shortfuse

I was at HQ post lcm for several years. It was far less controlling than the field experience of the 1990s. IMO.

(of course HQ was still BS, they were more crafty, another topic. Also, everyone had experienced so much control prior I think certain behavior was already conditioned)

edited for grammar

Word up on the conditioning. No need to be so overt once people have been trained.

In our new bodies we can vanish right when you attempt your pathetic kick and you'll fall on your butt just like Charlie Brown when Lucy pulls the football away. Ha ha.

I'm fine with you and VP disappearing as an alternate version.

I hope I'm there at the return too, and when you see VPW, and go into your, "Hi, God bless. How are you?" that the two of you share a warm embrace, and that VP is a little clingier than you expected, and the hug lingers, and just as you are starting to think "this is awkward", right at that moment the two of you line up perfectly and I come up and with one kick drill both of you squarely in the satchel while I shout, "TWO-FER!' That's my heaven. It will smart, but then again, you will be in your new body and recover super quickly so all good.

We left HQ in 2005 and TWI entirely in 2007.

Ain't freedom great? Husband and I coming up on our 11th wedding anniversary and our 9th year of cult free life.

Yes, I think it's better. A little surprised how many years it is taking me to sort through all this. Congrats to you and your hubby.

Yes, yes, yes, yes and yes.

Piecing together and rethinking what happened before can alter perception of what is going on now, and alter views looking forward. Which of course could lead to actions they prefer would not take place.

If you take those new actions, they want to argue that YOU are a FOOL, and not the other way around.

Look, I hear you, but you have to understand something. You can't change the past.

Through the Fog

Ah, dots connected. I listened to this in '08 which is the year I left twi and the corps. Just listened again. such a cluster.

I personally confronted dictor in his bunny hatch motor coach in early 1983.

Would like to hear this story.

Kids were often put on twig teaching rotations . . . and yeah later Way D . . . I never understood Way 'dogma' very well so I usually resorted to making stuff up. Having observed adults for so long imitating was natural. No, the first time it donned on me that I just sat there and made stuff up and the whole room was happy and excited made me upset. But I know other kids would joke about imitating the grown-ups like that (I think that imitation is natural).

Ah, I see. Felt that way about speaking in tongues, interpretation and prophecy.

Interesting . . . no statement is perfect. History is constantly re-written, I'm sure there's other ways to look at that.

My intent is interpret Waytalk . . . just working on how to react to their words.

Wayfers have a lot of little sayings that may have begun with leadership but take on their own life. Wayfers often expect a predictable response from statements like "well you can't change the past" . . . I imagine after leaving TWI and realizing that there's a hundred ways those expectations are far from perfect can often feel like enlightenment.

Seeing the thought process behind their words, even if they don't understand them, could make dealing with and directing conversation with them simpler. (and less aggravating)

Maybe the thing to strive for here is to politely challenge trite and cliché sayings, and state plainly what is minimized with euphemism.

Example: "I agree that you can't change the past, but you seem to be using that as a way of excusing wrong doing. Do you mean to do that?"

I will try to experiment with this more on my own family and see how it goes. Don't worry, I'll report back!

Followers of The Way are like walking wrecking balls.

I remember when I was "in", as a teenager and early 20s, I was able to do some directing. Wayfers (the older ones at least) could be convinced of anything if you said things a certain way. Did you ever do that?

If the language could be better understood and used properly . . . couldn't damage be mitigated?

I don't really remember directing any wayfers. Honestly, I remember trying really hard not to. I always felt they gave too much weight to my opinion for the simple reason of a leadership title. Was usually encouraging them to make their own choices and own them.

What kind of damage are you talking about? If the Wayfer is the wrecking ball, who is getting wrecked in the analogy? themselves, other wayfers, outsiders?

Not sure if I'm picking up sarcasm, is something being hinted at? . . . (I was meaning to be somewhat rhetorical in the prior post.)

I hope to be able to work with Wayspeak to get things done with Wayfers, would that be in the academic material? I'd prefer to hear some success stories. I've witnessed "the internet's" destructive power as well as TWI's. Unfortunately, the facts mostly lead to negative . . . is there just nothing to learn?

I've never heard of any success stories. Sorry.

My belief is that people have to see it for themselves. It seems that any kind of criticism of the way triggers a defense mechanism that only reinforces way loyalty - I assume the opposite of what you are after.

I think there is definitely something to Rocky's point that some dramatic event is often needed to trigger a change in beliefs. For me, I think it was the Allen Lawsuit that jarred me into thinking critically, or more specifically to start valuing my own perspective and stop thinking like a peon. It was however another 8 years before I would eventually leave the way because of the strong compulsion I felt to reform it.

I have family still deeply involved in the way and it is a source of frustration and pain for me. I don't know if there is a path to reason with them about it. I haven't seen one.

I'm not interested in changing minds. Getting people out of TWI is a fool's errand. . . . Managing Wayfers is the real challenge.

