rhino

Rhino, Jesus was not a Christian, either, he was Jewish. His followers became Christians - called themselves Christian and many of them did rule and convert by the sword, also.

The head of the Christian church is Jesus Christ ... he did not teach rule by the sword, nor do we see any of that in those early followers (that must have come from those trinitarians )

The head of Islam is Muhammad ... he did convert by the sword, and their teachings indicate submission by force is approved. I have not heard of any recent "honor killings" by practicing Christians, nor stonings of adulterous women. (though some in TWI treated them harshly)

The contrast is pretty clear as I see it ... no need to try to amalgamize the two religions for diversity's sake... or whatever. Calling someone muslim for not believing the Trinity would seem a rather harsh and unfair judgment.

The Trinity issue does not define a cult, except to the Trinitarians perhaps. Trying to make that legitimate doctrinal issue central to the cult definition seems to miss the mark, and is an unfair "attack" on all that hold that belief.

But even if JCING is true, it may well be that VP chose the issue more because it put him in contrast to the major denominations, which he always seemed to prefer. It distinguished his product. (It is this aspect of the JCING issue that makes it "on topic" ... it is also a distinguishing part of Lynn's "package". The actual doctrine of JCING is straying a little)

Muslim =/= terrorist.

Some claiming to be Muslims are terrorists. Some claiming to be Christians are also terrorists. May their God(s) have mercy on them.

Mohammad was a terrorist ... he ruled and converted with the sword.

Jesus was not a terrorist ... he said he who is without sin, cast the first stone. To this day, women caught in adultery in Islam are still stoned.

The issue went back to various Christian beliefs ... various statements here indicate the non-Trinitarian belief as only possible if people are somehow confused or not spiritual. The first "attack" was from apparent Trinitarian Juedes, quoted by Pawtucket.

Juedes indicated all in the Way only believed JCING because they could not think for themselves and were totally blind, believing everything VP said because they all believed he was MOGFOT.

Geisha introduced the Muslim view which she found interesting, that non trinitarians were maybe more Muslim than Christian.

I did introduce the idea of Trinity beliefs being arrived at from traditional indoctrination, and that one reason for the Trinity mentality being introduced (in the third century?) was the convenience of winning over pagans.

But I don't say Trinitarians don't think for themselves ... and I don't say they ARE pagan like for belieiving in the trinity. It was those type "attacks" (on JCING types) that I was taking exception to, though I am really in neither camp.

Juedes was apparently attacking Lynn for claiming the TWI teaching was so great, while not even quoting from JCING in his own book. In a little bit of fairness to Lynn, he was indicating all these ideas we were introduced to were not available (as a package) anywhere else. I'm not sure he claimed VP was any kind of scholar.

Of course Lynn's "as it had not been known since the first century" statement seems rather odd to most all of us, especially us that see VP as more fraudster than "MOGster".

geisha, I enjoyed your copy-and-paste about the muslim POV. I share your interest, and your surprise that "muslim" is automatically re-titled "terrorist."

Comparing non trinitarians to muslims has a definite negative connotation ... I can't think of any Christians that feel they are muslim like just because they don't confess to trinitarian belief. It is patently absurd ...

In today's world ... the muslim faith's belief of bringing the chirstian into submission ... is in the more extreme forms related to the terrorist.

So I asked ... if you are saying non trinitarians are muslim like, are they the more extreme types ... terrorists?

It is just one more step, and it was a question, not a re-titling.

Is it really a surprise? What was the thrust of the initial comparison?

And how does it relate to The Way, It Was? Except for the non trinitarian view that was just discussed.

Should I find a thread comparing trinitarians to three headed purple people eaters? Just for fun?

But, we have grown right? We sure could dish it out to the trinitarians--let one lone little girl voice a differing position, say it matters and she is a mean old farm uncle.

But then again--Pastor Juedes was too much right? The sweetest guy around, faithful in prayer for YEARS for us. He is too much. How many here have been that faithful to ANYTHING in prayer.

Shows the disparity and my posts differ and that just irritates you enough to compare me to a mean old farm uncle.

What's the matter get tired of picking on DWBH?

My uncle was NOT mean .. he was compassionate .. a true believer. He was happy to spend time with me. He knew my Way history ... but he felt he had to help people avoid the fires of heell.

Juedes ... Sweet? He doesn't know me, yet made a blanket judgment that I only thought that I thought .. that I completely believed everything vp said. That is totally false ... not so sweet. But like my uncle .. he is probably certain he is right ....

