QamiQazi

Best wishes to you Fred in your new Neighborhood.

Happy Birthday, Kit. You don't look a day over 29.

Aaron Copland's

"Fanfare for the Common Man"

"Appalachian Spring"

The Who

"We Won't Get Fooled Again"

"Teenage Wasteland"

Blue Cheer

"Summertime Blues"

Joe Satriani

"Satch Boogie"

Cream

"I Feel Free"

The most obvious, and illustrious - Beethoven's 5th Symphony

EWB - ditto!

quote:

---

Then the day dawned, and I remembered... I don't know you but my impression of you then is the same impression I have of you now. I don't think you are a former Way leader. I don't believe you ever had anything to do with the corruption that was in The Way. I think you were sitting next to me at Twig, who shared your Bible when I left mine at home. I think you're the one who worked a steady job, and had enough left over to treat everyone to pizza after witnessing night. My guess is that you were the one who handed me your car keys when I needed to get to work. Heck, you probably were even the guy who gave me your car when it was time for you to buy a new one. I met dozens of ["believers"] like you. You went out in the middle of the night to fix a flat tire, brought over a cup of coffee at break, let others bum cigarettes off of you, and secretly slipped them a twenty when somebody ran out of money at the Rock. I think you were the backbone of the "ministry." You made a believer out of me.

---

You each know who you are. Hope you've been well. I appreciate the many forgotten kindesses, which you were always good for, whenever or whatever the need, whoever it was in need. Just wanted to say so. Been a long time. Drop a line here, if you ever get the chance.

laleo, that was well-written. I knew some of those people too. There may be more than a few of them here. Their ideals haven't changed, nor their loyalties, nor their faith.

Same people. All that has changed is they do know now, what they did not know then.

I thought the article was very effective, but I agree it did not account for reasonable and real-life relationships between "unequals." That was not its purpose. The writer could not afford to dilute the message with anecdotes of happy endings because people don't understand how bad the problem really is. Sexual harrassment and abuse is rampant in work environments all over the world. Rampant doesn't mean everywhere. It means rampant. By its nature it often goes unmentioned, covered up, lived down, swept under the rug.

Is every unequal relationship the same? Of course not. But each presents the same temptations to the one with power, and the same risks to the one without. Education is more needful than legislation, but legislation is needful. That is why we have it. The article was written to make the most waves against the tide of prevailing opinion. It may lose more readers, but reach more hearts. That must be the writer's hope.

mj412, I am QQ. Orange Cat is OC. Who is QC? I will assume you mean me. Please give it a chance. My question is asked in earnest, due to the content of his own post.

oldiesman should understand the question. I can't predict how he will answer, but I expect it will be thoughtful and truthful, and hope he will not see it as an accusation. It could be taken that way, but is not so intended. I read his words, but I can't help wondering what is between the lines, because they don't make sense on their surface. As for confessions, I wouldn't know about the other unless that poster spilled it, now would I?

excathedra, it is odd. I'm glad you mentioned it, because I noticed it too.

oldiesman, "let's say Hitler killed ten Jews, and only insulted another six million during his administration. For the record, I think that's just as bad as if the numbers were reversed."

What is going through your mind when you invent such a ratio? If it's just as bad, what is the point? Are you trying to say that after 200 the guy was on such a roll he didn't notice a few of them said "no?" Is that your point? You seem to view Dr. Wierwille as God's stud for our day and our time. Is that your point? The women of the kingdom belong to the king?

oldiesman, I remember a poster who was very defensive of Dr. Wierwille because he was himself accused of improper (or criminal) sexual activity, and while there was little dispute about the facts, only he felt he was justified by mitigating circumstances. In defending Dr. Wierwille, he was sort of defending his own choices and behavior. Are you that poster? Is that your point? Is this about you, and where you've put it?

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldiesman:

quote:

---

oldiesman, what is the difference between that, and what you are doing?

---

QQ, I see what you're saying, but really, do you have to bring Hitler up again? Hitler was a military dictator who presided over the murdering of millions of people. In our world he's probably the worst tyrant who ever drew breath. And you're comparing him to VPW?

So let's say VPW raped 10 women, and had voluntary sex with 200 willing women, during his 40 years of pastoring. For the record, I think that's just as bad as if the numbers were reversed. ok? He blew it big time.

