Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe
  • Announcements

    • GT

      Log in changes   08/07/2016

      With the upgrade there is no longer separate login ids and display names.  Your login ID is now your display name.
MRAP

John Lynn leaves STF

Recommended Posts

MRAP    18

Dan Gallagher. just informed me via email from STF that John Lynn is no longer with STF (Dan G. and I are not old aquantenances), this was because I was asking a question and the information was inadvertant. I responded back asking for some details - anyone out there know anything else. And by the way, I hope this has nothing to do with John A. Lynns' health.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tzaia    76

He has been gone nearly 10 years. Started his own thing...again. He's dealing with health issues. Much, if not all of it is documented here in this sub forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tzaia    76

FYI - he did not leave willingly. He was fired. He was put on administrative leave at least twice for getting out of line. When someone writes a paper on the sin of fornication and adultery, which apparently was news to TWI, the leadership of the offshoot needs to uphold that standard. JAL had issues in that area. Then there was the whole personal prophecy thing where the leadership did a number on his wife. Totally trashed her in the name of god. They divorced. The soap opera became more intense. Huge family rift. He ended up getting back with her causing a rift at STF. So sometime in the summer of 2005, STF decided to cut all ties with JAL.

I always felt there was an inordinate intrusion into people's personal lives at all levels in TWI. That behavior continued in leadership within CES/STF(I).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MRAP    18

I received a response from both Dan Gallagher and John Schoenheit. I was informed that John Lynn left (STF) in 2010 to start his own ministry (TLTF). I was of the impression that STF & TLTF were the same, just different arms (research and teaching); that's not the case. I came about this realizaton after emailing Dan Gallagher regarding a question on the "Know Your Enemy" and stipulated it was noted on a lead article on the Fruit of D'Vine newsletter: Dan told me that John Lynn was no longer with them and that they (STF) have nothing to do with the Fruit of D'Vine. I had concerns about some sort of termoil (that may affect the research on the REV)and John Lynn's health - both are intact. Tzaia, I had read the stuff on the CES prophecy issue, thanks for commenting. It's that read on CES that was probably in the back of my mind when I posted on the doctinal forum about the prophecy of Caiaphas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GarthP2000    303

In other more earthly terms, they f***ed up. ... In the Name of the Lord, that is.

Gawd, I miss Indiana, -- NOT!

:evilshades:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MRAP    18

Tzaia and GarthP2000, you left me hanging there. What more do I need to know because I have an interest in the REV research being done by STF and enjoy reading the Fruit of D'Vine newsleter by TLTF and some of their (TLTF's) other information; at least now I have those two entities straightended out - yeh, I teed that one up. The both of those two groups have provided for some of my spiritual interests but since I have been burned before (TWI), I have a logical weariness.

I have an honest appreciation for the GSC site as I am sure that all the (TWI) splinter groups monitor the site and that might help them to be more honest with their followers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WordWolf    371

I'm not sure what you, personally, would feel you need to know.

This entire subforum includes a lot about the entire tableau.

Personally, I'd start by reviewing either the Momentus or Personal Prophecy

fiascoes- both what happened, and, just as important- how they were

dealt with.

Momentus was a pop program, of dubious quality and shady practices-

to which CES' leaders became hardcore-committed.

They adopted its jargon, pushed for applications and attendance,

and set up a tiered ministry where those who refused to enroll

were seen as lesser members and suspect

(suspect of what, I don't know, probably a lack of commitment),

and where questioning the program at all was responded to in a

hostile fashion. That continued until Momentus blew up in their

faces. In private, JAL and others continued to advertise the thing

years later. (For all I know, they may still advertise it secretly.)

Personal Prophecy was the license for someone to come up, decide

something about you, announce it, announce it was from God providing

they made it sound like a dream, prophecy or prediction like Harry

Potter's Divination teacher, and expect you to go along.

To question any of that was announced to be questioning GOD ALMIGHTY

and not simply a practice of an organization.

Of course, when JAL started questioning it, that was a whole other thing

entirely. JAl went from "thou shalt never question it" to

"I began questioning it and a significant portion was error" in one

step, and continued to insult the people who warned him about it for

years because they questioned it AND his judgement.

