waysider

I venture to say that some people who have benefited and some who continue to benefit from GSC have never posted at all, but, rather, have found their answers in simply reading and giving careful consideration to the content.

Have you tried to grab her by the scruff? This is what mama cat does when she relocates her kittens. Some cats will assume a submissive attitude if you do this. Grab her scruff, lift her and put your other hand underneath for support, simultaneously.

Would that include such things as "Christ's eyes behind your eyes, Christ's ears behind your ears, etc....as taught in the Advanced Class? Doh! It just dawned on me that this is, in essence, not much different that the channelling that mediums claim to do. Except, this variety involves Jesus Christ instead of dear old Aunt Agnes.

I'm not trying to resurrect a VP debate but I honestly don't see how anyone, who is aware of the sordid and perverse lifestyle of Wierwille (one he carefully hid from the unsuspecting general public) can honestly say he was a Christian leader, whose lifestyle was worthy of emulation. Does that mean it's acceptable to seek out female followers (by the dozens), administer date rape drugs and then sexually molest them? Then, he deliberately recruited other upper leadership to share in his lifestyle. Really? That's a worthy example to be followed? That's what it means to represent God? It baffles me how anyone can rationalize that by saying they learned some cool stuff in a class that has long since been proven to be the product of deliberate plagiarism.

So, then, this raises the question, "What is it that makes you trust one source over the other?". Incidentally, I don't want this to become a political discussion but here are some sites that might help you sort out facts and statistics. They, of course, aren't gospel either but do give a good starting point. HERE HERE HERE HERE

I'm not sure if it's gullibility or skepticism or a combination. There's quite a difference. Both require a healthy dose of inquisition. That inquisition seems to be what is lacking. People seem to want to accept the latest theory on Obama or health care or medical quackery or gun control statistics or whatever as if what they're being told is the gospel truth. There is no excuse for that, not today, not with so much information at our fingertips. Instead, people apparently want someone else to spoon feed the answers to them. If you want to stay healthy, it's in your interest to know what's in that spoon. Blindly accepting it, without inquisition, it is gullibility. Rejecting it, in light of conflicting validation, is skepticism. A lot of the issues that are at the forefront of current controversy are not 'yes or no', 'black or white', 'either /or' type issues. Maybe that's where the problem lies. People want to accept whatever set of statistics or facts support their belief whether or not the statistics and facts are leading to a valid conclusion. The credibility of the source is always subject to scrutiny. That's how propaganda works. And, propaganda is really what is driving this current bandwagon trend. Years ago, during times of war, airplanes would drop leaflets of propaganda for people to "consume". Resources for validating the information in them was limited at best. Today, we find ourselves in a different set of circumstances. There is too much information. We need to sort through it with a critical eye toward accuracy and adjust our opinions if warranted. That's what critical thinking is all about. How does that play out with one's background and biases? I don't know. That's what this thread is about.

Yeah, for certain, ex-wayfers lay no claim of exclusivity on this stuff. People from all walks of life and diverse backgrounds are drawn to it, like flies are drawn to that stuff that draws flies. It just seems to me though, that ex-wayfers seem to be especially vulnerable. That's just my perception. No hard core scientific study or any such thing. Could it be because we were conditioned to think of everything as having a "spiritual meaning", with spirits waiting to snap you up if you lost your focus? I'm not trying to prove or disprove anything, just wondering if others have had similar observations.

When did this become about claiming moral superiority? Could it be you're reading something into this that isn't there? I'm fascinated with how people defend Wierwille by comparing him to Biblical figures. He wasn't a Biblical figure. He wasn't even a good example of what it means to live a Biblical-inspired lifestyle. The revealed word/will of God?....Jesus paying for sin?.... What does any of that have to do with the theme of this thread? I'm not judging VP. That's not my job. That doesn't mean I should ignore the obvious, though. This man, VP, whose example you suggest we should emulate, was a man who deliberately misrepresented his vocational credentials. (You know he wasn't really a "Dr.", don't you?) He was a plagiarist, habitual liar and drunken sexual predator, who even went as far as to publicly claim he sexually molested his own daughter. Did he actually do it? I don't know. I only know he claimed to have done it. That, in itself, is plenty bad enough for me to declare him an unfit example. You claim he taught you the "truths of God's word". Did that include portions of your Bible that dictate a man of God is supposed to be beyond reproach? Maybe he wasn't beyond reproach because he wasn't what he promoted himself as, a man of God. My conclusion would have to be that his actions summarily misrepresented God, both as as an example of how a spokesman for God should conduct himself and as an example of what one should expect the Christian lifestyle to be. We can get back to the subject of this thread or we can let it continue as a debate about Wierwille's fittness as a clergyman.

circular

You can make scriptures say anything you want them to say by simply taking them out of context and putting a private spin on their meaning. That's what we used to call PI or cherry picking. You have done so by deciding that this verse is talking about things you personally disdain when, in reality, it doesn't actually define what it means by "wisdom of this world". This, as usual, has little, if anything, to do with the actual subject of this thread.

Thank you for your reply, John. I must say, I find it rather..... interesting. You said: "God has given all mankind permission to disdain the wisdom of this world." Really? Where did you find this? You also said: "VP sometimes misrepresented himself, but did he misrepresent God?" I would have to say the answer to this is a resounding YES. Incidently, I didn't ask why ex-Wayfers seem so gullible. As Paul Simon said, "A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.".

Look how much everybody mindlessly believes everything that has "education" or "science" attached to it in the world. Time after time you have expressed disdain for higher learning and the scientific processes. Care to expound on why? I can't help but notice how much posters here attack VPs credibility down to the minutest detail. He invited scrutiny when he deliberately misrepresented himself.

"Sad preacher nailed upon the coloured door of time; Insane teacher be there reminded of the rhyme."

When in doubt, toss a scripture at it.

Yeah. Session #1 of PLAF (The Wonder Class). "The Greatest Secret In The World Today".... and you can be privy to it for a mere $65.00.

Maybe, along with that, there is a sense of empowerment in "sharing" that information with the less informed masses. Wasn't that the driving force behind witnessing PFAL class recruitment?

That makes a lot of sense, Frank. But, what about now? Why, after all these years, are Ex-Wayfers so drawn to this kind of stuff?

I've heard we don't reach our mental maturity until we're about 25. (citation welcomed) If so, most of us were at a critical stage of mental development when we "got in the word". I was 21. Maybe that plays into it somehow.

So, what was it? Was it the idea that the World has been hiding some great secret from you? (Session #1), Knowing that you "know that you know", battle of the senses (Session #6), Renewed Mind (session #8), Having done all, STAND! (against critical thinking), or maybe it was the Advanced Class, where we were introduced to all the "behind the scenes" workings of life's processes ....or what?

Why do ex-Way people seem to be so receptive to whatever conspiracy theory and bad science happens to be in vogue? Politics, medicine, scientific discoveries, medical news, health news, legislation....you name it. Was there something in our indoctrination that preconditioned us to ignore logic and jump on the latest bandwagon? O.K.....I'm not interested in debating any one particular issue, just curious about the basic concept in general.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8Gpni45oYs

The whole "likemindedness" concept was a cruel scam. “Where all think alike, no one thinks very much”.......Walter Lippmann

The Way openly discouraged empathy, as evidenced by the familiar phrase, "You have no friends when it comes to the word (Way theology)."