Yes we have, and I bring up the rarely considered views.
Here's another:
VPW was the kind of mover and shaker that moved the Word around the world, and even to this old hippie (young then), for which I am extremly thankful.
There is no way I could have gotten what I cherish now from any of VPW's sources, ESPECIALLY in the state I was in back in 1971. I would not have been able to listen long enough to Billy Graham to get born again, and I'd have NEVER learned to SIT from any of the teachers the past 50 years.
I can't take what Western Churchianity offers seriously. I love blending in with them to see if I can serve any where, gently and without controversy.
I have visited many churches with neighbors and customers and even the musicians I hob-nob with. EVERY time I am in another church I have a great sense of thankfulness for what I was taught, and for what I had in common with that particular church. I think we got the best quality product on the market.
With public domain, the public owns it. So, citing sources is still legally necessary. You can use it as much as you want- so long as sources are cited.
I thought I'd get ahead of one of our talking-points.
A lot of people here read "Babylon-Mystery Religion." Yes, the author wrote a sequel-"The Babylon Connection?' that largely repudiated the book. But that's not my point.
A lot of us read "Babylon- Mystery Religion". We had no trouble reading it- it was a book that was particularly easy to read. There's a reason for that. The author read "The Two Babylons" by Alexander Hislop, and found it ponderous and hard-to-read. So, he largely rewrote "The Two Babylons"- taking the main points and stating them much more clearly. The book was specifically designed to be easy-to-read.
According to one school of thought, vpw didn't follow legal and moral imperatives and cite his sources because he cared about us so much, and properly citing sources would have made the books unreadable.
That is demonstratably bushwah.
"Babylon-Mystery Religion" cites its sources ALL THE TIME. The end-notes for each chapter were extensive. Were they a distraction? Hardly. Most people not looking for them didn't notice they were there. Most people reading the book didn't notice they were there. As soon as I looked for them, I was amazed at how well-documented everything was, since all of it was UNOBTRUSIVE.
Worse, since this book was carried in the twi bookstore, vpw had an example on-hand of a book with extensive documentation that was NOT a distraction from the book. So, had he actually wanted to give proper credit (as is legally-mandated and morally proper), he had an example to use that would have been unobtrusive.
So, that argument is without merit. And was about to be repeated, so I thought I'd save everyone some time this time around.
"Yes we have, and I bring up the rarely considered views."
You bring up something. Whether it's rarely-considered or worthy of discussion is another thing entirely.
"Here's another:
VPW was the kind of mover and shaker that moved the Word around the world, and even to this old hippie (young then), for which I am extremly thankful."
vpw moved almost nothing. His group was tiny and incredibly obscure. We would never have heard of him if he hadn't hijacked the hippies. See, there was a bunch of quality Christians, young ones who walked the walk and weren't focused on studying a new Greek word. They were getting attention. vpw heard of them and rushed over. He put on his full act. They were convinced he was some great one. Some of them avoided him, but some others joined twi. Those people became the entire advertising arm of twi, its entire outreach program, its missionary program, etc.
One might say, by derailing the work they HAD been doing, that vpw had DISRUPTED the GENUINE work of God in the lives of local people there, people who were making enough of a difference nationally that people all over the US had heard of them- until they joined twi and faded from most of the public, and became part of the twi machine.
So, those hippies and ex-hippies- and the people they taught- "moved the Word around the world" to the degree it happened. However, despite them doing all the work, you never give them the credit.
"There is no way I could have gotten what I cherish now from any of VPW's sources, ESPECIALLY in the state I was in back in 1971. I would not have been able to listen long enough to Billy Graham to get born again, and I'd have NEVER learned to SIT from any of the teachers the past 50 years."
Sure would have been nice to have heard directly from your peers during a genuine movement among God's people.... which would have happened if they hadn't been drawn out of that movement and into twi.
"I can't take what Western Churchianity offers seriously. I love blending in with them to see if I can serve any where, gently and without controversy."
There are so many genuine things happening among God's people all over, regardless of denomination, that it's a terrible shame you're reduced to tossing insults like "churchianity" at them. If that's your attitude, you're neither going to be loving- they can sense that- nor will you find what you actually need. You'll no more find them than a thief will find a policeman.
"I have visited many churches with neighbors and customers and even the musicians I hob-nob with. EVERY time I am in another church I have a great sense of thankfulness for what I was taught, and for what I had in common with that particular church. I think we got the best quality product on the market."
