots for Mrs B - it was all clandestine, and handled behind her husband's back and in such a way that he ultimately was killed. So of course, there's no open law that David's invoking otherwise he wouldn't have had to hide it.
3. Nothing in the Torah says anything about special dispensation for any "king" in this area. There is that law about not coveting your neighbor's wife or any of his stuff though, so there's that.
4. When VP teaches this he did IMO speak as if it was some kind of understood law of the land at that time, but I'd agree that he could have just as easily been pontificating about the general idea that sure, David was king and could basically abuse his authority in any way he wanted since he was the ruler. As a teacher myself of that record over the years I have never taught it that way myself. If you're a proponent of reading what's written, there's no need to cover that because it's not written into the record. Rather, it's written into the record that this was a "crime of passion", and David fell victim to his own lusts.
5. Nathan reacts that way to David's authority later when instructed to go reprove David - if David get's ....ed at him it could be lights out. Which is a very interesting aspect to Nathan's "conversation" with God to say the least.
6. I never once thought of anything in the record or in the way VP taught it in PFAL to be an indication that what he was describing as David's behavior was somehow an indicator of how a leader of any kind today could act. It doesn't make sense and wouldn't have made sense at the time - the entire record indicates that at that point the character David was F'ING UP ROYALLY and about to bring death on Uriah and his own family as well as the nation he governed.
Or as the Bible says - "But the thing David had done displeased the Lord". Why or how could anyone think that's a good thing?
In the time I heard, saw, knew and worked with and around VP from 1969 through his death I never heard him teach this subject matter as a means of saying that he himself somehow might have - what? - access to all the unmarried women of the Way because David did, or something akin to that. I never heard that connection made by him.
I've never really understood how this connection's been made - maybe others did hear him talk about it or they heard the teaching and figured it somehow sounded like a good idea or something. I don't know.
Well... seems you started to answer Twinky's questions... then got testy and judgmental again. Why do you think anyone here can "see (or perceive) your "heart" by way of anything other than the words you write? If you figure out that someone didn't understand the message you intended to communicate... whose responsibility is it to clarify? Not only have I set this model of communication forward for you multiple times, but it seems you're stuck in some kind of magical thinking that suggests your readers are responsible for understanding you by revelation or something.
YOUR words. Your responsibility to clarify.
The words that Twinky missed, I reposted with color to show what she missed. I was on her side and said so. If she had gotten what I said she wouldn't have needed to ask me, especially in such an accusatory manner. Here's a replay:
Long before I took the class, while in High School, I theorized on something troubling me, that seemed to be stamped into human genetics. I first noticed it in the 6th grade, and my young RC mind couldn't fathom it at all. But by High School I think I knew the score.
I believe the modern "Me Too" movement is onto roughly the same troubling thing.
My summation of what I saw early in my High School scientific life was "The Football Captain always gets his choice of the cheerleaders." I didn't like it, being skinny and doomed to football failure, but I could see it was true.
Fifty years later and the Me Too people point it out in nearly every power based human organization. I didn't bat an eyelash at King David's choice of the cheerleaders. It bothered me, as usual, but it didn't surprise me.
Of course you do. Your hero did too. It brought HIM the attention. Just like you so desperately crave. Sell your brand of snake oil to someone else will ya’?
Why would God take him out of sight on the Ascension day? God saw that as the best plan for us.
There's the same FALSE DILEMMA again. My offer to help you was a sincere one. I think you really don't see it.
You are right there.
I was SO much not using as an argument element, that I did not and still do not see what you are talking about.
I was merely offering my disbelief that so many here could have such false expectations of the what they can talk me into. My hat's off to Rocky for seeing what I meant.
You got my curiosity up now, though. Give me the elementary lesson on it. I don't know what I logic steps went befor it, all I knew was my exasperation at cartoon simpleton models of how life and belief works.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
25
118
33
51
Popular Days
Feb 9
41
Feb 10
39
Feb 14
37
Feb 21
30
Top Posters In This Topic
Rocky 25 posts
Mike 118 posts
Twinky 33 posts
So_crates 51 posts
Popular Days
Feb 9 2018
41 posts
Feb 10 2018
39 posts
Feb 14 2018
37 posts
Feb 21 2018
30 posts
Popular Posts
Twinky
I do not see that this says, Love a book (not even a bible) - not love PFAL. I do see that it requires some practical application, otherwise, how else will you love your neighbour? By reading th
Twinky
Mike, please re-read the first two posts when I opened this thread. You indicated that you had been re-reading heart-rending stories on old threads and your understanding was growing. So this thread
Twinky
Well, this thread has wandered off point somewhat. This was the point: I'm seeing lots of defensiveness from Mike, but nothing about empathy or understanding about the hurt caused by TWI.
