shortfuse

Maybe this has been covered here before, but I haven't read it...

Was there a certain point in time when The Way began to adopt non-mainstream Christian doctrines or did it happen gradually overtime? I'm referring to all the differentiating points like rejecting the Trinity for example. VPW was raised and schooled trinitarian, he even slipped up with some comments in PFAL. Does anyone know if there was a turning point where he started teaching JCNG and why?

It seems to me that some or all of the points that made Way teaching unique must have had an origin in calculated decisions to differentiate TWI and give it the appeal of scarcity.

Is there any other explanation for the theme, poster (you'll see Sunday), CD's, etc? Completely and utterly out of ideas.

Note to TWI Watchdogs: "Borrowing" from other sources was always so fruitful for VPW. Maybe taking a look at other groups for some fresh slogans would help.

"Lift" a situation/person instead of "pray". Anything to distinguish ourselves from "ordinary" Christians who just didn't have the "greatness of the Word".

I remember at one point Craigers told us to say we weren't Christian (lol- he wasn't). "Christian" is a term of derision - we were "Disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ". I remember shortly after that being in a witnessing situation, and answering "yes" when asked if I was a Christian. Afterwards, my witnessing "buddy" rebuked me strongly. "Weren't you paying attention on Corps Night! We're not Christian - WE'RE DISCIPLES!" Oh, yeah. Slipped my mind.

Later they had to back off all that "we're not a religion" talk when it started to jeopardize their tax exeption as a religious non-profit.

Oakspear - who is "the family tables guy?"

That guy is in Florida someplace. This is somebody else. I think he also has a fellowship page someplace but I don't see any links to it here.

He said some things I'd like to smash his face in for. He's encouraging human slavery among cabinet.

Human slavery among the cabinet, eh? Care to elaborate? Sounds a bit melodramatic.

No counselling received. Were told the Corps training was counsel enough.

Reading the thread about the (im)probability of changes at The Way, I'm reminded of how powerless most Way folks feel in affecting any change whatsoever in the organization. These folks who so earnestly crave a change at the top, act like the only way that will ever happen is by outliving the current regime, and picking up the pieces. But honestly, who really wields power in the Way? Is it the B.O.D. or the individual believer? Simple. Who funds it? The individual believer.

Here's what I'm saying, "innies". If you don't like the direction the Way is going in, stop waiting for it to change one day in the future. Make it change today. That is, STOP SENDING THEM YOUR MONEY. You will be shocked how quickly you will have their ear with this one simple measure. If you feel bound by duty to tithe, you don't have to stop, just give your money where you believe it will better fund God's work. If/When The Way is more in line with what you can honestly support, then give them your money in a clear conscience.

I love ignorant, self-righteous dweebs who come on here and tell others to STFU.

Until then, STFU.

Classic. Love you, too.

I don't mean to be rude, but I see a bunch of delusional dumb kids with entitlement problems.

Saying "I don't mean to be rude" doesn't make you any less so. You "see" nothing except the hearsay you've read in this thread, and yet you smugly bash the character of someone you probably don't even know. I don't mean to be rude, but p1ss off.

There will never be a coup - the kids are dreaming.

Once they wake up, they'll realize, they're just going to have to outlive the folks in power and wait patiently for their turn - 20-30 years from now.

Exactly.

Here's the thing, though. They do understand that and they are willing to wait.

Thank God for bless patrol.

I bet lots of couples got married because of it.

LOL. 'Tis true. :)

I wonder who "Rose" is....

(And I doubt it's Axl Rose.... )

Used to be a St0kley and D3bbie Rose in MD. Dunno, just a guess...

They may have internet in their rooms, but don't forget all that internet traffic first goes through TWIT's routers and firewall and ultimately only what Steve Longley's department allows is what they have access too. I'm certain they block some sites "for the good of the twits", which ones I haven't a clue. More than likely they use a proxy server for that purpose, any TWITS at HQ confirm you use a proxy to access the internet [special browser configuration?]