Are you going around calling them "churchianity"? If your focus is more on what you have, and not what you can gain from interaction with them, you're going to miss it every time.
Do you remember right after that where he said most Christians don’t manifest an abundant life, little less a more abundant life?
If you do remember it why did you leave that out?
That is at the beginning of the class. The class doesn't teach every detail. Much more was taught later in the class and in SNTs and other books and magazine articles
.
It is really pretty logical that believers SHOULD be able to use it much better. It is logical and he highlighted it, and so did other teachers. I know I did when I was a twig leader.
With public domain, the public owns it. So, citing sources is still legally necessary. You can use it as much as you want- so long as sources are cited.
I think we need to do a cartoon depiction like “conjunction junction” for all those followers of the Way.
When telling a story
”Cite your source”
When writing a paper
”Cite your source”
”Bibliography junction source your function”
“No conspiracy journals”
”Peer reviewed journals”
I can see the cartoon characters looking like Stepfords for the greatest reach in appeal to TWI followers.
It would do them so much good. It could help them pass college.
That is at the beginning of the class. The class doesn't teach every detail. Much more was taught later in the class and in SNTs and other books and magazine articles
.
It is really pretty logical that believers SHOULD be able to use it much better. It is logical and he highlighted it, and so did other teachers. I know I did when I was a twig leader.
Why would it be more logical for believers to use something that's binary better?
Once again, it's often been stated that you believe or you don't. Under those circumstances, how would it work better for a Saint?
And just where does Saint Vic say that, as I don't remember it?
I don't in any way buy the meme " you believe or you don't."
I am sorry you seem to have been given some bad teaching. I am thankful I found teachers withing TWI that explained things. I am glad I went back to the materials to get the details better than you seem to have them.
That is at the beginning of the class. The class doesn't teach every detail. Much more was taught later in the class and in SNTs and other books and magazine articles
.
It is really pretty logical that believers SHOULD be able to use it much better. It is logical and he highlighted it, and so did other teachers. I know I did when I was a twig leader.
It was pretty logical to VP that he shouldn’t have Oleo on his table as a Christian manifesting an abundant life.
Once he stole the correct IP and resold it he didn’t have to.
I don't in any way buy the meme " you believe or you don't."
So you're saying believing can be quantified? How?
3 hours ago, Mike said:
I am sorry you seem to have been given some bad teaching.
And if I've gotten bad teachers, they were with Twi.
3 hours ago, Mike said:
I am thankful I found teachers withing TWI that explained things.
Did they explain things the way you explain things? That would explain a lot.
3 hours ago, Mike said:
I am glad I went back to the materials to get the details better than you seem to have them.
You know details? What has knowing those details done for you? Your believing sucks. You're always whining about being mocked or misrepresented. Both reveal your believing.
That is at the beginning of the class. The class doesn't teach every detail. Much more was taught later in the class and in SNTs and other books and magazine articles
That's a lame excuse! You just shifted your position yet again.
16 minutes ago, Mike said:
It is really pretty logical that believers SHOULD be able to use it much better. It is logical and he highlighted it, and so did other teachers. I know I did when I was a twig leader.
A person using confirmation bias would say something like that - and citing yourself - a well-known super-duper fan of wierwille doesn't sell the bull-$hit any better.
The counterfeit is self-focused with the super-natural use of believing.
The natural use of believing is another story.
*/*/*/*
But the dangerous stuff is the supernatural ABUSE of believing, or the misapplication of the law of believing for supernatural powers.
The genuine use is the manifestations in accordance with 1 Cor 12,13,14.
Seven of the nine manifestations are focused away from self, and onto service to others. I call these the PURE SERVICE manifestations.
ONLY TWO of the nine manifestations are self-focused, and even they, SIT and believing, are closely related to the PURE SERVICE manifestations, and often used with the PURE SERVICE manifestations.
The end result of the law of believing is God is relegated to being a passive observer who has given all his blessings, health, and wealth to anyone who is focused enough on their own ability to claim it. It’s really an atheistic system that nullifies God’s relationship with those born again of his spirit and puts God’s favor to the one who has the strongest believing.
I keep trying to tell you folks that I was dragged into this whole circus more than 10 years before GreaseSpot and WayDale started. It was 1988 when I first saw that book, and bought it.
As if your unrealistic expectations for readers on this topic is to develop and keep their lives focused on what you did 35 years ago?
