Leaderboard

We must be led down a rabbit hole by someone, and we have to ultimately decide to follow them down the hole, just like we followed VPW down his rabbit hole called TWI. After awhile it should have become obvious there are several rabbit hole “leaders” who post on GSC, and their intentions are only to disrupt the thread. They will twist just enough of the subject with the idea of only inticing others to bite and take the bait. Once hooked, apparently the gullible actually believe they can point out the errors to the “leader” of his/her posts, and he ar she will miraculously thank them for the correction. But instead, the “leader” slightly twists the subject a bit more, and drag the firmly hooked, further down and around the hole. After days and pages of postings, that have accomplished absolutely nothing, the hooked finally give up in exasperation, but seem to only wait for their “leaders” to throw out the next bone for them to chop on, and the crazy arguments continue again. Could it be that we have some of the same, still within us, that allowed a man to lead us into his cult and control our lives for years and decades? Do we still need to be led by another? Or might another possibilty might be, after several decades of posting on GSC, there are simply no new subjects to discuss about TWI? We have dug up postings begun twenty plus years ago, and put a new twist on them. Do we need to run down rabbit holes to keep things interesting day to day on GSC?

And speaking of missed (deliberate or not) irony, 9. Gurwinder's Theory of Bespoke ....: Many don’t have an opinion until they’re asked for it, at which point they cobble together a viewpoint from whim and half-remembered hearsay, before deciding that this two-minute-old makeshift opinion will be their new hill to die on. Solution: Discard all the opinions you thought of instinctively. Resist the reflex to offer impromptu answers, and become comfortable with saying “I don’t yet have enough information.”

Nobody except Way people say things like this: "I am believing to go on vacation" or "I am believing for a new car". Barf. Gag. I still catch myself talking like this sometimes, and I see it on Greasespot now and then too. So here's a little whining from me about this disgusting use of the word "Believing". It's not just the Way-Speak factor, but also the implication that goes along with it ... a subtle but definite diversion of meaning which happens with this diversion in language. Believing involves some entity which is believed. It could be a person or a story or even a doctrine. We believe IN things, but not FOR things or TO have something happen. Think about it. If I say I believe God, then the honor and trust belongs to God. If I say I believe my mother, then the honor and trust belongs to her. Now if I say I believe TO go on vacation, and then I get to actually go on vacation, who is the honorable or trustworthy entity? Me !!! If I am believing FOR a new car, and I don't get one, who screwed up? Me !!! In Way-Speak, TWI people are constantly referring to believing To and For things, which by sheer logic attributes the success or failure of the believing on the believe-er. It is one more method that was taught to us (via our echo-ing of leadership lingo) which in effect diminishes God's involvement and opens the door for the worship of certain humans. It also invites condemnation whether from one's self or from those "superior" "believers". Then there are the statements like "I am believing God for a new car". BELIEVING Him? Come on now. God never told you you would get a new car. It's just weird. Language is very powerful. I think ex-Way people should become aware of their speaking habits and consciously work to delete these tricks of speech that were programmed into us by repetition and isolation from non-Way influences. Many English-speaking foreigners will tell you that they still THINK in their native language. I am certain that some of us still THINK in Way-Speak.

In geometry, parallel lines are coplanar infinite lines that do not intersect at any point. Because the Word works with a mathematical exactness and scientific precision in the law of believing then we can safely produce the following mathematical corollary regarding needs and wants: If you want it you’ll never need it. If you need it you’ll never want it.

And the award for Best Example of Missed Irony goes to....

Do you have any documentation to back up your conjecture about to whom he referred? I know, that's your story and you're sticking to it. But it has nothing to do with anything on the topic of this thread.

This is NOT a statement of fact. It's a story. "Eve considered some bunk info..." Not only did the developer(s) of the AC on PFLAP NOT have any legitimate data upon which to make a true statement, but it is structured as a story. The conclusion, "what we can know by the 5 senses God expects us to know" is not founded either on scripture or anything that could be reasonably taken as factual. It's something Victor Wierwille decided God had meant and he taught it as such. IOW, he conjured it up. That's essentially what I meant by characterizing the paragraph as a story.

No. I don't input your posts into my mental database, sorry.

It's not anything but a story you told. No qualification as to whether it's true or not.

Not directed specifically at anyone, but I actually thought we were gonna have an intelligint discussion based on GMIR and the topic at hand. Is this all GSC is anymore?

Rocky, I absolutely LOVED those 3 videos. In my research I found that too much free will would RUIN good habits !!! All three videos are on track with my theory. We are saying the same things, but from differing fields. We only have partial free will and the rest is habit. In my theory I often call habits "robotic behavior." I learned of Lisa Feldman Barrett about 4 years ago and was shocked at how she was saying the same thing as I was saying. I tried to get in touch with her but the Pandemic interfered. Thanks for the reminder to contact her. */*/*/* I didn't understand you comment of "Btw, Mike, that is a story" regarding my mention of Key #4 from the AC. */*/*/* Your last comment is EXTREMELY similar VPW's call that we all do a Spiritual Makeover in his last Way Magazine article, and then he repeated this same suggestion in his last Our Times Editorial, both in the same magazine issue. He called for us to ask ourselves about ALL our beliefs: Where did I get this belief? Who taught it to me? Why do I believe it? Do you remember me posting that last call from VPW to us to do our own Spiritual Makeovers?

U S Marshals Wesley Snipes White Men Can't Jump

My heart goes out to the many people whose "believing" was insufficient (according to TWI) to prevent flat tires and rainstorms and illnesses. As a friend to lots of TWI folks through the years, it was difficult enough - as it would be with any friend - to endure hardship with them ... BUT ... if a hardship occurred to a family in TWI, not only were they faced with the hardship itself, but also with the condemnation from Way leaders because their "believing" was bad. I remember a Corps family who lost a child, and another in which the wife passed away. These families were discussed by name during a Corps Night, and rather than offering a prayer of compassion, LCM just RIPPED these grief-stricken people to shreds, blasting their poor believing and of course banishing them from TWI forever. Sick as it was, this behavior was totally logical if you actually think that the "believer" controls God. If, on the other hand, you recognize that GOD Himself is the One in control, then it would be ridiculous to condemn the "believer" when something goes wrong. Get it? The actual DOCTRINE evolved from the terminology of "believing FOR" something or "believing TO do or get something". Whatever happened to just BELIEVING GOD? Talk about idolatry! But, of course, if something bad happened to leadership, it was because they were so very very good, that the Adversary had attacked them. Good grief.