Leaderboard

As top-tier corps/clergy (cough, cough) splinter from twi.......soon thereafter, some of wierwille's hard-core men desire to subjugate others with new, ongoing teachings, classes and weekends that you just can't miss [and the wheels on the bus go 'round and 'round]. In the immortal words of The Church Lady from Saturday Night Live................"How Conveeenient." Subjugate --- 1. to bring under control or subjection; conquer 2. to cause to become subservient; subdue Looking back at wierwille's ministry and corps program........I believe that subjugating was the core of the corps program. Wierwille did NOT design a "leadership program." THAT was all a deceptive tactic. Wierwille designed a FOLLOWship program wherein the youth were subjugated to his control.......and corps women were subjugated to his sexual predation!! He sat back and picked his prey. He targeted the innocent and vulnerable into his classes and programs. Isolation. Immersion. Intimidation. Indoctrination. Idolization. Classes can have profit........or........classes can be steppingstones to indoctrination. Already, we see that Rico has a foundational, intermediate and advanced class/course to offer. THEN.......how about a special weekend in Montana? Enjoy some hiking, fishing, kick-back relaxing and all. Is this good? Or, is this to get you to drop your guard.........and start the CULT PROGRAMMING all over again? HOW does this happen AGAIN? HOW does someone throw off the shackles of twi's hypocrisy and absolute power over the individual.......THEN, fall again into a splinter group that runs classes, demands tithing and claim that they are, indeed, the ones to follow? It nearly baffles the mind to see how some are so easily persuaded against their own will and better judgment to repeat the same cycle. Especially those who follow those corps "leaders" who are ADAMANT that wierwille was "the man of God" who walked by revelation. And, most notably.......those who pattern the SAME pyramid organization from afar, the SAME class structure, the SAME clichés and the SAME approach that "humble yourselves and our classes will answer your questions." Screw that !!! I believe that Taxidev had it right when he stated in Splinter Cults are WORSE: Are you someone who prefers to be led? Are you someone who prefers the life of those institutionalized?

Once again, brother, you have nailed it. How does this happen again? That's the ultimate underlying issue. One way to look at possible answers to it is in this book. WHY we fall for it EVERY time... until we choose not to be conned, which goes directly to whether we prefer to be led. Another author, journalist Gail Sheehy published a book, 38-years ago, on finding one's own way, Pathfinders. Might be a good book for those tired of being led by wolves in sheep's clothing. Sheehy wrote a number of other books on subjects that can shed helpful insight. But what she doesn't do and hasn't done, is develop a series of classes that one must take to secure HER (the author's) living. None of the insights from either Sheehy or Konnikova relieve the very real human need for belonging. The con artists Skyrider exquisitely described above grab hold of that human need and try to sell themselves as the answer to that need. But if a person finds her/his own path, (s)he can also find others who share interests in the same or similar paths. That can make for a more fulfilling (self-actualizing) inner AND social life with great meaning. Anyway, thanks Skyrider for your salient post.

Well, couple things off the bat, and I'm sure others will chime in.... First point - The issue of God's sovereignty - some people want to believe that if some of us aren't getting condemned to hell forever then some of us are "getting off the hook".....that a righteous God will serve up justice to those who disobey him and the penalty needs to be eternal punishment of some sort. Needless to say whether it's eternal burning or getting pitchforked forever or maybe just having to hang out with Hitler and some of those nasty assed Popes, it's not something anyone will like. Conversely they believe True Justice will be served when God extends magnanimous gestures of grace and mercy to some of us, no matter how bumbling, incompetent, selfish and inept we really were and waves us through to an eternity of fun with the Son because - I dunno - He "Likes Us", maybe, for whatever reasons....? The assumption is that those who believe this will be most likely to get the pass, of course. The scariest version of this is hard core Calvinist theology, salvation by grace, not works, and that God by His own will chooses who will and won't "be saved". One of the weirder splinter teachers of Christian Reformed Calvinist theology was "Harold Camping" who taught what they call hyper Calvinism with a twist of his own to it - he made the news for awhile because he was predicting the return of Christ from the Bible's "data". More than once. I loved to listen to his call in radio show at night when I'd be on long drives. He was down right creepy, but it kept me awake. : ) That hyper Calvinism also covers the section in Ephesians where it talks about "predestination" - in that Calvinist view that means that God predestines and decides everything - who believes, who doesn't, what happens and when, etc. Everything that happens must happen that way because God is "in charge". So if God doesn't want some of us to believe in Him, we're not going to. Some of us will "go to hell" forever, because that's what He wants. "The Elect" and those He chooses, those "sheep" He gives to His Son the Shepherd, will be saved. Others, won't be, by God's determination. These beliefs were codified by some churches in response to theology like Bell's proposing so that they could shut the door tight on any possibilities that might include those who might get or even deserve "a second chance" or perhaps never had even heard of Jesus Christ. Figure - if God wants them, they're gettin' in, regardless. And If I understand it correctly this drills deeper into that predestination plan of God's where He already knows who would believe or not BECAUSE HE MAKES THEM THAT WAY. BUT - This "administration of grace", of the church of Christ of both Gentile and Jew reflects an inclusion of PEOPLE THAT WEREN'T INCLUDED BEFORE CHRIST. So really, the very existence of this time period reflects God's desire for the world to be drawn to Him in ways PREVIOUSLY NOT UNDERSTOOD but now in movement as an entire world hears a message that the Jews didn't believe was directly for anyone but themselves.....ironic in a way. So, this is kind of chatty I know, but I don't want to presume to try to teach a history of theology here - there's a lot of things this doesn't cover, but I as far as I've studied, the real core, real platform, real foundation of disagreement on any of Bell's premise(s) is the question of heaven or hell, but under it all it's the belief that Bell's position questions and demeans God's Ultimate Authority. And by association, their authority. Cause there's a LOT OF POWER in having the one clear voice of God's will. Lot of power. Hell, you can even demand people pay you to hear it. - My take on it is that if God has given us the ability to choose - and He clearly has from Day One of man's relationship with Him - then it reflects His sovereign will to use it. Remember the "first and great commandment" is "love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. " If I don't insert my own logic into that statement then I have to assume that God's logic is clear - He's telling me what He wants me to do, so that I can do that. It's not of concern to me whether or not I am even able to do it or not - if I hear that I have to assume that I should choose to do that, to obey that commandment and my next concern is "how". It's important to see that Jesus never taught people that came to Him to hear him and be helped by Him that they couldn't be helped. He never said "No, my Father has said I can't heal you", or "Sorry, you can't have any of the bread or fish, you're not included in this, my Father doesn't want you". He did reject those who rejected Him, who sought to kill him, He did reprove those who taught error and led people astray and who sought their own good and not the good of God and His people. Not many were turned away who came to Him seeking help - there was the one guy who asked Him to help settle a family inheritance issue, and he told the guy he wasn't a judge of those affairs over him (there were others who could do that).....There were some people who turned away from Him after one particular teaching, but it doesn't said He sent them away, it says they left. Another person He told to see all he had and give it away and that person didn't want to do that so they left. But Jesus never looked a person in the eye who was asking Him and who wanted to follow Him and said "Beat it, my Father tells me He didn't plan for you to believe". People say that today, but I don't see that Jesus took that route. God's "sovereignty" means that what God has put in place and done is what's going to happen, and since He's given us these lives and minds that are designed to think, act, choose, respond and learn, we are going to have to learn to function in this world the way He's made it and with the plans He's put in place.