The end result of the law of believing is God is relegated to being a passive observer who has given all his blessings, health, and wealth to anyone who is focused enough on their own ability to claim it. It’s really an atheistic system that nullifies God’s relationship with those born again of his spirit and puts God’s favor to the one who has the strongest believing.
As stated in pfal, the so-called "Law of believing", when practiced, is a means by which a person, using only the force of their will, causes things to happen, in accord with what that person wills to happen.
"Magick is the science and art of causing change to occur in conformitywith the Will."- Aleister Crowley.
So, does that mean the "Law of Believing" as taught in pfal is witchcraft and magic? Yes. It could have come straight out of the writings of Aleister Crowley.
YES or NO three times ...That's an isolated line, with no context...Any particular reason for leaving out the other things he said on that? Do you forget him saying that the law of believing SHOULD work much better for a saint who knows and rightly divides God's Word and promises?
If you DO remember it, why did you leave out that info?
Mike said: Do you forget him saying that the law of believing SHOULD work much better for a saint who knows and rightly divides God's Word and promises?
~ ~ ~ ~
Mike posits there ought to be improved functioning of the law of believing for a saint who understands and correctly interprets the Bible.
However – I disagreed because I remembered what wierwille said in the blue book The Bible Tells Me So, chapter five, The Law of Believing, on page 44, wierwille says:
The law of believing works equally effectively for both the sinner and the saint; however, the believer, because of the spirit from God within him, may bring forth more abundantly.
~ ~ ~ ~
There is NOTHINGin wierwille’s statement that suggests “the law of believing SHOULD work much better for a saint who knows and rightly divides God's Word and promises”.
Also noteworthy is the fact that neither wierwille nor Mike cite Scripture to back up those speculations…However, strictly from a salesperson’s point of view, Mike’s theory might sucker some young and naïve person into PFAL to reap all the alleged ‘benefits’ from the mind of a plagiarizing pathological liar and deluded person like wierwille.
As far as I'm concerned this is all a hot mess anyway - since there is no law of believing
"As far as I'm concerned this is all a hot mess anyway - since there is no law of believing "
Now, now,
that's unfair to all the witchcraft and magic practitioners out there. They're entitled to try to alter reality with their thoughts. We've had readers and posters for whom that would apply.
Mike posits there ought to be improved functioning of the law of believing for a saint who understands and correctly interprets the Bible.
However – I disagreed because I remembered what wierwille said in the blue book The Bible Tells Me So, chapter five, The Law of Believing, on page 44, wierwille says:
The law of believing works equally effectively for both the sinner and the saint; however, the believer, because of the spirit from God within him, may bring forth more abundantly.
Magick is a tool that can be used for good or evil. It’s your intention that matters.Sure, it’s a loathsome cliché. But it does neatly sum up how many Witches feel about the ethical status of magickal work. That’s another way of saying that any spell or working that’s done with good intentions is white magick.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
82
50
43
92
Popular Days
Jan 31
120
Feb 1
100
Feb 4
65
Feb 2
65
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 82 posts
T-Bone 50 posts
Bolshevik 43 posts
OldSkool 92 posts
Popular Days
Jan 31 2023
120 posts
Feb 1 2023
100 posts
Feb 4 2023
65 posts
Feb 2 2023
65 posts
Popular Posts
waysider
I knew someone who died trying to make it work. Then, the ministry blamed him for not having big enough believing. He left behind a wife and 2 young kids.
WordWolf
Every once in a while, in society and here, there's someone who engages in this specific fallacy. "I must be right because I'm in the minority." "I must be right because lots of people keep insistin
chockfull
As a different direction with respect to all of the philosophical angles on the law of believing, I am considering Jesus teachings in Matt 6:27 “which of you by taking thought can add one cubit to his
Mike
Yes we have, and I bring up the rarely considered views.
Here's another:
VPW was the kind of mover and shaker that moved the Word around the world, and even to this old hippie (young then), for which I am extremly thankful.
There is no way I could have gotten what I cherish now from any of VPW's sources, ESPECIALLY in the state I was in back in 1971. I would not have been able to listen long enough to Billy Graham to get born again, and I'd have NEVER learned to SIT from any of the teachers the past 50 years.
I can't take what Western Churchianity offers seriously. I love blending in with them to see if I can serve any where, gently and without controversy.
