Leaderboard

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with trauma, PTSD or the sting of being ripped off. I was about to agree with you until you leaned on the cult trope of "crying about decades old offenses". These offenses include rape, sir. They include taking my teenage friends for abortions financed by a handful of money dipped from a free bucket of cash called "tithes". Perhaps giving your entire childhood to a movement that turned out to be a fraud run by grifters and perverts, stings a little. "Crying" isn.t weakness. It is a basic human emotions. If you don't cry while you're recovering from a literal attack on everything you are and everything you have, then you're the one with the problem. And by the way, I don't see anyone "crying" in the replies to your post. I see people who learned the hard way and are trying to warn you that these offenses, not all of which are "decades" old, hurt people. People still haven't recovered. Some people died, MAN. Do you have any idea the number of people who have died as a direct result of trauma from this cult? I have friends who died in accidents and were blamed for not being holy enough. It's gross. There is also no rule that says if you're "crying" about the way's literal crimes, that means that we aren't walking with Jesus. That is a fallacy. Both things can be true. You can walk with Jesus and be wise to The Way's bullcrap. And when we meet a person who says they went to HQ and everyone was so nice, we want you to know that trusting in this group will deceive you and you might not even know it's happening. If you want to stick your hand on the burner to see if fire is really hot, go ahead. You've been warned. But don't pretend that we are all crying. We were trying to warn you.

The foolish man built his house upon the sand and the rains came down and the floods came up... Glad they were nice to you. They are a poorly researched, mean spirited cult who worshipped a man and paid the price. They turned a blind eye to assaults of all kinds, theft, adultery, abuse of children and they separated families. This went on for decades, heck half a century plus. But I am glad they were nice to you.

Great atticle defining a cult https://findingmyway12.substack.com/p/waityou-grew-up-in-a-cult

Almost thou persuadest me to be an atheist

WW kind of sideswiped a theory I've been working under for the past few years. I've brought it up before but it bears repeating. I have a suspicion (not enough evidence to call it a theory) that VPW was an unbeliever at heart. In tribute to Mike's thesis about how Wierwille hid great truths in plain sight and we all missed it: He declared himself to be all but atheist after studying the Bible. He no longer believed the words Holy or Bible on the cover (which is grammatically and rhetorically stupid, but you get his point). Being educated about the Bible, its history and authorship caused him to all but lose his faith. He said so! What if he never regained it? Bear with me: what if, from that moment forward, it was never about getting God and His Word right, but getting while the getting was good? He got money. He got adoration, He got fame (relative to most of us). He got attention. He got sex. He got power. How much of what he did makes more sense if he didn't believe a word of it but knew how to manipulate people to get what he wanted from them? Every time he discovered a niche, he exploited it. "This book is not some kind of Johnny come lately idea just to be iconoclastic..." [if someone has the correct wording, please let me know. I'll be happy to fix]. Oh it WASN'T? Because it was so shoddy I would think that you were selling a title rather than a book. You have a doctorate. You know how to present and defend a thesis (stop laughing, you in the back row. @#$%ing Snowball Pete). But he was an unbeliever. He KNEW the scholarship about the Bible that people like Bart Ehrman and Dan McClellan are popularizing today. He knew and he stopped believing. And THAT is when the bulls hit started. The funny thing is, it doesn't negate anything he taught. Just his motives. If McClellan and Ehrman are right, the first Christians really weren't Trinitarians. They weren't what Wierwille espoused either, though some were. Jehovah's Witnesses actually got it right, if McClellan and Ehrman are correct. But even that conclusion presupposes a unified message from the New Testament writers. And they weren't unified. Here's the problem Wierwille exposed that a lot of Christianity still gets wrong. There WAS NO FIRST CENTURY CHURCH. There were first century churches. Tons of them. And they disagreed with each other about EVERYTHING. Another topic for another time. Bottom line, I'm increasingly coming to believe that Wierwille's rise and ministry can best be explained by the hypothesis that he was an unbeliever from the moment before he became relevant.

For those of you asking. The Way is no longer supporting "tithing", in their STS they talk about "GIVE" and in the last fellowship I participated I was encourage to give freely. So they are not longer asking for 15% even for graduates of the advanced class ( I was) The Way has changed in the recent years? For sure, ¿ real changes? Not at all. TWI is bringing back the "good old years", uploading VPW teachings on their Youtube Channel, offering basically the same content. And hiding some of their core teachings in order to look more appealing to a younger crowd. Good people in TWI? For sure, you can find good people everywhere. You'll receive a lot of love in the beginning (Love-bombing uhh) ; as long as you don't commit to the ministry, they won't ask much of you. When you become deeply involved with TWI, the hell and abuse begin. And even though LCM's abusive tactics are no longer as prevalent, the emotional and psychological manipulation persists. I left TWI a little over two years ago. If you have any question about current TWI, just ask. Have a good day!

