Just for the record, Walter Cummins taught DWA, not VP.
quote:Â
"I'm sure that it is possible to get possessed by going to a trinitarian church. Where do you think twi got half its people? "
Half of twi's people were possessed people who came possessed from trinitarian churches?
Â
Interesting how it's only "trinitarian churches" that are a risk for getting possessed, here. Other cults, no. Groups demanding blind loyalty, no.     Actual occult practices, no.  Actual devil/demon worship, no.  No worries about practicing Satanists, but that Franciscan Order RCC that's feeding the hungry and helping people get jobs and housing are hazardous to your spiritual health!
Where did I say "only"? Also...quote: Half of twi's people were possessed people who came possessed from trinitarian churches? - That's not what I posted. All you ever do is misrepresent anything you don't like. I don't have to give you a straight answer. (Prov. 26:4 - answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him)
Hey, Waysider? I guess you succeeded in luring me into an argument after all.
I used to visit trinitarian churches in the 1970s to witness to them. I was focused on preaching SIT, but also got myself informed on the details of the three-in-one oil anointing. Then JCNG came out and I had more amo. It got pretty intense, because the minister would usually drag me into his office to avoid having churchgoers overhearing us. It got pretty intense, and challenging.
Very often (I have found), when a grad talks about possession, they are pretty ignorant of the far more common phenomenon of OPPRESSION.Â
Most of what I saw in churches that believed in the trinity was oppression. The people were afraid to even approach the trinity ideas for fear of accidentally committing the unforgivable sin. We were ABUNDANTLYÂ blessed far more than we know by PFAL. The first session starts to clear up the fears like this that oppress so many Christians.
The churches that have the most fears about the trinity usually have one person who could be seed or possessed that constantly harps on the consequences of not believing Jesus is God. We've all seen these kinds of people. They were a few in the Corps, but not too many. Dana Carvey's SNL Church Lady character perfectly captures what I saw, minus the laughs.
Quite a bit of that comment, Mike, is complete BS.Â
33 minutes ago, Mike said:
The churches that have the most fears about the trinity usually have one person who could be seed or possessed that constantly harps on the consequences of not believing Jesus is God. We've all seen these kinds of people. They were a few in the Corps, but not too many.
Attempts to make an argument, but no way that can be construed as anywhere close to being a valid argument.
Very often (I have found), when a grad talks about possession, they are pretty ignorant of the far more common phenomenon of OPPRESSION.Â
Most of what I saw in churches that believed in the trinity was oppression. The people were afraid to even approach the trinity ideas for fear of accidentally committing the unforgivable sin.
I was raised in the Roman Catholic Church and never even heard of the unforgiveable sin until I joined The Way International... In the Catholic Church there were mortal and venial sins...there was purgatory...there was Limbo (which I think they did away with the concept years later)...we even used to pray for the souls in hell...
Quote
Â
We were ABUNDANTLYÂ blessed far more than we know by PFAL. The first session starts to clear up the fears like this that oppress so many Christians.
Â
considering all my life experiences I can say without hesitancy that through the Power For Abundant Living class, I learned to fear more stuff than anywhere else...like, fear of something happening to my kid on his way to school can actually allow it to happen...fear that I have already committed the unforgiveable sin (I actually have thought about it a few times over the years when I felt my enthusiasm or commitment didn't match those I looked up to) ...fear of being out of fellowship cuz it might mean I can get possessed...fear of doubting "the man of god's interpretation" of the Bible - cuz God might punish me somehow or take away any blessings - that could put me out of fellowship and open to possession...worried I didn't speak in tongues enough or always worrying I didn't "work" the PFAL material enough to make it my own... ...I think the ideology in PFAL was wierwille's strongest tool for subjugating followers of TWI - believers were afraid to step outside the boundaries he had set...that is pure oppression...enslavement.
Quote
The churches that have the most fears about the trinity usually have one person who could be seed or possessed that constantly harps on the consequences of not believing Jesus is God. We've all seen these kinds of people. They were a few in the Corps, but not too many. Dana Carvey's SNL Church Lady character perfectly captures what I saw, minus the laughs.
Â
wierwille was the biggest fearmonger that I have ever come across...I've heard him say many times in different ways that if you walk out of The Way Ministry the only thing left for you is oblivion...quite often wierwille would harp on the consequences of believing Jesus is God - and I've heard him say in meetings open to the public - that to truly believe that Jesus s God you'd have to be possessed...looking back - it's obvious to me now that all his bluster and thunder was just a way to galvanize folks to side with him on the issue - simply out of fear of the consequences (getting possessed)...a handy way to polarize folks - divide and conquer - "all those who don't want to get possessed, come with me."
...wierwille promoted paranoia of the devil to get people to cling to his teachings - as a parent would use the fictitious boogie man to frighten little children into good behavior. ..and that erroneous concept of wrong-seed is so absolutely-biblically-bogus anyway I don't think it deserves any more attention here - other than to say wrong-seed is the ultimate boogie man.
Quite a bit of that comment, Mike, is complete BS.Â
Attempts to make an argument, but no way that can be construed as anywhere close to being a valid argument.
That was not an attempted argument, Rocky. Just a set of observations.Â
I pretty well exhausted all the arguments that were worth having here over 10 years ago.  I said when I was leaving (a gradual process) around 2008 that I wanted to shift from preaching PFAL here to living it.
I come back for visits to stay connected.
One of the most terrible things I ever saw in the ministry (and still see today in many grads) is this shallow, breakable family-love bond.  It looks on the surface like a lot of love in a small group for a while, and then it goes stale or there's some kind of disagreement. Then, suddenly no one wants to be together any more.Â
I've always regarded these kind of break-ups a tragedy, and in the months and years the follow I'd always be looking for some kind of reconciliation as tempers calm down. In a family with deeper established love, after a breakup members should always be looking for, and ready for a reconciliation.
Because it saddens me to see this all around, in my affairs I want to seen the opposite.  I have seen a few surprising cases of this, but it is sadly rare.Â
No, Rocky, I'm not into a debate.  I see many out there, not just here, where all of life seems to be formal debate. One of the reasons I did up the debate thing here is because I saw the damage (some of it) as it was happening, and I can well relate to many of the feelings here. Some I had myself, and intensely, for years.
In my later years I am so happy to be able to just shmooze with old grads. We saw a lot. I think we were involved in much more than we can be aware of.  Someday we'll see, and every tear will be wiped away.
