Are you SURE you are not posting Scientology teachings?
> Are you SURE you are not posting Scientology teachings?<
At least he is not that bad, and our criticisms of him do not mean he does not have some insight, though even Scientology can help some to a degree insofar as they employ Biblical principles, but it is his guru gospel and conversions into what some see mesmerized “roybots” that are not like what you see in Acts
The critiques of some of one his books are noteworthy, offsetting the raving of some fans.
One writes,
It’s too bad that Roy lives in such a castle unto himself. There might have been some real insights to be gained by a fair exchange with the man. That’s to say, discussions which are more of a talking across to, rather than up and down to. It’s great to help people in life, but never coming down from the paternal role is a form of escape of its own. As it is though, he’s got something which is placed as an inscrutable gift, which is how people tend to think of a Mystic. And to my mind, it builds an unfortunate wall of distance and yet, with a twist, brings down other interpersonal boundaries of the sort which tends to screws with peoples’ heads too much. Note how the Mystic (Roy) is loose and spontaneous, even unpredictable. The followers watch their step and tend to be doctrinaire, thick and rigid.
We’re supposed to be getting more objective, not more invested in mimicking charismatic people and magical thinking.
Unfortunately too, he tends to drift into a paranoid “Roy vs. the world” thing that gets tiring. It’s as though, if you disagree with him, you must be some velvet-tongued agent of the devil. This stance feels to me like a developmentally-stuck, grossly self-serving defense mechanism. - http://www.amazon.com/review/R2EVDSEI0Z9UH2/ref=cm_cr_pr_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0933900090&linkCode=&nodeID=&tag=