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.
God did not do it.
Sometimes I feel like I'm trapped in the last episode of "Seinfeld."
See, the top button.....
Amazing. We've gone over this for YEARS.
This segment is based completely on a false doctrine and perpetuates error.
The hypothetical example given is a boy run over by a car.
Was it God's fault? No-AND NOBODY CLAIMED IT WAS, duh.
Was it the mother's fault? No-but vpw blamed her.
He claimed it's a LAW that if you worry something bad will happen to your child,
you are them RESPONSIBLE for MAKING something bad happen.
That is a vile error, and it is a lie to perpetuate it.
Every morning, millions of children are sent off to school.
Every morning, millions of parents worry something will happen to their children.
Every morning, millions of children get home alive and unharmed.
Every day, millions of children CONTINUE to come home unharmed despite worrying
parents.
Every day, someone's hit by a car and suffers serious injuries.
That's NOT because someone was in a panic that such a thing would happen to the
person. That's because there are bad drivers, there's suffering and evil in
the world, and we live in the world. Forcing them into a construct required
by an erroneous doctrine does them a disservice.
Some GSCers have pointed out they had parents who were TERRIFIED something would
happen to them, and nothing happened.
Other GSCers have had nobody worried about them, and bad things happened.
====
A child is struck by a car and killed.
Was God responsible? No.
Was his mother who wasn't there responsible? No.
Maybe the DRIVER was responsible.
did vpw blame the mother because the child was insufficiently socialized and
lacked experience?
No-although those MIGHT have helped-or they might not.
Children cross the street with the light every day and are hit by drivers
running red lights.
vpw said the mother was responsible for the sole reason of FEAR, and keeping FEAR.
vpw's construct didn't blame the DRIVER any-he was a humble pawn in the game-
this mother's fear FORCED him to hit the child. If not for her fear, the driver
would have driven safely. So, it's not his fault.
What a vile, vile thing to say!
To blame a victim!
This is as sensible as saying that the people who worked in the Twin Towers and
escaped had no fear, but the people in the upper stories who died were fearful.
According to vpw's construct, the FEAR in the HEARTS of the people in the upper
stories was the MAIN cause of their deaths,
and the planned and orchestrated hijackings, and hitting the planes into the
buildings, that was not only incidental, but the terrorists didn't have a choice
any more than that DRIVER did! The believing of those people dragged them along
and they were incidental, pawns under the FEAR of the people there.
Of course, the Police and Fire Dept people who went in and were inside when they
collapsed-despite their training, they must have been full of FEAR also, since
they had insufficient believing to escape alive. Odd how trained disaster
specialists were full of fear while some civilians were confident and escaped.
This must also mean that Todd Beamer ("Let's Roll") and the others on his flight
lacked sufficient believing to override the believing of a handful of terrorists
on their flight. If they had believed enough, they could have prevented their
Just wondering- "fear is believing", and "doubt, worry, fear issuing in unbelief"- was this one of Vic's original thoughts, or was this plagiarised also? If so, where did he get it?
Behold, the Angel of the Lord hath descended, and shining a light upon him, saith, "Thou art smikeol, the ProphetTM of the Most High God".
And there was much weeping and gnashing of teeth.
For hath not smikeol said, "Thou shalt reject TVT, thou OLGs, else thou shalt be smitten by He who smiteth. Thou shalt turn away from the TVT, PCP, LSD, JKLMNOP, and such, and turn to PLAF, which Jesus hath wrought, and given to docvic(praise be his name!) along with an overabundance of Brains! and Brawn!"
Just wondering- "fear is believing", and "doubt, worry, fear issuing in unbelief"- was this one of Vic's original thoughts, or was this plagiarised also? If so, where did he get it?
The law of believing. That is what Wierwille called it, a law. Not a principle (a guiding concept) but a law-- something that is immutable and inviolate: What you believe will surely come to pass, whether positive or negative. We've heard this all before.
This "law" was drummed into our heads from the very beginning of our involvement, from session one of Power For Abundant Living or even our first fellowship. And, as we deepened our involvement in The Way International, it became part of the fabric of our gestalt.
This is why some who have left, even decades later, still have such difficulty with prying it out of their lives and seeing it for what it was: a manipulation and control technique.
