How can someone have the time to write a post that is an order of magnitude longer than any T-Bone post (Love ya, Brother T-Bone!) and still claim to not have time to finish Charlene’s book?
How can someone have the time to write a post that is an order of magnitude longer than any T-Bone post (Love ya, Brother T-Bone!) and still claim to not have time to finish Charlene’s book?
Here is a section of a thread dealing with the topic from the film class “what killed that little boy.” This thread is almost exactly 20 years old.In this thread and several others I had been discussing genuine fear and genuine believing, as opposed to milder versions of same, that we were taught.I was asserting often that real solid fear is pretty rare, and most of what we see is far milder, like doubt and worry, or anxious concern.
The general solution to the problem people have with this section of the class is to see that the fears we have in every day life, and the concern for loved ones safety and health are not really the kind of power fear VPW was talking about in the class.
By not relying on memory for my stand on this, and going back to read the book and transcript, plus listen to the audio and watch his face and body language in the video, I can confidently say that the woman in this story was accurately depicted by VPW as operating genuine, law of believing style FEAR.I’m thinking even possibly analogous to the manifestation of believing, which I have been calling “power believing.”
So keep in mind the major attitude I was writing about 20 years ago here: genuine believing and genuine fear are rare in real life.We tend to inaccurately label all sorts of milder mental operations as “believing” and “fear” that are NOT the kind VPW was talking about in the class.
I often keep in mind Jesus’ mention of “believing with no doubt in the heart.”
besides the fact that there is no such thing as the law of believing wierwille is NOT God and did not have the ability to peer into the mother's mind - END OF ARGUMENT !
the baseless theory you propose is about as preposterous as believing that miniature invisible horses are what moves cars and trucks. A man is showing off his 2022 Lamborghini Aventador and brags to the folks crowding around his car in the parking lot "this beast has 759 horsepower under the hood."
People ooh and ahh - but one skeptic says "naw, how can you fit 759 horsepower under that hood?"
An adamant believer from the Saint Vic Church of Nonsense shot right back, "you idiot, it's 759 miniature invisible horses."
~ ~ ~ ~
7 hours ago, Mike said:
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
I've always seen the law of believing...(SNIP)
...In order to align our vocabularies with Dr’s, we need to recognize that the milder mental operations of mental assent, agreement, worry, concern, and sudden fear, are just that: mild precursors to the stronger operations of believing and fear.
When we get to the story of the mother and her little boy, we’ll see which mental operation she had cooking.
The red drapes are interestingly not in the book, and I don’t yet know what to make of that. Another change going from film class to the book, regarding needs and wants, is that the word “parallel” was changed to “in balance” in a few places.
As far as receiving something from another source, other than God, it does seem to be possible, but not as reliable, due to the untrustworthy nature of the adversary.
"In order to align our vocabularies with Dr’s," - whoa right there, partner! what if I don't want to align my thinking process with wierwille's weird and goofy vocabulary / re-definitions / concepts?
~ ~ ~ ~
7 hours ago, Mike said:
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
The most efficient, maximum yield, spiritual use of the law of believing requires a promise of God.
chapter and verse, please.
no essays please.
please provide Scripture to support your theory that "The most efficient, maximum yield, spiritual use of the law of believing requires a promise of God"
To assist you in being clear and concise I suggest you cite specific verses that show a clear correlation between the promises of God and the amount of yield being contingent upon one's incremental use of the law of believing - perhaps include a graph chart.
~ ~ ~ ~
7 hours ago, Mike said:
Sure, there are 5-senses applications of all sorts, but they are not as powerful. Having a positive attitude on a job interview is going to help score points, but not miraculously.
*/*/*/*/*
Raf Posted July 12, 2003
Have you noticed that you have to re-write the law of believing into a "maybe it will happen and maybe it won't"thesis in order to establish its veracity? That's not what Wierwille wrote, and you know it.
"Having a positive attitude is going to help..." is NOT the "law of believing."
"Whatever you believe for or expect, you get," is the law of believing.
If receiving something from a source other than God is not reliable, then believing is not a law.
*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
How about this:?
It's a law designed BY God to be operated WITH God. Any operation of it outside God is doomed to anything from partial results to counterfeit harmful results.
*/*/*/*/*
Raf Posted July 12, 2003
FINE!
But it's still not what Wierwille taught.
Wierwille taught "what you believe for or expect, you get."
Not, "what you believe for within God's will..."
Not, "What God promises and you believe..."
Not, "What you believe for or expect you might maybe get if the conditions are right."
I agree with what you're saying. I do not agree that it is a reasonable approximation of what Wierwille taught.
Like I've said before and I'll say again, Wierwille often got "believing" right. But he also got it wrong from time to time. Your reliance on your own words and dismissal of his words (as we've quoted them repeatedly) proves it.
*/*/*/*/
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
Rafael,
I’m not dismissing Dr’s words. I’m dismissing the implications you see in them.
From my perspective I’m absorbing Dr’s books exclusively, and daily for 5 years. I’m posting back to you what I’ve been able to ‘rightly divide’ from Dr’s books. Some of this believing stuff I’ve posted goes back to the 70’s when I first started noticing that some people were slipping into teaching the abbreviated form of the law, and not it’s fuller God based, promise based version.
I read Dr a little differently, some things I take in a figurative sense, while you look at them literally. There are other factors that go into this, but my “agreeable-to-you” reformulation of this law is as straight from what Dr teaches as I can get it. Not all in one location, though.
The ‘iffy’aspect that I acknowledge is due to how ‘iffy’our believing can be, and how easily it can actually be only mental assent. Dr acknowledges this ‘iffy’aspect when he finally does teach mental assent, later on. But in these earlier sessionsof the class he teaches on the NON-iffyaspects of the law and God’s part.
in other words, there is no logical method to your analysis of wierwille's works. it seems you're always dumbing it down and obfuscating any real meaning so it fits in a sub-cultic mindset - my guess is that this particular subset of the typical wierwille-cult-mindset is unique - and hopefully a one-off mutation.
~ ~ ~ ~
7 hours ago, Mike said:
I’m presenting the same message as Dr, only in a different order, and with emphasis or focus slightly rearranged.
The reasons my presentation looks different from Dr’s to you is because of your exposure to the TVTs, and the resulting different way you look at the books. My motivation to find something good in the books is different than yours, because I saw a ten year period (1970s) where it all worked very well. I have a different attitude toward the books, more time in recent years with them, and some exceptionally mature teaching from others on these matters.
As we communicate more on all these matters, more will be untangled.
Nope!
you're reinterpreting wierwille's message to suit your own agenda - whatever that is - it's seems to change frequently.
you're re-interpretations of wierwille's message look different from his, because they are! wierwille's message may have twisted Scripture, logical fallacies, and dubious speculations, whereas your stuff is bat-$hit crazy mercury running all over the place!
~ ~ ~ ~
7 hours ago, Mike said:
***
I have another thought as to the difference between believing and mental assent and how believing is of a higher intensity. Look at how long it took Abraham to get his believing together. It was a task for him that took time. Some things are easy to believe for.But it’s when we face challenges to our believing persistently we get stronger to get to real believing. The things that are easy to believe for now may be difficult later, unless this believing muscle is flexed and exercised like Abraham did.
what is the "believing muscle"? Where is that in the Bible? Chapter and verse please.