Glad you had a good experience Joyful. For many of us here, it would take a lot more than people being friendly and joyful to overcome the darkness the organization embraced for many years. If you go to ROA 2025, let us know what you think.

No, thanks.

I remember, back in the day, there was a twig leaders' syllabus that outlined acceptable behavior at large events, such as limb meetings, branch meetings and so forth. One of the admonitions listed was to "refrain from picking your own seat." My question is this: Are there currently any circumstances under which it's acceptable to pick your seat? Whose seat should you pick instead? (Yes, thank you, I've been told I'm a twisted individual.)

Freedom, a new life, a new perspective about God and the Bible An opportunity to love all people, to serve from something as basic as a warm greeting in the morning to saying thank you and please, not being a false servant in a group only to become a leader. A wonderful chance to get closer to my family, that family from which I distanced myself because they did not participate in the ministry.

TWI has changed a little bit during the recent years. But their change its only towards recover the "good old days" of VPW and PRE-LCM. VPW is still the main figure and the functioning of the organization and psychological abuse towards people persists. They're not willing to apologize to people; they only ask them to forgive and move forward "in love" . It's sad, but they demand greater maturity from the "average" believer than they do from the leader. Forgiving someone does not immediately mean restoring the relationship or psychological healing.

Thanks For the Letters Charlene, I'm new in the Forum though I lurked for years. And I left the Way 2 years ago.

????????

Oh, they're full of it, alright.

For many people, recovery is an on-going process. Think in terms of something like weight loss. You don't reach your target weight and suddenly abandon the effort. I think there's a bit of a parallel in the comparison, but maybe that's just me.

Must have been when he wasn't busy inventing the hook shot.

The question is - will they bring back the shower tent? If you weren’t there picture a tent with hundreds of naked men or women all out in the open with no curtains showering off like cattle. I was a teenager and it was mortifying. Let’s not forget the drugs and orgies in tent city and LCM ranting for hours under the big top. Remember when the WOWs got cancelled for being “infested with homos”? Maybe they will bring back LCM to see if the new ambassadors pass his “homo sniff test.” Any other Rock of Ages nostalgia? It’s fun to reminisce. Their beliefs are too weird to attract any new people in large numbers so they turn to the good ol’ days and hope people will come back. Ironically, I had made peace with the way and never thought about it until I got one of those post cards which brought me back into looking at this site and revisiting how screwed up it all was. what a sad bunch of whack jobs.

That substack by Liz Childers is remarkable in that she shows so well what her cult experience was like and how it continues to affect her today. She writes in such a brave, down-to-earth way, with clarity and deep understanding. Cheers to Liz! Charlene

That's really big brush you're painting with there.

When we were in our teens, WordWolf once had a bunch of notes from which I used to study, and one of them was "Things in Which Christians Are to Abound," or something close to that. The list was believing, the Word, knowledge, diligence, love and grace. It was drawn from II Corinthians 8:7. It took me years to realize what II Corinthians 8 was doing. To really grasp it, you HAVE to let go of the tithe. Only then does the section make sense. A group of Christians was exceedingly generous to Paul, and he was using that group as an example to the Corinthians for how to approach giving. Their gift was both generous and entirely voluntary. The percentage was not discussed. And then v. 7 makes total sense. As you abound in one thing, abound in the other. A standard is being set. As you about in A, abound in F. As you abound in B, abound in F. As you abound in C, abound in F. It's not just a list of things in which we are to abound. It is a standard that is supposed to underscore our motivation to give. You call yourself a Christian who believes? Give accordingly! You call yourself a speaker of the Word? Give accordingly! You call yourself knowledgeable of the Word? GIve accordingly. You call yourself committed to the spread of the Word? Give accordingly. You say you love? Give accordingly. Our giving, according to the Bible, is to be motivated by these attributes. Not a percentage. A reflection of your commitment, of your dedication, of your seriousness about this whole Christian thing. The tithe is not a minimum or a maximum. It's not even a reference point. Abraham tithed ONE TIME, best as we can tell from scripture. No one told him to do it. No one asked him to do it. He wasn't setting a pattern. If he was, the pattern was this: YOU choose when to give. YOU choose who receives it. YOU choose how much. There is no place in scripture where ALL believers are instructed to tithe. It is simply NOT the big deal churches make it out to be. I've long forgotten my deep dive into tithing. But I do remember this much: believers should give, and give generously. NO ONE defines "generously" but you. Just don't be a hypocrite about it. When something's important to you, you invest in it.

Sadly, there is quite a lengthy list of posters who will never post here or anywhere else again. Missed, but not forgotten. Life can be rather cruel at times. Enjoy life while you still can and celebrate each new day.

I'm not disputing that. I'm just saying this is not the place to discuss it.

