oldiesman

I think judgments also should be made on logic and facts, not emotion. Saying John Doe was 100% responsible for Jane Doe's suicide when Jane Doe performed the act, is not logical, factual, compassionate or loving. I suppose its just like accusing someone of murder who didn't do it. Accuse them of what they are guilty for, yes, but not wholly for someone else's suicide.

Rascal, I said you lied because you didn't know whether or not I had experienced that kind of pain, not because I had experienced it myself. It just so happens that I have, but it is irrelevant whether I did or not; the point is, you wouldn't know so you can't make incorrect statements like that. Anyway, I apologize for the lying comment, I should have used the word "mistaken". I still disagree though with the idea that someone who commits suicide isn't at least partly responsible for their actions. Unless they are totally insane, which is in a separate category altogether.

Didn't you just say you were talking about Prager. Now you're saying it was about me? Which is it?

I don't think so. Even if the comment was directed at Prager, you'd still be lying. You have no idea what pain he has experienced in his life! Its a put down, really. You couldn't just disagree with his opinion and say so and leave it at that; no, you felt the need for a put down too.

So then people who commit suicide do not even share any responsibility for their own actions. Well, I disagree with that opinion.

Edited - removed personal attack

That goes without saying.

I guess it's just his opinion. Just like me, I suppose he doesn't always subscribe to the "blame somebody else" syndrome.

Am I allowed to post opinions without getting attacked personally?

All that goes on in a persons mind before committing suicide, I don't know. But I was listening to the Dennis Prager podcast one day and the topic was suicide... Dennis said something that stuck with me "suicide is selfish and narcissistic". It impressed upon me that no matter how hurt, desperate, depressed or insane a person may be because of relations with others, they still share in a level of responsibility for their own thoughts and actions.

All that goes on in a persons mind before committing suicide, I don't know. But I was listening to the Dennis Prager podcast one day and the topic was suicide... Dennis said something that stuck with me "suicide is selfish and narcissistic". It impressed upon me that no matter how hurt, desperate, depressed or insane a person may be because of relations with others, they still share in a level of responsibility for their own thoughts and actions.

Well obviously it was bull, especially since the same man wrote the following in his loyalty letter of March 1989: This certainly is written confirmation that one may walk with God outside of twi. So I think it really was up to each individual what to believe. I'm not saying some didn't buy into the "greasepot by midnight" line as a cause for concern; but to me it's a red herring. I can't buy into the idea that it was a reason some now say kept some folks inside twi for years, with all the other evidence we have available to us. My basic belief is this: generally, participants stayed as long as twi was in some way beneficial to them. They left, when twi became un-beneficial to them. Of course there will always be some exceptions.

Anyone who sat through PFAL and believed in "the law of believing" had the option of deciding for himself what he would believe. So when one heard "if you leave the ministry you will die", one had a choice to believe that or reject that, depending upon one's own choice. Or, choose to have faith in God and in the scriptures with verses like "I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee." So I think it was ultimately up to each individual. I don't think so. Just so we're clear on this, I disagree. I don't believe people stayed in twi or the corps because they feared that if they left, they would die. However, I can see that upon being told "the hedge of protection" will be gone if one left, it's possible some believers fell into that thought process for a time AFTER THEY LEFT. The thought crossed my mind too for the first few days. However, after more reading of scripture, retemories, SIT, faith in God, and common horse sense (like seeing all the folks who already left who didn't die after all) that fear vanished quickly.

I am not disputing the fact that some people, upon leaving twi, wondered if everything would be ok. I'm opining that that worry had NO comparison to an actual beheading by a King who had the military might to pull it off as desired. It's still apples and oranges. Comparing a religion where participants have free will with a military dictatorship where free will can get one killed, will never be a fair or factual comparison. If one commits treason against twi, one gets marked and avoided. If one commits treason against the King, one gets beheaded.

Thank you WhiteDove.

I'm not so sure. Even so, the penalty for saying "no" to a king could be a beheading, so there's really no comparison.

I disgree with this viewpoint, at least in part. If you're talking about perpetuating a secret doctrine like "having sex with my twig coordinators wife is just like shaking hands", ok yeah, then I agree. Get rid of that part, and other highly questionable stuff. But the whole of TWI doctrine is a lot more than just the secret doctrines that now have been revealed and condemned. Its also about many wonderful truths that have a permanent place in Christians' hearts that folks want to perpetuate for generations. That's why I'm not condemning groups like CES, CFF and the like; they are trying to perpetuate the good doctrine even though once taught by Victor Paul Wierwille. They realize the fundamental concept that the sins and wrong doctrines of the teacher does not negate the truths and right doctrine in the teachers message, and they are able to separate the fish from the bones and continue.

how the stick people became extinct

Thomas, if you want to help someone I think the loving thing to do would be to PM them and not try to publicly humiliate. You have a right to your own opinion, but to say that your post is "tough love" is lame. I think you're full of crap.

Thank God this is the United States of America with freedom of religion.

I forgot to mention a few other scriptures taught in the context of the law of believing: Remember these scriptures from the Class?: Rom 4:19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara's womb: Rom 4:20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; Rom 4:21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. Being strong in faith giving glory to God, and being fully persuaded that what God has promised he was able also to perform, was a vital key in understanding and practicing "the law of believing" as taught in PFAL. This speaks for itself, and reasonable and intelligent folks who practiced these truths can judge for themselves whether the system was atheistic.

Dr. Juedes has done this repeatedly. He's taken "the law of believing" taught in the context of how to receive the things of God and tries to make it sound like God wasn't needed, something like some atheistic voodoo belief we were supposedly practicing. Yes shame on Dr. Juedes for twisting the teachings around. He knows better, but when it comes to twi he can't see it.

I agree. His statement "lots of the stuff I teach is not original" confirms just that. He was confirming he wasn't the only one receiving these truths and he said as much. He said he "learned from men of God scattered across the continent". These men were receiving truths from God. Yes, giving proper written acknowledgement in his books would have been the right thing to do. But the idea that he was trying to palm off his teachings as original (when he tells us they are not, when he tells us who he learned from, when he says he learned from men of God scattered across the continent, and when he sells some of the books he learned from in the Way Bookstore) is simply, a fairy tale.

Hi Phil, I agree in part. Yes, I agree we should never make a claim to have full knowledge of Him and His ways. Even with all the revelation in the bible we only know in part. I would add to your verses the ones in Corinthians: 1Cr 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 1Cr 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. Not sure about the pride part and what you mean. When people have boldness and confidence in their faith, it doesn't automatically mean they have pride in their own abilities or exalting themselves. I suppose its possible, but we'd have to look at the person's mindset who you may be referring to and what set of circumstances. In any case, I believe God wants us to have great boldness in the faith, and teach with confidence. Consider these verses: Eph 3:12 In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him. 1Ti 3:13 For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus. Hbr 10:19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, Act 28:31 Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him. 1Jo 4:15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. 1Jo 4:16 And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. 1Jo 4:17 ¶ Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world. In that last set of verses, I think its clear that the purpose of God's love is so we may have boldness, because as he is, so are we in this world. Ambassadors have confidence and boldness in the power and authority they have been given by their country. We are ambassadors for Christ. As such, we have confidence and boldness in the power and authority given to us by God. Furthermore I think having confidence and boldness in what God has wrought through Christ Jesus is the opposite of having pride in oneself or one's own abilities.