To Gok, is this a fair summary of your position?
			Forum

Posted by: JHB ® 11/02/2004, 03:38:38 Author Profile Edit Alert Moderators

GOK, I want to try to summarise your position on Rawat's status, and issues arising. I would be grateful if you could read this and let me know if it accurate. The person called Prem Rawat is not the omnscient, omnipresent being that we refer to as God. He is however, a human being with a very special status that has previously been applied to Jesus Christ and Gautama the Buddha. Consequently, he is worthy of being called 'The Lord' by those who recognise that status. Prem Rawat, Elan Vital, and most followers of Rawat, do not publicly claim this status for Rawat, but allow his followers to discover this for themselves in their own time. By not publicly declaring their belief in Rawat's exalted status, Prem Rawat, Elan Vital and premies are not lying, but they are being evasive for a noble purpose. This purpose is to prevent newcomers to Rawat's message misunderstanding Rawat and his message because they have an incorrect pre-conceived idea of what the Christ and the Buddha are. Is this a fair statement of your position? I would also like to ask you if you think Elan Vital are lying when they state in 2004 that ex-premie.org is safely out of reach of the law, when in 2003 they unsuccessfully took legal action against ex-premie.org (which is located in Colorado BTW!). I can give you more details if you wish. John. Modified by JHB at Tue, Nov 02, 2004, 03:40:30

Previous

Recommend View All Current page

Next

Replies to this message

To paraphrase JHB --- nemesis ( Tue, Nov 02, 2004, 09:01:59 ) ( 1055 bytes ) +1 GOK thinks lying by omission is okay... --- Cynthia ( Tue, Nov 02, 2004, 09:28:11 ) ( 473 bytes ) +1 Re: "lying by omission" --- godonlyknows ( Tue, Nov 02, 2004, 21:45:46 ) ( 960 bytes ) +1 Re: "lying by omission" --- Cynthia ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 08:03:00 ) ( 1695 bytes ) +2 Re: "lying by omission" --- Jethro ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 12:45:05 ) ( 180 bytes ) +1 deception as a means to and end is Ok for Christianity too, apparently ... --- cq ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 15:14:20 ) ( 3445 bytes ) link +1 Re: deception as a means to and end is Ok for Christianity too, apparently ... --- Jethro ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 21:18:56 ) ( 116 bytes ) Re: " you said that it's quite okay for EV to lie on behalf of Prem Rawa... --- godonlyknows ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 16:02:01 ) ( 117 bytes ) +1 Well, yes you did say that...(Amended) --- Cynthia ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 06:11:59 ) ( 1296 bytes ) Re: To Gok, is this a fair summary of your position? --- jonx ( Tue, Nov 02, 2004, 16:11:35 ) ( 899 bytes ) +2 How close was I? --- JHB ( Tue, Nov 02, 2004, 16:42:43 ) ( 164 bytes ) +2 Re: How close was I? --- Paddy ( Tue, Nov 02, 2004, 19:49:38 ) ( 84 bytes ) +1 Re: I can't see any such admission by GOK? --- godonlyknows ( Tue, Nov 02, 2004, 21:48:41 ) ( 108 bytes ) Re: How close was I? --- jonx ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 18:03:04 ) ( 58 bytes ) C'mon we know that all! we've been part of that too.. --- toby ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 00:11:28 ) ( 80 bytes ) Very well put, John.... --- nigel ( Tue, Nov 02, 2004, 16:53:33 ) ( 702 bytes ) buddha went pthhiiitt into the unconcious oneness--poof he is not a lord (no text) --- bill ( Tue, Nov 02, 2004, 18:05:47 ) ( 0 bytes ) Maybe close, but not quite, John --- godonlyknows ( Tue, Nov 02, 2004, 22:33:32 ) ( 4791 bytes ) +2 2 points GOK --- The Falcon ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 02:56:48 ) ( 286 bytes ) +2 Sorry, I don't have the documentation, but... --- Neville B ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 10:01:56 ) ( 219 bytes ) +2 Nev.,,,he said that in 'Satguru has come' nt (no text) --- Jethro ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 12:36:43 ) ( 0 bytes ) Yes, it's difficult nowadays --- Tempora ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 12:43:11 ) ( 3897 bytes ) +3 Re: Yes, it's difficult nowadays --- NikW ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 13:28:54 ) ( 1489 bytes ) +1 Rawatism is a dualistic doctrine, like all manicheaisms (...) it litterally m... --- G. ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 20:01:48 ) ( 185 bytes ) Re: Maharaji had received K when a child and realised it about 24 hours later. --- godonlyknows ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 15:36:31 ) ( 36 bytes ) +3 Is that a serious question? --- Bunny ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 16:05:53 ) ( 1000 bytes ) +1 Here's my guess at GOK's motives --- cq ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 15:26:30 ) ( 608 bytes ) Re: Maharaji had received K when a child and realised it about 24 hours later. --- PatD ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 17:59:32 ) ( 2543 bytes ) What does that mean - "realised" it? --- Neville B ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 18:53:31 ) ( 727 bytes ) +1 BUT HE DID realize it! --- NAR ( Fri, Nov 05, 2004, 17:09:13 ) ( 373 bytes ) The point of honesty in deception --- billy ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 15:13:25 ) ( 970 bytes ) Re: 2 points GOK --- godonlyknows ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 15:31:24 ) ( 217 bytes ) +1 Re: 2 points GOK --- The Falcon ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 04:55:49 ) ( 435 bytes ) +1 Realised soul --- Tempora ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 08:50:48 ) ( 1977 bytes ) Re: Maybe close, but not quite, John --- Lexy ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 04:12:38 ) ( 279 bytes ) +1 Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, --- godonlyknows ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 15:58:00 ) ( 38 bytes ) +1 You're very frivolous tonight Gok....... --- Lexy ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 16:16:12 ) ( 104 bytes ) +1 I have a theory about GOK's new-found frivolity --- Jim ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 17:53:48 ) ( 1814 bytes ) +2 Re: "lying" --- godonlyknows ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 21:05:25 ) ( 38 bytes ) +2 Re: "she" --- godonlyknows ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 21:26:29 ) ( 129 bytes ) +1 Perhaps ~ I think your a conman just like Prem Rawat... --- Hilltop ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 22:57:38 ) ( 1208 bytes ) +2 GOK is in training with the most rejecting people.... (no text) --- toby ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 05:01:30 ) ( 0 bytes ) Re: Perhaps ~ I think your a conman just like Prem Rawat: I agree, Hilly --- gerry ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 10:20:07 ) ( 423 bytes ) +1 I think Gok is a conned man Thanks to Prem Rawat! --- Hilltop ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 23:29:44 ) ( 880 bytes ) +1 Da Swine Likes Millions --- gerry ( Fri, Nov 05, 2004, 18:50:18 ) ( 165 bytes ) +1 Re: Da Swine Likes Millions --- Hilltop ( Fri, Nov 05, 2004, 22:32:31 ) ( 1202 bytes ) Re: "lying" --- Jim ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 10:39:39 ) ( 375 bytes ) Re: "So now, as a coward and liar" --- godonlyknows ( Wed, Nov 03, 2004, 21:32:55 ) ( 149 bytes ) +1 Even your asking me how you're a liar is itself a form of deceit --- Jim ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 11:19:17 ) ( 4336 bytes ) +1 Re: Even your asking me how you're a liar is itself a form of deceit --- godonlyknows ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 16:24:07 ) ( 215 bytes ) +1 Re: Even your asking me how you're a liar is itself a form of deceit --- Lexy ( Thu, Nov 04, 2004, 17:54:08 ) ( 122 bytes )