It's the beleefs. Every time. I don't know JoyfulSoul, but reading his last two or three posts brought forth a wellspring of compassion for him. Only from reading the words he wrote, I gather he suffers deeply because of his beleefs. And, sadly, he won't let go to be liberated, or as he says, delivered. My ex-step son (is that a thing?) has serious psychological disorders. He was clinically diagnosed in his teens, but because his mother and her wierwille-worshipping family are so vehemently opposed to a psychiatric diagnosis and treatment, his disease progressed and worsened. Today he is in prison. I was with him one night when he was having a psychic break. He babbled a bunch of nonsense about heaven and hell and the devil and Israel, etc. His own Corps grad uncle never got the green light or cookie or whatever to cast out the psychological disorders. Now the young man is spending the rest of his life in prison. Little children are more "spiritually mature" than all actors in this tragedy. They have yet to be conditioned to beleeve anything at all.

Is it human nature to expect a glove to fit every hand that arises? Words and their definitions are problematic, aren't they? Words like transcendent, numinous, sublime, even spiritual. They are pretty much all we got and religion can't claim exclusive rights to them. Transcendence has several meanings, only one of them religious. Numinous can mean awe-inspiring. Kant has a concept of the Sublime. Christopher Hitchens uses these words to make the point that you need to go beyond religion in order to fully appreciate reality, not just to understand it rationally but also to enjoy it, to be dazzled by its beauty and order, to exalt in its wonder. When Hitchens talks about "the transcendent and numinous," he's not referring to anything supernatural. He's also not advocating any type of worship or debasement. He's referring to an appreciation for the amazing insights and workings of the natural order as well as an appreciation for the greater aspects of the human experience. He's trying to make the case that religion doesn't own these words or concepts. He's also attempting to address the claim that science reduces everything to chemical impulses and nihilism. His position is that atheists are capable of having the exact same types of experiences as believers, and none of them require beleef in anything supernatural or anything unsupported by the evidence. He's saying that atheists are just as capable of feeling self-transcending love or connection to something greater than oneself or true awe. One doesn't need superstition to take part in any of these amazing human experiences. If you reject the notion that there exists a supernatural dimension, then all religious and spiritual experiences can be understood as purely, physical phenomena. Therefore, when someone experiences a moment of self-transcending love that feels all-encompassing or when someone goes into a desert and fasts for 40 days and 40 nights or when someone takes a pilgrimage to feel a connection to the divine or when someone learns about the natural order and feels an incredible connection to the universe or when someone experiences a piece of art that moves them deeply and inexplicably to feel as if they're part of something larger than themselves, all of these things can be understood as meaningful subjective experiences in a physical, natural universe with no supernatural or spiritual dimensions. It's difficult to illustrate how meaningful and impactful these experiences are without using language that is typically reserved for usage in explaining religious experiences. After all, people like Einstein and Spinoza weren't necessarily religious, but they definitely had beliefs that could be called spiritual. Not spiritual in the sense that it spoke of a spiritual dimension, but spiritual as in an incredible admiration for the workings of the natural order, the range of human experience, and the mysteries of the universe. One can reject the supernatural and absolutely still have a transcendent experience. Here are the Four Horseman talking about the transcendent and numinous. https://youtu.be/9DKhc1pcDFM?si=n2dsCndVCJviEYEn And here's Sam Harris on his use of the word spiritual. https://youtu.be/zLKNvBdUtZY?si=utS8kRZtcr7AX8Ka

Differences of opinion! Differences of opinion are allowed at the GSC! Politics are verboten. Anyone who takes a position that "vpw was the greatest man of God since the apostle Paul" will find they've taken a VERY unpopular stance and will be debated. But they will be allowed to post- as will everyone who disagrees with them. Differences of opinion, agreeing to disagree, and independent thought are not allowed at twi, and never were. So, people used to twi and ex-twi ONLY may find freedom to think unsettling. But it's an asset.

The are NO SUCH THING as devil spirits. You learned about them while in twi and this explains why you thought of one when LCM looked at you with all the pride and evil that were behind those eyes of his. Being involved with the other ministries you've mentioned only cemented your belief in demons because they are steeped in teaching about them and falsely claiming to rebuke them. Christianity is a fear-based doctrine that ministries/religions feed off of and become rich from because of the hold this doctrine has on keeping people in line. If you want to be free of having to cope with such a mythical being as an evil spirit, start deconstructing from what the bible teaches about them. Begin with the whole concept of the fall of Lucifer and then go straight to the most inane story of the serpent with Adam and Eve in the garden whereby all mankind supposedly inherited an evil and sinful nature and Satan became the god of this world. I sincerely hope you do.

