Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 11/01/2022 in all areas

  1. I do want to address this Mike. You constantly come at me like I have forgotten, or have been talked out of the truth of wierwille, or that I just don't understand where you are coming from. Personally, I have never had a better relationship with God and Jesus Christ - just like it says in the Bible. I spend my time reading scripture and tracking topics through Church history and other avenues. I don't waste my time reading wierwille -- been there done that. I have very dillegently, and judiciously considered and reconsidered most everything I learned from TWI over the past 14 years since I left. Most of wierwille's doctrines are not supported in actual scripture. I don't mean pretending you are a biblical researcher because you know how to use lexicons and concordances where you get to cherrypick your own brand of Christianity...like saying cloak = book case. Anywho - Let me say this again and say it clearly - wierwille was a false prophet who abused the flock he was entrusted with. - wierwille was a thief and liar and also a drunk who liked to take advantage of the Lord's heritage - his people! - his legacy is riddled with lies and occultic based principles such as the law of believing. It is plainly noted that he studied people like Albert Cliffe - a known spiritist. - wierwille wanted people to only read his books because if you branch off too far you will find the sources he stole from and you will also find out the truth on a lot of topics he preached...that truth? He preached a lot of LIES. - The way international is a preservation society dedicated to elevating wierwille up there next to Jesus Christ, the true preeminent one, because they have NOTHING else. No new charismatic cult leaders, no new anything, only the half baked legacy of their drunk a$$ father in the word. Before you talk about me dragging up his sins and compare that locust to King David, et. al. let me say this. I AM a RECOVERING ALCOHOLIC who will openly talk about my past and my sins and they are sordid and many. You know why? Because I have repented and been forgiven and perhaps my story can serve to help others who are caught in the same snares. Wierwille HID his sins and I will do all I can to expose them and the corrupt organization he left behind. It's not out of hate for anything...it's out of a sense of duty to come out from among them and be ye seperate. I will not be associated with anything TWI because the organization is corrupt to the core and a lot of that corruption stems from doctrine, doctrine that is above question and considered proven ministry research by the way international. I will not slink off quietly in the night and not expose what I came here to expose. I will not give a tacit agreement with their practices by supporting them with silence.
    5 points
  2. Axe #1 - my Jackson Frankenstein. Re wired it all with high output pickups.
    3 points
  3. It's not a matter of looking for them to find them. It's a matter of the flaws literally leaping off the page for anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear.
    3 points
  4. At best you won't decode him. You'll offer an opinion on what you think he's saying. Remember all those term papers and dissertations on what the white whale in Moby Dick means? And, in all probability, he probably writes that way because he's trying to give himself wiggle room if somebody challenges him. People also often write word salad style so people will read into the text what they want to read into the text. Writers with nothing to hide, hide nothing. They write clearly and to the point. Oh, and also, experience teaches me, writers trying to snow you try to add in extraneous details that have nothing to do with the point, this makes there work far longer than it should be. As a general rule: the more padding, the longer the post; the longer the post and the further off point, the greater the snow job. There are exceptions.
    3 points
  5. Thought this was worth discussion. Not quite sure in which forum to place it. Seems to link well with some recent threads here. From my Facebook feed today.
    3 points
  6. This whole topic to me seems to be brought up as the last sentence says as an excuse not to hold someone morally responsible for their actions. In other words for the purpose of whitewashing. Whitewashing the history of the Way. Whitewashing VPs image and class. Convince me I’m wrong.
    3 points
  7. Worth the price of a stamp to write “No” on the back and send to PO Box 328? But I mean their symbolism is on point. Country BFE road. Ditch. Fog covering the path. I mean what could go wrong lol
    3 points
  8. This right here. If you're unable to define and regulate your control factors and variables, your research is worthless. The best you could hope for would be an observational analysis of your collected data. But, even then..."How do you know if there is “spirit” there or not?" edit. Oh, silly me. I forgot all about the black heart/white heart thing.
    3 points
  9. Again, the reality is posters on this thread are TOYING with you, almost certainly because (as has been documented in various comments) nobody is taking your "thesis" seriously... and because it is obvious to everyone (perhaps excluding you) that you're both full of bullshonta and freely posting without honoring either your fellow posters or the (legitimate) owner(s) of the website who make it available for you to publish your "book" without contributing financially.