Juedes is faithful in prayer? How does anyone know how faithful he or anyone have been in prayer?

I'm not tired of picking on dwbh ... where is he anyway? I never picked on dwbh, I disagreed ... he is quite capable to disagree without getting bent, isn't he?

Now I'll get blamed for picking on you ... I'm not .. you posted some serious issues ... tell that story if you want, why else bring it up? ... my uncle died with his Bob Jones kids not talking to him ... and his wife maybe not meeting him in heaven ... in his mind. I was talking to him and helping him throughout ... my message is that strict adherence to doctrine can divide more than unite.

My point is this Bill. If I can't even post a differing POV without being called a liar--how on earth can I bring forth the most life altering and shattering events of my past in TWI.

I wasn't trying to hurt anyone with my post but I found it so interesting. I wanted to share it.

If I can't share this--I am surely NOT going to share my story--and I have a winner of a TWI experience. I had a child with CF--just imagine for a moment if you will.

You are firm in your trinity belief ... I had an uncle and his fam that hurt everyone , despite his most sincere intention that anyone that did not believe exactly as he did was going to heelll. In the end even his Bob Jones grad kids were lost causes ... not of the correct Baptist way ... it was sad ...

Comparing a Christian to a muslim ... it may well be you are just trying to help them see the light ... as my uncle tried. Even his wife .. he was not sure she was heaven bound ... I brought them tomatoes and melons ... I'm not a guru .. but can see what doctrinal obstinance can do.

And I don't know where you would feel safe telling your story or if you need to ... and I can't help with your child. I really CAN'T imagine.

I hope you find some solace somewhere.

Go Sox--Red Sox Nation Baby!

I think I'll pass. I have seen the compassionate nature on display here.

Thanks for the light heartedness--calling me a liar on what I just posted and deciding my motives for me.

I will spare you the smiley faces

my point was that YOU made a point of what the muslims were comparing. It was your point being made here ...

The other horrific events that you expressed ... I don't know how that relates to doctrine that was being debated ... but that might be a story you could tell ... and should tell?

I've certainly been a proponent of exposing all those that committed those crimes ... or helped with or enabled or looked the other way or did any less than commandeer every available soul to stop the actions of the predator in chief.

I don't really care how many dogs vp had ... some actions had to be stopped ... not intellectualized.

I'm sorry for any of that ... that happened to you ...

Islam seems to take a more kindly view of unitarians than trinitarians.

Rhino--I just thought it was interesting! Geeeeze lighten up! It was a Muslim site. I promise LOL I have been both ANTI-TRINITY and now accept it as truth--don't really think anything else. I believe it is all. Boy trying to have some fun.

Oh, I am very light, that is why I am replying to lightweight posts like this ... you are having fun comparing non trinitarians to muslims ... :) I get it ... :)

this is a beer post, just so dwbh knows .. I know he cares

cards lost ... cubs win cubs win cubs win ... 100 years ... the stars are aligned for the cubs ... prepare the fatted goat ... edmonds is the judas ... it all fits like a hand in a ball glove ... mstar has prophesied ...

Two Boots for Sister Sarah

I guess this is a bit off topic, but I found this on a Muslim forum and found it really interesting. . . . . .

Just thought it was fascinating! Didn't copy and paste it all. They seem to have an interesting take on the whole topic.

:) :)

What seems clear is you have a belief that people that don't believe in the Trinity are confused/damned/antichrist ... whatever.

Now you are bringing in some Muslim forum baseless post to support your view, or introduce what you seem to consider support for your trinity view.

The smiley faces are overdone ... you are saying Christians that don't believe the trinity are muslims (terrorists?) .. an extreme viewpoint, not supported by much of anything.

It seems to be more grasping at straws than any sort of reasonable discourse.

My guess is the person posting that message is some other whacko trinitarian poser, trying to fabricate evidence to support his nonsense position.

:) :) :)

When you say you would not pass go in a divinity school--is it really an allegiance to the trinity that would be a problem? You speak of it as if it is an allegiance to a dogma--can you see the perspective that is an understanding of God's nature instead? If you were in divinity school majoring in "God" and you rejected the most basic understanding of His being--and the textbook(The bible :) ) taught you otherwise--but you rejected it for a shoddy piece of scholarship--no bigger than newsweek and weak in its argument. Just to shore up a misunderstanding--should you pass?