It's taken me about 25-30 years to heal from the TWI experience too. But happily not that long to buy my house. I messed around for a decade, afraid to make any decisions of any kind. Finding this place helped me heal a lot. But nothing disappeared instantly. I bought my house with much trepidation in 2007. I made overpayments every year when I could. I think my 25 year mortgage ran originally till I was 74, but it has been repaid (YIPPEE) for several years now, thanks to very diligent efforts on my part. It was either pay off the house, or pay into a pension scheme, not enough for both. I am entitled to get state pension (not a lot) but the thought of a mortgage as a pensioner was horrible. I have deferred claiming my pension because for every 9 weeks that I defer, I get a small uplift in the amount received. And, praise the Lord, he had a plan for me to get a pension anyway. I am getting married soon and my husband has a big pension and on his decease I will get half his amount, which, together with my state pension, will be more than I have ever earned in my life! As WordWolf mentioned earlier, we have a variety of beliefs here. I'm in the "God is good" category. I go to a great church which is very involved with the community around it. I do not subscribe to the standard beliefs of my church (am still non-trini) and I would go elsewhere if I felt the church was "off" in its treatment of parishioners. Well, no, first I would have a "what's going on?" session with any leadership that seemed off, and would escalate that if necessary. The days of being beaten down by nasties like TWI leadership are long gone. But so far, nothing has raised any red flags, nor seems likely to.

No one is being combative with you. You asked questions and answers were provided. You've accused people, at least implicitly, of crying and not moving on. I tried to help you understand that your dismissiveness is not merely a childish cop out, it's a form of gaslighting. Perhaps my showing you this caused you discomfort, causing you to falsely accuse me of trying to start a forbidden topic while blaming you for it. After admittIng the possibility of my own failure at communicating, I offered a different illustration. Now you 're gaslighting again accusing people of being combative. This is how you react when you are challenged and corrected? It's a discussion. You aren't the only one allowed to take a passionate position for or against an idea.

“The Word, the Word, and nothing but the Word.” -vpw Nothing. But. The Word. NOTHING. So, what is the Word? It’s whatever victor paul wierwille says it is. I was “taught” victor did all the “research” so I wouldn’t have to - oh, how he toiled 18hrs/day for years. Such selfless sacrifice on his part, I was “taught.” I should be so grateful. Oldies is right. It’s like any other religion. (TWI is indeed religion, no matter what they claim.) They are dogmatic, yet call themselves a “research ministry.” This is one of many contradictions illustrating their mathematic inexactness and scientific imprecision. No doubt they are nice. Super nice, I bet. Friendly, I’m sure. Be friends. Go to their church (yes, it’s a church), fellowship with them. Whatever. If anyone in TWI came on this board wanting to talk, I suspect they would be welcome. Wierwille apologists have always been welcome and free to post inexhaustible platitudes. Some here might have questions for them. I know I do.

Oops! This is the first thing that will get you in hot water. Make that boiling water. The Word takes precedence over everything... not God, not Christ, not family, not your friends. "You have no friends when it comes to The Word." (VPW). They don't come right out and say it, but, in essence, they worship The Word. "You have to put The Word above everything else." "Having done all, you just stand on The Word and don't let anyone budge you." (VPW). Oh, I could go on and on about how they exalt The Word (at, least, their interpretation of it) above all else, but I probably shouldn't, I have to go shopping for dental floss today..

Hmmmm. You might be on to something.

I don't know anything about narcissistic children, but I know something about the full blown disorder (NPD) in adults. Adults that develop this disorder usually suffered trauma/abuse as children. This abuse is usually by a parent who is an NPD/sociopath themself. Often the abuse is severe neglect or abandonment. It can even be overvaluing the child. (This may seem counterintuitive, but it's the academic term for "spoiled rotten.") The NPD seeks to destroy that which they did not experience. A form of revenge? Envy? I don't know why exactly, but narcissists are attracted to good people who are strong, honest, kind, generous, empathetic, loved and authentic. They didn't have any of that as children. NPDs are incapable of honestly expressing and living those qualities. Others who exemplify and embody those qualities are targeted. And they are then systematically destroyed. Self esteem isn't the primary reason. Empathy is a significant factor.

There was a little book sold in the bookstore called Christian Etiquette by Dorothy Owens. It was probably about 50 pages or so. It had a lot of advice on things like how to set a table, what fork to use, proper dinner conversation, etc. Most of the trivial details have become antiquated in today's society. The overall concept it stressed, though, remains true. Our "etiquette" should be concerned with making people feel at ease and should never create an atmosphere of stress. I would recommend the book and reiterate it should be used with that thought in mind.

I like Waysider's comment about recovery being an on-going process. I has been for me. While I was writing Undertow, soooo many years after my direct expereinces in TWI, I was still coming to realizations. While the Way organization may be a shadow of its former self, as Wordwolf described it, I think it appears that way because the number of active followers is lower than in its heyday of the 1980s, for instance. Since Undertow came out, I've gotten numerous emails from children and grandchildren of my former Way peers. These descendents read Undertow and are surprised to see how abuse they suffered actually began with VPW himself. Many of my former peers won't admit that, since they still believe he was the man of God. It's sick. So abuse in one form or another has filtered down in their lives from their parents giving them warped doctrines and confusing messages, such as "you're sick because you don't believe strongly enough." The fallout from the "early days in TWI" has domino effects that take time and education to rectify. The thousands of posts here on GSC are evidence of that.