The "law" was the cardinal lesson of session one, and has been the basic tool used by The Way International in every one of their endeavors to control people at every level of their involvement. From the very beginning we were taught to blame the victim and dismiss the perpetrator.
Those who years later, still cling to it as if to a liferaft in a stormy sea, are still under the mind control of that organization, and have no idea that what they see as a liferaft, is an anvil they have voluntarily lashed themselves to, taking them deeper and deeper from reality.
Now you tell me, just what are the motivations for a fifty to sixty year old man to show pornography to minor teenage girls?
Exactly Catcup
They always said they wanted us to profit from them and their teachings. Just tell me "there are devil spirits working".
When I saw the tape I saw two naked chicks "working" a dog. That was all I saw. I did not see one damn debil spirit.
I had seen naked women before and I had seen dogs humping before I saw the tape. Just tell me about two chicks screwing a dog. I can figure it out all on my own.
They were for him to get his rocks off by seeing it all the time.
It was to desensitize woman so he could have his way with them.
They were for him to control whatever he wanted in his sick life.
Don't tell me he didn't show the movie of the dog and two women continously when it was. Year after year for years he showed this to people. Young people, older people. He didn't care.
He was one sick puppy, mike and it stuns me that someone would want to follow after someone as sick as him. You want to be just like him? Go ahead!! Follow someone that abused and controlled and ruined lots of people's lives. You want to be just like him? Be my guest. I just pray that you don't bring down as many people as he did. You really think he cared about people? HA!!! He cared only for himself. He cared for all the people worship he had. He loved the control and raping of the women.
He died a miserable lonely man. Is that what you want?
Out of all the things that Dr presented to us, look at what you're gravitating towards and focusing on!
Touche' Mike. You accuse us of focusing only on the perversions of vee pee (of which there are plenty, while you continue to ignore, justify and/or praise those same perversions.
quote:
Dr did not FOCUS on things like this. He pointed out things and moved on.
finish the sentence, Mike. "....and moved on to another, different perversion or lie." He "pointed out" the same disgusting things over and over and over again. If you want to call that "pointed out", fine. I call it "dwelling on" and "pounding into people's brains".
quote:
Of course, you righteous people have a good reason for isolating and dwelling on such items. Roll Eyes
Of course Dr did NOT have a good reason for even briefly bringing it up.
Go ahead and focus away, showing the world just what you are made of, and becoming.
This is just one of many items that your precious dr brought up, taught and exposed people to. It's the standard, foundation and pattern he taught and encouraged in his ministry. It's the beginning of what became twice the child of satan than he was. Dr started it, Mike. We're just exposing it and reminding people of it and trying to help others get out, get over and stay away from TWI and other destructive groups like the one your precious dr created.
The law of believing. That is what Wierwille called it, a law. Not a principle (a guiding concept) but a law-- something that is immutable and inviolate: What you believe will surely come to pass, whether positive or negative. We've heard this all before.
Perzackly, Catcup! He said it's a LAW like the LAW OF GRAVITY. Every single time I let go of something it falls to the earth. Why? Gravity - it's a law. I can, without fail, predict what is going to happen. If it doesn't then I can very easily discern why.....
vee pee's law of believing doesn't work that way and the reasons why vary, can't be proven and are extremely inconsistent. It's downright devilish how vee pee and TWI taught us to condemn others and ourselves when things don't work out the way it seems they should.
quote:
Those who years later, still cling to it as if to a liferaft in a stormy sea, are still under the mind control of that organization, and have no idea that what they see as a liferaft, is an anvil they have voluntarily lashed themselves to, taking them deeper and deeper from reality.
Yes as Bell said, I heard his voice, I felt the hands of the girl behind me giving me a neck rub to keep me from falling asleep, the sweat rolling down my face (they turned the a/c off because you counld't hear the class with it running), my butt hurting from sitting.
At first I as going to down load it. But why. I know better now.
I don't know why it is... but every time I read Mike's posts the words don't reach my brain... the only thing that goes on in my brain, no matter how hard I try to read them, is....
"the bear went over the mountain,
the bear went over the mountain,
the bear went over the mountain....."