No essays please.
It's a shame you don't work on your communication skills. You tend to overcomplicate and obfuscate almost everything. I wish you'd take Rocky's advice and work on your communication skills - discussions with you might be possible then.
And pay attention to the feedback you get from others – and use their comments and advice to help you hone your writing skills.
I’m probably the last person you want to hear from about trimming down long posts…but if I may be so bold as to offer some constructive criticism:
1.reference other works besides wierwille’s. That may seem like a ridiculous suggestion – but hear me out. I’m aware most of your posts are in About the Way forum because it relates to wierwille – but this would go for doctrinal forum as well. I’m aware you lean heavily on wierwille doctrine – but you can argue for something he taught by not limiting yourself to just his works. You could cite the works of others – including commentaries, study Bibles, systematic theologies, biblical studies on select topics, hyperlinks, parallel translations (Bible Hub is great for that)and even secular works and hyperlinks if relevant to the topic.
2.embrace the Socratic method. That really is a group effort. It is NOT a gotcha game…rather it’s great for boiling things down to what’s essential and exposes logical fallacies too. Encourage cognitive skills in the discussion. I’ve referenced Bullinger’s Companion Bible and Bullinger’s How to Enjoy the Bible from both a positive and negative viewpoint – he was wacky on some stuff (4 crucified, dispensationalism, the NT canon), but good on other things (like literary structure, figures of speech). In light of # 1 – feel free to reference wierwille’s works or any TWI material – if something has validity it should be able to stand up to the most intense scrutiny.
3.respect common definitions and conventional intellectual standards. This should be no surprise to you – most Grease Spotters don’t think much of wierwille’s definitions and dubious credentials / accomplishments. And it doesn’t sit well with others when you declare the devil has a chokehold on academia.
4.rely on appropriate Scripture to make your point. Rather than writing a lengthy commentary or essay to make your case – try to find a verse or verses that plainly state your argument – and doesn’t require your audience to perform mental gymnastics – difficult and complex logical thought processes. For example, OldSkool’s and my reference to Matthew 5:18
King James Bible For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
~ ~ ~ ~
hey WordWolf and all Grease Spotters on this thread please excuse me talking about writing with Mike - but I'm going on a hunch that he might be interested in developing his writing / communication skills to become better at sharing his ideas.
One book that I review occasionally helps me in cutting down my wordiness:
If you like writing and sometimes struggle to get what’s in you out – keep an eye out for helps and hints from published writers. In Penworks’ newest book she also recommends:
which I got the other day…I usually wind up reading 3 or 4 books at a time – depending on the subjects. In a given day I might block off an hour here and there – in between errands, and home maintenance, music projects, writing projects.
Recently I've had 2 major shots-in-the-arm for creative writing; one was a suggestion from Penworks' guidebook for the writing life - and that was handwriting instead of typing on a computer...that was something different and more direct - I got a composition notebook and whipped out a beefy first chapter for one story...
the other inspirational boost was after watching season 2 of The White Lotus , there was an unpacking feature at the end by the writer and creator Mike White; he talked about several critical scenes in season 2 that were intentionally written to NOT spell everything out. he left some things up to the imagination of the audience...this also helped me breeze through writing that same first chapter - it's a techno-psychological thriller and I was getting bogged down thinking I had to explain every detailed aspect of how the technology worked.
I love creative writing! I have 41 story ideas in various stages of development with plot lines, subtext, themes, characters. Don’t know if I’ll ever publish any of it – but it burns a hole in me if I don’t do anything. My wife urges me to do some kids’ books and graphic novels…I don’t know about that – I think of it as a satisfying hobby like art or music and if anything, my family is my target audience...Even if anything I make doesn't go beyond my home - there is something so satisfying...fulfilling even - to look at something and think "hey, I made that!"
The urge to create is what makes me post goofy stuff in the Being on-call and other misadventures in the humor forum. It's addictive to do - my humor is so quirky anyway - I don't post stuff cuz I think it will make others laugh so much as I feel like I'm getting away with murder - kinda like my modus operandi as class clown wannabe in high school. I can still hear my old critics "you killed it alright".
Some of my inspiration for that comes unexpectedly when I look at CNN or Yahoo news on my computer – and you know how they have click-bait stuff like – 10 huge plot holes created by movie sequels...I look at a picture - and start thinking what is another way to explain how the scene came about.
Think about what motivates you to post here. Most of the time I get the feeling you come here to cause trouble. But I don't know what motivates you. Again, think about the feedback you get. Apparently, many Grease Spotters feel like I do...If causing trouble is not your intent - you should reconsider the way you communicate here. and if causing trouble is not your goal - your efforts thus far - most of the time are actually counterproductive, if you are wanting folks to be receptive to your ideas.
~ ~ ~ ~
7 hours ago, Mike said:
While reading this below, please pay close attention to the intensity and persistence of the negative believing portrayed here. This is the film class transcript for the story with my commentary in square brackets regarding its differences with the book:
Fear brings results. But they are negative results. They are results in reverse, just out of the opposite order of the positive results.[this paragraph was removed from the book]
Years ago I knew a minister whose wife had passed away and he had seven or eight children. I just do not recall how many children. About a year later he married another woman who had four or five of her own. And I suppose this gave it to them cheaper by the dozen, but I'm not sure. But they lived happily together.
And about a block and a half away lived a woman who had just one boy. And this woman who had just this one son was always frustrated, always nervous, always afraid. While this minister and his wife who had this whole bunch of children it just seemed like somehow or another nothing ever happened to them.
Oh they get a black eye once in a while, somebody comes home with a bloody nose, but they just lived. But this one woman with her one son, boy she was a nervous frustrated woman if you ever saw one. And week after week and month after month it got worse.[this paragraph was removed from the book]
When her little boy started to kindergarten she used to walk him across the street and put him in the next block where the kindergarten was for fear he might get run over. Afraid he might get hit by an automobile. When he was in the first grade she did the same thing--in the second grade--third grade.
And she called on this minister and she said, "I don't understand why I'm so nervous and so upset all the time. I have just one boy, that's all I have to care. You have got all of these children, somehow or other it just seems like nothing ever happens to them and you just live abundantly."
You know what he said to her? He said, "ma'am this is how we operate. We get them around the breakfast table. It's the only time we can get our whole family together. We get them all around the breakfast table and when we have them seated around the breakfast table I do the praying. Everybody's quiet, I pray. And I pray like this: `Lord here we are all together at breakfast; now Lord,' he said, `they're all going out to school and other places today. So what I'm going to do with this family Lord; I give them all to you right now. Amen.' Boy right after you give them to the Lord you say `amen' real quickly because you don't want to take them back." He relinquished them to the Lord. Literally, he just let go and let God and those children just did amiably.
About a year and a half or two later this son of this woman was coming home from school early once. Mother hadn't met him at the street across the block. He came home from school and they were living on a road where not more than three houses were located at the time. And when they came back from school that day the boy walked out in that street and got hit by an automobile and killed outright.
