Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

More "law of believing" nonsense


waysider
 Share

Recommended Posts

I was kinda thinking it was the other way around. The PFAL version of the "law of believing" is a repackaging of Napoleon Hill.

Ultimately, its all the same thing.

One of the things I always wondered was if believing were true, why didn't Saint Vic mine the scriptures and experiment to learn the dynamics of it?

To me that's like saying there's gravity, but leaving it at that: not bothering to find out about mass, the rate objects fall, or escape velocities.

I wondered about that for a couple of years, then along came the law of attraction. Surprisingly, they were much more explicit than the law of believing. I read everything on it I could for 6 months. Tried some of the principles and found out it, too, is bunk.

SoCrates

Edited by So_crates
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things I always wondered was if believing were true, why didn't Saint Vic mine the scriptures and experiment to learn the dynamics of it?

One of the things I've wondered about.....

...if the "law of believing" were true and wierwille packaged his product with God's stamp of approval....WHY didn't he just lay claim to this "law" rather than lose his eye?

...WHY didn't it work for him when those pesky cancer spirits came 'round?

...Why he wasn't able to side-step death at the age of 68?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and why, if God had really shown him truths that hadn't been known for two thousand years, did he have to default to the works of psychics, spiritualists, magic-thinking promoters and the like as a vehicle to deliver the message?

Edited by waysider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a thought. Rather than accusing people of their unbelief when something bad happened or they failed to manifest, isn't it the leaderships fault? Saint Vic, in the PLAF class told us you can't go any further than your taught. Apparently, the leadership didn't teach us enough about believing to keep away fear and to bring our hearts desire into manisfestation.

If you look at the whole believing thing from the ministry's point of veiw, how did leadership miss this?

SoCrates

Edited by So_crates
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a thought. Rather than accusing people of their unbelief when something bad happened or they failed to manifest, isn't it the leaderships fault?

SoCrates

Oh believe me, when the SHTF the first thing that usually happens is a witch hunt from the top down to scrutinize the level below you to make sure you identify the "error" and reprove the leader who missed it and did not teach the member of the flock to avoig the evil, or whatever. You get the idea. And the blame usually rests with the poor individual who is having the trouble at the moment. Instead of helping through understanding and compassion they blame the person driving them deeper into condemnation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh believe me, when the SHTF the first thing that usually happens is a witch hunt from the top down to scrutinize the level below you to make sure you identify the "error" and reprove the leader who missed it and did not teach the member of the flock to avoig the evil, or whatever. You get the idea. And the blame usually rests with the poor individual who is having the trouble at the moment. Instead of helping through understanding and compassion they blame the person driving them deeper into condemnation.

That's the same problem we have in many of our corporations. Establishing blame makes people feel better, but it doesn't solve the problem. Identifying and solving the problem solves the problem.

Also, usually when blame is established, it doesn't fall on the most guilty, it falls on the most convenient.

At least that's how it works in my experience.

SoCrates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the same problem we have in many of our corporations. Establishing blame makes people feel better, but it doesn't solve the problem. Identifying and solving the problem solves the problem.

Also, usually when blame is established, it doesn't fall on the most guilty, it falls on the most convenient.

SoCrates

Well put, very well put. Establishing blame for something engenders a false sense of control. If we can affix blame, then we don't have to face the fact that something is broken within our system. We also don't have to deal with the fact that the world is unpredictable and sometimes bad things happen even when you do everything "right". That's a hard fact to face. I would only add that blame falls not only on the most convenient, but on the one least able to defend themselves. Rarely does the blame go to the organization or the "top dog".

Edited by Broken Arrow
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a hard fact to face. I would only add that blame falls not only on the most convenient, but on the one least able to defend themselves.

I am married to a lovely lady who became the whipping post by her region coordinator whom she offended because she offered a differing opinion from his in a public meeting when asked. From my perspective, the especially love to do a feeding frenzy on single, young women.

Maybe some day they will endeavor to feed on the wrong one. A person could only dream of the ramifications. :CUSSING:

Edited by OldSkool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am married to a lovely lady who became the whipping post by her region coordinator whom she offended because she offered a differing opinion from his in a public meeting when asked. From my perspective, the especially love to do a feeding frenzy on single, young women.

Maybe some day they will endeavor to feed on the wrong one. A person could only dream of the ramifications. :CUSSING:

I think the phrase you meant was a "whipping boy" (or in this case, girl), rather than a "whipping post."

A whipping post itself received none of the punishment.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Whipping_boy

"A whipping boy, was a young boy who was assigned to a young prince and was punished when the prince misbehaved or fell behind in his schooling."