---

I invoke Hitler because he is the archetype of evil for our age. Evil is evil. Hitler's ultimate example minimizes the tempation to equivocate, and makes for a vivid illustration. I do not equate the two, other than they were both servants of evil. Hitler was a world-class devil. Dr. Wierwille was only the local talent.

I appreciate your own concession oldiesman, but when somebody forgot to rewind the tapes for session 12, that was "blowing it big time." Dr. Wierwille did not "blow it big time" oldiesman. Dr. Wierwille was a seducer, a deceiver, a sexual predator, a molester, a callous, cold-blooded, serial sex-abuser of Christian women, which he did (as he told the women) in the name of God. That's right!! Would you really call that "blowing it big time?" Doesn't really cover it, does it?

Long Gone, that was very effective. oldiesman, do you see what you are doing, or did you already know?

Now somebody just show me where it says that Hitler killed all the Jews. I just don't believe it. Prove to me that every Nazi is a murderer, or that they all directly participated in genocide. Can anyone offer any objective proof? Did anyone confront Hitler at the time? If not, why now? Why does it come up when he can't defend himself? Why can't people see what he did for national pride and get over his imperfections?

oldiesman, what is the difference between that, and what you are doing?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rafael 1969:

What I'm trying to say is that you folks can be 100% right - 100% - and still leave room for the possibility that not every example will fit the critical view we have of Wierwille.

I really wish you folks saw Oldiesman the way I do: as someone seeking to come to terms with the dismantling of a belief system he once held dear: as someone who's recognizing, slowly but surely, that a man he really looked up to did some things that at first seem just dishonest, but increasingly realizing how horrible they were.

You want him to join you in your point of view instantly? He's not going to. But he's going to start by recognizing, as I believe he has, that at least SOME of what you guys are saying is true. That there WERE times when Wierwille did exactly what he's been accused of doing. Do you have any idea how much it takes for him to concede that point? It's HUGE. So forgive me for recognizing that breakthrough and encouraging him onward in at least small steps.

Take a look at oldies' posts on the Actual Errors thread. You want to call him a Wierwille worshipper? Take a look over there and recognize, as I clearly do, that he's got an open mind to Wierwille's faults, and he's working them through in his mind and heart with prayer.

Rafael

---

Rafael, are you "undershepherding" your "babe" in the grease? I remember all those "back off" conversations when we'd tell others to leave our new person alone. What you're saying is it takes time to "re-old" his mind and we need to give him the grease-grace to do it.

I'm really blessed about that.

On the other hand, the point is so irrelevant that Dr. Wierwille didn't do it to "everybody" (see my wonderful yeah-but thread), it is like (forgive the n-teenth H analogy) saying that Hitler didn't kill "all" the Jews, so cut him some slack.

No human being is perfect, and no human being is perfectly evil either. We therefore judge people along a continuum. It's reasonable for oldiesman to concede that Dr. Wierwille was far to the evil side of most contemporary, Christian "ministers." He doesn't have to be Hitler to be a bad person. I don't think oldiesman should require so much time to read the writing on the wall. There isn't much to read. It all says the same thing.

I think Orange Cat is right. You are enabling the enabler, by lending credibility to an incredible position, which is the defense of the indefensible. It is not your position, but you yet validate that position. Does that make sense?

Watered Garden,

Your answer was worth the wait. Thank you for proving to be such a remarkable person. I very much underestimated you.

QQ

Erick, you haven't discovered "new light." Do you imagine no one has ever heard of forgiveness until you, Prometheus of Greasespot, bring us the apostolic gift? Though your arrogance is couched in humility, it is nonetheless arrogance.

Try to understand how others might see you. You say "forgive" but you effectively mean "pretend it never happened." That is not the meaning of forgiveness, Erick.

Everyone who has ever defended Dr. Wierwille's teaching legacy, whatever it may amount to, has felt compelled to re-write history, to un-write history that has been written here on internet bulletin boards. You can't reconcile the work with the man. Nobody can.

So you come as a friend bearing wonderful truths, good news, and God's promises, and you say, "Just agree to pretend it never happened, and you shall enter the Kingdom." A little lie, embraced for Jesus' sake. For Christ's sake! How could it hurt? Who could it hurt?

Erick, one who asks a woman molested by "the Teacher" to forgive and (especially) forget asks only a small thing. All she needs to do is forgive her predator, her rapist. How petty, that she shouldn't comply? How pitiful, how pathetic she is. Denying you, she denies God, because it is the truth you speak. It is a much greater challenge for you to forgive your Greasespot detractors and their unbelieving words. Somehow you bear up under the persecution, and I don't know how you do it. You're a real man, Erick. A "man of God" a lot like your father in the Word. You don't see it? Try.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Watered Garden:

If I said I knew the moon was made of Roquefort cheese, would you believe me? Of course not. If I said I knew someone who talked to an uncle of an astronaut who said it, would you believe me then?

