It is a law. It even works with witchcraft. We have additional power with tha name of Jesus, but there are conditions that we have to meet as well, such as "If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me:" Psa 66:18
Excellent observations and points made Seth. I agree with you. Believing in God should not be equated with witchcraft and is therefore not a law. When it comes to faith in God that heals the sick and moves mountains to God be the glory. And I will not equate my faith in God or God's son Jesus with witchcraft.
Caveman and I go back aways, 1987-88 time frame, right John? Thanks but, I'm not interested in what the bible says or man's opinion, and I'm a little surprised that you who I know have been through the wringer with this TWI babble about laws of believing, should wish to defend it.
I'm also not interested in reading anything about it here as far as that goes.
I'd like to see a scientific study done, forget the bible, if there is a power that anyone can tap into that issues the goody goodies of life on request I'd like to see it put to the test.
If it's a law it should be testable measurable and definable. Other wise it's just an attitude an outlook or perspective or observation, but a law? Please don't insult my intelligence.
You're right, if it's a Law it would be measurable, repeatable, I doubt that it is. I can't think of anything supernatural that's been tested in that manner. At least not tested sucessfully.
And it's not just PFAL..I know plenty of folks who believe that prayer "always works", or who swear by The Secret, practice magick that "really works" or a host of others.
The thing that they all have in common is that none of them produce the advertised results all the time, or even consistantly and all of them have some kind of weasel words or exceptions which explain why they apparently didn't work in this instance or that.
Personally I'm open to the supernatural, I just try not to depend on it!
You're right, if it's a Law it would be measurable, repeatable, I doubt that it is. I can't think of anything supernatural that's been tested in that manner. At least not tested sucessfully.
And it's not just PFAL..I know plenty of folks who believe that prayer "always works", or who swear by The Secret, practice magick that "really works" or a host of others.
The thing that they all have in common is that none of them produce the advertised results all the time, or even consistantly and all of them have some kind of weasel words or exceptions which explain why they apparently didn't work in this instance or that.
Personally I'm open to the supernatural, I just try not to depend on it!
Funny thing-
on more than one occasion, vpw PUBLICLY announced it WAS repeatable, that it was CONSISTENT.
He did this by saying it was just like how 2 atoms of Hydrogen and one atom of Oxygen compound to form water.
"And I don't care if you pray or you DON'T pray, you're still going to get water."
The "Law of Believing" as taught in PFAL is a non-Biblical teaching and can be quite destructive. The Bible does mention a "law of faith" in Romans 3: but it has nothing to do with the PFAL's name it and claim it nonsense.
Here it is in context :
Romans 3:20 - 28 (KJV)
3:20
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law [is] the knowledge of sin.
3:21
But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
3:22
Even the righteousness of God [which is] by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
3:23
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
3:24
Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
3:25
Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
3:26
To declare,
, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
3:27
Where [is] boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by
the law of faith.
3:28
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
A natural reading of this section in Romans shows that the biblical "law of faith" has to do with redemption and justifcation through faith in Jesus Christ as opposed to doing works of the Law ( of Moses) The real law of believing (faith) has nothing to do with fire-engine red drapes and the best parking spots at the mall.
PFAL took a few scriptures out of their context then errantly inferred and tried to establish some kind of "imutable spiritual law" that "works for saint and sinner alike" . Christian or non-Christian , just claim it (if it's available) and believe, and presto chango... it's yours!.
Of course, you have to "know what to do with it after you receive it " (non scriptural) and "have your needs and wants parallel" (also "non scriptural) .... and then there's the pop in and out of fellowship crap ........ yada yada yada.
Aside from the saint and sinner contridiction, (a sinner/non-Christian wouldn't use the name of Jesus Christ), VPW put in the loopholes so his so-called "law of believing could remain a "law" without being questioned.
Got a cold? .... Where's your believing ? Had a car wreck? .... No faith. Didn't get what your prayed for? ..... Certainly something you did wrong ..... cause it couldn't possibly be that VPW's law of believing is wrong and not a "law" at all.
Why? -- Because the great Wierweille declared it ( by fiat) to be an IMUTABLE SPIRITUAL LAW ................ Baaaaaaahhhhh ! .
on more than one occasion, vpw PUBLICLY announced it WAS repeatable, that it was CONSISTENT.
He did this by saying it was just like how 2 atoms of Hydrogen and one atom of Oxygen compound to form water.