You might pass in Victor Paul's School of the Divine--Someone who's qualifications match those of a false teacher, but in a Christian institue--you would not be sent out to tend the sheep--as your doctrine would be recognized and graded as false and you would be ill-equiped to minister to the brethren.

Another way to look at it??

I think your statement is a bit misleading because it imposes your understanding just in the framing of the question itself.

Rhino==of course there is an understanding that readers would have rejected it. Billy Grahm prepared the people he ministered to with an understanding of who God is and the true gospel of salvation. A child would recognize that error after hearing and accepting the truth of the gospel and reject it soundly--much like my child did. We were in a "Cult" and conditioned to dismiss it--reject it and mock it.

As someone basically out of either position, saying "the Trinity" has anything to do with understanding God's basic nature does not seem natural to me ... it seems like a dogma.

Knocking the book JCING and VP's shoddiness does not address the real issue. Surely there are shoddy works that support the trinity as well. I'm not that interested in the issue, but Lynn's book did not use JCING as a reference. Perhaps the Babylon Mystery religion would be a better reference.

Traditional religion can't explain away Christmas or Easter myths so easily. There is clearly plenty of error in traditional Christian beliefs and practice.

Children learn what they are taught. It seems harder to teach that the child is the parent, than a more logical belief that they are distinct. If the comparison to sonship is only a figure of speech, it is still the one God chose ... (most of us are not our own grandpa). Do you teach your child that you and he are one?

And then of course Christians are also sons, and of the one body, with Christ as the head ... more problems for Trinitarian dogma. And as simple as it is, the use of "son of God" and not "God the Son" (or "God the Sun") seems rather glaring, though I haven't read the original manuscripts ... or was it spoken first?

I see nothing obvious about the trinity, except that it fit in better with old pagan beliefs, and would help convert pagans ... they have their easter and christmas and all the other fishiness.

Only to those that have been "brainwashed" at some point about the trinity, would that belief seem "natural", as i see it. Once indoctrinated, it seems natural, and since that is the major Christian belief, it becomes dogma, as all of us exWOWs that were burned at the stake in some small town, can testify.

Of course most of the world does not believe Jesus is God ... they believe in some other sacred cow. "Blindness" is in the eye of the beholder, so to speak. :)

Juedes seems to be getting a little grandiose here ... there were varying degrees of belief in vp as MOGFOT ... Juedes seems to want to use totality as a springboard for his own Trinitarian beliefs ... a little self righteousness. It seems to me to be his own version of "people were possessed to not believe the Trinity"

We mostly laughed at the stupid peter beter tape about the fake moon landing. VP didn't openly teach his adultery doctrine .. he probably did some testing and found most people would not accept it. Certainly later most thought the Schoenheit adultery paper was obviously correct.

There are certainly plenty of reasons to believe JC was not God ... it seemed more logical to me even before TWI. Before TWI as a Lutheran I never thought of JC as being God, to the best of my recollection. Now as someone who doubts the Bible was "God breathed", I still don't see the Trinity doctrine fitting very well.

This section from Juedes marks him more as a black and white thinker, speaking from his own trinitarian cult ... marking all wayers as totally accepting, blindly devoted to vp ... "how else could they possibly deny The Trinity?". It seems to me he has his own Holy Cow.

But Juedes claims ...

There is no evidence that readers would have rejected it ... except that their larger cult "blindly" accepted Trinity doctrine for so long. And certainly not all blindly accepted VP's trinity views, but they were less likely to stick around if they did not. Certainly there was less room for divergent views in TWI (I presume), but I find Juedes' view too absolute. If you were in divinity school, were you allowed to "pass go" without firm allegiance to Trinity dogma? (I don't really know, I'd say no, at least at Bob Jones University)

When I ran piffle, there were always parts that made me cringe, and I think most recognized vp "imperfections".

It was never total acceptance for most ... but it was strong influence. And probably the majority of TWI was closer to not believing vp was MOGFOT ... but the higher up the pecking order you went, the more allegiance and belief was required and instilled.

The vast majority of "wayers" were people going to twig, maybe running a twig. They were a different type than the people that dwelled in the hotbed of oppression that existed at the root locations. Those people are not the norm (nor normal).

Because GSC is inhabited by so many that spent time at HQ ... or that were in over a decade, the average wayfer is not represented. Especially the average joe from the vpw era.

I think the group think mentality was a large part of the influence, which also happens in most churches. It was the whole package, and so much in TWI tended to isolate the wayfer from everyone else.