I went to the service of that boy and you know what the minister preached on? That God now had another rose petal in heaven. My God people! To think of it, that God Almighty, who created the heavens and the earth, that he should want to kill a little boy like that because God needed another rose petal in heaven. Oh my God when are we going to learn something? That's blasphemy! Do you know what killed that little boy? You just quit yakking about anything else. You know what killed him. God didn't kill that boy. You know what killed that boy? The fear in the heart in the life of that mother--because that mother was just desperately afraid something was going to happen to her little Johnny. And she kept that fear and kept it, till one day it happened.
Why? Because it's a law! It's a law. That which you are afraid of is what you are going to receive. She was afraid of her boy, she was afraid he was going to get killed. She was afraid she was going to lose him and she did just that. God didn't do it! She did it with her own negative believing. Her own fears were the contributing factors that ultimately made possible the death of that little boy. [this paragraph was removed from the book]
You do realize that this was all speculation on the part of wierwille. There is NO law of believing. It's a pet-theory of wierwille and all the other health and wealth gospel preachers.
A law invariably works every time! Like the law of gravity. If you jump off a 102-story building today, you’ll plunge to your death. If you try it tomorrow – it will happen then too. Matter of fact, anyone who has ever had a death wish and attempted to jump from a high building were never disappointed by the law of gravity not working. It's not called the theory of gravity.
There is zero evidence to support the supposed law of believing.
~ ~ ~ ~
7 hours ago, Mike said:
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
Ginger,
I think the big point Dr was making was how intensely the woman in the story cultivated the wrong things.
There are religious circles where people who DON'T exhibit a fear of going to hell, then that kind of cocky attitude places them right on the edge of the pit. These circles encourage fear bigtime. Advertising and the news foster fear.
If fear isn't resisted it's damaging.
This is the whole point.
I don’t think you know what you’re talking about…first off, wierwille is the last person anyone should emulate for what mental habits one should cultivate. I mean – he was an unabashed plagiarist, pathological liar, a drunkard, a sexual predator, a thief, an abusive and mean-spirited hypocritical pontificating deluded person. Apparently wierwille was incapable of distinguishing truth from lies, fact from fiction, right from wrong.
you said "If fear isn't resisted it's damaging." Really ?How so? most normal fears have to do with self-preservation - that's something I believe God instilled in humankind...
However, concerning your statement “There are religious circles where people who DON'T exhibit a fear of going to hell, then that kind of cocky attitude places them right on the edge of the pit” does fit wierwille to a T ! His lifestyle was typically one unconscionable act after another.
Perhaps one of wierwille’s deep rooted problems was that he had no fear of God.
If someone has difficulty distinguishing normal fears from phobias / irrational fears then maybe they should consider seeking professional help. Below are a few hyperlinks for direction:
And since no man knoweth the day or the hour, which man o Gawd knoweth not? For how can one be a man o Gawd, unless the man o Gawd knoweth? For in the knowing that he knows the not knowing is known. This full circle is throughout time, and days, and hours.
I'd worry his overdue library book fees are enormous...if so, maybe he should look at one of those debt-consolidation service...just a thought.
Thought it was an appropriate tie in to the law of believing...library book...and a dump truck to haul the books to the ...city...ahah...library...thought I was gonna say dump....ok...I'm abstract
I said some is hyperbole. I was aiming at the law of believing part before this story came up.
I then said the story of the woman is literal.
I'm have a few doubts now about literal. It might be allegory? I don't have all the answers, but this is my best answer so far on this item.
Mike, have you ever heard of self-awareness? I expect you have. However, when you waste your time and energy on trying to clarify things like this, you act as if you have never heard of it. Why, you might ask?
Because if you've gotten this far and you become aware your point was not understood the way you intended your readers to understand it, it's too late.
You might do better by asking if anyone is interested in hearing/reading what you really meant... If nobody responds in the affirmative to such a question, just don't spend your time or energy on it any further.
Here is a section of a thread dealing with the topic from the film class “what killed that little boy.” This thread is almost exactly 20 years old.In this thread and several others I had been discussing genuine fear and genuine believing, as opposed to milder versions of same, that we were taught.I was asserting often that real solid fear is pretty rare, and most of what we see is far milder, like doubt and worry, or anxious concern.
The general solution to the problem people have with this section of the class is to see that the fears we have in every day life, and the concern for loved ones safety and health are not really the kind of power fear VPW was talking about in the class.
By not relying on memory for my stand on this, and going back to read the book and transcript, plus listen to the audio and watch his face and body language in the video, I can confidently say that the woman in this story was accurately depicted by VPW as operating genuine, law of believing style FEAR.I’m thinking even possibly analogous to the manifestation of believing, which I have been calling “power believing.”
So keep in mind the major attitude I was writing about 20 years ago here: genuine believing and genuine fear are rare in real life.We tend to inaccurately label all sorts of milder mental operations as “believing” and “fear” that are NOT the kind VPW was talking about in the class.
I often keep in mind Jesus’ mention of “believing with no doubt in the heart.”
*/*/*/*
I had to smooth out this text to make it more easily readable and I did a BARE MINIMUM amount of editingto make things more readable. Plus I highlighted a few things with bold fonts and/or color fonts. I honestly did not change anyone’s arguments any. You can check me out by comparing with the originals, which are a big chunk of page 70 in the “Ubiquitous…” thread, back in the Summer of 2003.
I've always seen the law of believing as being more powerful on the positive side than the negative. On the other side, I've never seen anything to the effect that the fear of a mustard seed will bring results.
The same way we sometimes label our own mental assent (or agreement) as believing, we sometimes see worries and concerns as if they were full-blown fears.
We were taught in the 70’s that the feeling you get from a speeding car headed in your direction is NOT genuine fear. It is natural protective biology.A shot of adrenaline and high heart rate in such an emergency is normal, natural, and part of God’s design in the human body. I think there was a verse to this effect that goes: “Be not afraid of sudden fear.”
In order to align our vocabularies with Dr’s, we need to recognize that the milder mental operations of mental assent, agreement, worry, concern, and sudden fear, are just that: mild precursors to the stronger operations of believing and fear.
When we get to the story of the mother and her little boy, we’ll see which mental operation she had cooking.
The red drapes are interestingly not in the book, and I don’t yet know what to make of that. Another change going from film class to the book, regarding needs and wants, is that the word “parallel” was changed to “in balance” in a few places.
As far as receiving something from another source, other than God, it does seem to be possible, but not as reliable, due to the untrustworthy nature of the adversary.
*/*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
The most efficient, maximum yield, spiritual use of the law of believing requires a promise of God.
Sure, there are 5-senses applications of all sorts, but they are not as powerful. Having a positive attitude on a job interview is going to help score points, but not miraculously.
*/*/*/*/*
Raf Posted July 12, 2003
Have you noticed that you have to re-write the law of believing into a "maybe it will happen and maybe it won't"thesis in order to establish its veracity? That's not what Wierwille wrote, and you know it.
"Having a positive attitude is going to help..." is NOT the "law of believing."
"Whatever you believe for or expect, you get," is the law of believing.
If receiving something from a source other than God is not reliable, then believing is not a law.
*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
How about this:?
It's a law designed BY God to be operated WITH God. Any operation of it outside God is doomed to anything from partial results to counterfeit harmful results.
*/*/*/*/*
Raf Posted July 12, 2003
FINE!
But it's still not what Wierwille taught.