    3 points
  10. I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue.
    3 points
  11. Ezekiel 33: 3-5 (KJV) If when he seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet, and warn the people; 4Then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning; if the sword come, and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head. 5He heard the sound of the trumpet, and took not warning; his blood shall be upon him. But he that taketh warning shall deliver his soul. =============================== All the warnings in the world are in vain for the person whose practice and doctrine punish them for CONSIDERING/THINKING, and reward them for blind loyalty and never examining whether or not they've taken a wrong turn somewhere. STUBBORNNESS is not a fruit of the spirit, no matter who seems to think it's something praiseworthy.
    3 points
  12. 92. Ethical dilemmas…..
    3 points
  13. We got private interpretation in the process. HINT: I won't mention any names, but his initials are Saint Vic
    2 points
  14. How I feel, too. If anything, I feel sorrow that they care(d) so little. Whether still the same, I don't care to find out. And I feel anger at the abuse so many suffered in so many ways. But my focus is not backwards but forwards. People are still being abused in similar ways, and in other ways, and I prefer to draw on my own experiences of abuse to relate better to others I reach out to help. I can empathise so much better. Some might call that making lemonade from the lemons.
    2 points
  15. `If it wasn't been for that pesky determinism thing, you could have just believed for a new one. (I mean, if you wanted to.)
    2 points
  16. This isn't about who was and who wasn't in the Corps, it's about how VPW laced his doctrinal stew with ingredients culled from the occult. That story about a mother's fear being responsible for her little boy's death? Straight out of the occult. The red drapes and camera analogy? Occult. "What you're confessing is what you're possessing."? Yep... occult. This isn't complicated. It's about as straightforward as you can get. And where will you find evidence of this stuff? Well, what do you know, right there in the collaterals. Oh, but wait a minute, I thought the collaterals were divinely inspired. Gimme a break.
    2 points
  17. The "greatest secret in the world today" is how did Mike learn to so efficaciously push the buttons of GSC netizens to keep wasting time on vain babblings (useless/fruitless interaction) on a topic that even trained philosophers and/or scientists will likely never resolve... let alone a handful of disgruntled PFLAP grads.
    2 points
  18. Happy upcoming Thanksgiving, Greasespotters. I'm very thankful for the many insights I've gained at this site where so many of you have read my memoir: Undertow. This November I celebrate Undertow's 6th birthday. Time sure flies... A little background: When I was 16 years old, my mother passed away on the day before Thanksgiving. That trauma, I believe, made me (in part) vulnerable to Way recruiters' claims of teaching "the rightly divided word" two years later at East Carolina University. Flash forward: in 2016, my goal was to publish Undertow in honor of my mother just as Thanksgiving rolled around. With the support of many good folks, like some of you reading this post, I met that goal. Thanks again for your kind support and interest in Undertow! While supplies last: You can get a personalized, discounted copy of my second book, From the Porch to the Page: A Guidebook for the Writing Life. Send me a message here. Cheers, Penworks
    2 points
  19. “No man can REALLY say that Jesus is Lord, but by holy spirit.” That's pfal, not Bible. When you add "really", you add a word, and no longer have...? Also, saying "by holy spirit" means "by speaking in tongues". you're changing what the Bible said. When you change the words, you no longer have..... So, if that has nothing to do with s.i.t. (which it doesn't, that was vpw's unsupported claim,) then what does it mean that "No man can say that Jesus is Lord, but by the Holy Spirit"? It's still taking about making Jesus your Lord/setting forth that Jesus is your Lord. What does it mean that he's your lord? It means he's your sovereign, and you have sworn fealty to him. He commands, you obey. (Yes, as your sovereign, he has responsibilities, also, so this goes both ways in a formal relationship.) So, how does 'by the Holy Spirit" figure in? In the more obvious manner. Matthew 13. "3 And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a sower went forth to sow; 4 And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up: 5 Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth: 6 And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away. 7 And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them: 8 But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold. 9 Who hath ears to hear, let him hear." ======================= John 12: 32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. -------------------------------- Once you look at it without trying to shoehorn vpw's error-ridden doctrines into the verses where they do not appear, they make a lot more sense.
