Army-of-me,

No need to apologize for your comments of yesterday questioning my comment on the Impact learning statement, “The purpose of life is to learn.” Your reaction is typical of LDS folks exposed to the Impact false, vain and foolish doctrine. The statement looks very appealing at first glance, but it is really a self serving statement put out there to legitimize their perverted training. The first law of the Universe is not the “Secret” or “The Law of Attraction” at all, but “obedience.” Christ repeatedly and through out his ministry said that he was doing the will of his father. Satan, bright, enlightened, knowledgeable, angel of light that he was failed the obedience test and was kicked out of Heaven per LDS doctrine.

Impact teachings undervalue obedience to God and overvalue learning. The most important thing to learn in life becomes obedience to God. If you don’t get that all is lost in LDS doctrine. King Saul was directed by God to destroy all of the livestock of his defeated foes. He chose to sacrifice the best of them to God. This drew the strong rebuke of God, who said obedience was more important than sacrifice. This is in the Old Testament, not later LDS scripture.

So, thank you for helping me to illustrate this fatal flaw in Impact doctrine. If they can get you as a Latter Day Saint to believe that their learning is more important that the First Presidency direction over the pulpit repeatedly over the last several years to leave self-awareness/empowerment type training alone, they have you and thousands of others in their clutches. The comments of exImpact on these pages have been excellent in pointing out the dilemma or paradox that TIT folks especially have in trying to resolve the LDS doctrine with Impact training. The fact is it can’t be done. The reason is that the root philosophy, doctrine, theology, call it what you will is rooted in rebellion of a Satanic nature cleverly cloaked in the legitimacy of training, light, happiness, good, etc. Their motivation is not to teach truth but get economic gain. By their fruits ye shall know them. The real fruits of Impact are well illustrated on this forum, and this discussion needs to be part of it. So congratulations, you have nothing to apologize for.

Hopeful

Quote
Hopeful Soul
Army-of-me,

No need to apologize for your comments of yesterday questioning my comment on the Impact learning statement, “The purpose of life is to learn.” Your reaction is typical of LDS folks exposed to the Impact false, vain and foolish doctrine....

Quote
army-of-me

Quote
Hopeful Soul
The purpose of life therefore for a Mormon is not to learn, as Impact says, but to prove who will pass the obedience to God test.

Hopeful, this quote doesn't [i:16a16f07a4]quite[/i:16a16f07a4] align with what I've read in my religious studies. Since this isn't the forum for this kind of discussion, though, please IM me if you want to discuss it. :)

Hey Hopeful Soul, it is my opinion (I may be in error) that you misunderstood Army's entire post. It is not [i:16a16f07a4]only[/i:16a16f07a4] the first part of what you said that Army quoted that they disagree with (Impact's "purpose of life is to learn") but rather your [i:16a16f07a4]entire[/i:16a16f07a4] statement is suspect. That is why the whole statement was quoted. Your opinion that the purpose of life for an LDS person is to "prove who will pass the obedience to God test.", is also what Army finds contentious. I am inclined to agree with Army. That opinion (as well as many others you have posted btw) does not reflect what my study has escavated, nor does it [i:16a16f07a4]necessarily [/i:16a16f07a4]reflect the opinions of the majority of active Mormons I know.

I am not saying your opinion is wrong or right, I am saying it is inappropriate for one to assume their opinion or beliefs are universally held by everyone within their organization.

In the future, please be [i:16a16f07a4]careful [/i:16a16f07a4]when you assume you speak for an entire group of people. Diversity of belief and varying interpretation of doctrine exists within any religious group, I have found this is particularly true for the Mormons.

P.S.: From what I could read, Army didn't apologize for anything they said in that post. Only for "going off topic". I apologize for that as well, and as with Army, I'd like you to PM me if you want to further this conversation .

My wife was labeled Damaged Goods from Impact. She didn't like it, but at that point she was pretty much stuck with going along with the whole Impact belittling routine - because she sincerely thought it was going to be "good" for her.

I totally agree with Army - it is abuse - but unfortunately, everyone there is subjecting themselves to it "voluntarily."