Wierwille taught "what you believe for or expect, you get."
Not, "what you believe for within God's will..."
Not, "What God promises and you believe..."
Not, "What you believe for or expect you might maybe get if the conditions are right."
I agree with what you're saying. I do not agree that it is a reasonable approximation of what Wierwille taught.
Like I've said before and I'll say again, Wierwille often got "believing" right. But he also got it wrong from time to time. Your reliance on your own words and dismissal of his words (as we've quoted them repeatedly) proves it.
*/*/*/*/
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
Rafael,
I’m not dismissing Dr’s words. I’m dismissing the implications you see in them.
From my perspective I’m absorbing Dr’s books exclusively, and daily for 5 years. I’m posting back to you what I’ve been able to ‘rightly divide’ from Dr’s books. Some of this believing stuff I’ve posted goes back to the 70’s when I first started noticing that some people were slipping into teaching the abbreviated form of the law, and not it’s fuller God based, promise based version.
I read Dr a little differently, some things I take in a figurative sense, while you look at them literally. There are other factors that go into this, but my “agreeable-to-you” reformulation of this law is as straight from what Dr teaches as I can get it. Not all in one location, though.
The ‘iffy’aspect that I acknowledge is due to how ‘iffy’our believing can be, and how easily it can actually be only mental assent. Dr acknowledges this ‘iffy’aspect when he finally does teach mental assent, later on. But in these earlier sessionsof the class he teaches on the NON-iffyaspects of the law and God’s part.
I’m presenting the same message as Dr, only in a different order, and with emphasis or focus slightly rearranged.
The reasons my presentation looks different from Dr’s to you is because of your exposure to the TVTs, and the resulting different way you look at the books. My motivation to find something good in the books is different than yours, because I saw a ten year period (1970s) where it all worked very well. I have a different attitude toward the books, more time in recent years with them, and some exceptionally mature teaching from others on these matters.
As we communicate more on all these matters, more will be untangled.
***
I have another thought as to the difference between believing and mental assent and how believing is of a higher intensity. Look at how long it took Abraham to get his believing together. It was a task for him that took time. Some things are easy to believe for.But it’s when we face challenges to our believing persistently we get stronger to get to real believing. The things that are easy to believe for now may be difficult later, unless this believing muscle is flexed and exercised like Abraham did.
*/*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
Another thought on the intensity requirements for believing or fear, Job said it was what he GREATLY feared that got him. If it’s not intense and leading to actions, it is probably not genuine believing or genuine fear.
*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
Has anyone noticed in the class anything about the intensity levels of the woman's fear regarding her little boy’s safety?
*/*/*/*/*/*
karmicdebt Posted July 12, 2003
"Another thought on the intensity requirements for believing or fear, Job said it was what he GREATLY feared that got him."
He DID NOT!!!
He said the thing he greatly feared happened. You act as though because he feared it it happened...that is not what it says!!!
To take a belief and bend scripture around it is not right. To take a verse and give it power is not right. Fear is a survival mechanism built in us to protect us. It is not a metaphysical power used to trip us up.
Other places in the Bible teach us that there was a connection between Job’s GREAT fear and his catastrophe.
*/*/*/*/**
karmicdebt Posted July 12, 2003
"Has anyone noticed anything about the intensity level of the woman's fear regarding her little boy’"
Yeah, they are not real people. They are imaginary people designed to prove an imaginary point…
*/*/*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
The point I was bringing out with Job was how the word "greatly" indicated intensity.
The point of Dr's story rests on the intensity of her fear.
It was the intensity I was bringing attention to.
***
As far as who gets the credit for when the law of believing works? I'd say it all goes to God, who designed the law, who inspires great operation of it, and who stands by to execute His promises, and energize the operation of His laws, as He watches over His Word.
*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
Ginger Tea,
Why didn't people get up and walk out on the little boy story? Because of how well Dr paints the picture that this was an EXTREME case, not something we have to worry about in our own lives. THAT came much later, but it's not in the class.
*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
shaz,
You're right about a certain type of fear being a useful survival mechanism built in us to protect us. That was what I was getting into when I mention "sudden fear" above.
But there is ALSO a more intense mental ability of people to believe metaphysically or in the supernatural. This second type of fear is the more intense stuff Dr is talking about.
*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
While reading this below, please pay close attention to the intensity and persistence of the negative believing portrayed here. This is the film class transcript for the story with my commentary in square brackets regarding its differences with the book:
Fear brings results. But they are negative results. They are results in reverse, just out of the opposite order of the positive results.[this paragraph was removed from the book]
Years ago I knew a minister whose wife had passed away and he had seven or eight children. I just do not recall how many children. About a year later he married another woman who had four or five of her own. And I suppose this gave it to them cheaper by the dozen, but I'm not sure. But they lived happily together.
And about a block and a half away lived a woman who had just one boy. And this woman who had just this one son was always frustrated, always nervous, always afraid. While this minister and his wife who had this whole bunch of children it just seemed like somehow or another nothing ever happened to them.
Oh they get a black eye once in a while, somebody comes home with a bloody nose, but they just lived. But this one woman with her one son, boy she was a nervous frustrated woman if you ever saw one. And week after week and month after month it got worse.[this paragraph was removed from the book]
When her little boy started to kindergarten she used to walk him across the street and put him in the next block where the kindergarten was for fear he might get run over. Afraid he might get hit by an automobile. When he was in the first grade she did the same thing--in the second grade--third grade.
And she called on this minister and she said, "I don't understand why I'm so nervous and so upset all the time. I have just one boy, that's all I have to care. You have got all of these children, somehow or other it just seems like nothing ever happens to them and you just live abundantly."
You know what he said to her? He said, "ma'am this is how we operate. We get them around the breakfast table. It's the only time we can get our whole family together. We get them all around the breakfast table and when we have them seated around the breakfast table I do the praying. Everybody's quiet, I pray. And I pray like this: `Lord here we are all together at breakfast; now Lord,' he said, `they're all going out to school and other places today. So what I'm going to do with this family Lord; I give them all to you right now. Amen.' Boy right after you give them to the Lord you say `amen' real quickly because you don't want to take them back." He relinquished them to the Lord. Literally, he just let go and let God and those children just did amiably.
About a year and a half or two later this son of this woman was coming home from school early once. Mother hadn't met him at the street across the block. He came home from school and they were living on a road where not more than three houses were located at the time. And when they came back from school that day the boy walked out in that street and got hit by an automobile and killed outright.
I went to the service of that boy and you know what the minister preached on? That God now had another rose petal in heaven. My God people! To think of it, that God Almighty, who created the heavens and the earth, that he should want to kill a little boy like that because God needed another rose petal in heaven. Oh my God when are we going to learn something? That's blasphemy! Do you know what killed that little boy? You just quit yakking about anything else. You know what killed him. God didn't kill that boy. You know what killed that boy? The fear in the heart in the life of that mother--because that mother was just desperately afraid something was going to happen to her little Johnny. And she kept that fear and kept it, till one day it happened.
Why? Because it's a law! It's a law. That which you are afraid of is what you are going to receive. She was afraid of her boy, she was afraid he was going to get killed. She was afraid she was going to lose him and she did just that. God didn't do it! She did it with her own negative believing. Her own fears were the contributing factors that ultimately made possible the death of that little boy. [this paragraph was removed from the book]
*/*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
I'm not sure what you mean, shaz, so I’ll guess.