    2 points
  20. You said it before I said it. There are some good things in PFAL, but that's because they were pinched from someone who'd put thought in, and who may himself have been inspired by God. Also some good things in the RHST part - for the same reason. The trouble is trying to sort out the truth from the fanciful, reconciling the conflicting messages and versions of whatever "the class" says, etc. Not being able to sort out truth from - from what isn't - is confusing and distracting. It's a poisoned apple (from a poisoned tree). Not all of the apple is poisoned, but you don't know which bits are and which bits are safe to eat. Best thing to do is discard the lot. Heck, for all I know, the confusing bits were deliberate - to confuse, to distract, from the other garbage that we were supposed to take in subliminally. If you're still trying to reconcile "all without exception" with "all with (or without) distinction," you're missing some other perhaps more serious junk.
    2 points
  21. "TWI Verbal Traditions" were an absolutely essential ingredient in The Way's success. Without personal reinforcement of doctrine and behavior at the twig level, the written materials would never have been enough to hold anyone's fealty to the organization or its agenda. That's why the organization was so hell-bent on promoting frequent twig fellowship attendance. This is pretty much true of any cult-like group, not just The Way. If you attended twig fellowships on a regular basis, you could not have simply avoided exposure to it and it continues to permeate our thought processes, whether you think it does or not. .
    2 points
  22. @OldSkool : I was terrified, too. Embarrassing how afraid of people I had become. Oh really ... what kind of "Christian" organisation leaves people full of fear? Took years to "escape" from myself (!). Glad to say, I have a much more sound mind now. It's taken real Christian love; thoughtfulness and care from non-Christians; GSC (!!!), and much reapplication of thinking ability. Not for nothing does 1 Thes 5:21 exhort: "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." God clearly expects us to consider all the evidence, test (or "challenge") everything against what God says. Get that? Test against what God says, not test against what some denomination says. Or even what some other type of culture says. And test against "common sense," too. Lotsa that in the Bible.
    2 points
  23. OldSkool, what a very honest post. I would never have thought you'd've been fearful. Bravo for facing reality and moving on. I do think that a large part of the value of GSC nowadays is trying to beat out ideas, beliefs, with those who really understand where we're coming from, without risk of sounding weird. Exploring our own ideas and beliefs with others who have been through the same processes, sometimes with different results, can be very enlightening. Quite often, not just in the "belief" side, I find I don't quite know what I'm thinking or planning till I discuss with a friend, who might say, "But how will that work? What about...?" and then I can clarify to myself what I really mean, flesh out the details. Well, y'know. Iron sharpens iron. It's good to try our thinking processes against those of others, to help us get rid of the burrs, and to take our plans and ideas from nebulous theory to something firm enough to walk out on.
    2 points
  24. I've had exactly the same experience with PFAL !
    2 points
  25. The older I get, the less I seem to know. And yet, surprisingly, the wiser I get. We can get far too hung up on always being right. Relax a little. Take the pressure of "always being right" off. Permit yourself to be wrong, or to not know. Explore, and allow yourself to be interested, maybe intrigued, maybe surprised, by what you find.
    2 points
  26. Write: The Teacher Box 328 New Knoxswill, Ohio 45871
    2 points
  27. Once again. It's not a theory or thesis, it's a hypothesis. It's not provable nor repeatable. Your research methodology is, to state it kindly , completely flawed. You have presented an idea you believe to be true. And that's fine. We all have ideas. Sometimes they appear to be rational to ourselves but not to others. This is why we are tasked with providing evidence to support those ideas. There is a process for providing evidence that is generally accepted by most. It involves adherence to a set criteria of research methods. If you want anyone to accept your ideas and advance your hypothesis to a theoretical level, you need to follow that process. You need to compile data in an acceptable manner and allow for the possibility that you might have to entertain conflicting data. You might even have to change your position. If you can do that, perhaps you'll find an audience that is more receptive. However, this is something you seem to be unwilling or unable to do.
    2 points
  28. Months ago, Twinky noted the possibility that Mike was "on the spectrum." Others poo poo'd the notion. Mike's posting without being able to recognize that people are toying with him on this thread takes us back to Twinky's proposition. That he can't recognize the realities of social interaction he's in the middle of... AND fancies himself an intellectual in neurology matters, suggests he may indeed have some ASD even if not severe. Obviously, I'm not qualified to diagnose. I'm simply noting my observations of his behavior in our little ecosystem here.
    2 points
  29. However, like the story WW relayed about the chef, just before my comment, whether Mike knows what he's doing or not is not relevant. That he refuses to OWN his responsibility for communicating his message clearly IS relevant. IMO, it's well past time to send Mike home. It's a poor communicator that communicates vaguely and then blames the audience for not seeing his points.
