Double Standards

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by aron

The idea of innately rejecting all opinions as fallen doesn't stand up to the NT testimony. The Acts 15 conference in Jerusalem had all those present able to air their thoughts, feelings, and understandings without fear of intimidation. Look at v. 7: "after much discussion" Peter stood up and addressed the group (NIV). Where in the LC's vaunted "church life" do you see the opportunity for "much discussion"? Nowhere is where. The Deputy God has issued a pronouncement from the podium, and that's it. Get out of your mind, don't think, just be one with the latest speaking. No discussion, no consideration, no thought -- be "one" with Anaheim.

It is amazing how the LC is able to twist scripture in order to create a belief system by which members have no ability to discuss, debate, or express opinions. Their reasons for doing this are clear, however, what does it say about LC doctrines when they can only exist in an environment where there is not room for critique? To me, it is a strong indicator that their doctrines are not so solid, else why the fear of critique? They get around this by constantly being on the offensive, it puts the focus on others instead of themselves. The blendeds think they have the right to affirm and critique others, but the minute someone critiques them, they get up in arms and even go so far as to take them to court.

I really hope that some members will get to the point where they can see for themselves what the underlying message is in the "get out of your mind" or "drop your concepts" type of thinking. It's dangerous, and it is a tool leaders use to silence people.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Freedom

The blendeds think they have the right to affirm and critique others, but the minute someone critiques them, they get up in arms.

This is textbook double standard. "When we do it, it's okay, because we're correcting, rebuking, and perfecting. When others do it, it's not okay, because they're being critical, attacking and accusing." The loaded terminology reveals the subjective nature of the person speaking. It simply has no objective basis in realilty. It is pure impressionism: "I feel this way, therefore this is real."

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by aron

This is textbook double standard. "When we do it, it's okay, because we're correcting, rebuking, and perfecting. When others do it, it's not okay, because they're being critical, attacking and accusing." The loaded terminology reveals the subjective nature of the person speaking.

When the 'cult' label has been applied to the LC, that is a form of outside critique. It's basically others saying that hey we don't think your teachings line up with orthodox teachings or that certain practices are concerning. Sure it's a strong word, but ultimately when there is a group teaching things like "don't get into your mind", what do they really expect, that no one is going to take issue with such teachings? Plenty of members buy into it, but on the outside, it sets off all kinds of alarms.

Back when I attended some of the semi-annual training in the mid-2000's, I remember Ron telling us that Lee was the "acting God". That's quite a concerning statement. So as a member what was I supposed to do, not "get into my mind" about it? Problem is, that is exactly what they wanted us to do, to swallow it without a second thought. Those like Nigel who publicly challenged such teachings were viciously attacked.

They cannot simultaneously claim to not be a cult, yet deny members the basic right to challenge and discuss teachings. Why must every member who speaks out be slandered and attacked? There is something very dark beneath the surface. Members are trapped in their own mindset, so much so that they can't even come here and have a frank and honest discussion. That was my invitation in the first post of this thread, for current members or lurkers to come join this discussion. The silence is deafening.