"And I don't care if you pray or you DON'T pray, you're still going to get water."
Right, and then he taught about how if you were believing and didn't get results then you weren't really believing, even though you thought you were believing. How do you know you're believing? When you get results. Classic circular reasoning.
from 1) belief in personal magic over all...which is how subjective 1st person perspectives grow...
to 2) belief in cultural myth over all...which is how inter-subjective 2nd person perspectives grow...
to 3) belief in rational proof over all..which is how objective 3rd person perspectives grow...
to 4) belief in social process over all...which is how inter-objective 4th person perspectives grow...
to 5) belief in perspectives over all...which is how we grow aperspectivally (able to notice the above 4 perspectives from a 5th perspective)...
to perhaps even beyond
Since you and I have had time to discuss this it gave me process and the perspective yeilding insight, which I maybe wrong about but let me work it out here.
As an infant crying. Pre-stage 1 / stage 1
I as an infant was pre-verbal and autistic (everyone starts at an autistic level and grows out of it, some don't they have autism) but as I feel discomfort I make noises, some result in this giant godlike figure appearing. These god's (Father Mother Aunts Uncles) they touch me and it feels good and safe, they feed me, they make noises back to me. But after a short time I discovered if I make a loud sound they come and pay attention to me, feed me clean me, make happy sounds to me. So when I cry my god's come to me, my god's here my cry, and it's magical, I feel discomfort I cry and my god's come to make me feel better.
This is in some ways is on the level with this law of believing concept as taught by VPW and TWI in general, not really a mature self actualizing belief system.
Once one arrives at stage five in their development hopefully they see in perspective that believing is not a magical law, we should have learned by age 2 that our god's are not god's because our cries are being more and more unanswered time for a new paradigm. What believing becomes for stage five and beyond is a method, various sources and means to getting what we need, no magic just people power. A person who develops methods of doing things is a kind of person who sees value in everything learned, and has made more mistakes then successes. They look forward to the challenge and learning new perspective giving skills. The stage 1 and 2 stay in a perpetual state of perfectionism and laws and rules, things are black and white good and bad, it's me or us against you or them, there are no alternative ways of doing things, it's how my god's told me to do it and if I don't do it that way I get punished.
That is a good section of scripture quoted by Goey Romans 3:20-28. In fact, the following verses that concluded Romans chapter 3 along with all of Romans chapter 4 could also have been quoted. They all deal with the type of faith (faith in God) that a Christian ministry should be more interested in. Rather than bits and pieces used by Victor Wierwille to promulgate the equivalent of witchcraft, while taking his emphasis away from God and Jesus His Son.
Sorry Oakspear, but you will never make it as a witch or the male equivalent, in my opinion. You're just not devious enough. Let's leave this job, in Christian circles at least, for the arrogantly inclined false prophets and false apostles.
Hi Bumpy. How is everything going? After reading that article you posted. I had to check my little privy member. Yea it's still there. Got nuttin to wurry bout.
Hi Bumpy. How is everything going? After reading that article you posted. I had to check my little privy member. Yea it's still there. Got nuttin to wurry bout.
Hi Mark, glad to hear all's well in those areas! Hopefully holding up better than that California real estate market! Some of the more interesting unwritten articles relate to human sacrifice!
Serious cyber conversations seem to be still prevailing here at GS, with those TWI/CES whips still beating that old cult horse of days gone bye.
I guess if there's going to be a resurrection (not to be confused with a vp erection!) pasting the old doc to eternal flames is going to be high priority, eh?
Over here, France seems to be ever suffering with the Zarko/Carlita love tryst. I guess he brings back little froggie images of Nap. and Josephine?
I as an infant was pre-verbal and autistic (everyone starts at an autistic level and grows out of it, some don't they have autism) but as I feel discomfort I make noises, some result in this giant godlike figure appearing. These god's (Father Mother Aunts Uncles) they touch me and it feels good and safe, they feed me, they make noises back to me. But after a short time I discovered if I make a loud sound they come and pay attention to me, feed me clean me, make happy sounds to me. So when I cry my god's come to me, my god's here my cry, and it's magical, I feel discomfort I cry and my god's come to make me feel better.
my rewrite your description of pre-stage...
(notice the words i removed (i, me, my, they, it, etc...))
