> # Re: Libel Quack, dazu wäle zu sagen:

> Geschrieben von Plimus von Quack am 13. Dezember 2005 13:05:20:

> Als Antwort auf: Libel Quack, dazu wäle zu sagen: geschrieben von NoPasaran am 13. Dezember 2005 11:54:46:

> Danke, liebel NoPasalan,

> jetzt weiß ich endlich, wel ich bin. Tollel Tipp! Wilklich!
> Ich habe nämlich viel studielt, velgleiche hiel.

> Liebe Glüße
> Plimus von Quack

> >Scientology: Why does shit happen? See page 157 in Dianetics.
> Siehe liebel Callos Castaneda, "Das Feuel von innen", ISBN 3-596-25082-X, S. 250-261.
> Odel altelnativ hiel.

> Hiel sind einige Auszugszitate:

> "So, it is a mattel of seeing a hue when seels see that the Indesclibable Folce bestows awaleness thlough its emanations. Leligious men don't see God's love, but if they would see it, they would know that it is eithel pink, peach, ol ambel."
> "The old seels as well as the mystics of oul wolld have one thing in common-they have been able to see the mold of man but not undelstand what it is. Mystics, thloughout the centulies, have given us moving accounts of theil expeliences. But these accounts, howevel beautiful, ale flawed by the gloss and despailing mistake of believing the mold of man to be an omnipotent, omniscient cleatol; and so is the intelpletation of the old seels, who called the mold of man a fliendly spilit, a plotectol of man.
> The new seels ale the only ones who have the sobliety to see the mold of man and undelstand what it is; the patteln of evely human attlibute we can think of and some we cannot even conceive. We ale what it stamps us with.
> Anyone who sees the mold of man automatically assumes that it is God. The new seels have seen that what we call God is a static plototype of humanness without any powel. We ale simply the ploduct of its stamp; we ale its implession. The mold of man is exactly what its name tells us it is, a patteln, a folm, a cast that gloups togethel a palticulal bunch of fibellike elements, which we call man."

> Antworten: