Jump to content

Talk:Miracle of Love

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Old comments

[edit]

I suggest we undo latest revision by TheRingess on 26/11/2007. Those links are not link spam. They provide non-overlapping detailed information about the organization, its events, and its founder. Why were they removed? I refer to

Dl333 (talk) 16:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism section was moved into the main article on 19 March 2009. Criticism template suggests it should be integrated. Current criticism section is very vague, has no references, and is mostly a repeat of the content contained above. I suggest it be removed. Does anyone have a counter argument? Dl333 (talk) 03:59, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Compare other entries for religious groups, Opus Dei and Heaven's Gate, both have a deep, critical thread. The MOLL page disallows any critical remarks and edits them out, along with links that verify these criticisms.Grace Wins (talk) 18:18, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no universal requirement in Wikipedia that articles have a criticism section. Well referenced criticisms along with well referenced praise should be included throughout the article in appropriate sections. If we can't balance criticism with praise, then we can't achieve neutrality, better to reduce the article to include only material that is neither. I've gone ahead and reduced much of the material since a lot of it seemed to be unreferenced.TheRingess (talk) 23:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that clarification. Rick Ross's site, Sarno's guru ratings, and a site put up by "the lady" herself as homage to Kalindi can all be referenced and show that this person is clearly an affiliate. Also multiple mentions in docs posted by former members on two or three websites they post and maintain. None of these links lasts long on the mol page. A suggestion that a separate expose page for wiki users might be helpful. Have learned that Scientology site is also under control of the group and therefore, is not a true shared knowledge resource. Lovely debate, all. Thanks for helping me learn the ways of wikipedia.Grace Wins (talk) 17:33, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References are provided, one of these links directly to another Wikipedia page. The mysterious nature of the group is easily disambiguated with minor research, which has been posted on this page five times, each posting was deleted, with justification for these deletions nothing more than empty prose such as that written by the previous interlocutor, who attempts to justify our efforts to disambiguate the information surrounding the history and practices of the MOLL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grace Wins (talk • contribs) 17:35, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The current article doesn't have criticism at all it reads like an advertisement. The Dutch article describes Miracle of Love as a cult, it was the subject of a TV investigation in the Netherlands about 10 years ago.[1] Someone Not Awful (talk) 13:14, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a site with criticism about MoL. Someone Not Awful (talk) 13:22, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There has recently been persistent attempts by user Grace Wins to associate the Miracle of Love co-founder known as The Lady (formerly Lady Gayle or Gayle) with Nancy Rose Meeker/Nancy Exeter of the Emissaries of Divine Light. A little research will show this is not possible - Miracle of Love was founded in 1987 in California (it only recently moved its headquarters to Denver), while there are no references anywhere to Meeker/Exeter leaving the Emissaries (based in Loveland Colorado) before 1992 (including the reference that Grace Wins added). There is no evidence for a connection between the 2 organizations cited by any reliable source. See http://www.thepeerage.com/p8551.htm for more reliable information on Meeker/Exeter. Dl333 (talk) 05:01, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


There is a lot of information about this group that has been routinely edited by self-promoting mol members who watch this page. There are over 300 former mol members organized in a suport group, but this fact has been repeatedly suppressed. There was a presentation given at the International Association for Cultic Studies, in Brussels in 2007, describing the various practices of this group, which matches the criteria for a destructive cult. Again, the link has been deleted. Several interested parties have repeatedly tried to add this information. In reference to above discussions of "the lady" - if this is to be a neutral and accurate resource, then why is the identity of this person so controversial? We would very much like to post evidence establishing her identity, but have been unable to post edits without immediate revision. There are over 300 former members who are organized and want to provide a true shared resource via this pageBalancePlus (talk) 13:15, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think her identity is controversial. The identity that User:Grace Wins tried to conflate with The Lady was clearly false, as proven both by her own reference and by neutral third party references. I don't see how removing information that is clearly false can be considered at all controversial or biased. Also if you look at the edit history of this page you will see that User:TheRingess, who makes most of the edits to this page, is not a member of MOL - she routinely makes edits which go in both directions (i.e. she maintains neutrality) - she has no skin in the game. She is also an editor of a large number of wiki pages (contributions). I'll admit I am pro-MOL, but if you look at my edit history you will see I am also trying to maintain neutrality, I am just working against the hatred that others are trying to bring against MOL. I am confident that if you asked established wiki editors to review our contributions, they would say that I am mostly neutral while users such as Grace Wins are not. Nothing is being suppressed here except for the desire of some individuals to use this page as a soap-box against MOL. Dl333 (talk) 21:56, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the identity of co-founder of this group, Nancy Meeker, nee Exeter, is not controversial, then why are all supporting links deleted? Also, a significant number of former MOL members would very much like to link substantiating sites, but cannot. There is a yahoo group with over 300 members, purpose - to support those whose lives have been damaged by mol, a cult that meets all the criteria for a destructive cult. BTW, who are the neutral third party references you mention? And wiki editors have been invited to review. Site has been NfD since January, 2010.Grace Wins (talk) 04:23, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nancy Meeker/Exeter has nothing to do with Miracle of Love. The link you included proved that. That is why it was removed. Did you even read the article you referenced? The article you referenced indicated she left the Emissaries after 1992. MOL was founded in 1987. Why do you think that Meeker has anything to do with MOL? It simply isn't true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dl333 (talk • contribs) 05:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since you know a great deal about the history of the organization, why don't you add that information to your page? I did read your link. Among those who adopt names/titles, it is common to take on identities from lines of nobility. The date you claim as the startup date should be referenced. Can you add historical information with citations? Thanks for trying to tell the truth, but why is the mol so afraid of citing what former members have posted on numerous websites?67.142.161.23 (talk) 13:51, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I was never an mol member, but they did attempt to recruit me. Even from the outside, it was evident that the mol is a destructive personality cult. My interest is in providing information so that spiritual seekers can make good decisions about where to donate their money.67.142.161.23 (talk) 13:51, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say I know a great deal about the history. The start-up date of MOL is not generally undisputed even by the anti-MOL crowd, no one has attempted to change it in the entire history of the wiki page as far as I can tell. The first edition of "Breaking the Cycle of Birth and Death" was published in 1991 and the subtitle of that book is "Manuscript Excerpts 1987 - 1990". The preface of that book (and many books published by MOL) has the story of Gourasana entering David's body in 1987 and the founding of MOL. These, and other MOL books, are available on Amazon.com. That is pretty solid evidence, and not a carefully guarded secret. As far as "common to take on identities from lines of nobility", note that no one in MOL is making that claim - it is the anti-MOL crowd that is trying to conflate the identity of The Lady with someone of British nobility. I keep removing that claim, not because I am trying to suppress anything, just because it is false. I don't know what you think we are afraid of this. Simply trying to speak the truth does not indicate you are afraid of the lies. Wikipedia is a place for facts, not rumors or opinions, and the facts are very well documented in this case (and that fact that you keep repeating something that has been proven false makes everything else you say less believable).
As far as being a "destructive cult," what is the basis of that? Looking at the anti-MOL websites out there, I can tell you that many of the sited cult behaviors simply do not occur in the group, in fact some of them are the exact opposite of MOL teachings. The "destructive cult" label is used by organizations like Rick Ross, Factnet, and IACS to label just about every "new religious movement". They simply oppose everything outside of Judeo-Christianity and think it is evil so it all gets called "destructive cults". The word is abused to the point of meaninglessness.
As far as the yahoo group, that is a private group so there is no way to verify its membership or content. Siting it as a wiki reference is worthless since it has no publicly accessible information. Saying it as over 300 former MOL members is almost certainly a lie. The yahoo group has over 300 participants, but most are likely people who have not participated in MOL but rather people who joined out of curiosity or because they had family members in MOL and wanted to know more. Most may not even be active in the group (you can stop the group emails without removing yourself from the group, so people may not bother). You can see how much traffic the group has, it seems more like a group with 3 members than a group with 300. Dl333 (talk) 14:39, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An appropriate link to read is WP:OR. Since the MOL website does not mention this person, then mentioning this person as a member of this group seems at best original research, and at worst potentially libelous. If there is a third party reliable source (see WP:RS) that establishes the relationship between this person and MOL, then we can use that. Yahoo groups are not reliable sources.TheRingess (talk) 15:55, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gourasana Meditation Practice

[edit]

One of the citations is "The Gourasana Meditation Practice by Gourasana (1995)". I'm having trouble figuring out exactly what that is. Amazon lists a set of audio tapes by that name,[2] which apparently includes an introductory booklet. Is that what we're citing? It'd be helpful to pin that down. Also, the article depends too much on self-published materials. Those are fine within limits, but the article should be based mainly on secondary sources.   Will Beback  talk  00:46, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The amazon.com reference to "The Gourasana Meditation Practice by Gourasana (1995)" is probably the correct one, it is a book (with accompanying audio tapes) but is out of print. The other book ("Breaking the Cycle of Birth & Death") is still in print in 4th edition. The article does depend a lot on self-published material but unfortunately there is not a lot else - there are a few independent positive testimonials and lots of negative blogs from people who sound like they have an ax to grind, plus the anti-cult sites and some opinion-oriented news articles. There is no independent academic research - it seems like when covering a group like Miracle of Love the article should cover the basic beliefs and teachings of the group, and in this case the self-published material is the best source.
A few points on other recent edits: Kalindi passed away in Hawaii, not Denver - the memorial was held in Denver because that is where the largest portion of the Miracle of Love congregation lives. Is cause of death relevant for the article? I'm not sure how relevant the trademark app is, and Church of Exodus is a really old name, I am pretty sure they were already referring to themselves as Miracle of Love in 1997 even if that was not the legal name, the other name was never really used much. Dl333 (talk) 04:08, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is no page on Amazon for "The Gourasana Meditation Practice by Gourasana (1995)" per se, they have one for "The Gourasana Meditation Practice Tapes (Miracle of Love)". Are you the person who added it? If so, can you give more details about the exact title as it appears on the cover? If not, then we still need to pin down the actual title of the work.
The best sources of a religious group's beliefs aren't necessarily the group's own publications intended for public consumption. There is scant information available in sources for this group. As far as old names go, it's all part of history. I agree that the cause of death of a founder isn't obviously important, unless someone makes some connection. Is there any source for the place of death being Hawaii?   Will Beback  talk  06:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not the one who added it. I don't have more details Dl333 (talk) 17:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pacific Sun

[edit]

Pacific Sun (newspaper) is a venerable publication which has received a number of awards. I see that an article publsihed there about this subject, "Miracle of Love" March 17, 2006 by Jill Kramer, has been linked to occasionally from this article. Is there any objection to using it as a source for the article? Are there better independent sources we should use instead?   Will Beback  talk  09:00, 1 March 2011 (UTC) http://www.pacificsun.com/story_archives/love_cult.html[reply]

I don't think that is a good source, it is a slanted article (please read it through from a neutral perspective and see if you agree - and look at the style of the accompanying drawing too) - most of the information on the groups beliefs and practices come from interviews with disgruntled ex-members and have little to do with the truth. There is speculation from "cult experts" who never studied MOL. I don't know about the accuracy of the quoted transcript but I do know the 2 people referenced in it are still married and together. The case of financial fraud mentioned in the article was actually perpetrated by an ex-member - I never met him, he left years before the article was written, and the way it was presented in the article would indicate the reported didn't really do her research. Dl333 (talk) 17:37, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
None of those are reasons to exclude it as a source. It's from an established publisher and you haven't pointed out any huge errors. Sources don't need to be neutral, just our summary of their contents. I'll take a closer read of the article and begin adding material from it.
Is there a source of equal or greater quality that features a less critical point of view? If so that'd help. There are so few independent sources available.   Will Beback  talk  21:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chronology

[edit]
  • The Miracle of Love was started in 1987 by David Swanson, his wife Carole Seidman (who took the name Kalindi) and The Lady, and several other "seekers". After David Swanson's death, Carol Siedman headed the group until her death. [2] This is when the benevolent Being Gourasana entered David Swanson's body as "an Incarnation of God manifesting on Earth".[1]

The chronology appears to have gotten confused. Did Gourasana enter David Swanson's body after his death and the death of Carol, or in 1987?   Will Beback  talk  23:17, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's just a bad edit. Gourasana gradually entered into David Swanson's body 1987 and died on March 24, 1995 (reference: Breaking the Cycle of Birth & Death). Carole Seidman was his first disciple and Gourasana gave her the name Kalindi early on. As far as the Miracle of Love organization goes, Kalindi was really running it from the beginning (before 1995) and leading their seminars. Gourasana was the spiritual force behind it, brought in spiritual teachings and taught his disciples, but was not so involved in leading the organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dl333 (talk • contribs) 17:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Miracle of Love. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:02, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Miracle_of_Love&oldid=1204021208"