"Whipping boys were some of the earliest "fall guys"."

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Scapegoat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Law of attraction" is common sense, with limitations, IMO. "Like for like".

Look at a magnet though - opposites attract there, north and north repel.

There are intrinsic differences in male/female - I don't think I'd call them "opposites" (and doing so has created a huge morass of unnecessary conflict and misunderstanding that so many people accept - good for answer-guru book sales and speaking tours but incorrect IMO) Male and female aren't opposites and once you get past that it's easier to see how attraction can occur between diverse backgrounds and people. And oh if there were a law to govern that but alas, there appears to be none. :biglaugh:

The effort to synthesize, define and state one thing down to a governing "law" is the real problem in the believing/attraction thinking. Assuming that any one thing supercedes all others as the magic bullet so to speak is wrong and going to fail.

I'd say there are "foundational" and basic rules of the road, "laws", that work together. A strong effort or dominance of one over others can produce a result - nature's filled with examples of that. But there are limits - one thing like how I think about something (positive or negative as they say) can be the cause of certain results but there are limits - I don't think it's any more complicated than the limits of what a mental thought can accomplish.

It can govern my actions, what I do, how I respond, etc. That can have an effect on another but it certainly can't control what another does or thinks.

"Manipulation" is different than that and I see the believing/attraction as manipulation (not meaning that in a negative sense). Simply that through concerted effort a person can effect change. I could call it "work" or effort too.

In PFAL the "law of believing" is wound pretty loosely. All of the positive thinking baggage that was used to inform that idea is misleading too.

The point worth taking from PFAL is very simple IMO and amounts to learning and understanding God's will as best a person can and trusting in that.

Does God want people sick? Frankly I can't read God's mind but it appears obvious to me that the nature of life is served by a core state of "health" where organisms singly and together are free to exist, function and grow. I'm a collection of those as a human being. When one part breaks down or fails the whole group is affected - "me" sick or failing isn't as functional as me healthy and fully operational.

But the limits of "me" are what they are and it appears obvious to me again that failure will occur, sooner or later, in parts and ultimately in the whole.

Inbetween birth and death, trusting and pursuing God's will, a "best case scenario" of life both mentally and physically that relies on God's guidance and sustainance would produce the optimum results.

"Fail-safe"? Through a single "law" that governs them all? I think in the whole picture of things there's no such thing and isn't supposed to be - except for one - honor the creator of life, God, and expect Him to foster and inspire my own life in what I bring to Him. Bring a lot, expect a lot - live and learn.

In all the verses of the bible that "positive" thinker-doctrines cherry pick a fundamental understanding is lost and it's right in the bible where the verses come from - that is the underlying message of the bible of God's "sovereignty" and accepting that "what will be will be".

We can't control everything, aren't meant to and will never in this life. If we could someone would have by now. We through how we think and choose can cause results in and by our actions. Jesus Himself taught and lived doing the will of "His Father" and His life as that Son gives an example to consider and learn from.

(Why did VPW die of cancer? He was going to die of something. If anyone including him thought of what was being taught about this entire topic they'd know that. No one can overcome the limits of this physical life from it's realities).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all the verses of the bible that "positive" thinker-doctrines cherry pick a fundamental understanding is lost and it's right in the bible where the verses come from - that is the underlying message of the bible of God's "sovereignty" and accepting that "what will be will be".

We can't control everything, aren't meant to and will never in this life. If we could someone would have by now. We through how we think and choose can cause results in and by our actions. Jesus Himself taught and lived doing the will of "His Father" and His life as that Son gives an example to consider and learn from.

(Why did VPW die of cancer? He was going to die of something. If anyone including him thought of what was being taught about this entire topic they'd know that. No one can overcome the limits of this physical life from it's realities).

I think of the guilt and pain heaped on people who were less than healthy. Where is your believing? Believing equals receiving, confession of belief yields receipt of confession, believing images of victory.....you must not be believing...I am believing for this.....mind pictures...God won't spit in your direction. . . . staying your mind...renewing your mind...practicing the presence of God.....SIT......out of the abundance of the heart......confess it......believe to be healed. The adversary, the adversary, the adversary ....

You are going to die if you leave TWI. The devil is going to get you, posses you, kill you and you will deserve it too.

Then they kicked out the most vulnerable and most needy of hearts like they were taking out the trash.

Wasn't it VP who said..it was the fear in the heart of that mother that killed her child? People with sick children are already fragile...can you fathom what that kind of guilt and condemnation added to that fragile state can do to a human being? To a marriage..to a soul? It is very dark and evil doctrine they threw around like it was nothing but the gospel truth.