Sharing the pipe with a proxy server I wouldn't be surprised by. Monitoring in the office, sure. Monitoring in Founder's Hall, I doubt it.

And I have no doubt they watch what traffic goes in and out to see what their groupies are looking at on the internet, much like their phone guys are watching who their groupies are calling or receiving calls from, which has been confirmed, and they do take action accordingly..

Monitoring who people are calling and taking action on it? Again I doubt it, unless what you are talking about happened on office phones, in which case it is justified.

Does anyone know how successful the famous

"don't visit the GSC online or you'll get possessed"

rap is working on those currently in, lately?

That rap no longer in use.

"Ambassadors for Christ" is the theme for this one.

Alright, here's another one.

Craig used to teach (don't know if VPW ever took this stance) that since revelation comes by way of the "five spiritual senses", there was also such thing as "spiritual emotions" that were a form of revelation. Biblical examples included when Jesus was "moved with compassion" or angry with the money changers in the temple. These weren't regular emotions, but spiritual energizing to respond to a particular situation.

He went on to explain that he would recognize "spiritual emotions" because they would come on suddenly and didn't seem merited from a five-senses point of view. Furthermore, he recognized it as revelation because the emotional state would vanish as soon as he acted on it. (Seriously, I'm not making this up.) Anyone who interacted with Craig much saw MUCH more "spiritual anger" than any other spiritual emotion.

There much wrong with this teaching. One thing that stands out to me is the implied importance of disregarding that "voice of reason" most of us have. When experiencing an intense emotion like anger, we need to get good at hearing that faint voice of sanity telling us to calm down. Instead, LCM elevated his violent mood swings to the realm of "spiritual emotions" that should be acted on as revelation from God.

What fruit did this teaching produce? Exactly none. Those leaders prone to LCM-like rashness felt validated, and viewed this tendency for anger and vicious criticism as a great spiritual strength. It was precisely the opposite. For those of us of a milder temperament, we felt compelled to fabricate the kind of intensity exhibited by these "leaders". Many were cast aside as weaklings. Others of us spent years viewing a great strength in temperance as an embarrassing deficiency.

...but I digress. Anyone know if this "spiritual emotions" teaching is still in the advanced class?

This was the bottom line for Craig. He liked to claim he could always give good solid reasons for his decisions, but in the end he pretty much fell back on the claim that it was all by revelation. If it's by revelation, who are you to argue with God?! And if there is any question as to whether or not it was really instruction from God, "Look, either God works in me or he doesn't!"

D'oh

It's so obvious in hindsight.

This is another line I've heard repeated by many an LCM emulator.

Reading some of recent posts got me thinking about the impetuousness and emotional volatility LCM used to pass off as revelation and sound decision making.

One such example I first recall occurring while in-residence in the Way Corps. Craig would get all upset about some isolated situation in the ministry and go off on the whole Corps household as if it were indicative of all of us, or the whole ministry. He claimed God would show him the incident was an "index fossil", referring to a method of dating artifacts and geological samples. If the age of a particular fossil could be ascertained then everything in the same strata of earth could be ascribed the same age. The reference to science made the over-reaction seem more objective some how. <_<

Looking back it was not only dangerous over-reaction, it taught a generation of us to do the same thing.

Ya'll remember how we all got excited over his ramblings? Can you remember any?

Mostly insults come to mind.

"That guy's dumber than a box of hair"

"Elevator doesn't go to the top floor"

"Out to lunch without a sandwich"

"Possessed as a new boot in hell!" (still don't get that one)

Then there were okieisms to express intensity.

"All over it like a Texan on a pork chop"

"Go 'til you hear glass"

"Tight as you can, and then one more"

"All over that guy like a hair shirt"

I once met a guy in Oklahoma who had made a song out of many Craigisms. It wasn't intended as satirical at the time, but looking back it sure did that well.

Anyway, the "no gift" thing would have been nice if it had been handled logically, but it became a pain in the arse.