I don't know why that happens... but I swear it's true...
Ah, yes, the outrageous claim. Or, as they used to teach us in Christian Manipulative, er, Motivational Techniques: The first thing you do to get their attention is to make a
Big Fat Claim!
It's that old addage the communist party used to use, that still works for any huckster:
Tell a lie, tell it big enough, and long enough, and loud enough, and the people will eventually believe you.
Every morning, millions of children get home alive and unharmed.
I don't believe that fact matters much to any parent(s) who lost their kid(s) at Columbine. As I recall there was a similar situation like that which occurred in MN not long ago.
quote:
What you believe will surely come to pass, whether positive or negative. We've heard this all before.
Faith (doesn't matter if it is positive or negative .. Romans 10:17) comes by hearing. Faith, positive or negative still comes that way, even in 2005. But I can choose who or what I want to listen to just as easily as you can. But most people choose to listen to the "roar of the crowd." It's more like the roar of the lion rather than the crowd I believe. (1 Peter 5:8)
Believing (whether it's negative or positive ) is nothing more than a seed one plants in their heart, and what one sows they ultimately reap - positive or negative - it just depends on what is sown. Plant a seed in the right conditions and it eventually sprouts and grows. That shouldn't be a mystery to anyone here. Jesus taught the same thing in the gospel - in the parable of the sower and the seed. The only reason Mike can't plant this seed and expect much growth is because the ground here is rock hard. It's hardened by tradition, by religion, hardened by politics, by gossip, backbiting, and similar things people here want to talk about and listen to. At best, a different seed got planted and was sprouted.
quote:
Tell a lie, tell it big enough, and long enough, and loud enough, and the people will eventually believe you.
Quite a remark coming from someone who doesn't understand (or believe in) the law of believing and therefore rejects it. But frankly speaking, I do think they understand the law of believing because they couldn't make such a remark if they didn't. They're just not being very truthful with us about it, so who's the one pushing the lie? But let's not find fault with them just because they are not being truthful. Most people aren't even true to themselves so why listen to them? It all starts right back at Romans 10:17. Well, that's what got us all in the soup to start with - listening to someone other than - well you know who...
I'm sorry folks, but I just don't have the time to spend on every single detail that comes up against me, not even close. But the important things I make time for.
Belle, you wrote: "Every single time I let go of something it falls to the earth. Why? Gravity - it's a law."
That's not accurate. Try letting go of a helium balloon, and will NOT fall to earth. Ultimately it will, but not immediately. Remember the word "ultimately" that I boldfaced in that quote from Dr several posts previous?
Why doesn't the balloon fall? Because OTHER principles are at work, and they build an illusion that gravity is not working on the balloon. Similarly with an airplane.
To say that the LAW of gravity states that "everything falls when I let go of it" is a crude approximation. It works for MANY things, though, and CAN AT TIMES be a useful expression of the law of gravity.
I've pointed out here OFTEN that Dr was very careful to mention in several places that "Believing equals receiving" is a crude approximation of the law of believing. Many here have NOT been so careful to note the fine tuning Dr gave us in expressing this law. I also boldfaced the phrase "contributing factors" to show that, like with falling objects, there may be other factors to consider when looking into specific and particular applications or mis-applications of the law of believing.
*******
Another angle to consider is the difference between the natural realm and the spiritual. The adversary was given great control over the senses realm and his interference can give the illusion that the law of believing can look like it's being violated, much like a rising balloon makes it look like gravity is not working.
I'm still learning about this latest angle, but so far it looks like what we were taught in the FOUNDATIONAL class was just the beginning of what needs to be learned about believing. The adversary does not have any power in the spiritual realm, and from that perspective (God's) the law never even appears to be violated.
There are so many details that have to be looked into here, but the complaints I always hear about how we were taught this law always come from people who have never or seldom grappled with the more advanced aspects of this law, only the foundational expressions of it in the Foundational Class.
I yearn to discuss these things with thinkers, not emotional complainers. There is much yet to learn about these things. For those who want to think a little deeper on this I'm repeating my post of last night, the one to which I referred to boldfaced words here.
*****************
"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."
We've been over this umpteen times, but for the new people:
God did not do it.