Some mentally acquiesced, some suspended disbelief, some got too caught up in the drama ... I actually think few fully believed vp was the current Apostle Paul ... or anything near that.

Even in PFAL, his own stories showed him as too imperfect to be the MOFOT. Maybe the Apostle Paul was also imperfect, but VP's piffle stories of all the other men he learned from, and the mistakes ... did detract from the pure image of a more perfect MOGFOT ... didn't it?

TWI would qualify as a cult, as I see it. But to make such absolute statements about wayers seems wrong. Juedes seems to be speaking from his own cult's pulpit, when he uses the total blind devotion argument to support his Trinity belief.

It would seem lcm totally bought it ... he defended all the adultery and with claims that it was VP approved ... as if that was the final word. I think many other leaders just bought into the power trip and liked the perks. Certainly there were a good number that mostly bought it ... but few "totally accepted everything Wierwille said".

The cult label is a little unforgiving.

But where does Jalvis fit in? He seemed more opportunist. He used his position to party in the little basement romper room as corps coordinator, ten when time for rallying some contributors to his personal cause, he slammed the ministry and confessed his sins, wrote a few books for his splinter, now is trying the VP was God angle again.

That idea that the lion will one day lay down with the lamb is pretty strong image for the bible folks to hope for after seeing video like that--- I dont see it actually happening myself but Im sure it offers hope for a change from the harshness of life for a lot people

It happens ... but it is after the lion has killed the lamb. :o

Just yesterday, right in front of me, a couple new fawns ran out from under a tree in heavy brush, about 100 yards from my house. I haven't seen any coyotes around here lately, and they are really the only predator, except man.

I'm glad we don't have bears in the woods.

Interesting you brought up bylaws. As a legal entity, TWI had to file articles of incorporation and have a set of bylaws.

Well that is interesting ... I wonder if those are a matter of public record then.

Perhaps the officers were only the trustees ... but I found this ...

Anyway, whatever they had written, it was probably designed more to protect the trustees than to deal with illegal or immoral activity, IMO. But it would still be interesting reading ... maybe a good document to have on file at GSC.

I always thought that if Romans 13 said what TWI said it did that we should have sent LCM over to take care of Sadaam when the first Gulf War happened !

Good plan ... the OT MOG's seemed to do battle rather well at times.

I don't see the purpose of offering up our life, in general ... but some things are worth fighting for ... you only need the first 100 seconds of this .. but it's all good ... maybe that really was the greatest generation ... or maybe it is all crap ... sigh ...

The sad thing is the kid probably regards me as an enemy.. when I'm anything but..

just another "critic"..

too bad..

the current "advisors" that surround him would probably say "go for it, BE gawd.."

yeah well .. some here regard me as an enemy for disagreeing .. oh well ... communication is good. Some back and forth in an open and honest way is how conflicts get resolved.

I don't have time for those rules of nicey nice where everything is so shrouded in nuance that you can't tell what people mean. And people that use those techniques are usually telling you to eff off, but in their nice way ... :o Others just flame you and try to intimidate ... an old jedi vp mind trick.

There are things to learn from that twisted past ... those inside the new groups think they have learned ... so why would they be afraid of a little back and forth here?

Communication is more like sport to me ... not "let's just be super nice to everyone .. and have a super nice day" ... no, tell me what you think, and don't just throw insults. Communicate.

But too many people have too much to hide ... they don't want to be honest .. they are working an agenda ... and so it goes ...

I don't know the kid .. but yeah ... if he blows it, how will the word ever survive? It is an interesting soap opera to watch ... and our lampooning will hopefully poke a hole in any delusions of grandeur ... but you never know ... everyone likes to dream ...

"Counsel" in the old ministry rapidly disintegrated.. from trying to perform "psychic surgery" on people with bone knives and chisels.. to analysis why the "word" wasn't "moving" like it oughter..

they then began to offer unsolicited advice as to one's sex life, finances, hobbies, family relationships, child raising.. what kind of art one should display in the house, what kind of music is appropriate..

then went as far as to try "discern spirits" and weed out "the bad people" who were supposedly the root of the manufactured "problem"..

then went as far as to dictate where people live, whether they could buy a house, under what terms..

I wonder if the new group will undergo the same metamorphosis..

what will they do when the "word" doesn't "move like it oughter.."