. . .
One of the most terrible things I ever saw in the ministry (and still see today in many grads) is this shallow, breakable family-love bond.  It looks on the surface like a lot of love in a small group for a while, and then it goes stale or there's some kind of disagreement. Then, suddenly no one wants to be together any more.Â
. . .
Â
When it is taught and practiced that love is obedience what the heck do you expect? . . . OBEY!!
Oh! . . . Says here Narcissists prefer fear, obedience and admiration over love and likability. Due to the inferiority complex and paranoia.  I wonder if these matters have a connection . . .
When it is taught and practiced that love is obedience what the heck do you expect? . . . OBEY!!
Oh! . . . Says here Narcissists prefer fear, obedience and admiration over love and likability. Due to the inferiority complex and paranoia.  I wonder if these matters have a connection . . .
John 8:12 - the pharisees therefore said unto him, thou bearest record of thyself, thy record is not true.
In other words, hey, Jesus, that's just your opinion. Same self righteous tone as in WWs and Waysider's last posts.
I recall one encounter with a person who was adamant about the trinity. I tried to point out 1 Tim 1:5, one God...one mediator between God and men...the man Christ Jesus. Not the God/man, the man. The idiot came back with...a mediator has to be fully partaker of both. Not correct. A mediator, by definition, is a third party, agreed on by the other 2 parties to resolve a dispute. For example, in major league baseball at times, a player will demand X amount of money, but the team says no, we'll give you less than X. So a mediator is hired to resolve the dispute. The mediator in this case is called an arbitrator. This arbitrator is not a player or an owner. He/she cannot be full or any percent partaker of either. If he/she was, it would be a conflict of interests.
Jesus is not any percent partaker of God. He is a man, but all other humans are sinners. Jesus was tempted in all points, yet without sin (Heb 4:15). (Pssst...God cannot be tempted Jas 1:13) This is the ONLY thing which qualifies Jesus to be a mediator between God and man.Â
Â
Â
actually it would make perfect sense if the mediator  Jesus Christ   mentioned in I Timothy 2:5     was a partaker in the nature of both sides   –  human and divine  - because he would have a perfect understanding  of both sides of the situation...
it's perfect...it's fitting...who would be more qualified for the position as mediator between God and man? ....see  Hebrews 2:14   and  especially  John 1:14   which does suggest  that Jesus Christ is a crossbreed – a hybrid  - having a dual nature  ... “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son[a] from the Father, full of grace and truth.” ESV -  the Bible Gateway online version of ESV says of the footnote [a] after “Son” that it can also read "only One, or unique One”. being both human and divine is indeed unique!
  Luke 1:35     touches on the same idea of the divine conception - “And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God.”
it's quite possible wierwille's mischaracterization of the Trinity obfuscated the dual nature of Jesus Christ for a lot of TWI-followers. I've heard wierwille make fun of the Trinity in public meetings – likening it to 3-in-One multipurpose oil saying it was good for nothing. But as any do-it-yourselfer has found out that “Its name, given by inventor George W. Cole of New Jersey in 1894, reflects the product's triple ability to "clean, lubricate and protect".  from Wikipedia
Â
Just because wierwille refers to the Trinity as 3-in-One does not make it so. I think there are enough passages to suggest that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are NOT one and the same BUT rather that they work as one – they never operate at cross-purposes to each other ...plain language  distinguishes the difference between “the Father” and “the Son” - Jesus himself said “the Father is greater than I”  John 14:28    . The Father and Son are NOT  identical – similar in many ways perhaps – but NOT  identical.
I'm not saying I understand the Trinity. But then again who fully understands the concept of God – an infinite, omnipotent, omniscient being? Can anyone here tell me what it feels like to be around forever? Can anyone here explain how God is transcendent and yet at the same time immanent? I notice in the book of Acts the disciples often referred to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior – terms typically applied to God in the Old Testament.  when I read about the supremacy of Christ in the epistles I'm tempted to wonder if the Father gets envious of all the attention his son gets...maybe it's more like the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are perfect team players – they work as one...
...I just like to say perhaps wierwille had a tendency to trivialize God – reduce him to fit in some neat little theological box...we are all probably guilty of that at times...but how about broadening our horizons...maybe don't get so hung up in the trivial pursuit of bringing God down to our level of understanding...Where is the mystery...the metaphysics...the wonder in TWI-doctrine? Where is the honesty...the humble acceptance of saying we just don't know how God works?
I read some neat stuff in doctrinal on the economy of the Trinity – that made me re-think the Trinity ...economy - the careful management of available resources...think team players...think all for one and one for all – think The Three Musketeers Â
Edited by T-Bone 3-in-One just-4-fun edit - third time is a charm
THAT is a demonstration that you lack self-awareness.
Well, in a sense I understand you. I, after all, AM a walking talking "PFAL DEBATE" of very many deliberate and conscious decisions to be so, spanning 49 years. Thanks for the reminder, although it doesn't come in much in handy to remember this. It's nice nostalgia for me, though.
Actually I find that self-awareness is a trap, when that self is my old-man nature. Forgetting it is the name of the game.
I find that Romans chapter 4-8 are great at pointing us to the new man nature. Also, First John.
I was raised in the Roman Catholic Church and never even heard of the unforgiveable sin until I joined The Way International... In the Catholic Church there were mortal and venial sins...there was purgatory...there was Limbo (which I think they did away with the concept years later)...we even used to pray for the souls in hell...
+++++++++++++
Â
Â
Hi T-Bone.
I too was Roman Catholic, but the churches I referred to above were all Protestant.
In a sense, we RCs had something nearly equivalent to the unforgivable sin, tied up in the mortal sin you mentioned.
Forgiveness in the RC was difficult, even for venial sins. Â
But mortal sins were terrifying and much harder to merit forgiveness. Â First, you had to have a priest present, and also had to wait for Saturday, so it was temporarily unforgivable if it happened on a Tuesday.
A mortal sin had the same consequences of the Biblical unforgivable sin:
"Go directly to Hell; Do not pass Mary; do not collect for your good works."
If a mortal sin was habitual, all kinds of unforgivableness was attached to it. In the confessional box you had to pray "I firmly resolve, with the help of thy grace, to sin no more and to avoid the near occasion of sin."Â THAT is a mouthful for a teenage boy to say, sincerely.
Oh, it HAD to be sincere or it didn't work.Â
And if I didn't resolve FIRMLY enough, then forgiveness was withheld.