Edited by geisha779
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...We can't control everything, aren't meant to and will never in this life. If we could someone would have by now. We through how we think and choose can cause results in and by our actions. Jesus Himself taught and lived doing the will of "His Father" and His life as that Son gives an example to consider and learn from.....

yeah, THAT's a great point....i [like so many others] wish we knew that back then.....in retrospect, one personal incident more than anything else highlights the ridiculousness of the believing-you-can-control-everything mindset. i've shared this before here:

one rainy morning i'm driving a company work truck into work - and listening to a sunday night teaching tape on a portable tape player. i'm at a stop sign at bottom of hill and car behind me approaching a little too fast for a slippery road - couldn't stop in time and rear-ended my truck. a few days later, when i happened to mention it to my twig coordinator [she was corps] - she immediately gave me the third degree - pursuing a line of thought, like what was i thinking about at the time, where has my head been all week. i said "i dunno - but i do remember i was listening to a sunday night tape at the time."i wish i could remember what the teaching on the tape was!....all i got to tell ya is it's a good thing insurance companies and police officers don't find fault with someone failing to operate the power of believing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just before I left TWI2, I was called on the carpet.

My twig leader wanted to know why, after a year of ABS, I had stopped. "Don't you realize your stepping on the hose?

"From what I've seen there's nothing in the hose," I responded.

After much going around about giving and recieving and not recieving, he came up with the excuse: "Your not recieving because your not giving cheerfully."

"I'm not a cheerful giver? How do you know that?"

"I found a twenty dollar bill all wadded up in the point of the cornucopia."

"And you think that was me."

He nodded.

"Are you sure that was me?"

"Positive."

"That's odd," I told him. "I always pay ABS with a check."

After that I left twig never to return.

Of course, nowadays, this whole discussion wouldn't happen. The second he accused me of wadding up the bill, I would have lobbed the believign tennis ball back in his court. "You ever think maybe your just not believing enough?"

I think that's one of the things that really sticks in my craw about the ministry's leadership: they waste dno time criticizing your lack of believing, but never looked at the fact that maybe it was their lack of believing causing the event.

SoCrates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks T.

There are so many things that have gotten wrapped up in this - once someone accepts that their own effort is the source of all true change in their life and the only single source of access for God to "live" in their lives it hmmm, changes everything - man is at the center, God has no hands but ours, we're at a temporary stand off waiting for someone to make the first move. Is that the message of the Bible?

God is the creator - but man then creates his own reality from the tools given him, as if it were his own destiny and purpose and God's intent for the construction of the reality He wants.

"Adam and Eve" - first man and woman in a perfect world, choose....poorly...but now through their believing action can fulfill God's original purpose.

God is love - redefine the entire history of the Old Testament (man's entire existence from Day One) to exclude anything that might be thought to be "negative" to seve our modern fat, happy and oil-rich sensibility where we think we should have anything we want that we of course really need because God would of course want that. For us.

Jesus saves - eternity isn't enough, nor a life filled with a relationship with our heavenly Father, we get stuff now, stuff that won't rust or really be destroyed like all the rest of our stuff when we die but will have value towards "spiritual rewards" later, as if we'll each have our own U-Haul pull up to the Judgment Seat to lay testimony to the abundance we accumulated in this life of believing.

Prayer - community with God and our inner hearts becomes mankind's Request Line for whatever it is we're being bugged by. "Bless this food for the nourishment of our bodies, God". Pass the Big Mac's, they're holy, non-toxic and only the good stuff gets through now..

The list goes on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah - that reminds me of a poignant challenge i read somewhere - it was a bottom-line question: if all that Christianity offered was Jesus, would i still be interested?

back in the time frame of when i first took PFAL i was definitely looking for something spiritual - one of the benefits on the back of the green card really stood out to me - "makes life meaningful".

....but you know....after the class my quest for something spiritual just got lost in the complicated discipline of learning how to sell PFAL to others....among other core beliefs, there must have developed a deeply embedded mindset of PFAL makes life meaningful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah - that reminds me of a poignant challenge i read somewhere - it was a bottom-line question: if all that Christianity offered was Jesus, would i still be interested?

back in the time frame of when i first took PFAL i was definitely looking for something spiritual - one of the benefits on the back of the green card really stood out to me - "makes life meaningful".

....but you know....after the class my quest for something spiritual just got lost in the complicated discipline of learning how to sell PFAL to others....among other core beliefs, there must have developed a deeply embedded mindset of PFAL makes life meaningful.

