Mike: neurosciencethese days sees human consciousness as a bit of a confabulation.
A profoundly inaccurate assertion.
Neuroscientists today see consciousness as FUNDAMENTAL. And the mathematicians and physicists working with them see spacetime as doomed. Anyone interested in what they are working on can find out for themselves.
Mike: neurosciencethese days sees human consciousness as a bit of a confabulation.
A profoundly inaccurate assertion.
I used the words "a bit of" to mitigate my statement.
All forms of neuroscience see that there is lots of confabulating going on in both brain damage victims and in normal people.
The older schools of thought look at the confabulation as incidental, while smaller but very vocal schools of thought are looking at the confabulation as fundamental. I kid you not. It is, again, neuroscience coming around to agree with the Bible on consciousness, and "all men are liars."
So, I may have been expressing a minority point of view, but it is one that is growing.
But one by one, the unique things of the human mind are turning up to not be so unique after all, and "man has no preeminence over the beasts."
In the Bible man's mind is portrayed as egotistical and self boasting. and not possessing the great wisdom it likes to think. Neuroscience is finding this to be the case in many ways.
What I have learned to focus on are his printed writings that went through a bunch of filters (including holy spirit in many of his editors), and re-writings over the years.
...
I choose to look at what went most right in VPW's life: the collaterals.
Did your 20 years of deep study of these collaterals lead you to discover where they, or at least the better ones of them, were plagiarised from? Or did that information get "filtered" out?
Not sure why something so perfect would need to be re-written, but that's by-the-by (=immaterial, Mike. Don't bother "answering" this point).
Did your 20 years of deep study of these collaterals lead you to discover where they, or at least the better ones of them, were plagiarised from? Or did that information get "filtered" out?
Not sure why something so perfect would need to be re-written, but that's by-the-by (=immaterial, Mike. Don't bother "answering" this point).
My library has all sorts of the teachers VPW had. I have collected more than the ones that were easily available at the Way Bookstore. I don't filter those things out at all.
*/*/*/*
So glad you asked about the re-writing.
Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: As silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
First the revelation comes, and it is then spoken, and then later put into written form. This last step can include finding better ways to say it, or include new research, new light on the topic.
It is only in the "divine dictation" model of revelation writing that your objection makes sense. VPW taught in the Thess. Univ of Life that generally the Word did not come by divine dictation.
Mike: while smaller but very vocal schools of thought are looking at the confabulation as fundamental.
Citation?
Cognitive neuroscience sees CONSCIOUSNESS as FUNDAMENTAL, and what we think we see is not reality. The analogy is icons in the interface of the computer desktop. The email icon is not what generates and executes the email, but the icon is exceedingly more useful and efficient than screwing with all the circuits and transistors. I posted a TedTalk from Donal Hoffman a while back. I'll look for it and repost while Mike looks for his citation.
Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: As silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
First the revelation comes, and it is then spoken, and then later put into written form. This last step can include finding better ways to say it, or include new research, new light on the topic.
It is only in the "divine dictation" model of revelation writing that your objection makes sense. VPW taught in the Thess. Univ of Life that generally the Word did not come by divine dictation.
Actually, you’ve misinterpretedPsalm 12: 6:
The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
But that is only if PFAL (collaterals) are not from God.
And, again, if PFAL is not from God, then I am in a rut.
Good thing I saved those 3 rut links, in case I'm wrong.
no Imeant "misinterpreted" - YOU changed what the message meant - which led to your misapplication
what the message in Psalm 12:6 means is simply that the words of the Lord are pure...the words don't need any filtering or re-writing from an incompetent plagiarizing, pathological liar, who steals and lies, and desperately grasps for money and glory, while he chain-smokes and guzzles Drambuie when he's on break from sexually molesting women.
I try my best to not consider what other people say what they think was on the mind of VPW.
What I have learned to focus on are his printed writings that went through a bunch of filters (including holy spirit in many of his editors), and re-writings over the years.
His recorded teachings are a secondary focus for me, and after that I find it useful to not do very much considering about him.
It matters almost nothing to me what you think VPW's "obsessions" were.
It matters almost nothing to me what VPW's actual "obsessions" were.
It took me years to find that this way of thinking is best.
I choose to look at what went most right in VPW's life: the collaterals.
I offer this as an alternative to the mental rut many are stuck in here.
Odd, you can critique my "obsession" but you can't critique Saint Vic's "obsession".
It's your standard, babe. Once again you negate PLAF. If Saint Vic was obsessed with academia, then PLAF is not truth because, according to you, people who worship the god of academia (as in applying they went to an ivy league school and insisting on a title they didn't earn (Saint Vic's lies were more important to him than the truth).) are NOT ALLOWED to have truth (as in his claims about PLAF) or to know it if it lands on their lap (if Saint Vic didn't know the truth, how could he write the truth?) Other than what's in the parentheses, that is what you wrote, right?