Why doesn't anyone here focus on and discuss the "contributing factors" mentioned here?
Why doesn't anyone here focus on and discuss the "ultimately made possible" mentioned here?
The woman focused on fear, when she had good advice to do the opposite.
What we select in our focus is important.
If we see ourselves developing great fear, it's wise to put on the brakes, learn how to control our minds, and find the protective promises of God to believe.
What we should NOT do is condemn ourselves. If we see others falling into the fear trap, we should not condemn them, but help the out with kind words. It is in THIS point (not Dr's teaching) that our TVT (Twi Verbal Tradition) went awry, and our experiences soured.
vpw said the mother was responsible for the sole reason of FEAR, and keeping FEAR.
Funny. I just re-read the exact same section that another Dr. of Theology had just read, and NO WHERE does VPW ever blame the mother herself for causing the death of her child. But he does blame her fear. NOw one would think a Dr. of Theology could read much better than that. (Just where did I hear that before?)
Perzackly, Catcup! He said it's a LAW like the LAW OF GRAVITY. Every single time I let go of something it falls to the earth. Why? Gravity - it's a law. I can, without fail, predict what is going to happen. If it doesn't then I can very easily discern why.....
If it doesn't then I can very easily discern why..... - THAT, Mike, is your helium balloon. Your argument still doesn't hold water.
Mike said:
quote:
There are so many details that have to be looked into here, but the complaints I always hear about how we were taught this law always come from people who have never or seldom grappled with the more advanced aspects of this law, only the foundational expressions of it in the Foundational Class.
I yearn to discuss these things with thinkers, not emotional complainers. There is much yet to learn about these things.
Yeppers! We're all idiots here, Mike. You would do much better to spend your time on the PFAL website. Please don't feel obligated to waste any more of your precious time on us non-thinking emotional complainers.
I will not argue with you and I usually ignore any post and most threads when I see your name. I probably should have continued to do that.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
50
49
36
97
Popular Days
Jun 18
120
Jun 19
84
Jun 24
72
Jun 17
47
Top Posters In This Topic
rascal 50 posts
Catcup 49 posts
WordWolf 36 posts
Mike 97 posts
Popular Days
Jun 18 2005
120 posts
Jun 19 2005
84 posts
Jun 24 2005
72 posts
Jun 17 2005
47 posts
WordWolf
Sometimes I feel like I'm trapped in the last episode of "Seinfeld."
See, the top button.....
Amazing. We've gone over this for YEARS.
This segment is based completely on a false doctrine and perpetuates error.
The hypothetical example given is a boy run over by a car.
Was it God's fault? No-AND NOBODY CLAIMED IT WAS, duh.
Was it the mother's fault? No-but vpw blamed her.
He claimed it's a LAW that if you worry something bad will happen to your child,
you are them RESPONSIBLE for MAKING something bad happen.
That is a vile error, and it is a lie to perpetuate it.
Every morning, millions of children are sent off to school.
Every morning, millions of parents worry something will happen to their children.
Every morning, millions of children get home alive and unharmed.
Every day, millions of children CONTINUE to come home unharmed despite worrying
parents.
Every day, someone's hit by a car and suffers serious injuries.
That's NOT because someone was in a panic that such a thing would happen to the
person. That's because there are bad drivers, there's suffering and evil in
the world, and we live in the world. Forcing them into a construct required
by an erroneous doctrine does them a disservice.
Some GSCers have pointed out they had parents who were TERRIFIED something would
happen to them, and nothing happened.
Other GSCers have had nobody worried about them, and bad things happened.
====
A child is struck by a car and killed.
Was God responsible? No.
Was his mother who wasn't there responsible? No.
Maybe the DRIVER was responsible.
did vpw blame the mother because the child was insufficiently socialized and
lacked experience?
No-although those MIGHT have helped-or they might not.
Children cross the street with the light every day and are hit by drivers
running red lights.
vpw said the mother was responsible for the sole reason of FEAR, and keeping FEAR.
vpw's construct didn't blame the DRIVER any-he was a humble pawn in the game-
this mother's fear FORCED him to hit the child. If not for her fear, the driver
would have driven safely. So, it's not his fault.