I have visited many churches with neighbors and customers and even the musicians I hob-nob with. EVERY time I am in another church I have a great sense of thankfulness for what I was taught, and for what I had in common with that particular church. I think we got the best quality product on the market.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Thanks!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I thought I'd get ahead of one of our talking-points.
A lot of people here read "Babylon-Mystery Religion." Yes, the author wrote a sequel-"The Babylon Connection?' that largely repudiated the book. But that's not my point.
A lot of us read "Babylon- Mystery Religion". We had no trouble reading it- it was a book that was particularly easy to read. There's a reason for that. The author read "The Two Babylons" by Alexander Hislop, and found it ponderous and hard-to-read. So, he largely rewrote "The Two Babylons"- taking the main points and stating them much more clearly. The book was specifically designed to be easy-to-read.
According to one school of thought, vpw didn't follow legal and moral imperatives and cite his sources because he cared about us so much, and properly citing sources would have made the books unreadable.
That is demonstratably bushwah.
"Babylon-Mystery Religion" cites its sources ALL THE TIME. The end-notes for each chapter were extensive. Were they a distraction? Hardly. Most people not looking for them didn't notice they were there. Most people reading the book didn't notice they were there. As soon as I looked for them, I was amazed at how well-documented everything was, since all of it was UNOBTRUSIVE.
Worse, since this book was carried in the twi bookstore, vpw had an example on-hand of a book with extensive documentation that was NOT a distraction from the book. So, had he actually wanted to give proper credit (as is legally-mandated and morally proper), he had an example to use that would have been unobtrusive.
So, that argument is without merit. And was about to be repeated, so I thought I'd save everyone some time this time around.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
YES or NO three times
That's an isolated line, with no context.
Any particular reason for leaving out the other things he said on that?
Do you forget him saying that the law of believing SHOULD work much better for a saint who knows and rightly divides God's Word and promises?
If you DO remember it, why did you leave out that info?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
That’s not what wierwille said
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Do you remember right after that where he said most Christians don’t manifest an abundant life, little less a more abundant life?
If you do remember it why did you leave that out?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Once again, it's often been stated that you believe or you don't. Under those circumstances, how would it work better for a Saint?
And just where does Saint Vic say that, as I don't remember it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
"Yes we have, and I bring up the rarely considered views."
You bring up something. Whether it's rarely-considered or worthy of discussion is another thing entirely.
"Here's another:
VPW was the kind of mover and shaker that moved the Word around the world, and even to this old hippie (young then), for which I am extremly thankful."
vpw moved almost nothing. His group was tiny and incredibly obscure. We would never have heard of him if he hadn't hijacked the hippies. See, there was a bunch of quality Christians, young ones who walked the walk and weren't focused on studying a new Greek word. They were getting attention. vpw heard of them and rushed over. He put on his full act. They were convinced he was some great one. Some of them avoided him, but some others joined twi. Those people became the entire advertising arm of twi, its entire outreach program, its missionary program, etc.
One might say, by derailing the work they HAD been doing, that vpw had DISRUPTED the GENUINE work of God in the lives of local people there, people who were making enough of a difference nationally that people all over the US had heard of them- until they joined twi and faded from most of the public, and became part of the twi machine.
So, those hippies and ex-hippies- and the people they taught- "moved the Word around the world" to the degree it happened. However, despite them doing all the work, you never give them the credit.
"There is no way I could have gotten what I cherish now from any of VPW's sources, ESPECIALLY in the state I was in back in 1971. I would not have been able to listen long enough to Billy Graham to get born again, and I'd have NEVER learned to SIT from any of the teachers the past 50 years."
Sure would have been nice to have heard directly from your peers during a genuine movement among God's people.... which would have happened if they hadn't been drawn out of that movement and into twi.
"I can't take what Western Churchianity offers seriously. I love blending in with them to see if I can serve any where, gently and without controversy."
There are so many genuine things happening among God's people all over, regardless of denomination, that it's a terrible shame you're reduced to tossing insults like "churchianity" at them. If that's your attitude, you're neither going to be loving- they can sense that- nor will you find what you actually need. You'll no more find them than a thief will find a policeman.
"I have visited many churches with neighbors and customers and even the musicians I hob-nob with. EVERY time I am in another church I have a great sense of thankfulness for what I was taught, and for what I had in common with that particular church. I think we got the best quality product on the market."