Yeah, on this site about TWI history, and its splinters ... it would be interesting to see the actual time line of "advancements" in counseling.

the 60's ... free love ... no problem ... vic explores the scene in California

the 70's ... naked vic ... teaching teenage girls the beauty of the body

the 80's ... a little trouble ... some counseling ... ?

the 90's ... legal problems ... lcm gets "counseled" out of HQ

how were these victims dealt with ... how was the source of the problem dealt with?

As counseling within the cult maybe improved ... when did they start counseling that the victims should be removed from HQ, at the least?

I would assume the splinters all preach against adultery or sexual predation on young women by ministers. But some of those same leaders were still part of TWI for a long time, and stood by as people that even just read the adultery paper were "exorcised" out of TWI. I suppose then, that either none of the counselors read the paper, or none of them are any longer in TWI.

So yeah, in this new Way Corps, where they are molding young lives, how will misconduct be dealt with? They have already stated they want people to come, only if they are willing to do things they are not comfortable with. How uncomfortable are they going to be made? What happens if they "break" them?

Is there a camp counselor, at least?

Considering all the "brainwashing" that occurred at so many levels of TWI, without major or complete overhaul of those corps principles ... it seems the best counseling would be to "GET OUT of the CULT" ...

At least they have Ham to contact for support ...

That said, I would never, I repeat never, mean to say that anyone who got any degree accomplished that ONLY to serve twi's purposes. Knowing some of the people DBWH mentioned (in the thread about TWI vs Therapeutic Relationships), I'm venture to say that in their hearts they genuinely wanted to help people. Who knows what is in a man or woman's heart anyway? The problem is that because twi was a closed system, these trained people in counseling were in a very odd situation when counseling, to say the least. DWBH outlined those issues already.

Peace,

Penworks

Thanks Penworks ... I didn't want to add more clutter to that other thread, which had covered a wide number of issues. I didn't mean to imply that you were pointing fingers at these men for debasing their teaching. But to me, especially in the field of psychology, it appears that even staying in The Way meant compromising and submitting to Vic's Way.

The research team is a classic example I suppose ... Vic got the final word, though he was not by any means the most competent nor the most educated. But he was the magic man ... he got a promise direct from God and saw snow on the pumps ... did you? (tongue in cheek)

I don't doubt the sincerity of those men, I lived with one of them for a year, and have no reason to think badly of him. But I do wonder how anyone could stay in The Way, and not be compromised. Especially so for those holding facts about VP's secret world.

There are counselors that apparently specialize in helping people out of cults ... books on all the subtle influences ... so given that, it seems these sincere and knowledgeable men were themselves still CUI ... "counseling under the influence."

So I have to wonder whether that was ever broken ... the cult addiction. Since I see that as THE real problem, I don't see much help beyond the bandaids until they themselves were delivered from that prison/allegiance. I don't understand how they could in good conscience, stay in TWI, unless they were still under a certain level of ... call it "cult mind control", for lack of a more professional term.

And of course with the new Way Corps rearing its head, I wonder how they will handle these issues. Greasespot spends a lot of time reviewing the old TWI of the early 80's and before ... but it is the current TWI and the splinters that are the issue now, really.

I think LCM once declared they had become a religion ... so maybe they have also taken a less dogmatic approach, maybe they do have checks and balances ... and even actual professional counseling. I just can't see it happening for those that were "IN" while VPW was around.

The splinters have decentralized to a large degree, and people that are still around in them are more mature and capable of recognizing and dealing with their spiritual "leaders" ... or so we can hope. Have they actually grown out of the cult think / group think?

To me, what you described as a "very odd situation" was indeed that ... but if they were still in the cult, they were blind to the root issue ... allegiance to this great manipulator. Everyone needed to leave the influence of the cult, before there could be a crisis resolution.

All in TWI were hostage, to a certain degree. Being in the cult WAS the crisis.

Seems every year, it's getting harder to hide behind the separationist issues, when one's actions cause harm..

I would be interested to know if those professional counselors are still in TWI ... or if they left and are in a splinter ... or when they left ... since you mentioned the comments from penworks, which are indeed helpful, i was wondering about this ...

Does TWI allow some of those professionals to help? Or are they still using holy water and silver bullets? Or are those professionals still in TWI, putting on bandaids, as they compromise their "secular/worldy" training to "make it accurate" according to da wuhrd?

The splinters have maybe progressed a little, how could they exist without some changes? ... But given the spiders in the noses type rev' that was reported ... it seems some ministers have their own schizophrenia ... or whatever ...