No doubt. As is evident in the language of the message, it was an ill considered emotional outburst, not a well considered policy change. That outburst became a mandate that lasted 8 or 9 years. Suddenly any act of kindness toward us had to be filtered through a guarded lens of distrust. What is this persons motives? What are my motives? Even if both are pure hearted, I might still be wrong in principle or precedent set. It took a lot of the joy out of simple cheerful giving (and receiving). It's hard to articulate the awkwardness and second guessing this engendered.

On another level, I see this as an example of how Craig tried to get the attention off of himself and made people to look inward and turn any criticism they might have on themselves.

Love that band but that is not what I want to talk about.

In Der Vey and it seems in many other non-denominational and protestant groups and for many around here "religion" seems to be a bad word. Why is this?

There is a reasonable definition for the word that basically involves a belief and respect for a god. Someone else on here a while back said religion was a set of beliefs you guide your life by. I don't see anything offensive with either of those usages.

Although, there is this other definition that seems to have been made up my none other than religious organizations that attempts to seperate them from the rest of THOSE people. In this case religion is a "four letter word", perhaps even evil. It is a man made set of rules to control etc. To me this is just a definition that makes it an us vs. them sort of thing... a we're different and better than them sort of thing.

So do you use the word "religion" in this way, and if so why? Are you apart of any organized god fearing group? Why do you not accept the normal use of the word? What is wrong with it? How should we refer to it?

Back in the day, LCM went so far as to say we shouldn't accept the label "Christian". We were "disciples". A few years after that, he had a bit of a reversal. Turns out the IRS considers The Way a religious organization. If you refuse to be called a religion, that's fine, but you have to give up your tax exempt status. No thank you! "The Way is a religion if anybody asks."

I remember reading a letter from VPW my folks had their files. I don't remember what he was apologizing for, but it was addressed to the whole Corps, and it was sometime just prior to a Corps week.

Anybody recall that?

I was perusing through links a couple of weeks ago from a link in a doctrinal thread and came across some writings that sounded similar to some of the things VPW taught and I came across a story of a man this minister (the writer) had healed.

Wouldn't you know it, but this story sounded remarkably like the one of the guy VP said he healed in India on the train. The one where he said something like, "I don't believe in your jesus, but I believe you can heal me." All my TWI books are in storage and my memory is a little fuzzy, so if any of you could relay the original story here, I will look for that link again.

At the time I was thinking to myself, "Holy crap, even this story was stolen."

I'll try and find it, but any of you have any other insight into this?

Probably can be found in the PFAL book and maybe Mrs. VPW's book.

I tried to articulate something to this effect a few months ago. I will try again in a different manner.

It occurs to me that many of the same tactics TWI ascribed to the adversary, they utilized themselves to deceive us. Consider these quotes from LCM's foundational class.

(segment 11, regarding Gen 3:4) "He will lie as big as he can, as quickly as he can. The bigger the lie, the more quickly people buy it and accept it; then the quicker he gets to operating and controling a situation."

Funny. In hindsight, that sounds like a perfect description of his teaching of Genesis 3. "What's that you say, Eve had a lesbian experience with the serpent?" Right, you would lie would you? The Bible is of no private interpretation, so you must not be doing that now. Must be true.

(segment 11, regarding Gen 3:4,5) "The lies stack up so quick, Eve can't control it. That's why you immediately confront the evil thought, confront the adversary no matter what from he comes at you. You've got to get the truth so burning in your soul and take charge of your mind, life, and logic."

The lies stack up so quick. Tell me about it. TWI f*cking buries you. Even if you try to reason your way through it, you will never dig out. Too many lies. The rest would have been good advice if it was directed back at the teacher.

In DTA Craig taught the the key to the adversary's success was the secrecy of his moves. He was supposedly destroying his works by exposing him. Looking back I see irony. Yes, TWI was/is incredibly secretive about other things, but knowingly or unknowningly at times they did it all right in front of you.