Via TWI I actually came to oppose more in Christianity than really understand and become accepting of Christ. I knew who I believed He wasn't ....but, I never knew Him as a real person. . . . I never fell in love with Him so to speak. I said I loved my "Big brother" but, if I related to Him at all it was in a less than reverent way......I was more concerned by how I believed others wrongly worshiped Him, and I was more consumed by the "word" than I was in relationship with the word made flesh.

I pretty much missed the entire boat of the Christian faith......but, I was really good at mocking it.

Edited by geisha779
Link to comment
Share on other sites

nice post, Geisha!

i read a great book by FF Bruce called "Jesus: Lord and Savior" - what i liked about it was the way he examined Acts and the Epistles to show that the basic message of the early church was really quite simple - Jesus is Lord and He has been raised from the dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The law of believing has been the topic of a few threads – and a subject I never get tired of discussing. There's more than one way to skin a red draped window.

I was thinking about the phrase the "LAW of believing" and the assumption it's right up there with the known laws of physics and chemistry….. So I'm searching the internet about scientific laws and find definitions for hypothesis, theory and law by Anne Marie Helmenstine, PhD [she is an author and consultant with a broad scientific and medical background], here's the link:

http://chemistry.abo...a/lawtheory.htm

after reading her definitions – in my opinion, the closest [and by closest I mean within at least 600 TWI-light years of each other] the "law of believing" comes to is an hypothesis . Helmenstine says this of hypothesis: "…an educated guess based on observation. Usually, a hypothesis can be supported or refuted through experimentation or more observation. A hypothesis can be disproven, but not proven to be true."

So, is it vp's educated guess or a plagiarized guess? 12 years of TWI involvement and my personal experimentation and observation do NOT support the law [or hypothesis] of believing…..it's probably just another case of vp making up his own definitions anyway.

~~

"believing equals receiving"

This implies believing and receiving are in some way proportional. The measure or power of one thing has a corresponding relationship with the other thing. Believe big you get big results. Believe a little you get just little results. The law of believing supposedly works for saint and sinner alike. God is removed from the picture – it's all based on YOU and YOUR believing.

To the contrary, Ephesians 3:20 NLT declares God is able to accomplish infinitely more than we would ever dare to ask or hope. I'd rather put my hopes in God Almighty than in my puny faith anyway.

~~

Thinking of verses that say things like "believe in Him" or "ask in His name" and "trust Him" makes me think God is not just an integral part of our faith – He is the very basis for our faith. It suggests a relationship between the believer and God. So, I tend to think of faith as something that links one to God. It's nothing by itself. Maybe it functions somewhat like an umbilical cord – a linkage channeling life-sustaining nutrients from heaven.

~~

That's all for now, folks….have a nice day :wave:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.precastco...r_believing.htm

From J. Juedes About The Way Page.......

Wierwille's form of "faith" teaching is the most damaging and unbiblical version. Unlike some teachers, he dubs this "the Law of Believing." His book and class, Power for Abundant Living (PFAL), calls this a law like the law of gravity. It applies to the whole world and dominates everyone's lives, whether they know it or not. In his view, the law is indiscriminate- it "works for saint and sinner alike."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

. . . . ' Wierwille and The Way International (TWI) teach that many nonChristians or atheists operate this law far better than Christians. He says, "The law of positive and negative believing works for both Christian and non-Christian. When we believe, we receive the results of our believing regardless of who or what we are" (PFAL, p. 38).

In other words, "the law of believing" is an atheistic system. God is not involved and has no influence on whatever good or evil things enter people's lives. God is a only passive bystander, waiting to see what positive or negative results they get in their lives as a result of their own believing. God is out of the picture and is essentially powerless- he cannot refuse the good or hinder the bad (either for his children or his enemies). God is at the mercy of what people, good and bad, choose to believe.

Besides being an atheistic system, the law of believing is entirely man centered. People do not have faith in God- they have faith in faith. Your will and believing, not God's, determine what you get, whether pain or pleasure.

The law of believing is inherently law, not grace. God is stingy; He only responds to people's believing and gives no more than what people believe for, no matter how little that may be- or how negative the believing and the results are. There is no room for the grace of God, for God giving us more than we believe for. He "can't" treat people better than their believing deserves, because that would violate the law. God becomes not a Father, but an impassive weapons dealer, dealing out the weapon of believing to all people, Christians or not, to do whatever good or evil they wish to do with it '.. . . .

Edited by geisha779
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

×
×
  • Create New...