THEN, there was the caveat that if any sins were forgotten or not mentioned clearly enough to the priest, then the forgiveness fails.
THEN, there was the penance. What if I spaced out for half of the 20 Hail Marys? Better say extra, just in case. Did I say ALL of them with enough sincerity? Another failure so possible here.
There were MANY strings attached to forgiveness, and no one ever knew if the conditions were met good enough for it to work.
With a mortal sin we were hell bound and all heaven couldn't stop us, if we died before Saturday.
There WAS something called a “Perfect Act of Contrition” where forgiveness was available before Saturday, and it could even work without a priest IF IF IF your heart was perfectly sorry or something like that. The nuns were very unclear about how this worked, and gave us the impression that we should never rely on it. They even told us to forget about it if we were asking questions.  I figured that it was just for established saints who accidentally committed a mortal sin.
Â
*******
So, imagine my shock at age 21, on finding 1John 1:9, and how easy and immediate it made forgiveness.
God is faithful, never enigmatic, and totally eager on His willingness to forgive.
And the word "confess" was totally easier also. In the Greek it is homologeo, which means "to say the same thing" or to simply ADMIT that an act was outside the will of God. No beating of the chest!
And all the sorrow for sin, and firmly resolving to sin no more, and contrition, and all those things were DISCONNECTED from the forgiveness part. They were for building the renewed mind, and could be dealt with later with a clean conscience.
I was ecstatic upon hearing all this in fellowships, well before the class.
I was raised in the Roman Catholic Church and never even heard of the unforgiveable sin until I joined The Way International... In the Catholic Church there were mortal and venial sins...there was purgatory...there was Limbo (which I think they did away with the concept years later)...we even used to pray for the souls in hell...
considering all my life experiences I can say without hesitancy that through the Power For Abundant Living class, I learned to fear more stuff than anywhere else...like, fear of something happening to my kid on his way to school can actually allow it to happen...fear that I have already committed the unforgiveable sin (I actually have thought about it a few times over the years when I felt my enthusiasm or commitment didn't match those I looked up to) ...fear of being out of fellowship cuz it might mean I can get possessed...fear of doubting "the man of god's interpretation" of the Bible - cuz God might punish me somehow or take away any blessings - that could put me out of fellowship and open to possession...worried I didn't speak in tongues enough or always worrying I didn't "work" the PFAL material enough to make it my own... ...I think the ideology in PFAL was wierwille's strongest tool for subjugating followers of TWI - believers were afraid to step outside the boundaries he had set...that is pure oppression...enslavement.
wierwille was the biggest fearmonger that I have ever come across...I've heard him say many times in different ways that if you walk out of The Way Ministry the only thing left for you is oblivion...quite often wierwille would harp on the consequences of believing Jesus is God - and I've heard him say in meetings open to the public - that to truly believe that Jesus s God you'd have to be possessed...looking back - it's obvious to me now that all his bluster and thunder was just a way to galvanize folks to side with him on the issue - simply out of fear of the consequences (getting possessed)...a handy way to polarize folks - divide and conquer - "all those who don't want to get possessed, come with me."
...wierwille promoted paranoia of the devil to get people to cling to his teachings - as a parent would use the fictitious boogie man to frighten little children into good behavior. ..and that erroneous concept of wrong-seed is so absolutely-biblically-bogus anyway I don't think it deserves any more attention here - other than to say wrong-seed is the ultimate boogie man.
Â
6 hours ago, Mike said:
Hi T-Bone.
I too was Roman Catholic, but the churches I referred to above were all Protestant.
In a sense, we RCs had something nearly equivalent to the unforgivable sin, tied up in the mortal sin you mentioned.
Forgiveness in the RC was difficult, even for venial sins. Â
But mortal sins were terrifying and much harder to merit forgiveness. Â First, you had to have a priest present, and also had to wait for Saturday, so it was temporarily unforgivable if it happened on a Tuesday.
A mortal sin had the same consequences of the Biblical unforgivable sin:
"Go directly to Hell; Do not pass Mary; do not collect for your good works."
If a mortal sin was habitual, all kinds of unforgivableness was attached to it. In the confessional box you had to pray "I firmly resolve, with the help of thy grace, to sin no more and to avoid the near occasion of sin."Â THAT is a mouthful for a teenage boy to say, sincerely.
Oh, it HAD to be sincere or it didn't work.Â
And if I didn't resolve FIRMLY enough, then forgiveness was withheld.
THEN, there was the caveat that if any sins were forgotten or not mentioned clearly enough to the priest, then the forgiveness fails.
THEN, there was the penance. What if I spaced out for half of the 20 Hail Marys? Better say extra, just in case. Did I say ALL of them with enough sincerity? Another failure so possible here.
There were MANY strings attached to forgiveness, and no one ever knew if the conditions were met good enough for it to work.
With a mortal sin we were hell bound and all heaven couldn't stop us, if we died before Saturday.
There WAS something called a “Perfect Act of Contrition” where forgiveness was available before Saturday, and it could even work without a priest IF IF IF your heart was perfectly sorry or something like that. The nuns were very unclear about how this worked, and gave us the impression that we should never rely on it. They even told us to forget about it if we were asking questions.  I figured that it was just for established saints who accidentally committed a mortal sin.
Â
*******
So, imagine my shock at age 21, on finding 1John 1:9, and how easy and immediate it made forgiveness.
God is faithful, never enigmatic, and totally eager on His willingness to forgive.
And the word "confess" was totally easier also. In the Greek it is homologeo, which means "to say the same thing" or to simply ADMIT that an act was outside the will of God. No beating of the chest!
And all the sorrow for sin, and firmly resolving to sin no more, and contrition, and all those things were DISCONNECTED from the forgiveness part. They were for building the renewed mind, and could be dealt with later with a clean conscience.
I was ecstatic upon hearing all this in fellowships, well before the class.
I still am.
Â
Geez Mike – I must have touched a nerve with my post that said “wierwille was the biggest fearmonger that I have ever come across” ...
...so why the diversionary tactic of you starting off with “Hi T-Bone.
I too was Roman Catholic, but the churches I referred to above were all Protestant.” followed by your soliloquy on blah blah blah and such.
...anyway...