What a vile, vile thing to say!
To blame a victim!
This is as sensible as saying that the people who worked in the Twin Towers and
escaped had no fear, but the people in the upper stories who died were fearful.
According to vpw's construct, the FEAR in the HEARTS of the people in the upper
stories was the MAIN cause of their deaths,
and the planned and orchestrated hijackings, and hitting the planes into the
buildings, that was not only incidental, but the terrorists didn't have a choice
any more than that DRIVER did! The believing of those people dragged them along
and they were incidental, pawns under the FEAR of the people there.
Of course, the Police and Fire Dept people who went in and were inside when they
collapsed-despite their training, they must have been full of FEAR also, since
they had insufficient believing to escape alive. Odd how trained disaster
specialists were full of fear while some civilians were confident and escaped.
This must also mean that Todd Beamer ("Let's Roll") and the others on his flight
lacked sufficient believing to override the believing of a handful of terrorists
on their flight. If they had believed enough, they could have prevented their
crash as well.
Blame the Victim, Blame the Believer.
Session One.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
BTW,
vpw showed a lot of students a pornographic movie with beastiality
in it, and described it for tens of thousands who didn't see it.
With more detail than was needed to make a point.
BTW,
did anyone see a specific point answered by the introduction of this
pornographic movie or its description?
If he was going somewhere with it, he took a wrong turn.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Not worry, but fear, extreme fear.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
A semantic difference. The chart from Session I showed they were the same category,
making large amounts of worry functionally equivalent to large amounts of fear,
with both diametrically opposed to believing.
That chart was in the sessions, the Orange Book AND the syllabus, and the
Listening with a Purpose questions centered around it, making it cardinal to the
understanding of Session I.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Just wondering- "fear is believing", and "doubt, worry, fear issuing in unbelief"- was this one of Vic's original thoughts, or was this plagiarised also? If so, where did he get it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve!
Behold, the Angel of the Lord hath descended, and shining a light upon him, saith, "Thou art smikeol, the ProphetTM of the Most High God".
And there was much weeping and gnashing of teeth.
For hath not smikeol said, "Thou shalt reject TVT, thou OLGs, else thou shalt be smitten by He who smiteth. Thou shalt turn away from the TVT, PCP, LSD, JKLMNOP, and such, and turn to PLAF, which Jesus hath wrought, and given to docvic(praise be his name!) along with an overabundance of Brains! and Brawn!"
These are the words of smikeol.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/rsr_lawbelieve.htm
And E.W. Kenyon.
http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Psychology/posit.htm
Where did Kenyon get it?
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Thebes/461...faithtract.html
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
I'm so confused... I thought she wanted red drapes!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catcup
The law of believing. That is what Wierwille called it, a law. Not a principle (a guiding concept) but a law-- something that is immutable and inviolate: What you believe will surely come to pass, whether positive or negative. We've heard this all before.
This "law" was drummed into our heads from the very beginning of our involvement, from session one of Power For Abundant Living or even our first fellowship. And, as we deepened our involvement in The Way International, it became part of the fabric of our gestalt.
This is why some who have left, even decades later, still have such difficulty with prying it out of their lives and seeing it for what it was: a manipulation and control technique.
The "law" was the cardinal lesson of session one, and has been the basic tool used by The Way International in every one of their endeavors to control people at every level of their involvement. From the very beginning we were taught to blame the victim and dismiss the perpetrator.
Those who years later, still cling to it as if to a liferaft in a stormy sea, are still under the mind control of that organization, and have no idea that what they see as a liferaft, is an anvil they have voluntarily lashed themselves to, taking them deeper and deeper from reality.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catcup
And about that pooch pornography:
He showed that movie to an advanced class where I KNOW there was at least one seventeen year old girl in the audience-- probably more.
In the country I live in, it is ILLEGAL to show pornography to a minor.
Now you tell me, just what are the motivations for a fifty to sixty year old man to show pornography to minor teenage girls?
There is absolutely NO JUSTIFICATION FOR IT WHATSOEVER.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
justloafing
Exactly Catcup
They always said they wanted us to profit from them and their teachings. Just tell me "there are devil spirits working".
