oldiesman

Saying there was never any baby is like saying there was never any bathwater. Both claims deny reality.

This can be a reality not only of the evil, but also of the good. I try to consider both, since both happened simultaneously. I feel the same way, but think the difference is I haven't allowed the bad experiences of others to corrupt or "talk me out of" the godly experiences. When one refers to the whole of TWI as an "abusive cult", one seems to have already jumped on the hate-TWI bandwagon, irrespective of any godliness that occurred. I am sometimes befuddled by someone who stayed in TWI for so long and can't testify or be proud of how wonderful it was. Seems like all that matters are the sins of people. I doubt if I will ever refer to the whole of TWI as an "abusive cult." The Corps maybe...we might all have been better off had that program never gotten off the ground.

Hope, something doesn't quite fit here. If the Judge really said that LCM committed rape, why didn't he have him locked up? To the best of my knowledge, Judges have the authority to lock someone up when they have evidence of a felony being committed.

Rottiegirl, I agree with your statement and that's pretty much how I feel about it. If one uses the same standards across the board, I have little problems identifying cults and identifying TWI as a cult if you also include the RC church and other churches in the mix for their oft evil ways. Let's not give any of these groups a break if the standard is identifying evil. Thanks Goey for pointing out the trinity in the mix.

Ginger, I think it really all depends on your point of view. Marxists might say that all religion is a harmful drug and people go get their daily or weekly dose in cultish bondage. I think all religions might be thought of as cults in that sense. As reported by many, TWI-2 was/is legalistic. But comparing my experience in TWI-1 with the Roman Catholic church: TWI-1's burden was not heavy, but light. I wasn't that dumb to go from the frying pan into the fire. When I was a Roman Catholic, every time I passed a church I had to make the sign of the cross; I had to pray to Mary (Hail Mary); had to recite trinitarian prayers; had to wear amulets (or whatever they call them now) to assure God was on my side if I died; had to go to confession on Saturday in order to receive communion on Sunday; etc. It goes on and on. I was a basket case. But maybe folks don't consider all that RC stuff religious bondage and folks who do all that stuff do it out of their free will; but every time one of us stepped foot in a twig, we were under someone's control; and in bondage. Go figure.

Every evil or dark extremity in TWI either existed at one point in time, or exists now, in the Roman Catholic church, perhaps even tenfold. Why then do they label TWI a cult and not the RC church? Was the RC church ever called a cult? No. I think simply it's because we never believed in the trinity. Hey, they label Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Moonies, Scientologists, etc.. (who else?) a cult too. All non-trinitarians. Perhaps I'm oversimplifying matters but it makes the most sense to me anyway.

Rottiegirl, I remember VPW saying in the early seventies, that the reason why TWI was labelled a cult was because we didn't believe Jesus is God. That was when I started believing that trinitarians loved to label us a cult, because its just another way to degrade the non-trinitarians. Would they call us a cult if we believe as they do? I doubt it.

The first time I realized VPW didn't get the PFAL class by relevation was when I saw the 4 crucified in the Bullinger bible. But I never knew about all the things VPW learned from B.G. Leonard. It sure looks like VPW wasn't the apostle we all thought he was. He certainly should have given B.G. Leonard more credit for his learning experiences, something like Mrs. Wierwille wrote only years and years before.

Laleo, WOW. You made me cry. Thank you so much for being so kind and loving. Thank you too Dot Matrix. Wow what a thread. I'm completely blown away. Thank you.

Dot, Please feel free to keep posting your stories and recollections; rest assured, I (and I'm sure lots of other folks posting and not posting) are listening.

Long Gone, I will keep your thoughts in mind when debates like this come up in the future. Thanks!

QQ, I mentioned that analogy because I didn't want anyone to think I was minimizing how bad VPW's alleged actions were in drugging women. It doesn't have to be 200 women he drugged to have been very bad; it's bad enough that only 10 might have been. I will admit I'm still speculating about VPW drugging people; it's all so hard to grasp. And regarding your other comment, no, I am not that poster.

Abigail, thanks for mentioning.

Ginger, As far as I can tell, there does seem to be a difference of opinion on what actually constitutes rape; and I don't know if there's any one set answer right now, maybe all viewpoints need to be considered. But I'm listening to all viewpoints and asking questions when I have doubts. Thanks.

Thank you again, Rafael.

Dot Matrix, Thank you for this response; it's been very helpful. You make lots of sense in your posts, and I'm reading and deeply considering everything you say. Thanks.

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.

LongGone where do you get that from? I never, ever suggested ANY woman was a slut, especially Excathedra, or even those who might willingly have had sex with VPW. And my argument never suggested it was about Excathedra's actual experience but my doubts about the article she was quoting. Excathedra explained her situation on another thread before this one, that she was in a moving bus and couldn't just leave; so after I heard that, the thought never crossed my mind that she wasn't a victim; as a matter of fact, I think I admitted on another thread that I thought she was VPW's sex slave. That's very bad. So I have no doubt that Excathedra was taken advantage of big time. Ok?

