Leaderboard

For those who were told by a certain leader that they should follow him blindly: Facebook

Classic John Lodge tune.

He was so much more than just a singer in a rock and roll band.

I was at work and saw an acronym M&A and immediately went to mark and avoid in my head?!? What? It’s been around twenty years since our freedom into the wide open spaces of God’s grace free of performance and the constant pressure of measuring up. Why did my brain translate a hospital news article as mark and avoid? Also why do I still refer to the Way as “the ministry?” I catch myself doing that still and it frustrates me. So many really good ministries genuinely meeting people’s needs and teaching the God’s Word are out here-TWI doesn’t have a monopoly.

I beg to differ WordWolf, Buffalo Springfield was a huge band. Still is. Stephen Stills and Neil Young are a big a part of rock history, first as CSNY, and second as solo artists. Stills alone stands as one of the most talented musicians in rock and roll. Neil Young goes without saying. I know I'm a big fan. Which two songs George? Maybe you might remember this one WordWolf.

You guys know he wasn't really a Dr., right?

I haven't called Vic Wierwille "Doctor" in decades. I still hear it a lot, though. George

I'll put some up soon.

Meh. I still call it "the ministry" out of habit. I never stop to consider the semantic implications. I'm sure there are lots of other non-cult words and phrases in our vocabularies that we never stop to analyse in-depth. I still call bandages "Band Aids" without much thought. I just don't worry about.

Someone should really tell her.

There's always next year.

Wait so I wasn't one of 4,000 WOWs for the 40th anniversary?

And now Imelda. Also predicted to veer northeast and away from the continental US: George

Welcome, Edgar. Nice you've decided to join us instead of just peeking round the door! You are very welcome here, and you may find some genuine "release from your prisons" that were built by the iron strictures of TWI. Neurodivergent? Good, you bring a different viewpoint. We're all ready to hear, discuss, consider. Have a cup of coffee while you're pondering what to think.

thanks i hadn't thought about that until recently. it doesn't bother me but jeez. not a healthful learning environment for sure

That never sat well with me. Even on the face of it, it seemed like nonsense. So I ignored his "interpretation" completely.

That was an interesting clip. What it doesn't discuss is the different regional accents that might also have come into play. Shakespeare was a Midlands man - probably, dropped "H"s and dropped "U"s, and generally a different accent from what there is in "received pronunciation." Also, as a Midlander, he may well have used words that were dialect words common to the local area but not nationally; or used words in a different way from "national" used. His vocab might also have included more "northern" words not necessarily known in provincial London. Why is that relevant to this thread? Because there is actually no telling how words might have been used in different parts of the Roman or Christian eras. Was the way a word was used and understood in Ephesus or Corinth the same as how that same word might have been understood at the same time period in Jerusalem, Rome, Crete, etc. Similar, maybe, Same, maybe, maybe not. What were the customs of the time, too? So what could that verse, that word, be referring to that might not be so obvious? Americans use some words right now that are different from how the same words are used in British English. And Brits use some words differently from how many Americans might use them. Sometimes they even mean something offensive in the "other" use of the language (what some, perhaps not all, Americans do to tighten a spanner is an offensive word meaning masturbation in British English and thus a big insult to hurl at someone). You cannot possibly read a Bible verse and tie a whole theology to it. That really is "private interpretation." You have to read in context with other verses relating to the same subject. If you're more widely read, see what commentators have to say (and why). If you're even more widely read, you might have studied ancient languages and you're smart enough to see how ancient Syrian, ancient Aramaic etc changed. None of us here have laid claim to that level of education or study.

P.S. Some of the women victims of VPW's sexual abuse spoke out in Karl Kahler's book, still availalbe to purchase at The Cult That Snapped.

My most immediate concern is the outsourcing of one's thinking- to AI, or to mindlessly swallowing and regurgitating everything from a single source, whether online or offline. The idea of opening a "discussion" -on a subject where I'm concerned people aren't doing their own thinking and discussing- with a link for a video to watch strikes me as...well, a little ironic. In another context, I'd complain about someone who insisted he was right- and "explained himself" by posting a link and essentially assigning homework for anyone who wanted to know why they should take him seriously. (No, not now, but it's happened before on the GSC.) I remember "discussions" and I'm a little surprised that we've gotten a number of "discussions" where the "discussion" started with "read this book" or "watch this video" and not actually DISCUSSING anything. I'm a little dismayed that people think this is perfectly fine.

Their being nice folks, to me, is beside the point. I'll bet they really are very nice, just as many people were when I was involved back the day. I hope and think I was "nice" too but I was totally misled, deceived, and gaslighted by VPW regarding himself, the Bible, and his organization. So in my opinion, being nice does not mean the BOT folks are not misled or worse, that they are not in denial of facts that would make most nice people shudder. In Whiteside's book they are reprinting, if you are clear-eyed when reading it, you can't miss VPW's narcissism, his conman fast-talk, etc. But I suppose when you're still loyal to the image he wanted people to buy into, you can't be so clear-eyed. I sure bought into what's in that book when it was first published in 1971 when I was in the Corps. The questions that come to mind for the current BOT are many, but here are just two: 1. How do they explain why VPW was a great man of God, appointed by God (as Way leaders still assert) given the many women he abused, for example? I realize there is only one woman who put that in writing, in a book called Losing The Way (which is out of print now) but I assure you I personally know the names of many women who were in his sex ring, but they told me in confidence, so I am not at liberty to say their names here. Some have come out on social media, I think. 2. How do they explain why they sell VPW's plagirized materials as if those books and teachings originated with him? For instance the holy spirit book he copied almost word for word from J. E. Stiles book on that subject, as well as the book How to Enjoy the Bible by Bullinger. (These facts have been shown over and over from many sources. One good source besides my own book, Undertow, is John Juedes on YouTube for instance this video about the four crucified with Christ teaching that VPW took from Bullinger. The number four is arrived at by a fundamentalist approach to the Bible, a way of harmonizing the gospels that ignores the facts about each gospel's purpose, historical background and the men who wrote each one. For what it's worth, here you go:

Thanks. Prostate cancer is one of the most curable, so the odds are on my side. George

Pro-choice? Hardly. It was never about a choice. Pro-abortion is a more mathematically accurate and scientifically precise description. Abortion was merely a rational and practical method deployed to mitigate risk of reputational and financial loss.

Good point. The thought keeps coming to me that if TWI ever were big, really big; no doubt it would encourage all members to pursue government action. Perhaps not directly, but individually. After all, what zealous religion who thinks it has the true word wouldn't?