You could argue, (we're far beyond the 1980s), keeping some people in is best for everyone. (Like if you're 95 and still smoking, there's no point in quitting, the shock will kill you).

The internet was mostly new when it affected me. It aimed for TWI, but I'm not sure anyone knew what the actual target was.

Can you elaborate on what you mean by managing wayfers?

I have 4th corpse pals who told me all about how Rosie was in the sack.

Just threw up a little in my mouth.

Learned yesterday, or, was reminded, that I am devil-spirit possessed.

I have been accused of that since I was little.

I don't believe a word of TWI nonsense.

It still makes my guts turn to water when I hear it. They are so confident.

That's .... up man.

I recently learned from my mom that when someone goes Corps, the devil assigns them a person deceiving spirit whose whole mission is to get them to cop out. That's her explanation of why I left the way, deceiving spirit got to me and I "got tricked". I'm a grown man, and I know she's full of crap, but it still felt like a kick in the satchel.

Sleep Link: Here

Just a reminder this study likely did not included factors such as SIT, Believing, and God's Hand of Protection.

I hope no one teaches the terrorists about speaking in tongues. Then we're screwed.

Also interesting article. My thought is that this kind of sleep deprivation torture seemed dismissible, but the more subtle "sleep is for suckas" could yield similar results over time.

Do you suppose there's some playbook out there?

or do cult leaders just instinctively do these things?

I have been reflecting on the cultish aspects of the way recently, and it occurs to me that sleep deprivation really *was* an issue there wasn't it? After the in-residence Corps, I don't recall anyone dictating how long I worked or how little I slept, but I think there was a macho "sleep is for sissies" kind of attitude that was prevalent. "I'll sleep when I'm dead." That sort of thing.

Fast forward to present, and many years post-twi I'm dealing with sleep issues,and trying to improve my sleep. I'm blown away by how differently I function on a good night's sleep. It makes sense to me now the value of keeping a group of people chronically tired if you want to influence them moreeasily.

What I like about this:

Importance of calling it like it is. It is not helpful to keep white washing what The Way was/is.

What I don't like:

The video quality. I appreciate what JJ is trying to do, but why does all his content come across so half-assed?

What do you get when you do a "search" on the name "Jim Jones"?

You get posts where his name was mentioned.

Thanks for Word Wolf for the LMGTFY reply. Sorry for the bad forum etiquette, I certainly could have searched first. Have just been throwing out some ideas lately as they hit my mind.

Thanks for the references. They help.

We were advised that we would be labeled a cult because of our belief in the "Jesus Christ Is Not God" doctrine, completely ignoring the reality there are cults that aren't even Christian, or otherwise religion oriented in any way. It wasn't our Biblical beliefs that defined us as a cult, it was our crazy lifestyle and propensity for commune-like living arrangements.

I think both usages of the word were appropriate. But you are right, the first usage was used to dismiss the second.

Anyone ever hear a Wayfer analysis of the Jonestown mass suicide. Curious what the take would be.

I'm starting another thread, related to my last one about the trinity. I am curious about the appeal of the *research* aspect of TWI. For example, I've been reading about the Jesus People Movement, with keen interest in the overlap to VPW. It seems VPW was not all that impressive to the Christian hippies of Haight Ashbury, but the few he was able to coax out to summer school in Ohio came away very impressed by the research. Things like four crucified, Paul's thorn in the flesh, etc. Also, and I don't if I'd call this research, the teaching discerning of spirits. My take away from these accounts is that Vic was trying hard to project an image of a great "man of god" with special insights, and it's this special knowledge that drew in some of these early Jesus People folk.

In talking to my own still involved family recently, one of the greatest points of Way Pride for them is still the research aspect of the ministry.

Anybody else feel a strong initial draw or compulsion to stay based on the special knowledge TWI was offering?

Great question Oakspear.

At Sumner School in 1970, the big hit besides the AC, was a class vic did which he entitled "How To Enjoy The Bible". The only temxtbook was Bullinger's book by the same title. Vic went through the entire book and everyone was amazed at how much of piffle was in that book! I bought it that fall and was also struck by its verbatim similarity to the first 8 sessions of piffle.

It was during this summer school class that vic first started really ruminating about JC not being God. A lot. That's where vic first said that he believed Nullinger was on track to eventually believe and teach JC ain't God. Of course no corroboration at all. Then, the full blown "research" started on JCING. It got rolling full steam during my first year in-rez, 1973-74. We had several "research nights" on the subject with cummins, Bernita jess, Donna Randall and the rest of the meagher research dept. Then the first interim year, 74-75. Book was published in the fall of 1975 and vic did his huge Motorcoach through the center of new knoxville dog'n'pony show, culminating with his ousting the book jacket and all the reasons JC ain't God. A hugely gawd's and arrogant deal with the air horns on the coach blaring and a long parade of wayfers marching behind it. Extremely embarrassing, at least for me. Then, the wars started with the cult rap gaining a full head of steam with JCING now splattered all over the place.