No one has answered my question yet. And I did ask it in good faith, because this is something that has bothered me since the first time I read "Marsha's story". Why did he get away with it for so long?

Surely someone must have gone to the authorities, not in TWI, but real authorities?

---

Watered Garden, your answer is condescending and mean. I realize you can't hear yourself. I conclude this because you can't hear anyone else. "Your" question has been answered so often by so many it's become nearly tedious repetition, if not for the sincerity with which each has answered. I suspect something within you is trying to wear people down. That's what you do. That's how you do it. You just keep saying "I don't understand," and with it, you repeat your accusation, again and again.

We are not discussing something distant and absurd, like the moon made of cheese. How could you draw that analogy? Maybe you are as cold and distant as the moon, despite your protests otherwise. And maybe your pretense of concern is as false as the claim the moon is made of cheese. That's what I think.

I hear in your voice an ordinarily good person, but with something bitter, vindictive, antagonistic, vengeful, a seed of contempt stirring within you. You don't hear it. You wouldn't. You have contempt for this suggestion. But others have heard it in the past. That's where you've heard "shut up, shut up, shut up." Three times you quoted it. You must drive people to exasperation when you want to. And you do want to. That's your game, when you feel like playing it. It's not very pretty, is it?

firebee, this sounds like what Kathy's husband Cliff is going through. A close in-law went through it about a month ago. She is alright now, but not out of the woods yet. Your son is in my thoughts.

QQ

Eaglehouse, that was too funny.

You were not "attacked." You shot yourself in the foot. If you got the parking sticker, there almost had to be instructions with it. You may have overlooked them. Even if there were none, it's common sense that parking stickers are not optional.

Your reaction was a rebellious reflex left over from life in an authoritarian cult. Understandable, but inappropriate in the real world. I had to learn similar lessons after leaving, and they were far more costly than yours should be.

The tow-truck driver was doing his job, and you may well be liable for a charge. If you cut the chain, you will be liable for that too.

If you did overlook the instructions, pay the fee/fine if they refuse to waive it. It is legitimate. Call it "tuition" for a life-lesson. As George pointed out, it's pretty reasonable in this world.

By the way, there are several inexpensive chemicals out there you can use to remove hideous-colored cult bumper stickers. Your solution was a good one too, although if I lived in a Wayfer town, I might cover it with one of those Grateful Dead dancing bear stickers, with just a hairline of fluorescent green showing from behind it.

This thread should be titled: "Would you diet for your beliefs?"

I see you've found Atkins. Suddenly a lot of science is backing up what he has said all along. Marilu Henner has some great books out too. She discusses the way foods interact when eaten together, something most other diets neglect. Plenty of science to back it up, too. She's not just another celeb with a gimmick. My dad has used a combination of the two for years, and very successfully when he has kept with it. Good luck.

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldiesman:

Qami,

Shame on you. You're comparing the Corps with people getting murdered?

-No, I am using the same reasoning you are to illustrate the absurdity of it. The circumstances are irrelevant.

The folks who died that day didn't know they'd be killed that day.

But the folks who signed up for the Corps, knew they were going on a program where they had to follow the direction of their coordinators/leaders. Was it possible you were subjected to fear and stress because that was part of the program, to OVERCOME fear and stress? Make you a stronger person?

-The Way Ministry was an illegitimate organization. (How many times do I need to repeat that? How much evidence do you need?) The coordinators were incompetent amateurs with axes to grind, chips on their shoulders and considerable amount of power, once the Corps was in residence. This was not represented to prospective Corps applicants. Sorry, but full disclosure was not part of the devil's bargain. It never is, is it?

It sounds to me like you're complaining that it was too tough....almost like signing up for the military, then complaining years later that they were too tough on you..

-Tough is easy. Neurotic, sadistic and abusive is not called "tough." That is called "sick."

Hey, YOU SIGNED UP for it did you not?

-The Corps was a mutual commitment. The Way Ministry broke its part of the commitment, as I described above. They never intended to keep it because they knew they could not deliver. They didn't know God from a hole in the ground. They knew how to sell God. That was their ministry.

