Quote:
Originally Posted by aron
Back to my initial point, the LC response would be that testallthings' inability to take WL's teaching on face value indicates some unresolved darkness or intransigence. The LC always reflects attention away from critical examination, which they call being negative, accusatory, dark, divisive, etc. Any problem always lies with the recipient, not the message.
|
Those in the LC who read this forum like the blendeds and DCP, might try to portray us as purposely 'misunderstanding' what WL taught. I notice that from the quote of WL, he pleads with his audience saying "
do not misunderstand me". When I read this excerpt, there was only one understanding that I walked away with, and that is of course, knowing that WL claimed that it is okay to lie in certain situations. That understanding has nothing to do with trying to understand WL a certain way. For the average reader, it should be a bit disturbing to read something like this.
Based on such concerns, there is an ever-apparent need to address and discuss such things publicly. If there are a good number of people who can't take WL's teaching at face value, then that is indication that he either didn't make himself clear, or that his teachings should be put under the microscope for further examination. If WL's teachings were fully orthodox and could proven to be so, then the LC would have nothing to lose by addressing these things in a forthright manner.