Was in church on Sunday. Our sermon series is about our identity as Christians. The curate, Ben, gave a talk was about being salt and light. Little bit different idea of "salt" but completely acceptable. Then he turned to a discussion of "light" and hiding candlesticks under bowls, cities on hills, etc - y'all know the passage. And then he said: "You are all lightbearers. Bearers of the light!" Lightbearers!!! Not a word commonly used by people. Never encountered it in ordinary conversation. Maybe the Olympics talks about that, but the expression is usually "torch bearer." I quite enjoyed Lightbearers apart from the hitchhiking. A nice, enjoyable, two week release from the stifling prison and rigid discipline of being at HQ. Stayed with, met, hung out with, some really nice people. Witnessed to some nice people - and some less nice ones. Overall, no regrets. I could even say, I have happy memories. Got back after one such expedition to have the whole group of us bollocksed for not being good enough. We deserved being kicked out, etc, etc due to our lack of believing. (Nothing about HQ's own lack of preparation or knowledge of the area!!) Our punishment: to be sent out again a month or so later, with the admonition that those who didn't get a class together needn't bother coming back as they would be thrown out anyway. No pressure, then. (All teams succeeded this time, in a different city.) Lightbearers! Ben, if you knew what you'd evoked, brought back, you'd've found a different word! But I'm willing to reclaim it and use it so that the ugly connotations get expunged.

We had a Political forum on the GSC, and it almost shut down the entire site. It took many times more moderation than all the rest of the board put together. Pawtucket was about to shut down the entire GSC out of frustration, but elected to keep everything else and just jettison the politics- which is unnecessary anyway. When 9-11 happened, a lot of people wanted to talk about it. That's how the politics board started, a board on 9-11, that expanded. But discussions got ugly, and posters didn't limit themselves to just mean posts in that board. Some followed other posters around and attacked them on threads that have nothing to do with politics, And so on. It made for a toxic environment. So, someone else agreed to moderate a purely political forum, and Paw jettisoned the one here. As I understand it, the other one lasted a few months, then fizzled out. I'm not sure why because I didn't follow it. So, the rule at the GSC is, NO POLITICS.

For anyone considering getting involved with The Way, or if you are and you're having doubts about the group, consider this. It is information you may not have already: The current Way organization still lauds the corrupt VPW as their founding "man of God?" About the Founder - Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille That's enough for me to categorize the current organization as corrupt. Its roots in Wierwille are rotten. Their current "tree" cannot be any good no matter how "nice" any followers might be. Many of us had first-hand experience with the authoritarian, narcissistic, predatory, abusive plagiarist named Victor Paul Wierwille. We know that he stole most of his teachings that are found on tapes and in his books. Many of those are still used today, or tweaked, or slanted this way or that. We know the women he seduced and raped and silenced. We know the emotional abuse he inflicted on anyone who questioned him. We now understand how cults work and how they make extensive efforts to hide their corrupt histories like the one The Way has and cannot escape. We know that no matter how many fresh coats of paint you slather over filth, the filth is still underneath. To any followers of this organization: ask where the money goes. Ask where the power lies. Ask what happens if you leave the group. Ask what happens if you disagree with the ideology. Think for yourself.

Greasespot Cafe always used to come up first!! Looks like the cafe isn't so popular now. Just the old-timers left. If TWI is still going, there are still going to be people who need what the Cafe has to offer. Need to boost our profile a bit. How?

Well, it's been over 50 years since I first heard these things, but as I recall, it was covered in what we used to call the "13th" session of PFAL. After the 12th session, in which students *manifested*, there was a separate session on the unforgivable sin. Supposedly, this involved the seed of Satan being irreversibly instilled into people. Born again of the wrong seed, as it were. It was supposed to be the polar opposite of the new birth, and quite different from possession, which could be exorcised. There was lots of talk about many of the people of great influence being "seed boys", and, therefore, irredeemable.(prominent scientists, actors, musicians, world leaders and so forth) Of course, it freaked out lots of people and negated the euphoria of session 12. That's probably why it was eliminated and not revisited until it resurfaced in the Advanced Class teachings. I think it might be included somewhere in the original PFAL collaterals. edit: You can't really accept it as being possible without first believing in "once saved, always saved" because of the element of permanence. It's hard to look back at some of this stuff and not laugh at what a chump I must have been.

Just a little tune to sing to the kiddos in your life.

So glad to now be after having been unburdened from what has been....

Thanks for this, Rocky. As for tactics TWI used in the past to find prospects. In the 1970s, one big time leader I won't name, told us to comb throught the obituaries to find the names of families who'd lost loved ones so we could approach them, offer "comfort," and try to sign them up for the PFAL class. I found that piece of advice so revolting I never did it. At least I had some good sense tucked in my mind somewhere back then ...