Wayfer Not!, My view is that genuine healing comes from God and Christ, not forums on Greasespot Cafe. "He sent his word, and healed them". Forums on GS are full of varying opinions and debate, and as long as folks like myself are respectful to others, we are (or should be) able to post dissenting opinions without worrying about offending others. Those are the GS rules. Ginger, As best as I know, I've been respectful to posters, and when I haven't, I've apologized. But it looks like what you may be really suggesting here is: "agree with me, otherwise keep your mouth shut"? Dot Matrix, Yes I'm fine. But I thought it was interesting you said if I was "caught up in it then I am also a victim". Thank you for trying to comfort me in that you say I was also a victim. But consider this too: if I was caught up in the doctrine of devils, then can't you apply that same logic to VPW? He ALSO was caught up in this doctrine of devils, no? He (VPW) was a victim of the devil too then, wasn't he? Rafael, Thanks again for the support and trying to see the viewpoints I've been expressing. Lindyhopper, I still have a problem with that word "rape". If you're talking about VPW administering those date rape drugs (which admittedly is still hard for me to believe) then you'd have to call it rape. No question about it. Other than that, I don't see it as rape, but more like sexual harassment. Does it matter? Well, sexual harassment conveys one idea, and rape conveys another. Rape conveys that you simply couldn't say no, and couldn't get up and walk out. But we've seen testimonies of women declining VPW's advances, so I know it was possible. But certainly please don't misunderstand me, its bad enough for me and others who respected VPW to now think that he had a very sleazy sexual problem. Orange Cat, I think you've distorted Rafael's intent to be fair and intellectually honest. He's bringing up viewpoints, just like I am. Why do you have to label him as bordering on an enabler? He's trying to be objective, just like I am. Alfakat, What difference does it make whether I may or may have not discussed these points on Waydale? If it does, please let me know because I'm missing your point.

Orange Cat and Evan, I am saying all, because the premise of the argument Excathedra brought up applies to all pastors according to her article: If that statement is true, then you may say that about VPW and all other pastors in TWI too, right? I think what's fair is fair, if you're going to apply that standard to VPW you might as well apply it to all of them. A side comment to Orange Cat: you may dislike me very much, hate my guts even, but in the future if you want me to answer your questions please address me by my handle.

This is the part that I still think hasn't been proven yet, that ALL ministers in TWI were sexual predators who weren't merely interested in (unacceptably) satisfying their sexual needs, but much more than that had this evil mind set that made their actions equal to committing rape on their prey. It's still a little extreme, in my opinion.

Def59, Is the reason why you believe PFAL contained a multiplicity of errors because VPW was as you call him "a scam artist", or is it because of the actual content of PFAL? Try to separate PFAL doctrine from the man Wierwille. This is what Rafael is doing, and I think its exceedingly admirable.

Oakspear, Actually, on the front of Koestler's book he says they became the cradle of Western Jewry; but nonetheless if Rafael thinks it should be put on the list and he says there's DNA evidence supporting his conclusions, it's good enough for me.

Rafael, Thanks and nice job so far. May I make a few suggestions that might improve things? (1) -- I think it might look better in column format, with 2 columns, like a table. The first column heading would read "What PFAL says" (or what other of VPW's writings say) then list in the rows in that column what PFAL says and document the exact page. The second column heading would be "what the bible says" or "other research" or something like that. Then in those cells you would put your responses. Finally for the "discussion" part you may want to use endnotes. I don't know how difficult this is to set up, I'm not knowledgeable how to do this on a webpage, but I do think it would look and feel more professional. But if it's too much of a hassle, then perhaps if you use your existing format and just put in parenthesis the actual page from where you are quoting VPW from, that would suffice. (2) -- Error 9 -- I think this is a big big deal and much further discussion is needed. If its true that the gospels are also written TO us, just as much as the epistles, then I think apparent contradictions between the two need to be explained. (3) -- Error 21 -- Just a small note here, but I think The Thirteenth Tribe is still very much contoversial and not definitively proven one way or the other. I've spoken to a few knowledgeable Jews about this book and there is controversy on all sides. But be that as it may, it says on the front cover that "evidence indicates that the Khazars themselves migrated to Poland and formed the cradle of Western Jewry...". So Koestler is contending that the large part of Western Jews of today (Ashkenazim) come from Khazars, they are Ashkenazim; not eastern, Sephardim Jews, which you correctly point out. But Koestler says that "Western" Jews form this group; while you say he is saying "Eastern" Jews that he doesn't say... Well that's it for now..I hope this helps in some small way.

Thanks...