And if you didn't like it the first few weeks, if it wasn't your thing, you could have left. Some did.

-Ever hear the analogy of a frog in a pot? Heat it fast, he jumps out. Heat it slow, he boils to death. The Way leadership was an intelligent enemy, a calculating and manipulative group. They could play one person against the other, exploiting every weakness they knew how. They could be, and were, despicably conniving sh_ts. What else do you need to know?

The unfortunate folks at the WTC who got killed couldn't leave, they were trapped and it was too late.

-The Corps was not physically trapped, but they often burned bridges when they entered the program. They were encouraged to "sell out," and they often showed far more commitment than that piece of sh_t Rev. Martindale ever dreamed of, and the sc_mb_gs in leadership used that commitment to exploit them every way they knew how. They were also exploited by their fellow Corps and elder Corps who learned and played Dr. Wierwille's real game.

---

oldiesman, you think you got away smelling like a rose. You are mistaken. You are still deluded, and this is perpetuated by your own blind pride, which The Way Ministry manipulates to this day, and you don't even know it.

oldiesman, it was the decision of 3000 Americans to go to work at the World Trade Center on 9/11/01. They were so stupid, they thought it was safe. Hell, they knew terrorists hate America. (It's in all the papers.) They knew the Trade Center had been a target once before. They knew that big jet airliners make a big hole in things they crash into, and lots of fire. They knew the Trade Center was the biggest building in New York, an easy target. But these morons went to work that day anyway. It was THEIR decision! Let's not blame bin Laden. They should have known better.

But you say, "Well they lived in a free and mighty country. Nobody dreamed this would really happen. The assumption was that the people in charge were able to prevent things from going wrong. People were reasonable to believe they were safe."

oldiesman, at at time when people considered the Corps, they believed (as you still do) that Dr. Wierwille had integrity. They believed that The Way was God-centered, and not a fraudulent little sham of a sect, scamming the pants off its followers. They believed the many false "proofs" of legitimacy served up to them on a silver platter by people who knew better. The Corps did not give their lives to The Way Ministry. They gave their lives to God. Or so they foolishly thought, because they believed what you yet believe. Fraud is a crime, oldiesman. Why do you think that is so? What is it about fraud that makes it evil? When you answer those questions, you will understand what you fail to grasp now.

oldiesman, when people are subjected to conditions of fear and stress, instincts seem to overwhelm the thought process. Victims feel trapped, even if they are not. Options are not so clear. They become like a "deer in headlights." Why do you think bullies act like bullies? Because intimidation works on most people.

PFAL's impact was to redefine our entire world-view in a very short period of time. Call that what you will. ("If it quacks like a duck...") No longer were we ordinary people. We were elevated, instantly and effortlessly, to a place of grace and grandeur, His kids, seated in the heavenlies, the hope of glory within us. It felt great. That was the bait. The hook was allegiance to The Way Ministry. The "Trustees" reeled us in.

To maintain this new image of ourselves, we had to accept the other teachings The Way offered. Otherwise, we were questioning God's own wonderful gift. Who were we to question? Had we sacrificed as much as Jesus, or Dr. Wierwille? How dare we suggest such a thing by questioning? Doubting is like stabbing them in the heart. The hearts that so loved us they gave...

We acquiesced to abundant sharing, the Way Tree, the "Man of God," the women belong to the king, "believing = receiving," and any number of other hooks intuitively used by leaders. Every aspect of our lives was redefined biblically, and the bible was defined by ("itself?" do you really believe that?) The Way.

By walking away from bad behavior, we had to walk away from the authority and credibility behind all we had been taught. But this became a "Catch-22" because when the sh_t hit the fan, those teachings were all we had left to depend on. We had rejected everything else. We had "put off the old man." Now what? Reject the teacher, reject the teachings. What else was left? Desolation, isolation, and total uncertainty. Don't think the leaders didn't know this. They wrapped themselves in the "integrity of the scriptures" the way politicians wrap themselves in the American flag.

I realize you don't believe this. You seem to think the teaching had integrity though the teacher didn't. You can only believe this by maintaining the tunnel vision The Way teachings imposed on us.

Whether battered, badgered or otherwise bullied, the survival mechanism kicks in and people are no longer "themselves." They may act rashly or logically, but they go into a kind of shock. Peripheral vision, and peripheral perspective ("common sense"), are lost. The "Stockholm Syndrome" is a good reference for this kind of behavior. Look at this website for some additional perspective on the impact you write off so casually: http://www.refocus.org/postcult.html

[This message was edited by QamiQazi on January 13, 2003 at 10:11.]