I don't know if they accept the science or not, but I suspect it doesn't matter to them either way because of the new earth. If anything, I could see them pointing to climate change as evidence of the coming eschaton. My fellowship ridiculed me for recycling because of the point above. My city no longer has a municipal recycling program because of ineptitude and corruption. Thankfully, a private upstart founded and operated by some young enterprising Christians has closed the void. Great guys doing great work. I wish I could afford to continue with their service, but it has gotten too expensive. On their cans and trucks is Psalm 24:1 (NIV) "The earth is the Lord's, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it." Pretty cool.

BTW, we've previously discussed and whether or not he was completely a fraud. That is, was he even a Christian at all, or was it all an act from the beginning? Was he a Christian once whose sins dominated his ministry, or was he a fraud from the beginning of his career? We know- by his own wording- that he chose ministry out of 3 possible careers, besides business or entertainment, and it was a toss-up. The only indications he was actually interested in God before his decision was 2 anecdotes- and vpw lied a lot. One anecdote was when he was a kid. A preacher showed up and preached at his local church. When the preacher asked him what he planned to be when he grew up, vpw supposedly said he wanted to be a man of God like the preacher. vpw followed this up with saying that he'd thought that he himself wasn't serious when he said it. "You know how kids talk." So, even he didn't believe that story. The other story was that he would shirk his chores as a kid and run off into the woods for hours. When there were no witnesses, he supposedly was off "preaching to the trees" and practicing how to preach. Naturally, nobody came forward and said they ever saw him do it, even once. Even more naturally, vpw- most obviously a big plagiarist- plagiarized that story as well as all the others he plagiarized. ORAL ROBERTS preached to the trees. He fought his own stage fright by going among trees and got used to addressing them as if they were the public, making altar calls and so on. Now, with the internet, that story is easy to find, and easy to trace to Oral Roberts. In vpw's lifetime, it was a LOT harder to catch him plagiarizing, without access to the internet. We know that his efforts in school leading up to the ministry were slack enough that his father had to get involved for vpw to be allowed to continue his education. By vpw's own admission, when he claimed to choose the ministry, his own father pointed out he lacked the discipline to be a decent farmer, and thought the ministry would require MORE dedication. When in divinity school, vpw chose the SOFTEST option available- preaching. He skipped studying church history, church languages, and so on. Later, he pretended to know both, but, as we've seen since. he was awful at both. His area of study was "homiletics"- or putting together sermons. How hard is that? Most of the posters here, if not all the posters here, have done it at some point, when in twi. We called them "teachings" but they were sermons by another name. vpw went to school for it, we did not. That's how soft an option that was. According to vpw himself, when he was first assigned a church to pastor, the local elders gave him almost no instructions. Rather than focus on what his congregation needed, he supposedly spent the entire first month focusing on going completely against what the local elders had said, and mouthed off to them when they confronted them on it. The story rings hollow and sounds made-up because they didn't have him removed and the church locals didn't stop attending when he spent his entire first month focusing ALL of his sermons on giving money to the church. However, as a lie, it shows his frame of mind- that he thinks that this is an appropriate lie to tell of his early days as a preacher. And he didn't spin this as "but I learned better and I thank God I'm not like that any more", he gave that as an example of his frame of mind, that he chafed at authority so much he would preach "up" if he was told to preach on "down,", and focusing all his sermons on talking people into giving him money was fine. Did you think it was a new thing with him that "Christians Should Be Prosperous" (why I should give twi my money) was mandatory reading for all pfal students, a book they paid for with their pfal tuition, a book they paid retail prices for, a book printed in-house for a LOT less than they paid? He got a job editing the sermons and articles of other Christians. Shortly thereafter, he got used to re-preaching whatever they'd worked at. In short, in his entire career, he plagiarized freely whenever and wherever he was able. He himself admitted that he's completed his entire divinity education, and spent his entire first year preaching BEFORE he ever believed the Bible was the Word of God. Is it even possible to believe a man could spend that much time as a GENUINE ministry student and preacher and not have that as A foundation for everything if not THE foundation for everything? By his own admission, TWICE in his first year as a preacher, he considered giving up as a minister. I'm supposed to believe he was a dedicated, GENUINE minister when he kept looking back and considering hanging it all up. What changed everything? All evidence points to him ripping off/plagiarizing BG Leonard's class, and JE Stiles book, both in the same year, and making those the 1.0 version and following of pfal. (The very first pfal class, "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today", was a ripoff clone of Leonard's class in EVERY detail, and remained so until he added Stiles' work, then Bullinger's work.) All evidence points