Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

i'll tell you what killed that little boy....


excathedra
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've thought for some time that the 'you know what killed that little boy' section of PFAL was the fear inducing hook that held many of us for so long.

Whether VP was some type of genius of manipulation, or whether he just stumbled upon it, I don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have seen people do some pretty foolhardy crap while they ignored fear.

From what I've read, practically the whole lead experience seems to me to have been an exercise in foolhardiness..

Have to hitchike there.. no money, except for an emergency fiver or so that you'd BETTER come back with..

get hurt? Lose a few toes? Well.. it had to because of FEAR.. pretty much absolved the people supposedly running the thing from responsibility..

Get gored at rodeo school? Same as above.

I think the "lack of fear" teaching wasn't primarily about lack of fear.. maybe it was to find out who could REALLY be aggressive..

i recall twi telling us fear was false evidence appearing real, go ahead and hitchhike cross county(idiot) as long as it was

to serve the "ministry" just go ((with a terminator type attitude)) nothing can touch me or harm me as long i am walking with

twi bt mskr sure you ar n bed by midnight and upreading yor bible by sunrise.

talk about MIND CONTROL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to make a guess and say Norman Vincent Peale, Ex. Sounds exactly like his sort of thinking.

I was thinking of Peale in light of how easily we swallowed this and other stories that seem so clearly messed up, made up, etc. now. At least for some of us.

It got me thinking about Peale's ideas on autosuggestion, a kind of repetitive self hypnosis, and thought it would be interesting to go back and look at PFAL and look at it not just in terms of analyzing what VPW says but when and how often, etc. Much of the class, the way VPW, taught it, IMO, was Peale-esk in his delivery and the things he encouraged us to do. The "Law of Believing" is just a part of it. I wonder if the amount of info that was being thrown at us in a fairly short period of time (by design) with repetitions sayings, and encouragements of not thinking negatively, not questioning (both in terms of the rule of the class and in terms of the 2 Peter 3:20/ Gen 2 "fall" teaching, etc that's been discussed) distancing ourselves from unbelieving negative people and worldly media, etc etc etc. lulled us to an almost hypnotic sleep (some more than others maybe).

I already think the whole thing was, by design, a con but I often wonder how crafty was this self proclaimed Dr. Shyster was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to make a guess and say Norman Vincent Peale, Ex. Sounds exactly like his sort of thinking.

I was thinking of Peale in light of how easily we swallowed this and other stories that seem so clearly messed up, made up, etc. now. At least for some of us.

It got me thinking about Peale's ideas on autosuggestion, a kind of repetitive self hypnosis, and thought it would be interesting to go back and look at PFAL and look at it not just in terms of analyzing what VPW says but when and how often, etc. Much of the class, the way VPW, taught it, IMO, was Peale-esk in his delivery and the things he encouraged us to do. The "Law of Believing" is just a part of it. I wonder if the amount of info that was being thrown at us in a fairly short period of time (by design) with repetitions sayings, and encouragements of not thinking negatively, not questioning (both in terms of the rule of the class and in terms of the 2 Peter 3:20/ Gen 2 "fall" teaching, etc that's been discussed) distancing ourselves from unbelieving negative people and worldly media, etc etc etc. lulled us to an almost hypnotic sleep (some more than others maybe).

I already think the whole thing was, by design, a con but I often wonder how crafty was this self proclaimed Dr. Shyster was.

I think that, perhaps, the obsession with speaking in tongues "much" in your mind was a part of it also.

You have to turn off your critical thinking while you are doing it.

Of course, that's not always a bad thing.

One could use the technique to refocus and refresh provided they were cognizant that this was the desired end.

(similar to a TM mantra.)

Edited by waysider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that came from a teaching by JAL.

But where did JAL get it from?

Knowing this bunch, from vpw, who got it from Peale.

However, we don't- YET- have a quote from Peale saying it to document this,

so, it is speculation, guesswork, at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I found out where F.E.A.R. came from:

HERE

and HERE This one is an article by Zig Zigler himself.

What is this fear. Zig Zigler summed up this four-letter-word beautifully – FEAR stands for False Evidence Appearing Real.

I forgot about him...

Edited by doojable
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Dooj

I read that article by Zigler.

It sounds just like the concept of the little boy.

It's "mumbo-jumbo".

In the least common denominator, it is really talking about unwarranted fears.

That's why it is referred to as being false.

Trying to apply this kind of thinking to tangible dangers is foolishness.

I read some of Zigler's materials years ago.