When I saw the tape I saw two naked chicks "working" a dog. That was all I saw. I did not see one damn debil spirit.
I had seen naked women before and I had seen dogs humping before I saw the tape. Just tell me about two chicks screwing a dog. I can figure it out all on my own.
There were motives to everything he did.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
vickles
And what motives were they may I ask?
They were for him to get his rocks off by seeing it all the time.
It was to desensitize woman so he could have his way with them.
They were for him to control whatever he wanted in his sick life.
Don't tell me he didn't show the movie of the dog and two women continously when it was. Year after year for years he showed this to people. Young people, older people. He didn't care.
He was one sick puppy, mike and it stuns me that someone would want to follow after someone as sick as him. You want to be just like him? Go ahead!! Follow someone that abused and controlled and ruined lots of people's lives. You want to be just like him? Be my guest. I just pray that you don't bring down as many people as he did. You really think he cared about people? HA!!! He cared only for himself. He cared for all the people worship he had. He loved the control and raping of the women.
He died a miserable lonely man. Is that what you want?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Touche' Mike. You accuse us of focusing only on the perversions of vee pee (of which there are plenty, while you continue to ignore, justify and/or praise those same perversions.
finish the sentence, Mike. "....and moved on to another, different perversion or lie." He "pointed out" the same disgusting things over and over and over again. If you want to call that "pointed out", fine. I call it "dwelling on" and "pounding into people's brains".
This is just one of many items that your precious dr brought up, taught and exposed people to. It's the standard, foundation and pattern he taught and encouraged in his ministry. It's the beginning of what became twice the child of satan than he was. Dr started it, Mike. We're just exposing it and reminding people of it and trying to help others get out, get over and stay away from TWI and other destructive groups like the one your precious dr created.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Perzackly, Catcup! He said it's a LAW like the LAW OF GRAVITY. Every single time I let go of something it falls to the earth. Why? Gravity - it's a law. I can, without fail, predict what is going to happen. If it doesn't then I can very easily discern why.....
vee pee's law of believing doesn't work that way and the reasons why vary, can't be proven and are extremely inconsistent. It's downright devilish how vee pee and TWI taught us to condemn others and ourselves when things don't work out the way it seems they should.
Excellent, Catcup! Very well said!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex70sHouston
This was a total flash back.
Yes as Bell said, I heard his voice, I felt the hands of the girl behind me giving me a neck rub to keep me from falling asleep, the sweat rolling down my face (they turned the a/c off because you counld't hear the class with it running), my butt hurting from sitting.
At first I as going to down load it. But why. I know better now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I think the outrageous claim was made for a reason- it made the product more sellable.
"Some people will never be what they really want to be because of cowardice and intimidation"
May be closer to the truth, but it just doesn't have the same "ring" to it-
"Fear is believing. Believing is a law.."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
I don't know why it is... but every time I read Mike's posts the words don't reach my brain... the only thing that goes on in my brain, no matter how hard I try to read them, is....
"the bear went over the mountain,
the bear went over the mountain,
the bear went over the mountain....."
I don't know why that happens... but I swear it's true...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catcup
Ah, yes, the outrageous claim. Or, as they used to teach us in Christian Manipulative, er, Motivational Techniques: The first thing you do to get their attention is to make a
Big Fat Claim!
It's that old addage the communist party used to use, that still works for any huckster:
Tell a lie, tell it big enough, and long enough, and loud enough, and the people will eventually believe you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
What The Hay
Faith (doesn't matter if it is positive or negative .. Romans 10:17) comes by hearing. Faith, positive or negative still comes that way, even in 2005. But I can choose who or what I want to listen to just as easily as you can. But most people choose to listen to the "roar of the crowd." It's more like the roar of the lion rather than the crowd I believe. (1 Peter 5:8)
Believing (whether it's negative or positive ) is nothing more than a seed one plants in their heart, and what one sows they ultimately reap - positive or negative - it just depends on what is sown. Plant a seed in the right conditions and it eventually sprouts and grows. That shouldn't be a mystery to anyone here. Jesus taught the same thing in the gospel - in the parable of the sower and the seed. The only reason Mike can't plant this seed and expect much growth is because the ground here is rock hard. It's hardened by tradition, by religion, hardened by politics, by gossip, backbiting, and similar things people here want to talk about and listen to. At best, a different seed got planted and was sprouted.