. . . Forgiveness . . was difficult . . . But mortal sins were terrifying and much harder to merit forgiveness.  First, you had to have a priest present, . . . . .And the word "confess" was totally easier also. In the Greek it is homologeo, which means "to say the same thing" or to simply ADMIT that an act was outside the will of God. And all the sorrow for sin, and firmly resolving to sin no more, and contrition, and all those things were DISCONNECTED from the forgiveness part. They were for building the renewed mind, and could be dealt with later with a clean conscience. . . .
Â
Fascinating.
A narcissistic PD person has their "selves" - authentic self and the false self - so split they dissociate --
It is like they are watching a movie. Of themselves . . . but to them it is not themselves. It's someone else!
So when confronted with their behavior they are genuinely shocked that they are a accused . . of doing the things they did do . .Â
So in PFAL/TWI . . . all this talk about sin, sin consciousness and forgiveness is training to think like the narcissist . . .
"Bah . . . derp derp . . . wasn't me! . . . I see the video too but you are wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong . . . "
Edited by Bolshevik making the quote box concise and readable
A narcissistic PD person has their "selves" - authentic self and the false self - so split they dissociate --
It is like they are watching a movie. Of themselves . . . but to them it is not themselves. It's someone else!
Â
So when confronted with their behavior they are genuinely shocked that they are a accused . . of doing the things they did do . .Â
So in PFAL/TWI . . . all this talk about sin, sin consciousness and forgiveness is training to think like the narcissist . . .
"Bah . . . derp derp . . . wasn't me! . . . I see the video too but you are wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong . . . "
Â
WoW! More than fascinating, Bolshevik!
You just helped magnify my understanding of Romans 7.
Not the second half of your post, just the first half.Â
The second half I never fell for. That would be bad, to make excuses for bad behavior.
Yes, plenty of people have done that kind of ridiculous defense, insulting all normal human sensibilities. I am with you in condemning that kind of defense. I have blown it in many different ways, but that pit I never fell into. Sad to see others fall into that trap.
But your post's first half is amazing.
Not the narcissist part. Narcissism, IMO, is just the modern, hip, secular way to say that someone has a devil spirit acting in their life, usually the oppressive kind. I hope, for your sake that is not "projection" on your part, another pop psychology term. (BTW, what is PD mean?)
*****************
But this part of your post is electrifying:
"A narcissistic PD person [a believer in Paul's Gospel] has their "selves" - authentic self and the false self - so split they dissociate -- It is like they are watching a movie. Of themselves . . . but to them it is not themselves. It's someone else!"
THAT is a nearly perfect depiction, in secular terms, of Romans 7, and reckoning the old man dead, and living in the new man.. BRILLIANT! You may have "pulled a Balaam" there, where you accidentally picked up a whisper of that still small voice of the True God, while you were trying to pitch in and help the cause that downplays the Gospel of Paul.
I always wondered how that Balaam prophesy (speaking for God) happened! Have you read his prophecy of the coming of the Christ in victory? It is so cool!
***************
Now, the second half of your post is a totally valid description and condemnation of a "Paul Quoting Person" wrongly dividing Paul's words and thinking the wrong way.Â
Paul would never approve of saying to an unbeliever, or to an unbeliever court, "I am no longer the person who did that dastardly deed, that was my old man nature, and I stopped living in that nature. That guy is dead. You have nothing on ME!"
That kind of a defense is INVALID. No normal person would accept it.
Neither should a right-on believer accept it.
I know this did happen in the ministry, and it doesn't matter who it was. That is a pit of broken fellowship. To climb out of it is EASY, as my previous post here celebrates. But to continue thinking that way means falling right back in.
I happened to be lucky enough to have never fallen into that particular pit, but I've spent plenty of time stuck in others. There were times when this lasted for weeks and months!Â
Not a good way to live an efficient spiritual life. But it happens.
Paul fell into some kind of pit in going to Jerusalem that last time. It ruined the efficiency of his ministry in some ways, but even then he did bounce back into fellowship while suffering the consequences of his error, writing some great epistles for us. Had he not fallen into that pit, we'd probably have more.
Geez Mike – I must have touched a nerve with my post that said “wierwille was the biggest fearmonger that I have ever come across” ...
...so why the diversionary tactic of you starting off with “Hi T-Bone.
I too was Roman Catholic, but the churches I referred to above were all Protestant.” followed by your soliloquy on blah blah blah and such.
...anyway...
...have a nice day
Â
That was not a diversionary tactic, because I am not in debate mode. Just here for conversation.
Please note that, at least for these last two posts (on forgiveness and new-man) are pretty devoid of PFAL debate.
I'm just trying to hang out and talk Bible.Â
Not just you, but many folks here seem to be "locked in" into that debate mode. Didn't we do that ENOUGH 15 years ago here? My vague memory is you came in late, T-Bone, to the those debates. Maybe you feel there are angles that no one took against me in debate. Trust me, we went thru it all!Â
I had my chance to debate all the angles of PFAL that were important. I said my peace. I feel that I laid it ALL out here, and feel no more need to debate.
I just want to live it and love the right way in my last years. I didn't come here and visit to stir up all those past negatives. It's all pretty much done now. In another few decades this will be something our grand-children look at as "just another soap opera."  There will be other battles that capture their attention.
All this debate and casting a spotlight on the TWI Bad Guys will be gone. And in Christ's Return, all the crap and every memory of it will be burned away, and the only things left will be the memory of when and where we walked in love.
That was not a diversionary tactic, because I am not in debate mode. Just here for conversation.
Please note that, at least for these last two posts (on forgiveness and new-man) are pretty devoid of PFAL debate.
I'm just trying to hang out and talk Bible.Â
Not just you, but many folks here seem to be "locked in" into that debate mode. Didn't we do that ENOUGH 15 years ago here? My vague memory is you came in late, T-Bone, to the those debates. Maybe you feel there are angles that no one took against me in debate. Trust me, we went thru it all!Â
I had my chance to debate all the angles of PFAL that were important. I said my peace. I feel that I laid it ALL out here, and feel no more need to debate.
I just want to live it and love the right way in my last years. I didn't come here and visit to stir up all those past negatives. It's all pretty much done now. In another few decades this will be something our grand-children look at as "just another soap opera."  There will be other battles that capture their attention.
All this debate and casting a spotlight on the TWI Bad Guys will be gone. And in Christ's Return, all the crap and every memory of it will be burned away, and the only things left will be the memory of when and where we walked in love.