We all have bouts of fears, but we fight it off mostly. The woman in the story is a rare type who zones into a negative expertise with little to no resistance.
When bad things DO happen to us, I don't think we need compare ourselves to this woman in the story, though.
Sorting through an inventory of where we often blow in our believing is NOT what we should be doing, although that is what things degenerated to at times.
Sorting through an inventory of the promises of God is what we were encouraged to do in the class.
*/*/*/*/*/*
karmicdebt Posted July 12, 2003
how many children do you have, Mike? Tell us how you can promote "truths" that you cannot really comprehend, having no reference point or experience...
*/*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
karmicdebt,
I've had fears and I've had loved ones.
*/*/*/*/*/*
karmicdebt Posted July 12, 2003
And with reference to promises of God...how many of your enemies did God actually, smite? I have submitted my list to God in triplicate at least and those bast*rds are still here and doing well I might add...
And doing the works and greater works of JC. Man, I still haven't walked on water. Please tell me after 5 years of daily working this stuff....how many promises do you have down pat? Cuz' if these "promises" are in you that you don't even need to consider...you know, just realized, like the all 9 all the time...then maybe you really do have something to offer us...
Signs, miracles and wonders follow them that believe, right....well let us see your trail...
Not trying to bust your balls here...just want to know...
*/*/*/*/*/*
karmicdebt Posted July 12, 2003
Mike, I love my parents dearly, I have a dozen brothers and sisters with whom I am extrememly close. My relationships with them are not even close to what I feel about the children I gave birth to. No you can't compare the two...
*/*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
karmicdebt,
Seeing my trail through your computer screen may be a difficult trick. Want to come to San Diego? Come and see’
*/*/*/*/*/*
dizzydog Posted July 12, 2003
Hi Mike,
I thought I would reenter the debate here.
You have contended on many occasions that the Bible we have in the current forms is no longer reliable. I think you called it unreliable fragments and tattered remnants.
I have contended all along that this is not the case and not the declaration of VPW. Furthermore I have contended that your relationship with Jesus Christ is affected by your attitude toward the Scriptures.
In Revelation 19:13 we read, "And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called the Word of God." In this passage of scripture "...his name is called The Word of God."
The Word of God is always the same and it is always the Word of God no matter whether it is written in Genesis or in the Book of Revelation. The Name and the Word are identical. Wherever the name of Jesus Christ is used, there you have the person of Christ and the Word of Christ as one and the same. The Bible Word, that which is written in the Book called the Bible, is God’s Word. The Written Word and the Living Word are identical. The Church has not majored this. Our hearts are not believing it. The Bible Word is God’s Word because the Bible is the Word of God.
In Luke 8:11, "..The seed is the Word of God."
In Isaiah 55:11, "So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it."
In 1 Peter 1:23, "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth forever."
In Ephesians 6:17, "...the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God."
Christ, the seed, the sword, are all referred to as the Word of God. The Word always produces reactions. Acts 7:54, "When they heard these things they were cut to the heart,..." Acts 2:41, "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls."
In 2 Timothy 2:15 is that wonderful record, "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed rightly dividing the word of truth." It does not say that I am to study to show myself approved unto my congregation. I am not commissioned as a man of God to study to show myself approved unto my community. I am to study to show myself approved unto God and God alone. Paul said, "Far be it from me to be judged by you people, because my judge is God." We must live by what the Word of God says, to be approved of God.
In Hebrews 4:12 we read "For the Word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." The word "discerner" in the Greek is the word "critic". This is the only time in the entire Bible that this word is used. It says that the Bible Word is a "critic." The Word of God is a critic of the thoughts and intents of the heart - the inner man.
We have come to a terrible day in history because so many people have set themselves up as critics of the Bible, of the Word of God; when the Bible is given to be our critic. What right does any man have to criticize the Word of God. The Word of God is our critic.
The Bible is a lamp as well as a light. In Psalms 119:105, "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path."
The Word is the Father God’s presence with us in his absence, manifested in the senses through the gift from the Holy Spirit in us. So the Word is my contact point with the Master. This makes the Word vital and alive.
The Bible is not just another book. Your attitude toward the Word is indicative of the place God holds in your life. All revivals are dependent upon the written Word becoming real in the lives of men.
It is impossible to separate a man from his words, likewise, it is impossible to separate God from His Word. So the living Word of God on the lips of a man of believing faith takes the place of the absent Christ. If a man’s word is of no value he will soon reason that God’s Word is valueless. Man’s unbelief in the Word of God is largely due to the lack of believing in his own words.
When you live in the Word and the Word lives in you, the Word once more becomes flesh among men. Let the Word of God then dwell in you richly for it will be life and health and joy unspeakable.
*/*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
Ginger,
I don’t see it as taking a shot at the woman. When God had the story of David’s great sins placed in the scriptures, I don’t see that as God taking a shot at David. David was a wonderful man. But he also had some great flaws that God knows we can learn from, so He has the story of David and Uriah in there for our learning.
The same is the case with Dr and this woman. There’s anguish in his voice about the loss of her son. It’s like he’s saying ‘if ONLY this could be prevented!? I see Dr teaching this to help us learn and understand how to get better results in our lives. Later, MUCH later, stories like this were misused and mis-taught in fear motivation schemes to keep the ministry together. The earlier is PFAL, the latter is TVT.
Let’s stop dredging up this story from memory and look carefully again at the text for a minute. There are key points that describe the intensity of the woman’s fear in this text.
This fear was CULTIVATED by her systematically. She had some teaching available to her by someone who was a good example in this area, and she still let this fear grow and grow.
These quotesbelow in red fonts are from the film class transcript that I posted above in green fonts:
this woman... was always frustrated, always nervous, always afraid.
this one woman ...boy she was a nervous frustrated woman if you ever saw one.
week after week and month after month it got worse.
in the first grade she did the same thing--in the second grade--third grade.
And she called on this minister ...He relinquished them to the Lord.
The fear in the heart in the life...
Her own fears were the contributing factors that ultimately made possible...
[Note from 2023-02-04 - Were you able to see all these intensity indicators in the green fonts? You should hear it in the original audio with this intensity idea in mind.]
*/*/*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
karmicdebt,
I guess I'm doomed to the same fate of ignorance Jesus seems to have had to suffer from having no DNA children.
*/*
dizzydog,
I'm off to work, and I want the story of the woman and her little boy to settle. Remind me again. Please don't forget that from 1971 to 1998 I did more Bible study than most. Plus in all my recent PFAL study, I'm seeing KJV verses on every page. Also remember that a translation of the Word of God is only as authoritative as the authority of the translator. For all your expressed believing in God giving His Word in ancient times, why does your paradigm forbid God from doing the same kind of giving to us in modern times of His Word in English?
*/*/*/*/*
dizzydog Posted July 12, 2003
Mike,
Do you think my post forbade God from delivering his Word to us today?
How did I disagree with you?
*/*/*/*/*
karmicdebt Posted July 12, 2003
Mike,
Show me other comparisons you have with JC manifested in this world. Then maybe you can be can be listed in the same company...