    2 points
  30. I was watching this television program last night. There's a contest among chefs, and the winner will get backing and advice so they can open their own restaurant. The contest is to determine who is most ready for the opportunity- who COULD run a restaurant if given a chance. Each contestant thinks they're ready to do it, and has their own concept of the restaurant they want to open. In the very first challenge, they were each given the task of making a single plate of food that embodied their concept for the restaurant. They were told that one person would be sent home afterwards, the one who performed least well in the challenge. (So, the task was to be making a single plate of food that embodied their concept for their restaurant, and also tasted good, which was obvious to all the contestants.) Everyone ran around and each prepared a dish. A panel of 3 people was presented each dish one at a time. One person on the panel knew the concepts. The other 2 tried the food, gave their thoughts on the quality of the dish, and also speculated on the specific concept of the restaurant, which was compared to the stated concept. Three chefs ended up performing less well than the others, and the one who performed least was sent home immediately. He said his concept was "Southern food and ramen." The dish he presented was not Southern food, nor did it contain ramen. Both guesses to the concept were from judges who could detect no pattern. "The concept is 'a mess.' " When the chef was sent home, he told the cameramen that the concept was there, but for some reason the judges couldn't see it. (Um, neither could we, and we were watching from home.) He refused to accept that the responsibility for clear communication was his, and decided that if there was a miscommunication, it HAD TO be on the recipients because he was SURE he had communicated clearly. However, he had not- and we have the video recordings to prove it. It's a poor communicator that communicates vaguely and then blames the audience for not seeing his points.
    2 points
  31. I completely understand....I feel like Im watching a movie where the lead character is living out his psychosis and thinks everyone else has all the problems...they were on an island and it ended with a trip to the light house....
    2 points
  32. This is an expected side-effect whenever one embraces a doctrine that requires one to CLOSE their eyes and ears, and LOCK the doctrine tightly. This produces mental inbreeding. Just like physical inbreeding makes animals or humans weak or ill, mental inbreeding weakens people by limiting their sources, their intake. Even if it's one good source, it's like eating nothing BUT rabbit. The rabbit isn't poisonous, but if you eat nothing else, you could die of malnutrition. In the case of mental inbreeding, the ideas that float around become progressively more UNsound. Worse, if grading is based on how "faithful" one is to the sole source of input, the more unsound the doctrine and ideas get, the harder one is to cling BLINDLY to them- and one is lauded and praised for doing so. "In multitude of counselors is safety." If one only has one source of knowledge and counsel, trouble is inevitable.....
    2 points
  33. As long as we're extrapolating things out of scripture: those Ministry women who believed Saint Vic was a MOG, did they get bread or a stone? An egg or a scorpion?
    2 points
  34. https://www.amazon.com/Why-Receive-Holy-Spirit-How-ebook/dp/B00IQFBMTE/ https://www.amazon.com/gift-Holy-Spirit-Jack-Stiles/dp/0800704789/
    2 points
  35. I feel faith in most of it's uses in scripture is simply talking about trusting God and taking him at his word in spite of the fact that what we see seems contrary to his promises. So - faith = trust. It's the least that God requires of us...that we trust/believe him at his word. Its a concept that has been redefined multiple times through the years and wierwille ran with that ball with the law of believing stuff he promoted.