I think VP knew he made up the snowy gas pump story ... but maybe the myth has become greater than the man ... a few more generations and vp will be remembered as half man, half god ... did he have wings? I almost forget ....

If I said,"Dr. Wierwille WAS LIKE A BASTARD, considering he abused women, took credit for other folks work, and emotionally bullied many into submission," that would be a SIMILE.

If I said,"Dr. Wierwille WAS A BASTARD, considering he abused women, took credit for other folks works, emotionally bullied many into submission, and caused the ruin of TWI," that would be a METAPHOR.

If i simply looked at these things and yelled at the top of my lungs,"BAAASSSTAAARRRD!!!" That would be an example of the figure of speach "HYPOCATASTASIS."

Actually, I don't think any of those are figures of speech ...

1. A child born out of wedlock.
   
2. Something that is of irregular, inferior, or dubious origin.
   
3. Slang. A person, especially one who is held to be mean or disagreeable.
   

He did not "willingly" give over control, but he was cheated, taken advantage of, captured, and later falsely accused by Potiphar's wife. I can see a number of parallels between Joseph's situation and that of anyone who is mistreated but comes out on top.

Well if you generalize enough ... sure, there are always some points ...

But rascal mentioned comparing it to our time in TWI ... it seems more opposite to me.

He was under physical duress yet did not submit ... we were told we were better/smarter than others ... and were tricked into following a man.

Some who got out did OK I guess .. some are still trying to recover. But maybe some good happened despite the negative surroundings ... and our leading people to a cult ... hmmm ... I don't think it was just the leaders that did harm.

I just can't see Joseph in the cult ... he kept his mind free.

Joseph being sold into Egypt is a great way to understand twi involvement.

I'm sure there is something to learn there ... but Joseph maintained his relationship with God ... while being forced into a different place and role.

We were suckered into following a man that filled us with a lot of false doctrine and practices. We were free to leave but were not spiritually or otherwise sharp enough to get out.

I don't see any Josephs in TWI daze ... people were abused, they fed money and time into a destructive cult. The way some men treated their wives (per TWI instruction) is just one example of how we were not Josephs.

I don't see Joseph as being led doctrinally astray ... nor that he was tricked or coerced. I can't see Joseph ever getting into TWI ... as opposed to him being sold into Egypt.

Cultists minds are captured ... whereas Joseph did not give over control, except in the physical.

There is also "lucid dreaming" ...

I have done this ... haven't thought of it for a long time ... glad this came up. You recognize the dream on some level, but decide to stay in the dream, but you control it. So maybe you were falling, but you fly ... up up and away ... superman ... or up up and away, in my beautiful balloon ... whatever you want ... wahooo ... can't wait to go to sleep tonight ....

If you have recurrent dreams that perhaps relate to some real world event, it may be that control through a lucid dream may give you more control over the situation in the real world as well ... giving yourself emotional power over it, mostly I'm thinking. This can free you from submissive responses maybe ... good for people in a cult maybe ... turn the tables on that MOG ...

"I'd be dead today if not for Dr. Wierwille/PFAL."

Through the years, even long before GSC, I have heard people use variations of this same phrase on so many occasions that it's difficult to estimate the number.

Does anyone know where this phrase or line of thinking may have originated?

I imagine it popped up in some teachings somewhere ... but it seems a common response of defensiveness. This "Father in the word" is found out to have done lotsa bad stuff ... some that were so enamored/entwined for so long can hardly just throw off that emotional attachment.

And of course there is the syndrome of the abused tending to protect the abuser. I believe anyone really seeking help would have found it ... and maybe some within TWI were still functioning as helpers. But as I see it, they would have functioned in that capacity more efficiently in other ministries, or even on their own.

Could VP's ability to hook people into his cult ... somehow have attracted people that would have stayed lost .... and then those people's lives were improved by the good folks that were also trapped in the cult?

It makes more sense to me that VP harmed other ministries (as WW pointed out), and was a parasite that killed or harmed his hosts. People that were helped, were really getting the ministry of other men, but VP stamped his name on everything. It was degraded by VP .. not improved. He drove it right into the ground. (literally ... he lived off their biblical work, till he went into the ground himself)

I do wonder if it was not just his physical abuse of himself (alcohol, tobacco) that led to his early demise, but his moral abuses as well. But even at the end, he was putting blame on others ...