to him being a fraud from the beginning. Every step was calculated as a business move, and none of it was "at the behest of God Almighty." When all of this came up, the counter-argument- the claim that vpw was always actually genuine, was entirely based on four things. A) Everything he taught was accurate, and of God, so he must have been connected to God to be that correct. vpw claimed to work by revelation, so he must have been working by revelation. As it turns out, the main reasons to believe he worked by revelation were his own claims he did so, and certainly all claims everything he taught was accurate run the same way- since we've examined some of his work and found errors all over it. Understandable as human error, but a problem if supposedly it was ALL by revelation, and so on. B) vpw claimed "the 1942 promise." vpw claimed God Almighty spoke to him, and that was the basis for his preaching, and of the material he presented later. It didn't take a lot of work to show that these claims didn't hold water. They fell apart easily when examined. Once again, vpw, a chronic liar, had lied to his congregation. C) I feel really blessed when I hear his teachings, and I felt really blessed when I was in twi, so vpw must have been genuine. Well, genuine Christians were in twi, and there was genuine, plagiarized material. I could see either blessing someone, even if vpw was a complete fraud. Furthermore, by vpw's own admission, feeling really blessed when he himself taught meant nothing- some people make similar claims about sitting on a Psychiatrist's couch (something he denigrated, probably because he was in competition with Psychiatrists who completed medical school.) So, those claims don't hold water, either. D) vpw sounded really sincere when he taught for decades, and supposedly nobody could sound sincere faking it for decades. YES THEY COULD. Now, none of US could do that, because we have a conscience. A true sociopath (like vpw) could brazenly go for decades, presenting things he didn't believe, to people who did believe them, in order to bring in the money. Certainly, any half-decent actor- or any half-skilled CON ARTIST- could do it for an entire sermon, given the right materials (like being able to plagiarize all the materials, the presentations, and so on, from real preachers.) So long as it was clear it was all for the stage, any decent actor could keep doing it- like Steve Martin performing in the movie "Leap of Faith". But his conscience would bother him if he pretended to be real while faking it and actually preaching at the pulpit. Heck, early acting exercises have actors practicing to speak convincingly while speaking literal gibberish. Any number of politicians have gone and given speeches they didn't really believe, and delivered them with gusto, as if they believed them. (No examples, please, politics is off-limits at the GSC.) I once saw comedian/actor John Candy deliver an example of that. He got onstage pretending to be a member of the Canadian Parliament. All of the MPs are supposed to be bilingual in English and French, but many don't know much French, and that was the basis for the joke. With lots of florid hand gestures and looking "genuine", he delivered a speech in French- in poorly-pronounced French. The subtitles clued English-speakers in on the jokes. "Good evening and welcome. I do not speak French. This speech was written for me by someone else, and I don't understand a word I am saying. I am a fat English pig." The entire time, that was delivered every bit as if he was giving a genuine speech. It's the example I know best, but it's common enough for actors. Faking it can be done if someone's conscience doesn't stop them. So, the only remaining objection doesn't hold water, either. Oh, there was also the "argument" that vpw was real because he spoke in tongues. No matter what twi said and says now, speaking in tongues can be faked, speaking in tongues with interpretation can be faked, word of prophecy can be faked. We had some heavy discussions as to whether or not they WERE ALL faked, or if they simply WERE faked LOTS OF TIMES. We know some were faked because some of us faked them at the time- all while trying to be genuine and meaning well, but faking it anyway because that's how we were taught. Now, I actually changed my position as a result of these discussions. I once believed it was all real, and now believe all the "speaking in tongues/interpretation" of twi and that style was and are all faked. (I'm convinced most of the "word of prophecy" was faked, but not all of it, I believe some of it was genuine.) Nobody is required to agree with me, but it's clear enough that SIT CAN be faked. So, the idea that vpw should be believed to be genuine because he was seen to SIT doesn't hold water either- it can be faked. Why do people believe it can't be faked? That's what we were taught by vpw- a man who lied to us all the time. Do you know the difference between "sincere" and "insincere"? vpw didn't. He said that the man who tries to sell you a toothbrush with only one bristle has to BE really sincere. UNTRUE. The man has to FAKE sincerity, he has to APPEAR sincere. Unless he is a complete moron, he would have to know such a product is defective and useless for its proclaimed purpose. He would be trying to con you, and APPEAR sincere while he FAKED his sincerity. Why would vpw be unable to understand such a simple distinction? It was part of his character. To him, there was no difference between BEING sincere- meaning it from the heart- and FAKING sincerity- looking like you meant it from the heart but faking all of it, making a performance with a genuine appearance. All evidence points to vpw having been a fraud from Day One. Oh, perhaps something, somewhere was genuine, but being 100% fake and being 95% fake pretty much look the same.