My wife and I have discussed the impact of Impact quite a lot at this point (if you don't know or remember my story/background on this go to page 36). She has agreed that Impact was horrible, although at our first REAL counseling session with a REAL counselor, she was still touting all of the "good" that she got from Impact, which infuriated me because when we were talking together about it earlier, she had been telling me how bad it all was with a new perspective and with deep retrospect. It has been helpful for me to get her to read many of your posts - at least the ones that stick to Impact. I don't know if I can totally believe her when she sings the same old tune and tells me again that Impact was horrible after lots and lots of talking about it, which is why I ask her to read some of these posts with me.

On that note, acknowledging that I'm not moderating this forum, I would like to comment that a lot of communications that are posted here are bickerings about what other members are saying, as if we can't be understanding enough to give another member the benefit of the doubt, or we WANT to be quick to judge them (harshly) which dilutes the power and significance of this forum for me. I almost fear posting my own thoughts and feelings sometimes because I'm afraid I'll come under attack/criticism from someone because they don't like or totally agree with what I might say. Is it so easy to forget the Golden Rule after going through an LGAT?

Damaged, I think Otter tried to take that approach, with little success. I agree with you though. Contrary thoughts here are not treated with respect.

Quote
damagedbyassociation
On that note, acknowledging that I'm not moderating this forum, I would like to comment that a lot of communications that are posted here are bickerings about what other members are saying, as if we can't be understanding enough to give another member the benefit of the doubt, or we WANT to be quick to judge them (harshly) which dilutes the power and significance of this forum for me. I almost fear posting my own thoughts and feelings sometimes because I'm afraid I'll come under attack/criticism from someone because they don't like or totally agree with what I might say. Is it so easy to forget the Golden Rule after going through an LGAT?

It is true, there has been allot of bickering. But why be afraid? This is an anonymous internet message board. There are many people who post here who are not afraid. As far as respect is concerned, I refuse to give it to any regurgitation of any support for the LGAT/Impact teachings/doctrines/business model. Short of that, let's talk!

If you want to be more specific concerning your criticisms of disrespect, it would be appreciated. But to say that the majority of the content on this board is disrespectful and harshly judgemental is a gross overstatement. As far as the golden rule is concerned, if you can come up with a valid argument about what I post, I welcome it. I am not afraid of criticism, especially when I am posting anonymously on an internet message board. If you don't want to be attacked or criticized, this is most definitely not a communication medium for you. I have been criticized, harshly judged and attacked since I began posting, but it won't stop me. How does conflict delude the helpfulness of the information presented here? Contrasting opinions breeds conflict. Why is that a bad thing? This LGAT nonsense is a contentious subject and unconditional agreement seems counter-productive.

Quote
Passionate
Damaged, I think Otter tried to take that approach, with little success. I agree with you though. Contrary thoughts here are not treated with respect.

Passionate, you have had your share of disrespectful behavior since you began posting here...

ExImpact wrote:

"As far as the golden rule is concerned, if you can come up with a valid argument about what I post, I welcome it."

This is like saying "If I am 30 years old, Thursdays are the fourth day of the week." Neither have anything to do with the other. Damaged was saying that people aren't generally nice here. While I support your idea that the very nature of the discussion topic here is contentious, it need not be a personal attack or go so far as to make someone feel stupid or feel that their opinion is not as valuable as anyone else's. The Golden Rule has nothing to do with any of your arguments - its how you go about arguing them, in my opinion, that Damaged may be addressing.

There have been times I withheld my opinion because of how people have been treated here. Thank you Damaged for saying this.

We're all here to expose LGAT's and educate people who come here to learn about them.

Quote
Passionate
ExImpact wrote:

"As far as the golden rule is concerned, if you can come up with a valid argument about what I post, I welcome it."

This is like saying "If I am 30 years old, Thursdays are the fourth day of the week." Neither have anything to do with the other. Damaged was saying that people aren't generally nice here. While I support your idea that the very nature of the discussion topic here is contentious, it need not be a personal attack or go so far as to make someone feel stupid or feel that their opinion is not as valuable as anyone else's. The Golden Rule has nothing to do with any of your arguments - its how you go about arguing them, in my opinion, that Damaged may be addressing.