Are you going around calling them "churchianity"? If your focus is more on what you have, and not what you can gain from interaction with them, you're going to miss it every time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
That is at the beginning of the class. The class doesn't teach every detail. Much more was taught later in the class and in SNTs and other books and magazine articles
.
It is really pretty logical that believers SHOULD be able to use it much better. It is logical and he highlighted it, and so did other teachers. I know I did when I was a twig leader.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
I think we need to do a cartoon depiction like “conjunction junction” for all those followers of the Way.
When telling a story
”Cite your source”
When writing a paper
”Cite your source”
”Bibliography junction source your function”
“No conspiracy journals”
”Peer reviewed journals”
I can see the cartoon characters looking like Stepfords for the greatest reach in appeal to TWI followers.
It would do them so much good. It could help them pass college.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Why would it be more logical for believers to use something that's binary better?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I don't in any way buy the meme " you believe or you don't."
I am sorry you seem to have been given some bad teaching. I am thankful I found teachers withing TWI that explained things. I am glad I went back to the materials to get the details better than you seem to have them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
It was pretty logical to VP that he shouldn’t have Oleo on his table as a Christian manifesting an abundant life.
Once he stole the correct IP and resold it he didn’t have to.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Was that a Yes or a No?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
So you're saying believing can be quantified? How?
And if I've gotten bad teachers, they were with Twi.
Did they explain things the way you explain things? That would explain a lot.
You know details? What has knowing those details done for you? Your believing sucks. You're always whining about being mocked or misrepresented. Both reveal your believing.
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
That's a lame excuse! You just shifted your position yet again.
A person using confirmation bias would say something like that - and citing yourself - a well-known super-duper fan of wierwille doesn't sell the bull-$hit any better.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
The end result of the law of believing is God is relegated to being a passive observer who has given all his blessings, health, and wealth to anyone who is focused enough on their own ability to claim it. It’s really an atheistic system that nullifies God’s relationship with those born again of his spirit and puts God’s favor to the one who has the strongest believing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
As if your unrealistic expectations for readers on this topic is to develop and keep their lives focused on what you did 35 years ago?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
What did he say?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
How is it pretty logical?
You repeated this. Are you trying to convince me or you?
You're trying to set yourself up as a standard. You're not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
As stated in pfal, the so-called "Law of believing", when practiced, is a means by which a person, using only the force of their will, causes things to happen, in accord with what that person wills to happen.
"Magick is the science and art of causing change to occur in conformity with the Will."- Aleister Crowley.
So, does that mean the "Law of Believing" as taught in pfal is witchcraft and magic? Yes. It could have come straight out of the writings of Aleister Crowley.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
first let’s review what Mike said:
Mike said: Do you forget him saying that the law of believing SHOULD work much better for a saint who knows and rightly divides God's Word and promises?
~ ~ ~ ~
Mike posits there ought to be improved functioning of the law of believing for a saint who understands and correctly interprets the Bible.
However – I disagreed because I remembered what wierwille said in the blue book The Bible Tells Me So, chapter five, The Law of Believing, on page 44, wierwille says:
The law of believing works equally effectively for both the sinner and the saint; however, the believer, because of the spirit from God within him, may bring forth more abundantly.
~ ~ ~ ~
There is NOTHING in wierwille’s statement that suggests “the law of believing SHOULD work much better for a saint who knows and rightly divides God's Word and promises”.
Also noteworthy is the fact that neither wierwille nor Mike cite Scripture to back up those speculations…However, strictly from a salesperson’s point of view, Mike’s theory might sucker some young and naïve person into PFAL to reap all the alleged ‘benefits’ from the mind of a plagiarizing pathological liar and deluded person like wierwille.
As far as I'm concerned this is all a hot mess anyway - since there is no law of believing
Edited by T-Boneclarity
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
"As far as I'm concerned this is all a hot mess anyway - since there is no law of believing
"
Now, now,
that's unfair to all the witchcraft and magic practitioners out there. They're entitled to try to alter reality with their thoughts. We've had readers and posters for whom that would apply.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Magick is a tool that can be used for good or evil. It’s your intention that matters. Sure, it’s a loathsome cliché. But it does neatly sum up how many Witches feel about the ethical status of magickal work. That’s another way of saying that any spell or working that’s done with good intentions is white magick.
https://www.groveandgrotto.com/blogs/articles/white-magick-black-magick-what-s-the-difference
The similarities are quite significant.
Edited by OldSkoolLink 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.