Â
Â
Â
This is odd -  you brought up wierwille's book “Jesus Christ is not God” , the blessings of PFAL, fear of accidentally committing the unforgivable sin, grads talking about possession, and wrong-seed or possessed church leaders who harp on consequences of not believing Jesus is God  and then you now claim you were in conversation mode …sorry Mike – I think you mean commercial mode.
... it all sounds like another one of your worn-out commercials to promote wierwille and all things PFAL.
Â
conversation is expression and exchange of individual ideas through talking with other people
debate is to dispute, argue, especially in a public arena
Â
You may claim you're just in conversation mode when someone confronts you on your shameless promotion of a fear-mongering cult leader like wierwille  - but I just think that's a chicken$hit way of avoiding a debate...
...Question dodging is a rhetorical technique involving the intentional avoidance of answering a question or addressing a challenge. This may occur when the person questioned or challenged either does not know the answer and wants to avoid embarrassment, or when the person being questioned or challenged  in debate wants to avoid giving a direct response.
You can express your ideas all you want here and offer them up in hopes of exchange (an act of giving and receiving with another) – but realize if the sum and substance of the ideas you offer up are just  “drink more Ovaltine   Kool Aid" commercials – then expect to receive resistance from people like me who balk at dumb commercials on TV - I'm one of those folks who talks back to the TV all the time  ... maybe someday you'll realize the differences between conversation, debate and  sales promotions.
Â
Edited by T-Bone speaking of Ovaltine - whatever happened to Postum?
The second half I never fell for. That would be bad, to make excuses for bad behavior.
Yes, plenty of people have done that kind of ridiculous defense, insulting all normal human sensibilities. I am with you in condemning that kind of defense. I have blown it in many different ways, but that pit I never fell into. Sad to see others fall into that trap.
 . . .
Â
Â
You're implying someone was trying to trick you. I wasn't. Not in this thread.
Â
I was describing something, as I understand it, happens at an unconscious level. Doesn't absolve the individual of responsibility but it's not quite a conscious process taking place. It certainly manifests in horrible ways.
Â
This trickster mentality . . . it didn't allow you to see what I was saying. Any person can be conditioned, groomed or love-bombed into that mode . . . (I believe) with VPW the issue was much deeper, much more pronounced.
Â
This seems like "trick of the Adversary" type of logic. I referenced the "possesion thread" a few posts back. Would be good to get your reflection on that.
2 hours ago, Bolshevik said:
You're implying someone was trying to trick you. I wasn't. Not in this thread.
I was describing something, as I understand it, happens at an unconscious level. Doesn't absolve the individual of responsibility but it's not quite a conscious process taking place. It certainly manifests in horrible ways.
This trickster mentality . . . it didn't allow you to see what I was saying. Any person can be conditioned, groomed or love-bombed into that mode . . . (I believe) with VPW the issue was much deeper, much more pronounced.
This seems like "trick of the Adversary" type of logic. I referenced the "possesion thread" a few posts back. Would be good to get your reflection on that.
********************
Â
I didn't think you were trying to trick me.
I thought you were implying things about ministry leaders who fell for the trick of thinking their "new man nature" defense was valid for their bad behavior. This did happen. I saw some use that spurious defense.
Ok, if you were referring to me and my subconscious then that is another matter.
My plan, and it is working pretty well, is to take what I said from Paul and DRIVE IT down into my subconsciousness. Whatever PFAL drove down there, it was never enough. It always evaporated by my living too long and comfortably in my OLD man nature.
So we may be on the same idea, except it's me doing the subconscious planting, and according to Dr. Paul's Rx prescription.
But you say that you know a better doctor, Dr. Antinarcissi, and he says that Paul's Mental Meds for me are dangerous and bad.
I say this is similar to the situation with L-Tryptophan ban long time ago.
The test batch was contaminated, or something like that, so L-Tryptophan was deemed poisonous by the medical establishment and laws. Turned out the establishment was premature and completely wrong.
I think your establishment Dr. Antinarcissi was premature with his careful prosthesis and completely wrong. He was fooled by the contaminants.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
18
35
21
44
Popular Days
Jul 9
30
Jul 2
17
Jul 10
16
Jul 8
14
Top Posters In This Topic
Rocky 18 posts
Mike 35 posts
T-Bone 21 posts
Bolshevik 44 posts
Popular Days
Jul 9 2021
30 posts
Jul 2 2021
17 posts
Jul 10 2021
16 posts
Jul 8 2021
14 posts
Popular Posts
cman
Thinking back at some of the places I worked, fear was used a lot. Like fear of getting fired or doing something the wrong way, or somehow shamed. TWI went further than that, trying to get deep in you
cman
Funny he said that in the class but promoted fear through the way tree, turning the tree upside down and killing the leaves. As Bolshevik said somewhere back a few posts, fear was institutionalized.
OldSkool
Yep, and thats total BS. That is probably based on the law of believing, which traces it's roots back to the the new thought metaphysics movement made popular by Phineas Parkhurst Quimby then traces t
Posted Images
Mike
I used to visit trinitarian churches in the 1970s to witness to them. I was focused on preaching SIT, but also got myself informed on the details of the three-in-one oil anointing. Then JCNG came out and I had more amo. It got pretty intense, because the minister would usually drag me into his office to avoid having churchgoers overhearing us. It got pretty intense, and challenging.
Edited by MikeVery often (I have found), when a grad talks about possession, they are pretty ignorant of the far more common phenomenon of OPPRESSION.Â
Most of what I saw in churches that believed in the trinity was oppression. The people were afraid to even approach the trinity ideas for fear of accidentally committing the unforgivable sin. We were ABUNDANTLYÂ blessed far more than we know by PFAL. The first session starts to clear up the fears like this that oppress so many Christians.
The churches that have the most fears about the trinity usually have one person who could be seed or possessed that constantly harps on the consequences of not believing Jesus is God. We've all seen these kinds of people. They were a few in the Corps, but not too many. Dana Carvey's SNL Church Lady character perfectly captures what I saw, minus the laughs.