Quite a remark coming from someone who doesn't understand (or believe in) the law of believing and therefore rejects it. But frankly speaking, I do think they understand the law of believing because they couldn't make such a remark if they didn't. They're just not being very truthful with us about it, so who's the one pushing the lie? But let's not find fault with them just because they are not being truthful. Most people aren't even true to themselves so why listen to them? It all starts right back at Romans 10:17. Well, that's what got us all in the soup to start with - listening to someone other than - well you know who...Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I'm sorry folks, but I just don't have the time to spend on every single detail that comes up against me, not even close. But the important things I make time for.
Belle, you wrote: "Every single time I let go of something it falls to the earth. Why? Gravity - it's a law."
That's not accurate. Try letting go of a helium balloon, and will NOT fall to earth. Ultimately it will, but not immediately. Remember the word "ultimately" that I boldfaced in that quote from Dr several posts previous?
Why doesn't the balloon fall? Because OTHER principles are at work, and they build an illusion that gravity is not working on the balloon. Similarly with an airplane.
To say that the LAW of gravity states that "everything falls when I let go of it" is a crude approximation. It works for MANY things, though, and CAN AT TIMES be a useful expression of the law of gravity.
I've pointed out here OFTEN that Dr was very careful to mention in several places that "Believing equals receiving" is a crude approximation of the law of believing. Many here have NOT been so careful to note the fine tuning Dr gave us in expressing this law. I also boldfaced the phrase "contributing factors" to show that, like with falling objects, there may be other factors to consider when looking into specific and particular applications or mis-applications of the law of believing.
*******
Another angle to consider is the difference between the natural realm and the spiritual. The adversary was given great control over the senses realm and his interference can give the illusion that the law of believing can look like it's being violated, much like a rising balloon makes it look like gravity is not working.
I'm still learning about this latest angle, but so far it looks like what we were taught in the FOUNDATIONAL class was just the beginning of what needs to be learned about believing. The adversary does not have any power in the spiritual realm, and from that perspective (God's) the law never even appears to be violated.
There are so many details that have to be looked into here, but the complaints I always hear about how we were taught this law always come from people who have never or seldom grappled with the more advanced aspects of this law, only the foundational expressions of it in the Foundational Class.
I yearn to discuss these things with thinkers, not emotional complainers. There is much yet to learn about these things. For those who want to think a little deeper on this I'm repeating my post of last night, the one to which I referred to boldfaced words here.
*****************
"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."
We've been over this umpteen times, but for the new people:
God did not do it.
Why doesn't anyone here focus on and discuss the "contributing factors" mentioned here?
Why doesn't anyone here focus on and discuss the "ultimately made possible" mentioned here?
The woman focused on fear, when she had good advice to do the opposite.
What we select in our focus is important.
If we see ourselves developing great fear, it's wise to put on the brakes, learn how to control our minds, and find the protective promises of God to believe.
What we should NOT do is condemn ourselves. If we see others falling into the fear trap, we should not condemn them, but help the out with kind words. It is in THIS point (not Dr's teaching) that our TVT (Twi Verbal Tradition) went awry, and our experiences soured.
.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
Here we see one using words that others have used in communicating truth. It is the Spirit that is in us that we must rely on. Not the word of men.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
What The Hay
Funny. I just re-read the exact same section that another Dr. of Theology had just read, and NO WHERE does VPW ever blame the mother herself for causing the death of her child. But he does blame her fear. NOw one would think a Dr. of Theology could read much better than that. (Just where did I hear that before?)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Mike, you took my quote out of context:
If it doesn't then I can very easily discern why..... - THAT, Mike, is your helium balloon. Your argument still doesn't hold water.
Mike said:
Yeppers! We're all idiots here, Mike. You would do much better to spend your time on the PFAL website. Please don't feel obligated to waste any more of your precious time on us non-thinking emotional complainers.
I will not argue with you and I usually ignore any post and most threads when I see your name. I probably should have continued to do that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
"the bear went over the mountain,
the bear went over the mountain,
the bear went over the mountain....."
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.