What believing becomes for stage five and beyond is a method, various sources and means to getting what we need, no magic just people power. A person who develops methods of doing things is a kind of person who sees value in everything learned, and has made more mistakes then successes. They look forward to the challenge and learning new perspective giving skills.
sounds more like 3rd to 4th perspectives...where action, behaviour, practice, objectivity, method, truthfulness are weighed in the 3rd
which then can eventually open us up to greater a capacity for deeper and more authentic introspection as we move through the 4th
5th is more passively active in the background...easy to miss, easy to notice...and like a thumb, touches any and all fingers
Right, OK I forgot pre-ego has no concept of self, it's all one, they do not make a distinction between the internal and external to them it's all one.
but eventually "i" starting noticing a "me"
and otherwise start building a face
eventually to become a wide range of "my" and "mine"
all my wanting and needing
my eating pooping sleeping
my wishing and praying
my happiness
my sadness
my anger
my thoughts
my dreams
etc...
my selfish ego is born
the quality of this brief experience varies wildly exotic among people
but embeds a specific archetypal shape at the base of our future knot of perspectives
its how we first come to believe in a self
the faith we have in our self will
and having been the firstborn sense of self
our magic wanting wishing seeking self is also always already the oldest perspective
...like the widest, deepest canyon ... big brother
like the shape of our first wound...our original "sin"
we each have a scar from our own blood red adam
and though we may pick up and lose and change a lot of little things
...this one pattern endures through death...swallowed over and over again by higher forms of belief
our experience of developing an ego are so deep and lasting
ive often wondered if the gospel millstone was meant for the child offended, and not the offender
as a way to make an even more important point about precious nature of infancy and youth
by spoiling them....we make magic addicts...selfish adults whose wants needs and will are the rules...
or by abusing them...we make magic phobia...self-abased adults who lack self will...starving for power for abundant living
or etc, and otherwise
QUOTE(Seth R. @ May 21 2008, 04:20 PM)
What believing becomes for stage five and beyond is a method, various sources and means to getting what we need, no magic just people power. A person who develops methods of doing things is a kind of person who sees value in everything learned, and has made more mistakes then successes. They look forward to the challenge and learning new perspective giving skills.
sounds more like 3rd to 4th perspectives...where action, behaviour, practice, objectivity, method, truthfulness are weighed in the 3rd
which then can eventually open us up to greater a capacity for deeper and more authentic introspection as we move through the 4th
5th is more passively active in the background...easy to miss, easy to notice...and like a thumb, touches any and all fingers
OK I'll have go read that paper you sent me again, this is new stuff to me.
Recommended Posts
Caveman
It is a law. It even works with witchcraft. We have additional power with tha name of Jesus, but there are conditions that we have to meet as well, such as "If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me:" Psa 66:18
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Excellent observations and points made Seth. I agree with you. Believing in God should not be equated with witchcraft and is therefore not a law. When it comes to faith in God that heals the sick and moves mountains to God be the glory. And I will not equate my faith in God or God's son Jesus with witchcraft.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Here are some good places to start examining the "law" of believing.
http://www.greasespotcafe.com/gsradio/audi...09-28-91942.mp3
http://www.greasespotcafe.com/main2/editor...god-needed.html
http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?showtopic=13052
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
again...
seems we can and do transform
from "belief to belief"
or "faith to faith"
example...
out of no belief
we move (or not)
from 1) belief in personal magic over all...which is how subjective 1st person perspectives grow...
to 2) belief in cultural myth over all...which is how inter-subjective 2nd person perspectives grow...
to 3) belief in rational proof over all..which is how objective 3rd person perspectives grow...
to 4) belief in social process over all...which is how inter-objective 4th person perspectives grow...
to 5) belief in perspectives over all...which is how we grow aperspectivally (able to notice the above 4 perspectives from a 5th perspective)...
to perhaps even beyond
from my perspective, i have seen and do see...
...how "belief" or "faith" is used in language by people who say they are Christians
in each and all of the above ways
...and how the "the law of believing" seems valid from any of the above perspectives
but most people who use the "the law of believing" in language today
seem to do so from the 1st and 2nd person perspectives only
where 1st alone is like "my believing/faith = my supernatural power over the universe"
and 2nd alone is like "our believing/faith = our exclusive story for interpreting the universe"
if nothing else
it seems to me
that our faith is, at least, being constantly pushed and pulled by some "law (or force) of transformation"
Edited by sirguessalotLink to comment
Share on other sites
Seth R.
Hi, thanks everyone for your replies.