Your Saint Vic worship is obvious, as your rules seem to hold for everybody but him.
Now, now Mister CEO of Chaos Incorporated – you’ve already admitted earlier on this thread that’s your number 1 job.
“You’ve got one job – ONE JOB!”
I'm not understanding what you mean here.
But let me ask something of you, and the rest.
What can I do to calm things down?
I see how things degenerate into food fights about me, and that is not what I want. I try to post what I honestly think people need and have a right to hear, and then I get many responses, to which I try to answer a lot of, and the cycle starts, and soon becomes chaos.
So what should I do now?
I was cooperative and stayed in the Absent Christ thread, then followed it into Doctrinal, then a special thread is made for me in the NT Canon, and then another one made for me in About the Way, and I finally I answer a long standing challenge to respond to penworks so I do in this thread.
You folks seem to have a anti-idol being constantly manufactured that is very fragile, and all it takes is one thankful PFAL grad to post a few key ideas about the value of PFAL, and all chaos breaks loose.
Instead of silencing me or shuffling me off to a closet, why not look at your own house and see if you are throwing out the PFAL baby with the bathwater.
You once got all caught up and zealous for a movement that turned from mindful to mindless.
So ask yourselves, how immune are you to getting mindlessly caught up in something, today, that turns from mindful to mindless?
If you were building a mindful model of what went wrong at TWI, it would not collapse at my mere posting.
If free will is biological, how could one third of the angels join Satan? Apparently, angels have free will, too. This is further reenforced by Paul's statement that believers will judge angels. You can't judge the actions of someone who hasn't the freedom of choice, freedom of will.
But let me ask something of you, and the rest.
What can I do to calm things down?
I see how things degenerate into food fights about me, and that is not what I want. I try to post what I honestly think people need and have a right to hear, and then I get many responses, to which I try to answer a lot of, and the cycle starts, and soon becomes chaos.
So what should I do now?
I was cooperative and stayed in the Absent Christ thread, then followed it into Doctrinal, then a special thread is made for me in the NT Canon, and then another one made for me in About the Way, and I finally I answer a long standing challenge to respond to penworks so I do in this thread.
You folks seem to have a anti-idol being constantly manufactured that is very fragile, and all it takes is one thankful PFAL grad to post a few key ideas about the value of PFAL, and all chaos breaks loose.
Instead of silencing me or shuffling me off to a closet, why not look at your own house and see if you are throwing out the PFAL baby with the bathwater.
You once got all caught up and zealous for a movement that turned from mindful to mindless.
So ask yourselves, how immune are you to getting mindlessly caught up in something, today, that turns from mindful to mindless?
If you were building a mindful model of what went wrong at TWI, it would not collapse at my mere posting.
You see collapse, we see setting the record straight.
If free will is biological, how could one third of the angels join Satan? Apparently, angels have free will, too. This is further reenforced by Paul's statement that believers will judge angels. You can't judge the actions of someone who hasn't the freedom of choice, freedom of will.
I am talking about free will of human beings, and more specifically, the free will of natural men, having no spirit.
Because a natural man has free will, I say free will is therefore Biological.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
120
259
157
205
Popular Days
Nov 2
154
Oct 30
111
Nov 3
106
Nov 4
104
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 120 posts
T-Bone 259 posts
OldSkool 157 posts
Nathan_Jr 205 posts
Popular Days
Nov 2 2022
154 posts
Oct 30 2022
111 posts
Nov 3 2022
106 posts
Nov 4 2022
104 posts
Popular Posts
penworks
VPW's statement that the Bible interprets itself is nonsense. The act of interpretation of any text is done by the reader of the text. People interpret what they read. They are the ones who give it me
waysider
And in doing so, he was violating his own "To Whom it is Written" rule.
Charity
What I see in what you wrote Chockfull is that we were meant to have a relationship with the class - you know the one that replaced our relationship with Christ. It was our lord in that it had power,
Posted Images
Nathan_Jr
Mike: neuroscience these days sees human consciousness as a bit of a confabulation.
A profoundly inaccurate assertion.
Neuroscientists today see consciousness as FUNDAMENTAL. And the mathematicians and physicists working with them see spacetime as doomed. Anyone interested in what they are working on can find out for themselves.
Confabulation: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confabulation
Edited by Nathan_JrLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I used the words "a bit of" to mitigate my statement.
All forms of neuroscience see that there is lots of confabulating going on in both brain damage victims and in normal people.
The older schools of thought look at the confabulation as incidental, while smaller but very vocal schools of thought are looking at the confabulation as fundamental. I kid you not. It is, again, neuroscience coming around to agree with the Bible on consciousness, and "all men are liars."
So, I may have been expressing a minority point of view, but it is one that is growing.
But one by one, the unique things of the human mind are turning up to not be so unique after all, and "man has no preeminence over the beasts."