If I recall correctly, they are designed to be used as motivational tools for sales people,.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what gave the vicster the idea that "fears are ALWAYS negative". "Always wrong".

Maybe HIS were.. doesn't necessarily make it so for the whole rest of the known world.

Maybe he mistook intimidation for fear. "For years, I was afraid.. of people in high social circles, high political circles.." perhaps he felt that he was out-classed.. still some second rate bumpkin from a little place in a cornfield in the middle of nowhere.. why else would he want the prestige that holding a doctorate purchased from a degree mill would bring him from the unwary?

Maybe he found it "better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven"..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the university I go to.. as of yet I haven't seen a single professor flaunt their doctorate in front of the students.

Some of these guys come to class wearing a pullover shirt and blue jeans..

As of yet I have not observed the unreasonable FEAR that da debil is gonna steal math like it hasn't been known since 3 b.c. from the students minds because the chairs are not strung, the oil spots in the parking lot outside are cleaned up.. cigarette butts outside picked up, walls washed.. everything set PRECISELY to the teacher's specifications.

one professor here.. every time he comes, moves a particular lecturn away from the front of the class, HIMSELF. No complaints.. no hour long rants because "setup" didn't "get it right".

vic and loy's teaching about fear is kinda calling the kettle black, do you think?

I think we were trained to be neurotic..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the university I go to.. as of yet I haven't seen a single professor flaunt their doctorate in front of the students.

Some of these guys come to class wearing a pullover shirt and blue jeans..

As of yet I have not observed the unreasonable FEAR that da debil is gonna steal math like it hasn't been known since 3 b.c. from the students minds because the chairs are not strung, the oil spots in the parking lot outside are cleaned up.. cigarette butts outside picked up, walls washed.. everything set PRECISELY to the teacher's specifications.

one professor here.. every time he comes, moves a particular lectern away from the front of the class, HIMSELF. No complaints.. no hour long rants because "setup" didn't "get it right".

vic and loy's teaching about fear is kinda calling the kettle black, do you think?

I think we were trained to be neurotic..

Just an observation of my own. Back in high school, exactly ONE of the entire teaching staff (when I went there) insisted on their Ph.d title.

Almost all, if not all, of the teachers had Ph.d's.

It didn't even come up until the last semester of my Senior year.

I learned a lot there. Some of what I learned was in the planned lessons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hey you kwazy skwewwil!..........you said:

Maybe he mistook intimidation for fear. "For years, I was afraid.. of people in high social circles, high political circles.." perhaps he felt that he was out-classed.. still some second rate bumpkin from a little place in a cornfield in the middle of nowhere.. why else would he want the prestige that holding a doctorate purchased from a degree mill would bring him from the unwary?

vic was a terrific "C" student at mission house college in sheboygan, wi..........his "god-breathed" writings were nothing more than hyper-edited transcripts of his live teachings from various classes or sunday night services.....which were based on his finest "academic achievements" of blatant, unabashed plagiarism of folks like b.g. leonard, e.w. bullinger, j.e.stiles, e.stanley jones, rufus mosely, glenn clark, rosalind rinker, e.w.kenyon, charles welch, and others.........his "abilities" in koine greek were limited at best, hebrew/aramaic virtually non-existent, and his politics taught that "hitler was right" and, that the united states "fought on the wrong side in WWII"!!!.......the only way he could attain his "doctorate" was exactly the way he did it............to buy it from a degree mill, pike's peak seminary in colorado..........he never could have gotten it the old-fashioned way, by earning it from an accredited, legitimate university, or school of theology or divinity!........he was'nt really "afraid" of those many folks who were legitimately more qualified in every category of "being a minister/clergyman" than he was........he was embarrassed and ashamed....because deep down in what was left of his "conscience" before it was "seared with a hot iron", he was well aware of his 8th grade intellect , and it's severe limitations, as well as his general incompetence at true christian ministry, and his total academic dishonesty and abject lack of genuine "biblical research" ability........pay no attention to the men and women behind the curtain!!

"you just quit yakkin' about anything else! you know what killed that little boy.......", the car that hit him on that rural road that he was trying to cross at the wrong -place and wrong time!............it had nothing to do with either "minister's" prayer, faith or sermons!.............nor with any so-called "law of believing" in reverse or any other direction!...............................................peace.

Edited by Don'tWorryBeHappy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay

I recall being taught we can only BELIEVE for babies, people unconscience, and people who are not mentally "there" to believe (they used to call it retardation)

So, how is it that if we can only BELIEVE for these people -- that the FEAR in the heart of the MOTHER killed her boy who was none of these things in the story of PFAL.