    2 points
  36. 92. Students develop a false confidence in wierwille’s ideas When I first took PFAL, there was great anticipation and anxiety building toward the session when wierwille would “lead us into receiving the holy spirit” – speaking in tongues. I worried that I might not have the believing to receive it. But I hung in there because I wanted that unshakeable confidence that wierwille talked about – “when you speak in tongues you’ll know that you know, that you know that you’re going to heaven and all hell can’t stop you from going.” ~ ~ ~ ~ Have you ever wondered what faith is all about? for we walk by faith, not by sight [living our lives in a manner consistent with our confident belief in God’s promises] II Corinthians 5:7 Amplified One commentary on this verse says: For we walk by faith, not by sight—Better, and not by what we see (or, by appearance). It seems almost sad to alter the wording of a familiar and favourite text, but it must be admitted that the word translated “sight” never means the faculty of seeing, but always the form and fashion of the thing seen. (Comp. Luke 3:22; Luke 9:29; John 5:37.) The fact is taken for granted; and it comes as the proof that as we are, we are absent from the Lord. Now we believe in Him without seeing Him; hereafter we shall see Him face to face. Our life and conduct and our “walk” in this world rest on our belief in the Unseen. From : Bible Hub: II Corinthians 5:7 commentary ~ ~ ~ ~ I’m not a philosopher or theologian. I’m a technician by trade – it comes natural to me – I guess because I’ve always been fascinated by how things work. Not that I always could figure out how something worked – but you know a typical kid’s mentality - it couldn’t hurt to try. Even as a kid growing up in a Roman Catholic home, I remember having these “think-about-it-sessions” on metaphysical matters. Where was heaven? What does God look like? Does God really exist? That last question was a dandy. I was troubled with that one day - after a ride home on the school bus – during which I overheard some older kids talking about their dads dressing up to be Santa. Since I still believed there was a real Santa Claus – my belief system was shaken to the core. Thus, began sporadic think-about-it-sessions over whether God existed. Which would then prompt me to go to mom and dad. I never asked them about the legend of Santa – I went straight for the question of all questions – how do you know if God exists? Mom’s response came from a life filled with challenges – her dad a widower and fisherman by trade – she was often being looked after by relatives and boarding schools. She talked about having a trust in God – that He was always there with her. Mom always seemed anchored – nothing seemed to shake her. I still remember the calming effect just being around her – like sitting by a gentle stream and listening to the water move around the rocks and brush by the shoreline. Dad’s response came out of a tough life too – a medic in the war, got 2 Purple Hearts. He was technical-minded too – probably where I got it from. For a time was a shop foreman at a Bulova factory. He suffered from PTSD related to the war – but there wasn’t that much awareness of it as there is now. He could tough it out with the best of them. He would often call my attention to the beauty and wonder of nature – and like mom he felt that God is always with us – tending to His wonderful creations big and small. ~ ~ ~ ~ I still have think-about-it-sessions on a wide variety of topics. But not about whether God exists. When you come right down to it – there is no way to prove in the existence or non-existence of God. I think it’s something we each have to figure out for ourselves…Leaving TWI was one of the most trying times in my life. Because what was at stake was a childhood faith that has gotten me through some really big messes that I made. During my slow exit from a harmful and controlling cult like The Way International, there was that “faith thing” that anchored me to something intangible – and there was that “tech thing” that kept driving me to figure out how this Christian life is supposed to work. 24 “Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26 But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.” 28 When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, 29 because he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law. Matthew 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ As I leave behind the bogus tenets of a cult, I find my faith deepens as I focus on what truly matters in my personal belief system. In the Christian faith – Jesus Christ is at the center of it. I aim to know more about Him. I read a great book – faith affirming - The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona. It got me to think like an historian or lawyer would studying a past event or a case – looking at the evidence, probabilities, testimonies – of even hostile witnesses. If you think about the evangelizing efforts of the early church – it was simple. They didn’t formulate catechisms, Bible classes, discipling programs…They didn’t have a cookie cutter mentality of expecting everyone to experience Christianity the way they did. They just preached about Jesus Christ offering Himself to be our Savior from sin and death and God raising Him from the dead, and now Jesus Christ is Lord - He has supremacy over all creation and has promised to be with us always in a personal relationship of love.
    2 points
  37. 91. Because all the SIT at the same time as the dividing off from Christs body makes you always needing more cowbell. SNL interpretation according to usage
    2 points
  38. So you don’t think we are aware you are trolling? As a former failed stand up comic you are hyper focused on how you play to an audience. You we’re sheltered from any personal effects of these amoral a holes so you have no skin in the game. And you choose to live with blinders only focusing on a small portion of the truth and or facts that make your comfortable. And you have no original thought. You survive off the second hand vomit from 2 decades ago emitted by a narcissistic joke of a preacher who stole everything in sight and chased everything available with a skirt.
    2 points
  39. If you really want to make your "research" marketable to neuroscientists, you'll need to start by getting it peer reviewed and published in a reputable journal.