Posted Images
Rocky
Yeah, it's easy for YOU to believe you can separate the ideas from the man. But that's not really how life works. In the actual bible, doesn't it say something about (and I know it's been covered by several posters posting it to you over the last weeks and months) being able to tell by the person's fruit?
When you adamantly hold that Wierwille's writings were of God but his life wasn't, who exactly are you deceiving?
Have fun dancing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JayDee
Of course you do. Your hero did too. It brought HIM the attention. Just like you so desperately crave. Sell your brand of snake oil to someone else will ya’?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JayDee
Triple posted. Sorry.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JayDee
Triple posted. Sorry.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JayDee
Sorry for the triple post mods. Don’t know what I did wrong and don’t know how to delete 2 of them. Help?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
There's the same FALSE DILEMMA again. My offer to help you was a sincere one. I think you really don't see it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Separating the books from the man:
Okay, why not?
The books are filled with inaccuracies and falsehoods, regardless of who wrote them.
How am I doing?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Think I have to disagree a little with you on that, Waysider. The orange book and the white book not completely filled with inaccuracies, in fact some of the information in them is good and solid. That's because they were poached from people who understood. But throughout, the real words of truth have been so meddled with, smeared and tarnished by the thief who stole them (ie, VPW) yet who didn't understand what he'd stolen, that it's difficult to untangle truth from error - despite the purported aim of the "class."
The orange book and the white book and the other PFAL books are inconsistent with each other (esp the collaterals) - in fact, the collaterals are poorly written folksy stories with no real meat.
For myself, knowing what I know now, if I can't trust the man, how can I trust his words? He didn't trust the words himself !!! The only way to work out the truth from error is to ascertain what the Bible really says. If it doesn't say so, anything in PFAL is suspect.
Growth occurs when one is able to look at what PFAL might purport to state, and REJECT the false premises, the lies, the contradictions against scripture. And this, Mike cannot do because, in his opinion, the Bible is merely "background."
Rejection of the false and holding fast to what is good
flourishes best in a heart that
rejoices and is thankful to God, see earlier in the same chapter.Anyone who cares to look can see that there has been a lot of growth in the lives of many of the posters here. We have rejected the lies, we have looked for ourselves, and most do our best to align our hearts with God's heart. And that growth allows, nay demands, reaching out to help others.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
I can see that. Your world is so positive and free of baloney that every other sentence you spout is some fear of what somone is going to do to you. You fear people pouncing on you, you accuse people of trying to trick you. You whine about people judging you.
You have more fears than Hefner has Bunnies. Now, how are these part of that positive lifestyle you have? How do they fit into everything PLAF has done for you?
And oddly enough, you leave that positive baloney free life to come here where you claim people are negative, judge you, pounce on you and try to trick you.
You did claim you were honest, didn't you? Then why the dishonesty?
Don't try to make a living as a poker player. You read like the morning paper.
Your only interest in ideas is to try and pettifog all the evil Saint Vic did. That's probably why you get no takers on the ideas bandwagon.
You can be sure I won't waste my time thinking about it. Why should I? Do you think I can't see its your attempting to derail me from the fact you don't quote PLAF and the bible.
When you start giving straight answers, then maybe I'll consider thinking about it.
Now we'll see how important ideas really are to you.
People may be more willing to discus ideas when they get straight answers. But then your unwilling to give straight answers, so..
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
I think my 2 cents with twi publications, at least pfal, collatetals, and the others ive read is they need to be read like any other commentary type publications and thats considering that vpw lifted from many sources. In other words theres biblically sound concepts intertwined with opinion and error, or erroneous opinion....opiniated error too....lol
The reader should beware and endeavor to seperate truth from error, hold fast to the good.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I have not had time to read anything posted since last night, but I look forward to it.
Meanwhile I heard an interesting radio show last night while driving. It was on football, one of my least favorite topics. But this discussion was on the Pure Evil model as it exists in modern society. I found a recording of the show and am extracting points and links. This discussion was on hating evil and the Pure Evil model that is emerging in modern culture. This confirmed a lot of the hunches I’ve been developing on how VPW is viewed here. Food for thought.