There have been times I withheld my opinion because of how people have been treated here. Thank you Damaged for saying this.

We're all here to expose LGAT's and educate people who come here to learn about them.

Funny statement Passionate. ExImpact's statement makes perfect sense. He criticizes opinions that he disagrees with and welcomes the same type of criticism (ie. The Golden Rule). Pay attention.

Like ex I am also very willing to discuss reasonable/rational/logical arguments that counter my points. That being said I have yet to hear a single pro-impact argument be supported by any kind of reason/rationality/logic or even common sense. As a result I have and will remain critical.

Like ex said, LGAT's by nature are a contentious topic. This is an anonymous online message board and so far the only place available where it is safe to express anti-Impact sentiments without reprisal. As a result I see no reason to attempt to censor arguments based in logic and common sense. Spamming, Trolling, posting nonsense or expressing opinions that ignore or minimize damages (such as "everyone's experience is different") deserve to be slammed. Other than that, everyone is free to post what ever they want.

Karl Marx believed that society progressed through the synthesis and change of conflicting ideas. If you, or anyone else, are unable to come up with reasons to support your beliefs then maybe you need to re-evaluate your beliefs.

That said, I agree that some of the bickering may have diluted portions the thread but the alternative is to allow nonsensical and off-topic statements to pass without being challenged. I have tried this method and allowing those types of statements to be posted without being challenged or picked apart has only seemed to lead to more off-topic and nonsensical statements. As a result, I think the arguing is the better alternative. I believe that it has lead to better and more consistent content in the long-term.

Quote
Passionate
....While I support your idea that the very nature of the discussion topic here is contentious, it need not be a personal attack or go so far as to make someone feel stupid or feel that their opinion is not as valuable as anyone else's. The Golden Rule has nothing to do with any of your arguments - its how you go about arguing them, in my opinion, that Damaged may be addressing.

There have been times I withheld my opinion because of how people have been treated here. Thank you Damaged for saying this.

We're all here to expose LGAT's and educate people who come here to learn about them.

The integrity of the thread is of the utmost importance to me, and sometimes I overreact to [i:c3cacfd2d9]any[/i:c3cacfd2d9] perceived threat to that integrity. I apologize if I have seemed unnecessarily heavy-handed at times, but sometimes I have to go on the offensive to defend my positions.

You know, as a teenager, growing up with my mother was rarely easy. She was one of those people that only heard tone and not content. If I was pissed off because of some injustice she threw at me, she couldn't hear a word I said unless I spoke quietly and nicely. She was absolutely unreasonable at these times, and I felt manipulated into being calm and accepting when I was anything but! Because she would only listen to nice tones, the fact that I was angry because of something she had done was completely lost on her.

Believe it or not, in real life, on the whole, I am an exceedingly nice person. Unless you want to talk about Impact, LGAT's and the degrees of [i:c3cacfd2d9]rampant stupidity[/i:c3cacfd2d9] they spawn.

Everything on this website aside, my deepest wish is for anyone who has been directly or indirectly damaged by Impact and the new-age/LGAT mindset to find real health, well-being and happiness.

If your opinions are not strong or potent enough to brave this apparent "lack of niceness" tone, it is my opinion that hearing them is not necessary, simply for the fact that, notwithstanding criticism, you don't think they are important enough to be heard or that they cannot withstand scrutiny. So it comes down to either people withhold what they have to say for fear of criticism, or I hold back what I want to say for fear that I will be criticized for being critical.

Chilloutnrelax.

of course you are going to say they have not been brainwashed --- you yourself have been brainwashed to say that --- duh!

Quote
Passionate
...While I support your idea that the very nature of the discussion topic here is contentious, it need not be a personal attack or go so far as to make someone feel stupid or feel that their opinion is not as valuable as anyone else's. The Golden Rule has nothing to do with any of your arguments - its how you go about arguing them..., in my opinion, that Damaged may be addressing...

...We're all here to expose LGAT's and educate people who come here to learn about them.

Passionate. I am amazed... I actually agree with you 100 percent...

Which in the past has not been the case.

But on this point. I can't agree with you more...