Quote
exImpact
[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.
Quote
RswintersQuote
exImpact
[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.
I may be responding out of my own frustrations from another topic thread where a member must hold the same perception.
Although I disagree with this mindset. It is a black and white, all or nothing approach that means that one view point dominates another by sheer force of how it is argued.
I believe there is a balance in the middle. I am a staunch allie in exposing LGAT's. Yet there is a tolerance in me for those who come on here and post in favor of LGAT's when it is done in a manner that allows for both views on LGAT's to be allowed and to let a reader decide what to believe.
I have posted very strongly agianst LGAT's myself. I am not perfect as I have failed to be this in some of my posts. I can justify my failure by my being so hurt in my experience with Klemmer.
Although, I try to find a balance which is difficult to accomplish at times. Because I must allow for opposing views to be shared along with my views without being so arrogant as to shut down any and all opposing views to my own.
Doing that on this website will keep it a very good tool for those to read about LGAT's such as Impact. Yet there needs to be kept in mind that if this forum tips to far to one side of opinions. Then it becomes a extremely biased site without the ability to be used as a way to make an informed decision on matters such as an LGAT.
So, we need to allow for views to be shared that oppose us. While we do need to scrutinize content of posts. We need to allow for views to be shared when they are shared in a way that is allowing for a reader to decide what to believe.
We cross the line when we decide what a reader should believe or not believe.
I may be responding to my frustrations on another topic thread. If so, please allow me to fail forward in my working out my emotions from the interactions that I have recently had on this forum.
They have not been good, and I am heavily considering removing myself from this forum altogether.
Thanks.
Quote
Rswinters
Even though I am with everyone on exposing LGAT's. We need to be careful not to place ourselves in the arrogant stance of not being open to other viewpoints shared.
This is my biggest issue with an LGAT mindset. Because it goes to an extreme of shutting down opposing viewpoints by refusing to allow for an opposing viewpoint to exist in interacting with them.
I would hate to see this forum turn into the very same thing that I despise in LGAT's and how they interact with me.
Quote
formerimpactgrad
8. Hans claims to speak for God when training in the Impact Trainings. I heard him say on more than one occasion, "When I am up infront of a group in Quest", the first of the core trainings, "Its not me speaking, Jesus, God, Lord Michael, St Germaine and the other masters are speaking through me. Impact is not my training, it is theirs, taken directly from God." Despite this, Hans has claimed that Impact is not a religion or a threat to religion when he has been questioned by local ecclesiastical leaders.
Quote
Rswinters
ExImpact. I am on the team of exposing LGAT's. I am not on the team that views faith and science as seperate.
I will call into account the contradiction on this matter that exists on this website.
If I am not allowed to remain because of this view.
So be it.
I just ask for the same standard to be applied to all views. Even are negative analysis of things.
Biased yes, but biased towards what needs to be biased agianst here.
LGAT's such as Impact, and Klemmer are what we need to be biased agianst.
Not a persons faith.
Quote
exImpactQuote
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-meHopeful, this quote doesn't [i:f2b4be943f]quite[/i:f2b4be943f] 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. :)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.
Hey Hopeful Soul, it is my opinion (I may be in error) that you misunderstood Army's entire post. It is not [i:f2b4be943f]only[/i:f2b4be943f] 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:f2b4be943f]entire[/i:f2b4be943f] 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:f2b4be943f]necessarily [/i:f2b4be943f]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:f2b4be943f]careful [/i:f2b4be943f]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 .
Quote
ExImpact. I am on the team of exposing LGAT's. I am not on the team that views faith and science as seperate.
I will call into account the contradiction on this matter that exists on this website.
If I am not allowed to remain because of this view.
So be it.
I just ask for the same standard to be applied to all views. Even are negative analysis of things.
Biased yes, but biased towards what needs to be biased agianst here.
LGAT's such as Impact, and Klemmer are what we need to be biased agianst.
Not a persons faith.
Quote
If you are referring to my responses to hopefulsoul's posts, I invite you to look again.
Quote
MaxuiQuote
formerimpactgrad
8. Hans claims to speak for God when training in the Impact Trainings. I heard him say on more than one occasion, "When I am up infront of a group in Quest", the first of the core trainings, "Its not me speaking, Jesus, God, Lord Michael, St Germaine and the other masters are speaking through me. Impact is not my training, it is theirs, taken directly from God." Despite this, Hans has claimed that Impact is not a religion or a threat to religion when he has been questioned by local ecclesiastical leaders.
See now that scares the CRAP out of me
The trainer on the workshops I attended is nothing like this
If he was i would have been out of there faster then you can say "Transformation"
IMHO any man who stands up and professes to speak for god should be avoided at all costs.