This radio discussion started in football, then went into fairy tales for models of evil in olden times, then politics. I’m extracting links and names.
So far:
ThePatriots Aren't Evil. They're Just Losers. – Bloomberg
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-02-05/the-patriots-aren-t-evil-they-re-just-losers
The good guy/bad guy myth - Catherine Nichols, Aeon Essays. — Jump The Fence
http://www.jumpthefence.com/news-2/2018/1/31/the-good-guybad-guy-myth-catherine-nichols-aeon-essays
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
I'm not going to do anything until you answer the post the night before. Experience tells me your just trying to muddy the waters.
Meanwhile, you like ideas. How about principle? For a change I'll give you something to think about.
What kind of man claims to be a MOG and
Now consider the above from a principle standpoint.
Now we'll see how much you really want to talk ideas
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Mike has made it clear he does not accept this premise. According to his methodology, the ideas belong to God and, thus, are available for all to use without citation. Unless Mike is willing to dispense with this misguided notion, all other discussion is in vain.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
I'm aware of that.
But, Mike invalidated his own argument.
He did so when it was sprovrn that all physical things belong to God. As all physical things belong to God, too, then it's okay to steal a car or his PLAF book. As you recall, Mike scoffed at that, yet he couldn't explain why stealing was okay in one realm but not the other.
So his argument is invalid.
He can refuse to accept all he wants. Until he can give me a valid argument why theft is acceptable in one realm and not the other, I do not accept his rationalization.
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
How do you fix cognitive dissonance? I have no idea.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Waysider an Twinky both make some very important points!
I just wanted to add my 2 cents ....
Regarding the verse Twinky referenced (I’m using the ESV of I Thessalonians 5:21 ) “but test everything; hold fast what is good.” is some good practical advice - - and in my opinion it’s talking about developing critical thinking skills...
but I have noticed that scriptural advice doesn’t work very well if certain folks insist on using the twisted doctrine, practice and frame of thought of an incompetent plagiarist (wierwille) as a yardstick to check anything....
the PFAL / wierwille yardstick is a very malleable measuring device: the Bible says committing adultery is sin - but with wierwille’s self-adjusting yardstick you’ll find it doesn’t really measure up to sin because it falls somewhere between “anything done in the love of god is ok” and “technically all the women of the kingdom belong to the king / cult-leader.”
And there’s another sin-adaptive tool forged in wierwille’s delusional factory: one can always ignore the seriousness of any sin by simply declaring it “broken fellowship”. ...”yeah, no big deal...no serious harm done to anyone - just a temporary lapse in my really tight relationship with God”...
I think wading thru PFAL to sort out what’s useful is a waste of time and would take too much work...and I don’t care for some of the stuff he stole from others anyway....like Bullinger’s ultra-dispensationalism (which ignores the importance of the Gospels and promotes an absent Christ) or BG Leonard’s Holy Spirit class - cuz the only thing I ever saw in TWI was a bunch of folks faking the utterance manifestations - never witnessed anyone “operating” the revelation or power manifestations - - you can’t fake those!...besides now I’m a cessationist anyway - until it’s PROVEN otherwise.
....a lot of wierwille’s stuff is geared to suppressing critical thinking and lends support to an abusive and manipulative cult with copious amounts of feel-good pablum peppered throughout to help mask the symptoms one experiences while being in an abusive and manipulative cult.
Sorry to be so blunt - but I’m not a big fan of beating around the bush or coddling anyone who is an apparent huge admirer of wierwille and his bull$hit.
Edited by T-BoneClarity
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thomas Loy Bumgarner
Mike, my Christ is present inside of me, and in the sacrament of Holy Communion/Eucharist. So He isn't absent, no matter what Wierwille, Bullinger, or other Christian authors say. Touche!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
You don't try to fix cognitive dissonance.
Rather, you give people a clear choice.
The word of Saint Vic says it makes the bible perfect so "it fits like a hand in a glove."
Many of those pro-PLAF grads Mike keep alluding to believe that.
Yet, Paul, in Eph 4:28, tells us not to steal. He doesn't say don't steal physical property, but intellectual property steal all you want.
Further, by claiming it's acceptable to steal in the intellectual realm. but not in the physical realm, your showing those pro-PLAF grads how irrational Saint Vic's word is.
After all, didn't Saint Vic, in discussing the Garden of Eden and the transfer of earth from man to the devil, imply that God was "logically logical"?