CAUSE if that mother could believe her son into the grave then that to me is casting "evil" or a spell on him.... Which would be witchcraft..... Causing EVIL to happen to others by belieiving......

I do not think that mother had THAT much power in a world owned by God to believe her boy into the grave because she was overly concerned about him...

Am I making sense?

Edited by Dot Matrix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay

I recall being taught we can only BELIEVE for babies, people unconscience, and people who are not mentally "there" to believe (they used to call it retardation)

So, how is it that if we can only BELIEVE for these people -- that the FEAR in the heart of the MOTHER killed her boy who was none of these things in the story of PFAL.

CAUSE if that mother could believe her son into the grave then that to me is casting "evil" or a spell on him.... Which would be witchcraft..... Causing EVIL to happen to others by belieiving......

I do not think that mother had THAT much power in a world owned by God to believe her boy into the grave because she was overly concerned about him...

Am I making sense?

You are making PERFECT sense, Dot.

(Hope you don't mind my bolding that part of your post.)

It's not you that makes no sense, it's the so-called law of believing.(IMO)

I, too, remember this being taught.

The Way taught that we had to believe for our children until they reach the "age of accountability".

Generally speaking, in many cultures, a child has reached an "age of accountability" at twelve.

This is the age at which they arbitrarily have the ability to decide whether to accept their given "faith" or reject it.

Thus, it is also the age that they can be held "accountable" for their transgressions.

Please note that this is not a Biblical concept, but, rather, a cultural concept.

The "age of accountability" is not found in the Bible to the best of my knowledge.

The Way further taught that, until a child reached he "age of accountability", their well-being was looked after by "Guardian Angels". A child was entitled to this protection if either one of his/her parents was a "believer".

In addition, a child that died before the "age of accountability" but had at least one "believer" parent, would share in the inheritance of Christ.

This type of thinking is cultural, not Biblical in nature.

The example of the little boy dying because of his mother's negative "believing" is a horrendous mishandling of God's word and a grotesque misrepresentation of God's will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was born to two unbelievers. So, it is amazing I am alive. If their believing could kill me - (their fear) I would have been gone. I was called before the foundations. Somethings are just BIGGER than we are IMHO.

At the age of six I witnessed to them. I went to church with the neighbors. Saw everyone going some place on Sundays and heard of "church" and God. My mom said most kids did not want to go, I wanted to go so badly I asked the neighbors!!!!

Then, I went to Bible school each summer. I told my parents of a loving God and they did not believe. One day, after my mother had her third (I think) heart attack, she asked me if God could heal her. I was about 17 years old (pre-way) and nobody was teaching healing. I told her I did not know. She said she thought for sure I would believe that God could heal her.....

She died soon after....

But I think she got born-again because of all the stuff I learned in Bible school.

Soon after I got into pentecostal stuff and was a real Jesus freak. I still say "Praise Jesus!" Which was frowned on at TWI.

The point is we give ourselves too much power if we think we can kill our kids by worry. God has got the whole thing in his hands. I do not know why some kids die. They seem to be gifts for a little while ----

Edited by Dot Matrix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I personally think the account in PFAL was not a real account, but a parable type of account made up by VPW to prove his point. After all, VPW's expertise and his doctoral focus of study was homiletics. I'm certain he knew the best way to make an impacting point. A parable story is more impacting than straight teaching of the point.

If you bypass all the parable type rhetoric, and try to analyze that story literally there are plenty of holes in it. There's quite a disconnect in the story about the minister "giving his kids to God", and how TWI recommends overseeing children. Also, to think that a mother with a young child would allow them to be near a busy street allowing them to run out in the traffic is ludicrous. Assigning blame to someone in a grief-stricken environment is pathological (but actually commonly practiced in TWI).

He used a parable to make a point about fear and faith. There probably is some truth to the lesson, however, as many have pointed out that whole 'law of believing' stuff can really be taken easily over the top to be a glossed-over generalized religious mental exercise kind of like 'the secret', which is too over-simplified in how things really work to be effective.

This also starts to make me wonder about the Job account as taught by VPW. Was it really 'fear in Job's life' that allowed all his children to be killed? The 'hole in the hedge' theory? Or is Job rather an account of the reality of human life, kind of like what Ecclesiastes contains, and showing God's goodness to bless people as they go through life's struggles and cope with grief, loss, unkind public opinion?

Edited by chockfull
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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...