Worked BP at the ROA a couple of times in the early 80’s. One shift I was working at the entrance to the driveway leading to (I think) Wierwille’s home. We were specifically told only vehicles with a certain colored pass were allowed through. A black limo rolls up. We stop it. Driver arrogantly demands that we let him through. We explain about the pass. He, again arrogantly informs us that The Way only has one limousine & this is it. We don’t budge. Finally the back window rolls down & it’s Howard Allen. Yeah, we let him through, but how difficult would it have been for the driver to get the pass that BP was being told to require for entry? Other than that, I worked the swing shift, so I had a legitimate reason for skipping the main evening teaching. Also a female friend would stop by to make out after things slowed down

Well... other than the "I'm right and they're wrong" aspect of your post I figure there could be some reasonable insight to looking at Jesus as fulfillment of OT law. I totally reject the paradigm of black/white, wrong/right interpretations of scripture. WE (humans/humanity) IMO are far too limited to be able to clearly define (most) interpretations of scripture as such. Stay curious and be willing to consider new ways to look at them. Just sayin'.

Hello, Greasespotters, This week is another anniversary for Undertow: in 2016, I was working with my editor on the final copy. In celebration, I thought I'd post something from the book. Enjoy. The following is the Preface to Undertow: My Escape from the Fundamentalism and Cult Control of The Way International. By Charlene L. Edge In its heyday in the 1980s, The Way International was one of the largest fundamentalist cults in America, with about forty thousand followers worldwide.1 Founded in 1942 by a self-proclaimed prophet, Victor Paul Wierwille (1916–1985), who marketed the group as a biblical research, teaching, and fellowship ministry, The Way still operates in the shadow of its dark history. I knew Wierwille personally. As one of his biblical research assistants and ministry leaders, I am a witness to his charisma, as well as his abuse of power and manipulation of Scriptures to serve his own agenda. I discovered his sexual abuse of women and chronic plagiarism. Today, those underbelly facts are hidden, denied, or otherwise squelched. The years of Wierwille’s authoritarian reign and the chaos after his death provide the context of my story. In 1987, after seventeen years of commitment to The Way, my life was a wreck. I rejected Wierwille’s ideology, escaped, and resumed my education. At Rollins College, my essay “Somewhere between Nonsense and Truth” laid the foundation for “An Affinity for Windows,” a short memoir in Shifting Gears: Small, Startling Moments In and Out of the Classroom. These writings are woven into this book. My recruitment story is included in Elena S. Whiteside’s book, The Way: Living in Love.2 This book is a memoir. It is my recollection of events related to the best of my knowledge and ability. The story’s crucial facts are true. Some events and conversations are combined in the interest of storytelling. Besides my memory and bits from others’ memories, my sources include my extensive collection of notes, journals, letters, calendars, books, newspapers, photographs, and copies of The Way Magazine. Names in this story that I have not changed, besides mine, are those of current or former public figures in The Way International: leaders at the state level or higher, Way trustees, and a few members of The Way’s Biblical Research Department. For privacy reasons, other identities have been changed or are composites. I recognize that others’ memories or interpretations of the events I describe herein may be different from my own. My book is not intended to hurt anyone. This is a recollection of life in a cult that in recent years has become a topic of public interest. My title invites the question, what makes The Way International a fundamentalist cult? Here is the crux of my answer: Wierwille believed in scriptural inerrancy, a cornerstone of Christian fundamentalism. As the biblical scholar James Barr tells us: “It is this function of the Bible as supreme religious symbol that justifies us in seeing fundamentalism as a quite separate religious form.”3 The Way International is also a cult, or at least was while I was in it. I use the definition of cult I found on The International Cultic Studies Association (ICSA) website: “An ideological organization held together by charismatic relationships and demanding total commitment.”4 Scripture quoted in this book is from the King James Version of the Bible. Any errors of fact, interpretation, or judgment in this book are my sole responsibility. I hope you enjoy reading my story. Charlene Edge Winter Park, Florida October 2016 Notes Preface 1. Author Karl Kahler states, “Cult numbers are notoriously hard to pin down, and are often inflated by anti-cult writers more concerned with sounding the alarm than checking the facts. Many writers have claimed The Way had 100,000 members, as if everyone who ever took the class were still a member. Around 1982, when [Craig] Martindale [second president of The Way International] was marching in Ontario and Way leaders were talking to the press, I heard consistently that we were claiming to have 40,000 members.” Karl Kahler, The Cult That Snapped: A Journey into The Way International (Los Gatos, CA: Karl Kahler, 1999), 110. See also: Zay N. Smith, “The Way—40,000 and Still Growing,” Chicago Sun-Times, Aug. 17, 1980. 2. Elena S. Whiteside, The Way: Living in Love. (New Knoxville, Ohio: American Christian Press, 1972), 142–149. 3. James Barr, Fundamentalism (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1978) 37. 4. The definition of cult is taken from “Cults: Theory and Treatment Issues,” a paper presented by Rutgers University professor Benjamin Zablocki at a conference on May 31, 1997; cited in Michael D. Langone, “Cults, Psychological Manipulation, and Society: International Perspectives— An Overview,” Cultic Studies Journal 18 (2001), 1–12. http://www .icsahome.com/articles/cultspsymanipsociety-langone.

Well.. this one deserves posted more than once. The Best of Chicago..