On one thread, we demonstrated Personal Prophecy, so don't think their

practice was anything to be revered or even taken seriously. I enjoyed

the thread and am quite proud to have participated in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MRAP    18

Appreciate your input WordWolf - I asked. From reading the past sub-forums, think I got a small but accurate feel about what Momentus is about (saw some of the same tactics in Army Officer training and how we were then told those tactics never worked out in the end - you can't really order anyone to do anything if they don't first trust you - otherwise, you just get fragged). My intent, at this time, is to keep distance until I have a feeling of trust. At this time, I find the STF's REV provides some insight (I take it all with some reservation but have no reason to dispute it as wrong) and as far as JAL's news letters, theyr'e inspirational. As far as jumping booth feet into either of the STF or TLTF, like I said, been burned once (well twice if you count the Lutheran Church but there I did see both villanous pastors and actual caring pastors). I appreciate your concern for someone not making the same mistake twice and that is good advice. Kinda like love (maybe), you don't give up cause the 1st experience turned out bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tzaia    76

Have you considered the bible, i.e. religion itself is the problem? All these efforts to decode the book; get it right; live it right; drive people to do some pretty fracked up stuff to other people - and themselves.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MRAP    18

Tzaia, sure, religion is a problem quite often but as far as the Bible (all the texts) itself, never considered it to be a problem, only problem is working with what we have - getting past theological and philisophical transcription of it through the last two millenium. If seedy folks want to utilize the Bible for nefarious means then they have sealed their future. The efforts, as I see them, is in fact decoding the book, I don't take that as a dis on folks who are trying to give a best version of what it originally said. Yes, live right. No, it's wrong to use the written word to manipulate people,especially when you do so for personal gain and even more so when not caring what those actions do to screw up the lives of other people. As you know Tzaia, $ & Sex but you don't take it by misleading folks.

It's unboubtedly easier to live the life of the world than live the life laid out in the Bible.

I decided a long time ago not to let the TWI experience to quell my love of God or what he gave, via revelation, to the original writers of His word. I applaud true efforts to get it straight.

It's really easy to give into emotion, especially anger and then let it pollute the rest of you against what you hold most dear - not happening here.

Thanks again for posing the questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tzaia    76

Tzaia, sure, religion is a problem quite often but as far as the Bible (all the texts) itself, never considered it to be a problem, only problem is working with what we have - getting past theological and philisophical transcription of it through the last two millenium.

I used to feel the same way. Now I don't. Now I see *it* as the problem.

If seedy folks want to utilize the Bible for nefarious means then they have sealed their future. The efforts, as I see them, is in fact decoding the book, I don't take that as a dis on folks who are trying to give a best version of what it originally said. Yes, live right. No, it's wrong to use the written word to manipulate people,especially when you do so for personal gain and even more so when not caring what those actions do to screw up the lives of other people. As you know Tzaia, $ & Sex but you don't take it by misleading folks.

I used to think that people disappoint people and that god doesn't do that because he's not people. I don't think that anymore. I'm pretty equal opportunity.

It's unboubtedly easier to live the life of the world than live the life laid out in the Bible.

I would say that's it's impossible to live out the life laid out in the bible. And now I'm leaning towards not particularly desirable.

I decided a long time ago not to let the TWI experience to quell my love of God or what he gave, via revelation, to the original writers of His word. I applaud true efforts to get it straight.

I used to applaud effort. Now I don't because I find very few are in the "true effort" category. Actually, statistically insignificant.

It's really easy to give into emotion, especially anger and then let it pollute the rest of you against what you hold most dear - not happening here.

Most of the time I don't really care enough to get emotional.

But to get back to the point - I like JAL. I knew (and cared deeply for) his parents, siblings, both wives, child. He's grown a lot in the past few years. I knew JWS and liked him at one time; spent a lot of time with hiim. He has his head so far up his butt and DG's butt.... Have no use for DG. He's manipulative and dishonest. JWS has no special insight into the bible.He believes he does, which makes him subject to bias and all kinds of things. He is being honest about this: that he has done the translation to fit with his theology. I had issues with that. I no longer care; it's simply another rabbit hole You do care. I still think it's nothing more than a rabbit hole.

Thanks again for posing the questions.

You are welcome.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MRAP    18

Tzaia, when you initialize JWS, I am assumming that is John Schoenheit, correct? I suppose that I could go back through the forum topics to understand all that you mean but is there anything, specifically, that you find wrong with JWS's REV?

It's difficult to wade through things here on GSC since I realize there is alot of personal bias from past experiences. You did help with some stipulation. So, is "working the word" now a bad thing since the taint of TWI.

What' the process for singling out specific portions of a previous post and to respond to them: is it a simple cut and paste?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmiller    78

Posted 23 March 2015 - 03:28 AM

Posted 23 March 2015 - 03:28 AM

Dan Gallagher. just informed me via email from STF that John Lynn is no longer with STF (Dan G. and I are not old aquantenances), this was because I was asking a question and the information was inadvertant. I responded back asking for some details - anyone out there know anything else. And by the way, I hope this has nothing to do with John A. Lynns' health.

You must've been "out of the loop for a while, eh? I've got letters from DG/ JAL/ MG/ JS/

(and a couple of others from "headquarters" there) dated from way back in 2005 about their "problems".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WordWolf    371

(snip)

What' the process for singling out specific portions of a previous post and to respond to them: is it a simple cut and paste?