It was this huge PR campaign and the pugnacious, combative methods vic employed to push his cult and his controversial book were garish and grossly argumentative. Just looking to pick a fight with the "mainstream denominations and their seed boy leaders" to establish his own superior church based on his version of rightly-dividing da woid. THAT's what was important. All that brouhaha over the completely non-salvific argument over the Trinity for nothing more than ego and pride. My truth is truer than your's. Absolutely NOTHING to do with Christian charity to the poor, sick, homeless and starving. Absolutely NOTHING to do with salvation in Romans 10:9,10. NOTHING about Christian living and giving. Only, buy my books or go to hell. Take my classes or remain useless to God and die with zero rewards. All about him and his with Jesus Christ nowhere to be found, prayed to, or felliwshipoed with since He is absent in way world, stuck at the right hand of God until vic and his minus-tray are done moving the word over the world and racking up the golden cookies at the bema. Taking the place of the absent Christ continues as a hallmark of twit theology along with that of every stupid offshoot. All over a non-salvific philisophy invented by man to explain the nature of God. How absurd.

So, I would say that the real big "move" on JCING started at Summer School 1970, and culminated with the publication and public tomfoolery of Vic's Martin Luther impersonation at his old church in new knoxville. All over nothing to do with Jesus Christ's mission of salvation and love. All about vic and his prayshuss minus-tray, not about The Boss. Total waste of time and money.

Good feedback. I think a lot of the unique doctrines were about VPW vaunting himself, and then for the rest of us there was the appeal of being privy to some insider, special knowledge. My feeling is that there are many doctrinal snares, which when believed kept people trapped in TWI. This seems like a big one.

One thing that I never knew until I went back to school recently and took a class on it is that there are TWO doctrines of the Trinity, the economic doctrine and the ontological doctrine.

The economic doctrine of the Trinity simply says that everything we receive from God the Father we receive through the Lord Jesus Christ by means of the Holy Spirit, and everything we offer to God the Father we offer through the Lord Jesus Christ by means of the Holy Spirit. The economic Trinity is Gad as he has chosen to reveal himself to us. A person can pretty much take any passage from the Bible regarding the relationships between us, God, Jesus and the Spirit at face value.

The ontological doctrine of the Trinity is God as he is in himself. The first thing everybody says about the ontological Trinity is that it is ineffable, which means we can't say any effing thing about it. They then go on to produce volumes of information about something which cannot be talked about.

The Council of Chalcedon (451 CE) attempted to settle all arguments about the relations between God and Jesus by saying that Jesus had two natures, one human and one divine, the two natures cannot be said to mix or mingle, and the two natures cannot be said to be divisible or separable. The decision of the Council didn't say what the relationship was... it just said you can't argue about it. Since then, Christianity has managed to maintain what little unity it has by singing the doxology without examining too closely the meaning of the words being sung.

Wierwille screwed up our understandings of the relationship between God the Father, the Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit by teaching that Jesus is out of the loop, seated at God's right hand, and everything we receive from God we receive either through the vending machine of our believing or through the man of God of the world for this our day and time. The holy spirit is little seed that God plants in each one of us which we have to feed and water by speaking in tongues.

Jesus is and always has been the Head of his body! When Wierwille taught that PFAL was the Word as it had not been known since the first century, he was denying that the Lord Jesus has had a hand in anything that's been going on for the last 2,000 years, and that just ain't so.

Love,

Steve

Interesting insight. Thank you, Steve.

Hey, Gspotters.

Question:

Does anyone know when VPW started teaching Jesus Christ is Not God. I know the book was published in 1975. I also know that early on Vic was Trinitarian. Seems to be hints of lingering Trinitarianism in the PFAL class. Curious if anyone knows when that switch took hold.

From my POV this is one of the doctrines that keeps people feeling trapped in TWI. So few Unitarian options out there, and this is made to be such a pivotal point, I think it holds people back from leaving.

What style-manual are you using?

It would seem you should be able to use material from this site as primary source material, if not as secondary. If you are required to use material from peer reviewed articles, and you are working with a due date, it would probably be best to have a reference librarian help you search something like Academic Search Premier or ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials as soon as possible.

I think if I were trying to place TWI within a larger context of history of religion in America, I would try to show it as an offshoot of the practices of the Jesus Movement. It's theology was an idiosyncratic pastiche of Reformed Theology and Dispensationalism with a little bit of Pentacostalism thrown in, but the practices that enabled it to grow were cribbed from the Jesus Movement.

Hope this helps!

Love,

Steve

Thanks, Steve. Those are good thoughts. It is very much how I am thinking of framing it. Also, I should have been more clear, we have specifically been directed to avoid internet sources in favor of scholarly texts.

Too bad you can't use this website, but I think we're too passionate in our prose here.

Well, the conversations here have definitely shaped my perspective of The Way, and also given insights into its history. That said, it's nothing I can site in a Bibliography. Thanks, everyone.