Do we need to list what Christ did his short time on this planet? We won't even talk historically, we can just use the stuff VPW mentioned in his books, teachings, etc.
*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
Now that I re-read it, it only seems to imply it.
If I didn't have a better replacement of God's Word given in English as PFAL is, then I'd NEVER have complained about the "difficulties" with the ancient received scriptures. Prior to 1998 I figured that these difficulties were God's problem and not mine. I just worked what was available to the best of my ability.
I think God's answer to the difficulties in the ancient scriptures, translation being a biggie, has been to re-issue His Word in a different format, PFAL.
When I say God has delivered His Word to us today in this form of PFAL, don't you say "no" and thus forbid this kind of process’
*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
karmicdebt,
I'm willing to fail your tests. Give me my "F" and let me out. I want to talk about things better than me, OK?
*/*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
It COULD be an allegory, but he seems to make it literal when he says he went to the funeral.
*/*/*/*/*
dizzydog Posted July 12, 2003
My post implied that God forbids this?
"When I say God has delivered His Word to us today in this form of PFAL, don't you say "no" and thus forbid this kind of process’"
How did I say that in this post’
Indeed I believe God is fully capable of keeping his Word throughout all generations.
*/*/*/*/*
Mike Posted July 12, 2003
Ginger,
I think the big point Dr was making was how intensely the woman in the story cultivated the wrong things.
There are religious circles where people who DON'T exhibit a fear of going to hell, then that kind of cocky attitude places them right on the edge of the pit. These circles encourage fear bigtime. Advertising and the news foster fear.
If fear isn't resisted it's damaging.
This is the whole point.
The first thing that comes to mind after reading this diatribe is all the fear that was attempted to be injected into all of our lives by a TWI President declaring that we would be “greasespots by midnight” if we ever walked away from “gawds ministry”.
I am certainly thankful for Jesus Christ my lord and savior for the strength to navigate through that false teaching and it’s impact upon me and the community of Christians I have interacted with.
The problem with this line of reasoning is that it ends up in uncertainty. People exposed to and adopting the teaching view their own past and others lives with a lense of “mental assent” and “cultivated fear” as their boogeyman and never truly certain whether boogey is gonna get them or not.
Like you. Suggesting that somehow repetitive reading of 6th grade level material is going to either jump someone over the “mental assent” gap or somehow after 20 years they can read, understand, live principles but still be “mentally assenting”
This instability and insecurity is not introduced by the doctrine of our Lord Jesus Christ it is taught by conspiracy theorists with a view to isolate and control you for their own benefit.
My response to VPs horse $hit is mentally he can F off down the road with that garbage.
Jesus said “my yoke is easy and my burden is light”
So if your personal doctrine twists you up and does NOT provide genuine answers it’s probably a false prophet in back of it.
Perhaps it's appropriate for everyone reading this thread to recognize Mike's 20 year track record on GSC clearly exposes him as a TWI reactionary.
I invoke the term reactionary and provide a definition/description as it relates to political reaction only to show HOW it relates. I'm neither suggesting Mike is a political reactionary nor inviting a political discussion.
Quote
Reactionary ideologies can be radical in the sense ofpolitical extremismin service to re-establishing past conditions. In political discourse, being a reactionary is generally regarded as negative; Peter King observed that it is "an unsought-for label, used as a torment rather than a badge of honor."
Of course he's not completely alone in that pursuit, except in terms of his voice on GSC being a lone voice.
I raise the issue [here] because twi is such a small fish in a very large ocean. Not only in terms of number of acolytes or followers but also as the ever expanding knowledge of humanity and perhaps also of God and spiritual matters. I now give you an 8 minute video of Yuval Noah Harari, historian and author of Sapiens and a new series of books, Unstoppable Us.
Quote
Even though we'll never outrun a hungry lion or outswim an angry shark, humans are pretty impressive--and we're the most dominant species on the planet. So how exactly did we become "unstoppable"?
The answer to that is one of the strangest tales you'll ever hear. And it's a true story.
From learning to make fire and using the stars as guides to cooking meals in microwaves and landing on the moon, prepare to uncover the secrets and superpowers of how we evolved from our first appearances millions of years ago.
Acclaimed author Yuval Noah Harari has expertly crafted an extraordinary story of how humans learned to not only survive but also thrive on Earth, complete with maps, a timeline, and full-color illustrations that bring his dynamic, unputdownable writing to life.
believing that miniature invisible horses are what moves cars and trucks
Actual picture of OldSkool and one of his miniature horse that pull his minivan....(plz note I neither own a mini-horse or mini-van but if I did it would look just like this)
Actual picture of OldSkool and one of his miniature horse that pull his minivan....(plz note I neither own a mini-horse or mini-van but if I did it would look just like this)
Actual picture of OldSkool and one of his miniature horse that pull his minivan....(plz note I neither own a mini-horse or mini-van but if I did it would look just like this)
At That Ain’t Hay Hot Rods they soup up cars the old fashion way - one horse at a time.
Here we see owner and guitar operator of That Ain’t Hay Hot Rods , OldSkool checking on the miniaturization process of a Clydesdale which can take up to several weeks for large breed horses.
OldSkool says the super-duper-ultra-trivialized-mighty-fine-equine is much easier to ‘invisiblize’ with Apparently Absent Paint since there is less mare to disappare…and cheaper to maintain too because there’s less steed to feed.
One trick pony down - seven hundred and fifty eight more to go!
At That Ain’t Hay Hot Rods they soup up cars the old fashion way - one horse at a time.
Here we see owner and guitar operator of That Ain’t Hay Hot Rods , OldSkool checking on the miniaturization process of a Clydesdale which can take up to several weeks for large breed horses.
OldSkool says the super-duper-ultra-trivialized-mighty-fine-equine is much easier to ‘invisiblize’ with Apparently Absent Paint since there is less mare to disappare…and cheaper to maintain too because there’s less steed to feed.
One trick pony down - seven hundred and fifty eight more to go!
14 minutes ago, waysider said:
They're on their way to PFAL to deliver a fresh load of...uhhh...collaterals.
Here we see owner and guitar operator of That Ain’t Hay Hot Rods , OldSkool checking on the miniaturization process of a Clydesdale which can take up to several weeks for large breed horses.
"There's a place in the world for the angry young man
With his working class ties and his radical plans.
He refuses to bend he refuses to crawl
And he's always at home with his back to the wall.
And he's proud of his scars and the battles he's lost.
And struggles and bleeds as he hangs on his cross.
And likes to be known as the angry young man.
Give a moment or two to the angry young man
With his foot in his mouth and his heart in his hand.
He's been stabbed in the back he's been misunderstood.
It's a comfort to know his intentions are good.
And he sits in his room with a lock on the door
With his maps and his medals laid out on the floor.
And he likes to be known as the angry young man.
I believe I've passed the age of consciousness and righteous rage
I found that just surviving was a noble fight.
I once believed in causes too.
I had my pointless point of view,
And life went on no matter who was wrong or right.
And there's always a place for the angry young man
With his fist in the air and his head in the sand.
And he's never been able to learn from mistakes
So he can't understand why his heart always breaks.
And his honor is pure and his courage is well
And he's fair and he's true and he's boring as hell.