Caveman and I go back aways, 1987-88 time frame, right John? Thanks but, I'm not interested in what the bible says or man's opinion, and I'm a little surprised that you who I know have been through the wringer with this TWI babble about laws of believing, should wish to defend it.
I'm also not interested in reading anything about it here as far as that goes.
I'd like to see a scientific study done, forget the bible, if there is a power that anyone can tap into that issues the goody goodies of life on request I'd like to see it put to the test.
If it's a law it should be testable measurable and definable. Other wise it's just an attitude an outlook or perspective or observation, but a law? Please don't insult my intelligence.
Seth
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Seth:
You're right, if it's a Law it would be measurable, repeatable, I doubt that it is. I can't think of anything supernatural that's been tested in that manner. At least not tested sucessfully.
And it's not just PFAL..I know plenty of folks who believe that prayer "always works", or who swear by The Secret, practice magick that "really works" or a host of others.
The thing that they all have in common is that none of them produce the advertised results all the time, or even consistantly and all of them have some kind of weasel words or exceptions which explain why they apparently didn't work in this instance or that.
Personally I'm open to the supernatural, I just try not to depend on it!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Funny thing-
on more than one occasion, vpw PUBLICLY announced it WAS repeatable, that it was CONSISTENT.
He did this by saying it was just like how 2 atoms of Hydrogen and one atom of Oxygen compound to form water.
"And I don't care if you pray or you DON'T pray, you're still going to get water."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Works for saints and sinners you like-----errrr, I mean sinners alike.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
The "Law of Believing" as taught in PFAL is a non-Biblical teaching and can be quite destructive. The Bible does mention a "law of faith" in Romans 3: but it has nothing to do with the PFAL's name it and claim it nonsense.
Here it is in context :
A natural reading of this section in Romans shows that the biblical "law of faith" has to do with redemption and justifcation through faith in Jesus Christ as opposed to doing works of the Law ( of Moses) The real law of believing (faith) has nothing to do with fire-engine red drapes and the best parking spots at the mall.
PFAL took a few scriptures out of their context then errantly inferred and tried to establish some kind of "imutable spiritual law" that "works for saint and sinner alike" . Christian or non-Christian , just claim it (if it's available) and believe, and presto chango... it's yours!.
Of course, you have to "know what to do with it after you receive it " (non scriptural) and "have your needs and wants parallel" (also "non scriptural) .... and then there's the pop in and out of fellowship crap ........ yada yada yada.
Aside from the saint and sinner contridiction, (a sinner/non-Christian wouldn't use the name of Jesus Christ), VPW put in the loopholes so his so-called "law of believing could remain a "law" without being questioned.
Got a cold? .... Where's your believing ? Had a car wreck? .... No faith. Didn't get what your prayed for? ..... Certainly something you did wrong ..... cause it couldn't possibly be that VPW's law of believing is wrong and not a "law" at all.
Why? -- Because the great Wierweille declared it ( by fiat) to be an IMUTABLE SPIRITUAL LAW ................ Baaaaaaahhhhh ! .
Edited by GoeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
Steveo
Well said Goey
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seth R.
Since you and I have had time to discuss this it gave me process and the perspective yeilding insight, which I maybe wrong about but let me work it out here.
As an infant crying. Pre-stage 1 / stage 1
I as an infant was pre-verbal and autistic (everyone starts at an autistic level and grows out of it, some don't they have autism) but as I feel discomfort I make noises, some result in this giant godlike figure appearing. These god's (Father Mother Aunts Uncles) they touch me and it feels good and safe, they feed me, they make noises back to me. But after a short time I discovered if I make a loud sound they come and pay attention to me, feed me clean me, make happy sounds to me. So when I cry my god's come to me, my god's here my cry, and it's magical, I feel discomfort I cry and my god's come to make me feel better.
This is in some ways is on the level with this law of believing concept as taught by VPW and TWI in general, not really a mature self actualizing belief system.
Once one arrives at stage five in their development hopefully they see in perspective that believing is not a magical law, we should have learned by age 2 that our god's are not god's because our cries are being more and more unanswered time for a new paradigm. What believing becomes for stage five and beyond is a method, various sources and means to getting what we need, no magic just people power. A person who develops methods of doing things is a kind of person who sees value in everything learned, and has made more mistakes then successes. They look forward to the challenge and learning new perspective giving skills. The stage 1 and 2 stay in a perpetual state of perfectionism and laws and rules, things are black and white good and bad, it's me or us against you or them, there are no alternative ways of doing things, it's how my god's told me to do it and if I don't do it that way I get punished.