I don't even know the old rules ... there are plenty of rules ... it is how they get applied that matters.

If someone posts something in response to another post ... then that post is deleted, and a responder to that post is called a liar because that post now never existed ... that is getting slimy. Then if the responder's rebuttal is deleted, but the king allows his false accusation to stand ... it gets real ugly ... and all respect is lost.

If flaming is allowed by a favored few, but an excuse is looked for, to ban those that post comments that don't support "the mission" .. that is slimy ...

If enough slime happens .. there will be a small gang of people remaining that agree with each other and use the site to rejoice at how superior they are ... but they will find ways to attack each other, with everyone else gone .. and the site dies.

That is not all that different than sites that don't allow outside commentary .. it might actually be worse, because there would be a pretense of openness ...

Ideally there is a purpose here, but there is no need to control the direction of commentary. Maybe get two people before banning anyone ... so personal grudges don't control those type actions ... it is easy to destroy a place when fairness is tossed out, and the eject button is used as a power trip tool.

Yes I agree ... why don't some good folks post here any more ?

Very interesting Jonny ... I had a college roommate .. a friend from high school, that went to see The Exorcist" and couldn't sleep with the lights out for a month or so.

Another interpretation may be that they were not spirits, but your own brain, with fear induced images from the movie. When you changed from fear to assertiveness ... your mind rejected the self produced images, and you felt you had control.

Of course I don't know ... but I just remember how amazed I was at the influence of that movie on my engineering student friend. But he wa in aeronautical engineering, so maybe he was just spacey ...

I applaud Don for not becoming part of the scramble and not starting some off-shoot.

I just don't agree with your POV here. And whether you intended to or not - there is a unspoken accusation being made.

Yes ... Vic was the higher power ... Don was not able to stand up to him ... I think that is fact, not accusation. He tried and then found up what he was really up against ... Don describes it pretty well, doesn't he?

I don't see you only giving a view - I see a review - and commentary. You are making many more statements than asking questions. That says to me that you want to promote an idea more than you want to put a puzzle together.

How would you handle this if you and Don were sitting at a counter having a few beers? No audience and no peanut gallery... That would be an honest approach - not this.

this is a forum ... sure, face to face at a bar would be different, but we are in a forum ... it can be honest here also. Why am I only allowed to ask questions, in your rule book? I was sending in money and people ... why is the perspective of the 99% of TWI that was on the field not important?

This idea that other TWI clergy have greater insight seems bogus ... maybe they have lesser insight. Being clergy was shown to not mean much of anything in TWI ... and some seem to still think there was some greater understanding at HQ ... I see it as greater confusion.

Then again - you didn't have kids to raise and feed - did you? You weren't held under house arrest for days with guns and dogs threatening your young family - were you? Add to that that your "space" was smaller. AND- you had the luxury of leaving after all these other events were old andhad been sorted out. Someone had to do the sorting out. By the time you got everyone in your space out - the real hard work had been done.

Exactly, it was and is easier for me to have a different maybe clearer perspective ... I was not so owned and controlled by doc vic ... but we are talking about four years at HQ, not just those couple of incidents ... starting in '82 I think.

Don stuck around to see what orders the bus driver was going to pass down. Trying to hold the ministry together was still important. I'm trying to reconcile all that.

Oh yea... JAL... the guy who still thinks twi was the best thing since sliced bread. Uh-huh... yea

While you're giving your honest opinion - why not try being honestly empathetic.

That was from the Jalvis letter in '88 ... I said he was at least right on that point. I'm not sure he STILL thinks TWI was great, that may just be his latest tack. It seems he was united with some others at that point.

I AM being empathetic ... I'm empathetic toward all those that suffered through those last four to six years when several exec's at HQ knew of the hypocrisy and lies and drunks and abuse ... but chose to keep it a secret.

We all soldiered on while the thumbs up was the message given from trunk. While I can understand Don's state, I can not agree that it was a conscious and correct decision to keep the 99% on the field in the dark ... nor to not push harder for a change. It was guided by confusion and fear of VP.

What needed to be revealed wasn't confidential knowledge .. Jalvis talked about it in 1988 ... we are talking about it now ... Don didn't want "the burden" ... he didn't ask for it, he just wanted to go back to NY and "move the Word".

I think there needs to be more than one perspective ... that one coming from deep inside "identity confusion" in the middle of HQ. There is nothing dishonest about that ... and there is empathy for Don's state, not blame .... he described it well ...