That would work. I prefer my method, which, I suspect, is more common.

When you're logged in, and if a thread isn't locked, all posts have a little link at the end

marked "Reply."

So, I log in, scroll to the post, then click "Reply" IN THE POST.

(Not "add reply" in a little box underneath the thread-that's for replying to

the thread without a quote.)

What happens then is that a new post opens, with the entire post I replied to

in it, with a header at the top and bottom that provide a link to the original post,

and who posted it, when, and so on.

Then I pick what I wanted to quote and respond to. Everything else, I delete, carefully.

I put "(snip)" wherever I did a cut (before or after) to announce it was part of the

whole post. For the full post, anyone can click on the link in the header to read the

entire thing. (So, I'm being honest and open about it.)

If I want to reply to different things, I type in the word "quote" before and after

each section, in brackets, with a "/"in front of the one closing it.

So, I type /quote when closing a quote, in these brackets- [ ]

If I have a matching header of quote in brackets higher up,

then everything between the two gets enclosed in the quote heading.

If it seems like work, it gets a lot easier after it's done a few times,

and, so long as you don't put a large amount of headers in a single post,

it works fine.

It also is the best way to be fully honest when quoting, since people can

click to what you're quoting, and you separate what you quote from your

own response. (At least one poster cronically refuses to do that when

debating, and I find it objectionable on several levels, since it's obvious

it's deliberate after over a decade of practice.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tzaia    76

Tzaia, when you initialize JWS, I am assumming that is John Schoenheit, correct? I suppose that I could go back through the forum topics to understand all that you mean but is there anything, specifically, that you find wrong with JWS's REV?

My objection to JWS's REV is that it is his; written to support his doctrine; essentially a vanity book. That is just my opinion.

It's difficult to wade through things here on GSC since I realize there is alot of personal bias from past experiences. You did help with some stipulation. So, is "working the word" now a bad thing since the taint of TWI.

Nope. I just think it's a waste of time, or a distraction, or a stumbling block. Take your pick.

What' the process for singling out specific portions of a previous post and to respond to them: is it a simple cut and paste?

There's a little balloon icon in the format bar above - next to the envelope to the right - click it where you want to quote text, then copy/paste the text between the ["quote"] ["/quote"](leave out the " marks)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow    77

If I may offer a slightly different take, I have no problem with "working the word" although I cringe at that particular term. But I have a problem with JS's translation. Admittedly I haven't read "The Rev" nor do I plan to. I don't have to read it to know it's fallacious. Perhaps that sounds arrogant but I don't think so (by the way, for some reason we've been asked to not type in people's full names. I forget why. Something to do with Internet searches).

Do you think JS submitted a rough draft to a committee of scholars who understand ancient Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic as well or better than he does? I doubt it. There are two reasons why he would not do that. Either he knew his findings would be rejected, or he is so arrogant that he thinks he has insights on biblical texts that surpass everyone else. I personally suspect the latter. The REV, therefore, is born out of one's ego and betrays an elitist mentality and as such is a waste of time and effort and should be ignored.

Edited by Broken Arrow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tzaia    76

Actually, what little I've read fits current STF theology well. I do not know if or how he managed to work the benefits Momentus or personal prophecy into it, or any of the other off the wall things they've managed to latch on to over the years. I just know that for me the need to have special knowledge diminished, and not caring has been a relief.

I do not miss the drama.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twinky    359

"Work the Word" ... does anybody outside TWI use this expression? I'm sure if I used that expression in any of the Christian groups I'm associated with, other people would look at me strangely. "Read" the Word (or the Bible) - "study" the Word (or the Bible) - maybe, at a pinch, even "research" it. But ... "Work the Word"??

What does that mean, anyway? Wouldn't it mean "working out" what it meant/said and then doing it?

Does it mean ... working signs, miracles and wonders? (But these don't necessarily come to order).

I'm jolly sure Bible study means more than pretending to find out dubious meanings for ancient Greek or Hebrew words (especially when you don't know any Greek or Hebrew) and then building a philosophy upon those meanings.

That seems more like "procrastinating the word" than "working" it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
waysider    655

Working The Word:

A methodology for studying the Bible that involves examining it for minutia and nuances that may or may not have been lost, added or misunderstood in the ongoing process of translation, with a view toward incorporating said findings into one's value system and personal behavior.

Source: Just pulled that out of my butt. :anim-smile:/>

Edited by waysider
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MRAP    18

Thanks for the info WordWolf. I will give it a try on something realy old and that's fairly short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Raf    223

Working the word consists of getting it to say what it must say no matter what it does say.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×