Well I've had enough of my own babble, NEXT!
Seth
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
I think twi's believing first stuff is silly and un reliable and without any thought.
I don't believe we are in charge of many things.
How we interpret our experiences and life is believing.
and that interpretation changes as we see more of it.
Like the baby growing to a child then adult.
As a baby things are seen different then an adult.
As you pointed out Seth.
So it is with us when we see more of life.
If we stay with one look or oerspective,
that doesn't mean there isn't more.
And not that's it's wrong to see one way for a while.
But just keeping in mind that there are other perspectives just as valid.
Just as real as ours, what we see, another can see differently.
That is believing I believe.
not some sort of empty thought.
But there is a history and substance and happenings embedded.
Edited by cmanLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
That is a good section of scripture quoted by Goey Romans 3:20-28. In fact, the following verses that concluded Romans chapter 3 along with all of Romans chapter 4 could also have been quoted. They all deal with the type of faith (faith in God) that a Christian ministry should be more interested in. Rather than bits and pieces used by Victor Wierwille to promulgate the equivalent of witchcraft, while taking his emphasis away from God and Jesus His Son.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Sorry Oakspear, but you will never make it as a witch or the male equivalent, in my opinion. You're just not devious enough. Let's leave this job, in Christian circles at least, for the arrogantly inclined false prophets and false apostles.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bumpy
And here is one more Frau Veysider!
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2319603620080423
Hocus pokus and getting your believing up, may be a little bit difficult!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Hi Bumpy. How is everything going? After reading that article you posted. I had to check my little privy member. Yea it's still there. Got nuttin to wurry bout.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bumpy
Hi Mark, glad to hear all's well in those areas! Hopefully holding up better than that California real estate market! Some of the more interesting unwritten articles relate to human sacrifice!
Serious cyber conversations seem to be still prevailing here at GS, with those TWI/CES whips still beating that old cult horse of days gone bye.
I guess if there's going to be a resurrection (not to be confused with a vp erection!) pasting the old doc to eternal flames is going to be high priority, eh?
Over here, France seems to be ever suffering with the Zarko/Carlita love tryst. I guess he brings back little froggie images of Nap. and Josephine?
Best, Bump
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
a few things...
my rewrite your description of pre-stage...
(notice the words i removed (i, me, my, they, it, etc...))
discomfort, noises, giant, figures, touch, good, safe, feed, noises.
when asked "where are you?"
pre-egoic children often point straight out
but eventually "i" starting noticing a "me"
and otherwise start building a face
eventually to become a wide range of "my" and "mine"
all my wanting and needing
my eating pooping sleeping
my wishing and praying
my happiness
my sadness
my anger
my thoughts
my dreams
etc...
my selfish ego is born
the quality of this brief experience varies wildly exotic among people
but embeds a specific archetypal shape at the base of our future knot of perspectives
its how we first come to believe in a self
the faith we have in our self will
and having been the firstborn sense of self
our magic wanting wishing seeking self is also always already the oldest perspective
...like the widest, deepest canyon ... big brother
like the shape of our first wound...our original "sin"
we each have a scar from our own blood red adam
and though we may pick up and lose and change a lot of little things
...this one pattern endures through death...swallowed over and over again by higher forms of belief
our experience of developing an ego are so deep and lasting
ive often wondered if the gospel millstone was meant for the child offended, and not the offender
as a way to make an even more important point about precious nature of infancy and youth
by spoiling them....we make magic addicts...selfish adults whose wants needs and will are the rules...
or by abusing them...we make magic phobia...self-abased adults who lack self will...starving for power for abundant living
or etc, and otherwise
Edited by sirguessalotLink to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
sounds more like 3rd to 4th perspectives...where action, behaviour, practice, objectivity, method, truthfulness are weighed in the 3rd
which then can eventually open us up to greater a capacity for deeper and more authentic introspection as we move through the 4th
5th is more passively active in the background...easy to miss, easy to notice...and like a thumb, touches any and all fingers
Edited by sirguessalotLink to comment
Share on other sites
Seth R.
Right, OK I forgot pre-ego has no concept of self, it's all one, they do not make a distinction between the internal and external to them it's all one.
OK I'll have go read that paper you sent me again, this is new stuff to me.
Thanks,
Seth
Edited by Seth R.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.