Â
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Quite a bit of that comment, Mike, is complete BS.Â
Attempts to make an argument, but no way that can be construed as anywhere close to being a valid argument.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Narcissist doesn't have real self - feels emptiness and shame - replaces it with grandiosity
Reality however tests that grandiosity - it doesn't stand up to the testÂ
Narcissist creates fantasy world complete with magical thinking - needs others to prop this up
In this world he is superior at all times
Those who get trapped in this world share this fantasy and help to defend it's boundaries - meant to protect the narcissist himself
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
I was raised in the Roman Catholic Church and never even heard of the unforgiveable sin until I joined The Way International... In the Catholic Church there were mortal and venial sins...there was purgatory...there was Limbo (which I think they did away with the concept years later)...we even used to pray for the souls in hell...
considering all my life experiences I can say without hesitancy that through the Power For Abundant Living class, I learned to fear more stuff than anywhere else...like, fear of something happening to my kid on his way to school can actually allow it to happen...fear that I have already committed the unforgiveable sin (I actually have thought about it a few times over the years when I felt my enthusiasm or commitment didn't match those I looked up to) ...fear of being out of fellowship cuz it might mean I can get possessed...fear of doubting "the man of god's interpretation" of the Bible - cuz God might punish me somehow or take away any blessings - that could put me out of fellowship and open to possession...worried I didn't speak in tongues enough or always worrying I didn't "work" the PFAL material enough to make it my own... ...I think the ideology in PFAL was wierwille's strongest tool for subjugating followers of TWI - believers were afraid to step outside the boundaries he had set...that is pure oppression...enslavement.
wierwille was the biggest fearmonger that I have ever come across...I've heard him say many times in different ways that if you walk out of The Way Ministry the only thing left for you is oblivion...quite often wierwille would harp on the consequences of believing Jesus is God - and I've heard him say in meetings open to the public - that to truly believe that Jesus s God you'd have to be possessed...looking back - it's obvious to me now that all his bluster and thunder was just a way to galvanize folks to side with him on the issue - simply out of fear of the consequences (getting possessed)...a handy way to polarize folks - divide and conquer - "all those who don't want to get possessed, come with me."
...wierwille promoted paranoia of the devil to get people to cling to his teachings - as a parent would use the fictitious boogie man to frighten little children into good behavior. ..and that erroneous concept of wrong-seed is so absolutely-biblically-bogus anyway I don't think it deserves any more attention here - other than to say wrong-seed is the ultimate boogie man.
Edited by T-Bonejust for fun
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
That was not an attempted argument, Rocky. Just a set of observations.Â
I pretty well exhausted all the arguments that were worth having here over 10 years ago.  I said when I was leaving (a gradual process) around 2008 that I wanted to shift from preaching PFAL here to living it.
I come back for visits to stay connected.
One of the most terrible things I ever saw in the ministry (and still see today in many grads) is this shallow, breakable family-love bond.  It looks on the surface like a lot of love in a small group for a while, and then it goes stale or there's some kind of disagreement. Then, suddenly no one wants to be together any more.Â
I've always regarded these kind of break-ups a tragedy, and in the months and years the follow I'd always be looking for some kind of reconciliation as tempers calm down. In a family with deeper established love, after a breakup members should always be looking for, and ready for a reconciliation.
Because it saddens me to see this all around, in my affairs I want to seen the opposite.  I have seen a few surprising cases of this, but it is sadly rare.Â
No, Rocky, I'm not into a debate.  I see many out there, not just here, where all of life seems to be formal debate. One of the reasons I did up the debate thing here is because I saw the damage (some of it) as it was happening, and I can well relate to many of the feelings here. Some I had myself, and intensely, for years.
In my later years I am so happy to be able to just shmooze with old grads. We saw a lot. I think we were involved in much more than we can be aware of.  Someday we'll see, and every tear will be wiped away.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Â
When it is taught and practiced that love is obedience what the heck do you expect? . . . OBEY!!
Oh! . . . Says here Narcissists prefer fear, obedience and admiration over love and likability. Due to the inferiority complex and paranoia.  I wonder if these matters have a connection . . .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
THAT is a demonstration that you lack self-awareness.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Yep.... Â
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Â
Â
actually it would make perfect sense if the mediator  Jesus Christ   mentioned in I Timothy 2:5     was a partaker in the nature of both sides   –  human and divine  - because he would have a perfect understanding  of both sides of the situation...
it's perfect...it's fitting...who would be more qualified for the position as mediator between God and man? ....see  Hebrews 2:14   and  especially  John 1:14   which does suggest  that Jesus Christ is a crossbreed – a hybrid  - having a dual nature  ... “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son[a] from the Father, full of grace and truth.” ESV -  the Bible Gateway online version of ESV says of the footnote [a] after “Son” that it can also read "only One, or unique One”. being both human and divine is indeed unique!
  Luke 1:35     touches on the same idea of the divine conception - “And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God.”
it's quite possible wierwille's mischaracterization of the Trinity obfuscated the dual nature of Jesus Christ for a lot of TWI-followers. I've heard wierwille make fun of the Trinity in public meetings – likening it to 3-in-One multipurpose oil saying it was good for nothing. But as any do-it-yourselfer has found out that “Its name, given by inventor George W. Cole of New Jersey in 1894, reflects the product's triple ability to "clean, lubricate and protect".  from Wikipedia
Â
Just because wierwille refers to the Trinity as 3-in-One does not make it so. I think there are enough passages to suggest that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are NOT one and the same BUT rather that they work as one – they never operate at cross-purposes to each other ...plain language  distinguishes the difference between “the Father” and “the Son” - Jesus himself said “the Father is greater than I”  John 14:28    . The Father and Son are NOT  identical – similar in many ways perhaps – but NOT  identical.
I'm not saying I understand the Trinity. But then again who fully understands the concept of God – an infinite, omnipotent, omniscient being? Can anyone here tell me what it feels like to be around forever? Can anyone here explain how God is transcendent and yet at the same time immanent? I notice in the book of Acts the disciples often referred to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior – terms typically applied to God in the Old Testament.  when I read about the supremacy of Christ in the epistles I'm tempted to wonder if the Father gets envious of all the attention his son gets...maybe it's more like the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are perfect team players – they work as one...
...I just like to say perhaps wierwille had a tendency to trivialize God – reduce him to fit in some neat little theological box...we are all probably guilty of that at times...but how about broadening our horizons...maybe don't get so hung up in the trivial pursuit of bringing God down to our level of understanding...Where is the mystery...the metaphysics...the wonder in TWI-doctrine? Where is the honesty...the humble acceptance of saying we just don't know how God works?
I read some neat stuff in doctrinal on the economy of the Trinity – that made me re-think the Trinity ...economy - the careful management of available resources...think team players...think all for one and one for all –
Edited by T-Bonethink The Three MusketeersÂÂ3-in-One just-4-fun edit - third time is a charm
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Well, in a sense I understand you. I, after all, AM a walking talking "PFAL DEBATE" of very many deliberate and conscious decisions to be so, spanning 49 years. Thanks for the reminder, although it doesn't come in much in handy to remember this. It's nice nostalgia for me, though.