And he'll go to the grave as an angry old man."
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
Nathan_Jr
How can someone have the time to write a post that is an order of magnitude longer than any T-Bone post (Love ya, Brother T-Bone!) and still claim to not have time to finish Charlene’s book?
Edited by Nathan_JrLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
T-Bone uses hyperlinks and you know, references.
Others hyperventilate the words according usage.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Oh, I know.
…that I know that I know that I know.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
so, you're going to continue to waffle then - I figured as much
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
besides the fact that there is no such thing as the law of believing
wierwille is NOT God and did not have the ability to peer into the mother's mind - END OF ARGUMENT !
the baseless theory you propose is about as preposterous as believing that miniature invisible horses are what moves cars and trucks. A man is showing off his 2022 Lamborghini Aventador and brags to the folks crowding around his car in the parking lot "this beast has 759 horsepower under the hood."
People ooh and ahh - but one skeptic says "naw, how can you fit 759 horsepower under that hood?"
An adamant believer from the Saint Vic Church of Nonsense shot right back, "you idiot, it's 759 miniature invisible horses."
~ ~ ~ ~
"In order to align our vocabularies with Dr’s," - whoa right there, partner! what if I don't want to align my thinking process with wierwille's weird and goofy vocabulary / re-definitions / concepts?
~ ~ ~ ~
chapter and verse, please.
no essays please.
please provide Scripture to support your theory that "The most efficient, maximum yield, spiritual use of the law of believing requires a promise of God"
To assist you in being clear and concise I suggest you cite specific verses that show a clear correlation between the promises of God and the amount of yield being contingent upon one's incremental use of the law of believing - perhaps include a graph chart.
~ ~ ~ ~
in other words, there is no logical method to your analysis of wierwille's works. it seems you're always dumbing it down and obfuscating any real meaning so it fits in a sub-cultic mindset - my guess is that this particular subset of the typical wierwille-cult-mindset is unique - and hopefully a one-off mutation.
~ ~ ~ ~
Nope!
you're reinterpreting wierwille's message to suit your own agenda - whatever that is - it's seems to change frequently.
you're re-interpretations of wierwille's message look different from his, because they are! wierwille's message may have twisted Scripture, logical fallacies, and dubious speculations, whereas your stuff is bat-$hit crazy mercury running all over the place!
~ ~ ~ ~
what is the "believing muscle"? Where is that in the Bible? Chapter and verse please.
No essays please.
It's a shame you don't work on your communication skills. You tend to overcomplicate and obfuscate almost everything. I wish you'd take Rocky's advice and work on your communication skills - discussions with you might be possible then.
And pay attention to the feedback you get from others – and use their comments and advice to help you hone your writing skills.
I’m probably the last person you want to hear from about trimming down long posts…but if I may be so bold as to offer some constructive criticism:
1.reference other works besides wierwille’s. That may seem like a ridiculous suggestion – but hear me out. I’m aware most of your posts are in About the Way forum because it relates to wierwille – but this would go for doctrinal forum as well. I’m aware you lean heavily on wierwille doctrine – but you can argue for something he taught by not limiting yourself to just his works. You could cite the works of others – including commentaries, study Bibles, systematic theologies, biblical studies on select topics, hyperlinks, parallel translations (Bible Hub is great for that)and even secular works and hyperlinks if relevant to the topic.
2.embrace the Socratic method. That really is a group effort. It is NOT a gotcha game…rather it’s great for boiling things down to what’s essential and exposes logical fallacies too. Encourage cognitive skills in the discussion. I’ve referenced Bullinger’s Companion Bible and Bullinger’s How to Enjoy the Bible from both a positive and negative viewpoint – he was wacky on some stuff (4 crucified, dispensationalism, the NT canon), but good on other things (like literary structure, figures of speech). In light of # 1 – feel free to reference wierwille’s works or any TWI material – if something has validity it should be able to stand up to the most intense scrutiny.
3.respect common definitions and conventional intellectual standards. This should be no surprise to you – most Grease Spotters don’t think much of wierwille’s definitions and dubious credentials / accomplishments. And it doesn’t sit well with others when you declare the devil has a chokehold on academia.
4.rely on appropriate Scripture to make your point. Rather than writing a lengthy commentary or essay to make your case – try to find a verse or verses that plainly state your argument – and doesn’t require your audience to perform mental gymnastics – difficult and complex logical thought processes. For example, OldSkool’s and my reference to Matthew 5:18
King James Bible
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
~ ~ ~ ~
One book that I review occasionally helps me in cutting down my wordiness:
Amazon.in: Buy Write Tight: Say Exactly What You Mean with Precision and Power Book Online at Low Prices in India | Write Tight: Say Exactly What You Mean with Precision and Power Reviews & Ratings
Another paperback I’m reading is Penwork’s newest book:
From the Porch to the Page: A Guidebook for the Writing Life | Charlene L. Edge (charleneedge.com)
PS – finish Undertow first !
If you like writing and sometimes struggle to get what’s in you out – keep an eye out for helps and hints from published writers. In Penworks’ newest book she also recommends:
The Mystery of the Cleaning Lady: A Writer Looks at Creativity and Neu – UWA Publishing
which I got the other day…I usually wind up reading 3 or 4 books at a time – depending on the subjects. In a given day I might block off an hour here and there – in between errands, and home maintenance, music projects, writing projects.
Recently I've had 2 major shots-in-the-arm for creative writing; one was a suggestion from Penworks' guidebook for the writing life - and that was handwriting instead of typing on a computer...that was something different and more direct - I got a composition notebook and whipped out a beefy first chapter for one story...
the other inspirational boost was after watching season 2 of The White Lotus , there was an unpacking feature at the end by the writer and creator Mike White; he talked about several critical scenes in season 2 that were intentionally written to NOT spell everything out. he left some things up to the imagination of the audience...this also helped me breeze through writing that same first chapter - it's a techno-psychological thriller and I was getting bogged down thinking I had to explain every detailed aspect of how the technology worked.
I love creative writing! I have 41 story ideas in various stages of development with plot lines, subtext, themes, characters. Don’t know if I’ll ever publish any of it – but it burns a hole in me if I don’t do anything. My wife urges me to do some kids’ books and graphic novels…I don’t know about that – I think of it as a satisfying hobby like art or music and if anything, my family is my target audience...Even if anything I make doesn't go beyond my home - there is something so satisfying...fulfilling even - to look at something and think "hey, I made that!"
The urge to create is what makes me post goofy stuff in the Being on-call and other misadventures in the humor forum. It's addictive to do - my humor is so quirky anyway - I don't post stuff cuz I think it will make others laugh so much as I feel like I'm getting away with murder - kinda like my modus operandi as class clown wannabe in high school.
I can still hear my old critics "you killed it alright". 
Some of my inspiration for that comes unexpectedly when I look at CNN or Yahoo news on my computer – and you know how they have click-bait stuff like – 10 huge plot holes created by movie sequels...I look at a picture - and start thinking what is another way to explain how the scene came about.
Think about what motivates you to post here. Most of the time I get the feeling you come here to cause trouble. But I don't know what motivates you. Again, think about the feedback you get. Apparently, many Grease Spotters feel like I do...If causing trouble is not your intent - you should reconsider the way you communicate here. and if causing trouble is not your goal - your efforts thus far - most of the time are actually counterproductive, if you are wanting folks to be receptive to your ideas.