    2 points
  40. your lack of knowledge has never stopped you from posting before
    2 points
  41. As you have been with pretty much everything you've posted on GSC over the last two decades.
    2 points
  42. Lol from the #1 sh1tp0ster who never started a thread here but pollutes everyone else’s. Hey irony boy
    2 points
  43. Wow one more long diatribe where Mike himself is the focus and gets the glory. All while false humility saying God gets credit. In all of this we hear story after story of how 3rd party people fictionally verify Mikes superior intellect. We hear not one post of substance sharing anything he taught the group or shared with the group as he claimed. Then he ignores people and gaslights any attempts to dig for real information. I was gonna complain about contaminating a thread with bullshonta but I changed my mind. 35. Mike you yourself are a perfect example of why PFAL sucks. After 20 years of having your head buried in it, looks at this guy. High narcissism high mental density factor all with the view he is smarter than everyone else. No ability to interact in a community or understand group dynamics. Zero emotional intelligence. Flawed logic up and down. Oh but with a view like he has the Ironman suit gift and others don’t. Don’t take PFAL. Don’t be like Mike.
    2 points
  44. Your wierwillian judgmentalism really comes out with these statements. Who are you to judge another man's walk? So- if im to translate your way speak here....people are smart when they are following wierwilles formulaic approach to walking for God and when they no longer toe the line they become stupid because holy spirit no longer operates in them. And people who disagree with you lose IQ because that disagreement is based in hate. Either way your assumed superiority shines through here, both morally and intellectually.
    2 points
  45. Your narcissistQ seems to be very high, I’m sure though that doesn’t affect IQ I have seen previously smart men rendered quite stupid when continuing discourse with fools. That’s probably happening here according to proverbs. Rocky is correct we bear responsibility for feeding the trolls. what you have need of is attention
    2 points
  46. A) Most scholars are actively looking for the truth. That's why researchers research and experimenters experiment- they're looking for some form of the truth. B) This black/white thinking you laud is incredibly harmful, and is obvious in moments like this. If one has "found the truth on an issue", one must maintain the POSSIBILITY that one is wrong, and that a greater truth is out there. Otherwise, when greater truth arrives, one will actively SUPPRESS it and be HOSTILE to it. I've changed my mind when greater information overrode what I previously believed- and wanted to believe. When they discovered the atom, they believed it was insplittable, and named it so- "atom", uncuttable. Then someone figured out how to split the atom. Were they taken out and beaten to death with a rock? No- tentatively, scientists looked to see if he was right. When he demonstrated he was correct, they changed their thinking. Scientists used to be Lamarckians. They used to think that DNA or whatever was simple, and easy to change. They believed the agent of change was activity. When a proto-giraffe stretched its neck to reach leaves, its offspring would have a slightly longer neck. When a bird needed a sharper beak or a harder beak, his offspring would inherit it. And so on. (Charles Darwin was a Lamarckian.) Since then, they've discarded Lamarckianism because DNA is FAR more complicated, and does not work like that. So, for the rest of us, it's possible to change our minds- even if it will take a lot. This keeps us from missing something greater, more fundamental. You're proud nothing can change your mind. I wouldn't brag about that.
    2 points
  47. Some thoughts after both of your posts. In cyberspace, it may be difficult to figure out where someone is coming from when their persona contradicts their stated goals or intent. When someone is that predictably inconsistent, I become very wary of anything they say. Is it a mental health issue or a deliberate deception for whatever reason? Since I’m not qualified to play doctor and diagnose someone over the internet – I usually go by my version of dealing with someone at face value – as I would if I were a bank teller. If what they hand me looks fake, I won’t accept it. Go deposit crazy somewhere else ~ ~ ~ ~ for example - this post
    2 points
  48. Yet, Mike apparently hopes that seekers who come to GSC for inspiration on why they should return to twi and pflap will diligently sort through the noise and find his remarkable "wisdom" (albeit, his deficient ability to clearly communicate) because God will guide them. Mike flunked.
    2 points
  49. So naturally, being an expert in "spiritual mechanics" you're going to tell us how it works. How do you know how it works? Do you understand God designed the physical world to help us understand the spiritual world? God says we're a family, so to help us understand that he created families. God says he is a father, to help us understand that he created fathers. The other posters just explained something to you in that "logically logic" that Saint Vic claimed he used in PLAF. Then you did the exact opposite of your above complaint and refused to give it 35 seconds before you knee-jerked "this is too little PLAF" and let it cloud your understanding. Give it some time. This is one thing that puts me off. For Saint Vic, anything was acceptable, just claim it was "spiritual." Don't let the sun go down on your anger, but "spiritual" anger is okay. Want to sin? Just stay right in your spirit and then sin all you want. Common sense tells us one thing, but, guess what, the spiritual world doesn't follow common sense.
    2 points
×
×
  • Create New...