In the Bible man's mind is portrayed as egotistical and self boasting. and not possessing the great wisdom it likes to think. Neuroscience is finding this to be the case in many ways.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Mike: In the Bible man's mind is portrayed as egotistical and self boasting. and not possessing the great wisdom it likes to think.
Hence, the motivation to purchase credentials
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
What the F does this mean?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
It means that free will is BIOLOGICAL.
(and not spiritual)
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Did your 20 years of deep study of these collaterals lead you to discover where they, or at least the better ones of them, were plagiarised from? Or did that information get "filtered" out?
Not sure why something so perfect would need to be re-written, but that's by-the-by (=immaterial, Mike. Don't bother "answering" this point).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
confabulate
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
this thread has gone in so many directions - I think it would be helpful if we had one of those you are here maps
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
The words of the LORD are pure words: As silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
First the revelation comes, and it is then spoken, and then later put into written form. This last step can include finding better ways to say it, or include new research, new light on the topic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Mike: while smaller but very vocal schools of thought are looking at the confabulation as fundamental.
Citation?
Cognitive neuroscience sees CONSCIOUSNESS as FUNDAMENTAL, and what we think we see is not reality. The analogy is icons in the interface of the computer desktop. The email icon is not what generates and executes the email, but the icon is exceedingly more useful and efficient than screwing with all the circuits and transistors. I posted a TedTalk from Donal Hoffman a while back. I'll look for it and repost while Mike looks for his citation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
It was going in many directions before I stepped in.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Actually, you’ve misinterpreted Psalm 12: 6:
The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Psalm 12:6 KJV
That’s referring to the original message written in the Bible – it’s not talking about ways that cult-leaders can “re-write it”
~ ~ ~ ~
nice try on slipping that lie in
~ ~ ~ ~
it doesn't matter what theory of inspiration one subscribes to -
honesty in textual criticism and hermeneutics is a big deal out of respect for the pure words of the Lord
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Now, now Mister CEO of Chaos Incorporated – you’ve already admitted earlier on this thread that’s your number 1 job.
“You’ve got one job – ONE JOB!”
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I think you mean I misAPPLIED Psalm 12:6
But that is only if PFAL (collaterals) are not from God.
And, again, if PFAL is not from God, then I am in a rut.
Good thing I saved those 3 rut links, in case I'm wrong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
no I meant "misinterpreted" - YOU changed what the message meant - which led to your misapplication
what the message in Psalm 12:6 means is simply that the words of the Lord are pure...the words don't need any filtering or re-writing from an incompetent plagiarizing, pathological liar, who steals and lies, and desperately grasps for money and glory, while he chain-smokes and guzzles Drambuie when he's on break from sexually molesting women.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Odd, you can critique my "obsession" but you can't critique Saint Vic's "obsession".
It's your standard, babe. Once again you negate PLAF. If Saint Vic was obsessed with academia, then PLAF is not truth because, according to you, people who worship the god of academia (as in applying they went to an ivy league school and insisting on a title they didn't earn (Saint Vic's lies were more important to him than the truth).) are NOT ALLOWED to have truth (as in his claims about PLAF) or to know it if it lands on their lap (if Saint Vic didn't know the truth, how could he write the truth?) Other than what's in the parentheses, that is what you wrote, right?
Your Saint Vic worship is obvious, as your rules seem to hold for everybody but him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I'm not understanding what you mean here.
But let me ask something of you, and the rest.
What can I do to calm things down?
I see how things degenerate into food fights about me, and that is not what I want. I try to post what I honestly think people need and have a right to hear, and then I get many responses, to which I try to answer a lot of, and the cycle starts, and soon becomes chaos.
So what should I do now?
I was cooperative and stayed in the Absent Christ thread, then followed it into Doctrinal, then a special thread is made for me in the NT Canon, and then another one made for me in About the Way, and I finally I answer a long standing challenge to respond to penworks so I do in this thread.
You folks seem to have a anti-idol being constantly manufactured that is very fragile, and all it takes is one thankful PFAL grad to post a few key ideas about the value of PFAL, and all chaos breaks loose.
Instead of silencing me or shuffling me off to a closet, why not look at your own house and see if you are throwing out the PFAL baby with the bathwater.
You once got all caught up and zealous for a movement that turned from mindful to mindless.
So ask yourselves, how immune are you to getting mindlessly caught up in something, today, that turns from mindful to mindless?
If you were building a mindful model of what went wrong at TWI, it would not collapse at my mere posting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Wrong again!
If free will is biological, how could one third of the angels join Satan? Apparently, angels have free will, too. This is further reenforced by Paul's statement that believers will judge angels. You can't judge the actions of someone who hasn't the freedom of choice, freedom of will.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
You see collapse, we see setting the record straight.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Obvious signs of cults, indeed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I am talking about free will of human beings, and more specifically, the free will of natural men, having no spirit.
Because a natural man has free will, I say free will is therefore Biological.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I know nothing about free will in angels.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Kinda like a rhetorical question... answers itself.
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.