Actually I find that self-awareness is a trap, when that self is my old-man nature. Forgetting it is the name of the game.
I find that Romans chapter 4-8 are great at pointing us to the new man nature. Also, First John.
Â
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Â
. . . Or narcissistic mortificationÂ
That is funny. Â
Putting off the authentic self and putting on the idealized false self.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
The renewed mind is the key to power.
The key to the renewed mind is the stayed mind.
Â
Â
Â
Power comes from the grandiosity in the shared fantasy.
Just a bunch of steps to tune out the chaos of reality.
Nice feeling not dealing with anything real. Always victorious that way.
Â
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Â
 Â
13 hours ago, T-Bone said:
I was raised in the Roman Catholic Church and never even heard of the unforgiveable sin until I joined The Way International... In the Catholic Church there were mortal and venial sins...there was purgatory...there was Limbo (which I think they did away with the concept years later)...we even used to pray for the souls in hell...
+++++++++++++
Â
Â
Hi T-Bone.
I too was Roman Catholic, but the churches I referred to above were all Protestant.
In a sense, we RCs had something nearly equivalent to the unforgivable sin, tied up in the mortal sin you mentioned.
Forgiveness in the RC was difficult, even for venial sins. Â
But mortal sins were terrifying and much harder to merit forgiveness. Â First, you had to have a priest present, and also had to wait for Saturday, so it was temporarily unforgivable if it happened on a Tuesday.
A mortal sin had the same consequences of the Biblical unforgivable sin:
"Go directly to Hell; Do not pass Mary; do not collect for your good works."
If a mortal sin was habitual, all kinds of unforgivableness was attached to it. In the confessional box you had to pray "I firmly resolve, with the help of thy grace, to sin no more and to avoid the near occasion of sin."Â THAT is a mouthful for a teenage boy to say, sincerely.
Oh, it HAD to be sincere or it didn't work.Â
And if I didn't resolve FIRMLY enough, then forgiveness was withheld.
THEN, there was the caveat that if any sins were forgotten or not mentioned clearly enough to the priest, then the forgiveness fails.
THEN, there was the penance. What if I spaced out for half of the 20 Hail Marys? Better say extra, just in case. Did I say ALL of them with enough sincerity? Another failure so possible here.
There were MANY strings attached to forgiveness, and no one ever knew if the conditions were met good enough for it to work.
With a mortal sin we were hell bound and all heaven couldn't stop us, if we died before Saturday.
There WAS something called a “Perfect Act of Contrition” where forgiveness was available before Saturday, and it could even work without a priest IF IF IF your heart was perfectly sorry or something like that. The nuns were very unclear about how this worked, and gave us the impression that we should never rely on it. They even told us to forget about it if we were asking questions.  I figured that it was just for established saints who accidentally committed a mortal sin.
Â
*******
So, imagine my shock at age 21, on finding 1John 1:9, and how easy and immediate it made forgiveness.
God is faithful, never enigmatic, and totally eager on His willingness to forgive.
And the word "confess" was totally easier also. In the Greek it is homologeo, which means "to say the same thing" or to simply ADMIT that an act was outside the will of God. No beating of the chest!
And all the sorrow for sin, and firmly resolving to sin no more, and contrition, and all those things were DISCONNECTED from the forgiveness part. They were for building the renewed mind, and could be dealt with later with a clean conscience.
I was ecstatic upon hearing all this in fellowships, well before the class.
I still am.
Â
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Â
Geez Mike – I must have touched a nerve with my post that said “wierwille was the biggest fearmonger that I have ever come across” ...
...so why the diversionary tactic of you starting off with “Hi T-Bone.
I too was Roman Catholic, but the churches I referred to above were all Protestant.” followed by your soliloquy on blah blah blah and such.
...anyway...
...have a nice day
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Â
Fascinating.
A narcissistic PD person has their "selves" - authentic self and the false self - so split they dissociate --
It is like they are watching a movie. Of themselves . . . but to them it is not themselves. It's someone else!
So when confronted with their behavior they are genuinely shocked that they are a accused . . of doing the things they did do . .Â
So in PFAL/TWI . . . all this talk about sin, sin consciousness and forgiveness is training to think like the narcissist . . .
"Bah . . . derp derp . . . wasn't me! . . . I see the video too but you are wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong . . . "
Edited by Bolshevikmaking the quote box concise and readable
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Â
WoW! More than fascinating, Bolshevik!
You just helped magnify my understanding of Romans 7.
Not the second half of your post, just the first half.Â
The second half I never fell for. That would be bad, to make excuses for bad behavior.
Yes, plenty of people have done that kind of ridiculous defense, insulting all normal human sensibilities. I am with you in condemning that kind of defense. I have blown it in many different ways, but that pit I never fell into. Sad to see others fall into that trap.
But your post's first half is amazing.
Not the narcissist part. Narcissism, IMO, is just the modern, hip, secular way to say that someone has a devil spirit acting in their life, usually the oppressive kind. I hope, for your sake that is not "projection" on your part, another pop psychology term. (BTW, what is PD mean?)
*****************
But this part of your post is electrifying:
"A narcissistic PD person [a believer in Paul's Gospel] has their "selves" - authentic self and the false self - so split they dissociate -- It is like they are watching a movie. Of themselves . . . but to them it is not themselves. It's someone else!"
THAT is a nearly perfect depiction, in secular terms, of Romans 7, and reckoning the old man dead, and living in the new man.. BRILLIANT! You may have "pulled a Balaam" there, where you accidentally picked up a whisper of that still small voice of the True God, while you were trying to pitch in and help the cause that downplays the Gospel of Paul.
I always wondered how that Balaam prophesy (speaking for God) happened! Have you read his prophecy of the coming of the Christ in victory? It is so cool!
***************
Now, the second half of your post is a totally valid description and condemnation of a "Paul Quoting Person" wrongly dividing Paul's words and thinking the wrong way.Â
Paul would never approve of saying to an unbeliever, or to an unbeliever court, "I am no longer the person who did that dastardly deed, that was my old man nature, and I stopped living in that nature. That guy is dead. You have nothing on ME!"
That kind of a defense is INVALID. No normal person would accept it.
Neither should a right-on believer accept it.