~ ~ ~ ~
You do realize that this was all speculation on the part of wierwille. There is NO law of believing. It's a pet-theory of wierwille and all the other health and wealth gospel preachers.
A law invariably works every time! Like the law of gravity. If you jump off a 102-story building today, you’ll plunge to your death. If you try it tomorrow – it will happen then too. Matter of fact, anyone who has ever had a death wish and attempted to jump from a high building were never disappointed by the law of gravity not working. It's not called the theory of gravity.
There is zero evidence to support the supposed law of believing.
~ ~ ~ ~
I don’t think you know what you’re talking about…first off, wierwille is the last person anyone should emulate for what mental habits one should cultivate. I mean – he was an unabashed plagiarist, pathological liar, a drunkard, a sexual predator, a thief, an abusive and mean-spirited hypocritical pontificating deluded person. Apparently wierwille was incapable of distinguishing truth from lies, fact from fiction, right from wrong.
you said "If fear isn't resisted it's damaging." Really ? How so? most normal fears have to do with self-preservation - that's something I believe God instilled in humankind...
However, concerning your statement “There are religious circles where people who DON'T exhibit a fear of going to hell, then that kind of cocky attitude places them right on the edge of the pit” does fit wierwille to a T ! His lifestyle was typically one unconscionable act after another.
Perhaps one of wierwille’s deep rooted problems was that he had no fear of God.
If someone has difficulty distinguishing normal fears from phobias / irrational fears then maybe they should consider seeking professional help. Below are a few hyperlinks for direction:
Phobias and Irrational Fears - HelpGuide.org
Fear | Psychology Today
Distinguishing between phobias (apa.org)
That’s all for now, folks
Edited by T-Bone759 editor-power post
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
And since no man knoweth the day or the hour, which man o Gawd knoweth not? For how can one be a man o Gawd, unless the man o Gawd knoweth? For in the knowing that he knows the not knowing is known. This full circle is throughout time, and days, and hours.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Dang...dude still reading?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
So one is kept in a cult through fear tactics. But the cult teaches to have no fear.
I'm not touching you . . .I'm not touching you . . . I'm not conditioning you. ..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
I'd worry his overdue library book fees are enormous...if so, maybe he should look at one of those debt-consolidation service...just a thought.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Thought it was an appropriate tie in to the law of believing...library book...and a dump truck to haul the books to the ...city...ahah...library...thought I was gonna say dump....ok...I'm abstract
Edited by OldSkoolLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Mike, have you ever heard of self-awareness? I expect you have. However, when you waste your time and energy on trying to clarify things like this, you act as if you have never heard of it. Why, you might ask?
Because if you've gotten this far and you become aware your point was not understood the way you intended your readers to understand it, it's too late.
You might do better by asking if anyone is interested in hearing/reading what you really meant... If nobody responds in the affirmative to such a question, just don't spend your time or energy on it any further.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
The first thing that comes to mind after reading this diatribe is all the fear that was attempted to be injected into all of our lives by a TWI President declaring that we would be “greasespots by midnight” if we ever walked away from “gawds ministry”.
I am certainly thankful for Jesus Christ my lord and savior for the strength to navigate through that false teaching and it’s impact upon me and the community of Christians I have interacted with.
The problem with this line of reasoning is that it ends up in uncertainty. People exposed to and adopting the teaching view their own past and others lives with a lense of “mental assent” and “cultivated fear” as their boogeyman and never truly certain whether boogey is gonna get them or not.
Like you. Suggesting that somehow repetitive reading of 6th grade level material is going to either jump someone over the “mental assent” gap or somehow after 20 years they can read, understand, live principles but still be “mentally assenting”
This instability and insecurity is not introduced by the doctrine of our Lord Jesus Christ it is taught by conspiracy theorists with a view to isolate and control you for their own benefit.
My response to VPs horse $hit is mentally he can F off down the road with that garbage.
Jesus said “my yoke is easy and my burden is light”
So if your personal doctrine twists you up and does NOT provide genuine answers it’s probably a false prophet in back of it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Perhaps it's appropriate for everyone reading this thread to recognize Mike's 20 year track record on GSC clearly exposes him as a TWI reactionary.
I invoke the term reactionary and provide a definition/description as it relates to political reaction only to show HOW it relates. I'm neither suggesting Mike is a political reactionary nor inviting a political discussion.
Of course he's not completely alone in that pursuit, except in terms of his voice on GSC being a lone voice.
I raise the issue [here] because twi is such a small fish in a very large ocean. Not only in terms of number of acolytes or followers but also as the ever expanding knowledge of humanity and perhaps also of God and spiritual matters. I now give you an 8 minute video of Yuval Noah Harari, historian and author of Sapiens and a new series of books, Unstoppable Us.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Arrgggh!!! You mean this isnt true!!! AGGHHG! And all this time...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Actual picture of OldSkool and one of his miniature horse that pull his minivan....(plz note I neither own a mini-horse or mini-van but if I did it would look just like this)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
That van looks like it's about to stall.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
That horse is a bit ghetto so I have lure him in with a Colt45. Kinda like a equestrian candy van.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
At That Ain’t Hay Hot Rods they soup up cars the old fashion way - one horse at a time.
Here we see owner and guitar operator of That Ain’t Hay Hot Rods , OldSkool checking on the miniaturization process of a Clydesdale which can take up to several weeks for large breed horses.
OldSkool says the super-duper-ultra-trivialized-mighty-fine-equine is much easier to ‘invisiblize’ with Apparently Absent Paint since there is less mare to disappare…and cheaper to maintain too because there’s less steed to feed.
One trick pony down - seven hundred and fifty eight more to go!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
They're on their way to PFAL to deliver a fresh load of...uhhh...collaterals.
Edited by waysiderI can't spell.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
I gave my right eye for that horse
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
"Angry Young Man", by Billy Joel.
"There's a place in the world for the angry young man
With his working class ties and his radical plans.
He refuses to bend he refuses to crawl
And he's always at home with his back to the wall.
And he's proud of his scars and the battles he's lost.
And struggles and bleeds as he hangs on his cross.
And likes to be known as the angry young man.
Give a moment or two to the angry young man
With his foot in his mouth and his heart in his hand.
He's been stabbed in the back he's been misunderstood.
It's a comfort to know his intentions are good.
And he sits in his room with a lock on the door
With his maps and his medals laid out on the floor.
And he likes to be known as the angry young man.
I believe I've passed the age of consciousness and righteous rage
I found that just surviving was a noble fight.
I once believed in causes too.
I had my pointless point of view,
And life went on no matter who was wrong or right.
And there's always a place for the angry young man
With his fist in the air and his head in the sand.
And he's never been able to learn from mistakes
So he can't understand why his heart always breaks.
And his honor is pure and his courage is well
And he's fair and he's true and he's boring as hell.
And he'll go to the grave as an angry old man."
https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/billyjoel/preludeangryyoungman.html
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
There’s nothing quite so damaging as the human desire to be right.
From: Stop Doing That $hi+ by Gary John Bishop
Edited by T-Bonebook title "correction"
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.