So, tell me pro-PLAF grads what's so logical about accepting intellectual theft but not physical theft?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
On 2/10/2018 at 2:09 PM, Mike said:
Has anyone thought through how stupid it would be if I dropped PFAL because of the posts here?
The collaterals have worked fine for me all my life. How dumb for me to drop them and then ask for guidance as to what do I replace them with? Think it through. Pretend I repented of PFAL. What would you tell me next?
What positives do you all have cooking?
.Hi Rocky. My comments to your post in blue.
I see the dilemma. Nobody who invests so much time and energy into developing a belief system is going to give it up willy nilly. That's why sociologists have recognized that it takes a significant emotional event for adult humans to change their values/beliefs.
In Kuhn’s philosophy of science nobody who invests time and energy into developing a paradigm is going to give it up willy nilly, ESPECIALLY if that paradigm WORKS pretty good. It takes a significant laboratory-wrong prediction for scientists to change their paradigm.
What you have, Mike, as you yourself described, is a system of belief based solely on intellectual pursuit and near academic rigor. Until you realize that's not the genuine basis for that system, you'll trudge along happily alone in that belief... perhaps.
The “genuine basis” you refer to is a contestable item. You and others here over think that written PFAL was tainted by its handler. I do not. It’s completely sanitized IMO.
I've noted that you have indicated your reason for participating at GSC is nostalgia-based and that you long for fellowship with likeminded believers. (If that is not a correct understanding of what you've posted, please clarify)
.On returning here I was not sure of the reasons. At one point I listed several, and at the end I suddenly realized nostalgia should be on there. What I meant by that is anything grad and grad talk. Stories from grads long ago that I knew certain slices of.
It wasn’t nostalgia for like minded believers. I gave up on a lot of that years ago. I was yearning enough for any grad talk that I’d tolerate non-likeminded grads. I was also searching Facebook and YouTube for PFAL grads, and finding some.
Then a few weeks later, and learning more of the horror stories, and how recent some were, and all that got me thinking deeper on WHY was I here stirring up people who are already stirred up? THAT’s when I figured that nostalgia was pretty much the biggest reason and not bottom on the list.
But you've also said that you KNOW (not "knew") plenty of pro-pflap believers. Is that really the case?
Lest you think I'm trying to trap you, that's not the case. I'm just interested in you clarifying your situation.
.Yes to the above. What I mean by “proPFAL” is NOT that they are totally proPFAL like me. In some degree they liked it before and they like it now. They may run a fellowship, and have some collaterals on the shelf, but hardly ever brought out. Maybe once in a while they will do a teaching that mirrors what they learned in a collateral. Next week they may do a teaching that contradicts a collateral.
Another way they are proPFAL is that if I were to bring up something from PFAL they would not blanch. They do not entertain the Pure Evil model at all. They often agree with me that in fellowship: VPW did great for us. But out of fellowship: he screwed things up for us. We differ a little on what he did great, and what that quality it was, but it is generally positive. Unlike here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
socks! I'm sorry I missed this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
The words that Twinky missed, I reposted with color to show what she missed. I was on her side and said so. If she had gotten what I said she wouldn't have needed to ask me, especially in such an accusatory manner. Here's a replay:
Long before I took the class, while in High School, I theorized on something troubling me, that seemed to be stamped into human genetics. I first noticed it in the 6th grade, and my young RC mind couldn't fathom it at all. But by High School I think I knew the score.
I believe the modern "Me Too" movement is onto roughly the same troubling thing.
My summation of what I saw early in my High School scientific life was "The Football Captain always gets his choice of the cheerleaders." I didn't like it, being skinny and doomed to football failure, but I could see it was true.
Fifty years later and the Me Too people point it out in nearly every power based human organization. I didn't bat an eyelash at King David's choice of the cheerleaders. It bothered me, as usual, but it didn't surprise me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Like myself, I imagine we all go in and out of fellowship. When we are in we can do some good. When we are out things go badly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Why would God take him out of sight on the Ascension day? God saw that as the best plan for us.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
You are right there.
I was SO much not using as an argument element, that I did not and still do not see what you are talking about.
I was merely offering my disbelief that so many here could have such false expectations of the what they can talk me into. My hat's off to Rocky for seeing what I meant.
You got my curiosity up now, though. Give me the elementary lesson on it. I don't know what I logic steps went befor it, all I knew was my exasperation at cartoon simpleton models of how life and belief works.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.