I know this did happen in the ministry, and it doesn't matter who it was. That is a pit of broken fellowship. To climb out of it is EASY, as my previous post here celebrates. But to continue thinking that way means falling right back in.
I happened to be lucky enough to have never fallen into that particular pit, but I've spent plenty of time stuck in others. There were times when this lasted for weeks and months!Â
Not a good way to live an efficient spiritual life. But it happens.
Paul fell into some kind of pit in going to Jerusalem that last time. It ruined the efficiency of his ministry in some ways, but even then he did bounce back into fellowship while suffering the consequences of his error, writing some great epistles for us. Had he not fallen into that pit, we'd probably have more.
Â
Â
Â
Â
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
PD = personality disorder
NPD = narcissistic personality disorder (as opposed to someone who has a narcissistic personality)Â
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder
Concerning possession:
Â
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Â
That was not a diversionary tactic, because I am not in debate mode. Just here for conversation.
Please note that, at least for these last two posts (on forgiveness and new-man) are pretty devoid of PFAL debate.
I'm just trying to hang out and talk Bible.Â
Not just you, but many folks here seem to be "locked in" into that debate mode. Didn't we do that ENOUGH 15 years ago here? My vague memory is you came in late, T-Bone, to the those debates. Maybe you feel there are angles that no one took against me in debate. Trust me, we went thru it all!Â
I had my chance to debate all the angles of PFAL that were important. I said my peace. I feel that I laid it ALL out here, and feel no more need to debate.
I just want to live it and love the right way in my last years. I didn't come here and visit to stir up all those past negatives. It's all pretty much done now. In another few decades this will be something our grand-children look at as "just another soap opera."  There will be other battles that capture their attention.
All this debate and casting a spotlight on the TWI Bad Guys will be gone. And in Christ's Return, all the crap and every memory of it will be burned away, and the only things left will be the memory of when and where we walked in love.
Â
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Ok . . . I forgot that PFAL = Bible or something.  My Bad.
Â
I am assuming (an cannot validly diagnose) VPW had NPD of some form. I am assuming PFAL was a means for his NPD to bring in "narcissist supply". Â
I assume. Made an ARZ of U and ME.  Â
Balaam's ARZ.
Â
See how it all fits like a hand in a glove?
Â
Edited by BolshevikLet me curse. I am expressing my feelings to the universe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Â
Â
This is odd -  you brought up wierwille's book “Jesus Christ is not God” , the blessings of PFAL, fear of accidentally committing the unforgivable sin, grads talking about possession, and wrong-seed or possessed church leaders who harp on consequences of not believing Jesus is God  and then you now claim you were in conversation mode …sorry Mike – I think you mean commercial mode.
... it all sounds like another one of your worn-out commercials to promote wierwille and all things PFAL.
Â
conversation is expression and exchange of individual ideas through talking with other people
debate is to dispute, argue, especially in a public arena
Â
You may claim you're just in conversation mode when someone confronts you on your shameless promotion of a fear-mongering cult leader like wierwille  - but I just think that's a chicken$hit way of avoiding a debate...
...Question dodging is a rhetorical technique involving the intentional avoidance of answering a question or addressing a challenge. This may occur when the person questioned or challenged either does not know the answer and wants to avoid embarrassment, or when the person being questioned or challenged  in debate wants to avoid giving a direct response.
You can express your ideas all you want here and offer them up in hopes of exchange (an act of giving and receiving with another) – but realize if the sum and substance of the ideas you offer up are just  “drink moreÂ
 ... maybe someday you'll realize the differences between conversation, debate and  sales promotions.
Edited by T-BoneOvaltine  Kool Aid" commercials – then expect to receive resistance from people like me who balk at dumb commercials on TV - I'm one of those folks who talks back to the TV all the timeÂÂ
speaking of Ovaltine - whatever happened to Postum?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Â
You're implying someone was trying to trick you. I wasn't. Not in this thread.
Â
I was describing something, as I understand it, happens at an unconscious level. Doesn't absolve the individual of responsibility but it's not quite a conscious process taking place. It certainly manifests in horrible ways.
Â
This trickster mentality . . . it didn't allow you to see what I was saying. Any person can be conditioned, groomed or love-bombed into that mode . . . (I believe) with VPW the issue was much deeper, much more pronounced.
Â
This seems like "trick of the Adversary" type of logic. I referenced the "possesion thread" a few posts back. Would be good to get your reflection on that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
That whole confess your sin for forgiveness was to justify wrong doing. Namely, VPW's sex life. Which some others adapted to quite quickly.
Forgiveness is a way of life, a reality, not something that happens according to what is done or not done.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
mistaken post
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Â
2 hours ago, Bolshevik said:
You're implying someone was trying to trick you. I wasn't. Not in this thread.
I was describing something, as I understand it, happens at an unconscious level. Doesn't absolve the individual of responsibility but it's not quite a conscious process taking place. It certainly manifests in horrible ways.
This trickster mentality . . . it didn't allow you to see what I was saying. Any person can be conditioned, groomed or love-bombed into that mode . . . (I believe) with VPW the issue was much deeper, much more pronounced.
This seems like "trick of the Adversary" type of logic. I referenced the "possesion thread" a few posts back. Would be good to get your reflection on that.
********************
Â
I didn't think you were trying to trick me.
I thought you were implying things about ministry leaders who fell for the trick of thinking their "new man nature" defense was valid for their bad behavior. This did happen. I saw some use that spurious defense.
Ok, if you were referring to me and my subconscious then that is another matter.
My plan, and it is working pretty well, is to take what I said from Paul and DRIVE IT down into my subconsciousness. Whatever PFAL drove down there, it was never enough. It always evaporated by my living too long and comfortably in my OLD man nature.
So we may be on the same idea, except it's me doing the subconscious planting, and according to Dr. Paul's Rx prescription.
But you say that you know a better doctor, Dr. Antinarcissi, and he says that Paul's Mental Meds for me are dangerous and bad.
I say this is similar to the situation with L-Tryptophan ban long time ago.
The test batch was contaminated, or something like that, so L-Tryptophan was deemed poisonous by the medical establishment and laws. Turned out the establishment was premature and completely wrong.
I think your establishment Dr. Antinarcissi was premature with his careful prosthesis and completely wrong. He was fooled by the contaminants.
Paul got it by revelation from the Manufacturer.
Â
Â
Â
Â
Edited by MikeLink 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.