[This message was edited by QamiQazi on January 13, 2003 at 10:12.]

For describing The Way experience, I don't think the word "seclusion" is accurate on its face. Going into seclusion means going off by yourself, dropping out of sight, away from all others, making yourself excluded from the rest of the world.

We were included in a community within the ministry, not really secluded. And yet, the cumulative effects of the words I might have preferred in the thread's title add up to a seclusion far more effective than living alone in a cabin in the wilderness.

As Hope recalled, the word "sanctified" was defined as "setting apart." Sanctification became the euphemistic, underlying principle for denying followers anything that was not part of The Way's program for living.

Followers were:

insulated from the world and culture;

separated from family and friends;

segregated from society, even from other castes within The Way social structure;

isolated from our neigbors;

alienated from the rest of God's family.

If that isn't seclusion, I don't know what is. Then again, suffocation isn't a bad word for it either.

Kathy, I'm happy that Cliff is back home. Did the doctors offer any explanation? I have a relative who recently had the same thing come up (she's around 55). She spent nearly three weeks in the hospital while they tried to get it under control. Her brother has a pacemaker, but they decided it wouldn't be advisable for her.

She was working long, stressful hours and also using the over-the-counter diet pills. They thought the combination was what made an existing condition much worse. She is now on coumedin (which has an interesting background) and being monitored. She is working reduced hours, swore off the diet pills, and watching her stress levels.

QQ

Just a quick dissenting impression of the battle scenes: the warg and the orokai (sp?) looked indestructible but they were tossed and killed as if they were made of styrofoam. In the battle, the fierce warg/wolves had every opportunity to go for the Rohan horses' throats and they just stopped and snarled instead, inches from those tasty ersatz horse-burgers.

It would have been more convincing if they were less powerfully built, but still scary. They were an 11 on the ugly meter, weren't they?

Another scene where the bad guys parted like the Red Sea was at Helm's Deep, when Gandalf the White and the Renegade Rohan Calvary charged into the line of spears, and through the line of spears, as if there were no spears at all.

I haven't read the book for ages, but couldn't Gandalf do more with his great staff than bonk the orcs over the head? I expected a little wizardry, not ken-do. Or is it ken-po?

I don't remember why Wormtongue was spared, but the reason Aragorn gave was: "Hasn't enough blood been shed?" How dumb is that? Did their collective wisdom not know he would high-tail it to Saruman to tell him everything he knew, and that Saruman would use that knowledge to try and kill them all? Theoden might have saved a lot of soldiers' lives by killing or at least confining Wormtongue. If that's how the book told it, I still don't get it, but if not, they didn't make a great case for mercy. Show mercy, get slaughtered. Nice. At Helm's Deep, Aragorn tells the elves "Show no mercy for you shall be shown none." Had he learned his lesson? They nearly lost everything and everyone at Helm's Deep on account of Wormtongue, because he revealed its weaknesses to Saruman. Killing him would have saved hundreds or thousands of lives. Strange sense of morality, no?

Maybe there is more to it.

[This message was edited by QamiQazi on January 06, 2003 at 13:20.]

Mike, I think you are an essential voice here. Whether you stay or go should NEVER be put to a vote. Since when is an individual voice only allowed to speak at the discretion of the majority - in a free country that is? Or even an "open" forum?

I think you're making progress Mike. You're winning people's hearts, slowly but surely, or else, why would they protest so loudly? They are fighting the inevitable, resisting the truth. In their hearts they know you are right. No, I don't really believe that, but it was kind of fun to write.

Please don't go Mike. I am disappointed in the bathroom wall grafiti directed at you, and the hostility. It is misplaced. You are the effect, not the cause. Maybe people see a part of themselves reflected in you, and they don't like what they see, even though that part of themselves no longer rules their lives. Maybe the urge to rejoin the cult is like the long dormant ring in Lord of the Rings, whose power is rekindled in the presence of its master's influence.

The draw of the cult is strong. But you know that, Mike, wherever you are inside that mind of yours. I almost shudder to think how close to being Moonies we really were. You are the gentle presence of the insidious temptation to surrender we've all felt in the past. That's why your presence is so unsettling to some of us. But I think it's healthy, because there is plenty of opportunity to examine your beliefs in the clear light of day, and away from the inviting fellowship's appeal.