chockfull

There's also a Pentecostal branch - One God Apostolics

I asked dew, vpw's son a similar question to that once - there was a discussion going on about changing what you taught when new research was discovered. I asked if he previously taught on the trinity how did he handle explaining teaching against it later. He said vpw didn't understand the topic or wasn't resolved on it so would avoid it. If it ever came up as his assignment in a teaching pool in the denomination, he would trade with somebody.

Here's a YouTube clip - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joZnuVb9l5o...feature=related

A different and possibly more apt title for this class could have been "L is for lechery". I don't know if I remember this one correctly, but doesn't he make reference to a Tiajuana donkey video in that class, or German Shepherd or something? Or am I crazy and that was the Advanced Class? I do remember the slang terms. Which provided endless source of entertainment, and usually needed to be updated every class. I wonder which came first - the chicken or the egg? Meaning I wonder if all of the attempts to be "free" and teach in these categories caused vpw to think he was being free when lecherous, or if the lechery in practice was what produced the really weird doctrine?

And RFR, having the charisma of a band-aid and a little bit how do you say, butchy, also leads by control based upon position. Smile to the face, knife to the back, move the body off the property. In all of these cases why does anyone listen? Like JAL. Who hasn't yet realized his leadership ability went out with the hair bands in the early 80's.

For a little lighter perspective on the definition of a cult, I was watching Dana Carvey's latest comedy stand-up routine the other day. I believe it's entitled "Squatting Monkeys Tell No Lies". Which the title is a portion of a really out there mind journey he takes trying to define a religion that a Scientologist would say "now that's out there!!!". He brings in all sorts of strange and controlling behavior with weird quirks into this "cult". And honestly, after watching it, there was a part of me that said "did I believe anything that was THAT out there????? Naaaah, couldn't be." And then I walked away while sinking back slowly into denial.

I guess you could look at that like God is voting for you, Satan is voting against you, your vote is the tiebreaker. Even talking in terms of God / Satan, that doesn't remove personal accountability. That would actually be pretty much what you're getting at, talking about it in different terms.

I've seen enough of this touched on in other threads in this forum and others that I felt the urge to start a current discussion on the elephant in the room. Here's some questions related: 1. What is your understanding of the Trinity? 2. Does one have to believe in the Trinity to be a Christian? 3. If one does not believe in the Trinity do they believe in "another Jesus"? 4. Where is VPW's JCNG book accurate / inaccurate? 5. What turns have your beliefs taken w/r to theTrinity surrounding your involvement in TWI, in and out?

So let me get this straight. Because the "church" has a definition, it is right? How is that any different than following a man like in TWI? Because it's a group of men and/or women? Which specific group of men and women are we discussing? Actually, from my interaction in denomonations / non-denominational churches / Christian groups, while in VPW's day the trinity seemed to be more of the dividing line with what defines a cult, more modernly the view I've seen is more of like Oakspear is getting at - looking at thier practices. And actually, if you want a Biblical approach to it (NIV, NAS, KJV, RSV, whatever choice you want), Jesus taught himself "by their fruit you will know them". So the modern viewpoint is more Biblically sound. Take the Catholic church for example. Not a cult - old definition. They uphold the trinity. However, look at their practices. Priests and alter boys, all sorts of shenanigans, very heavy-handed dogma, praying to Mary, a saint a day, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if the structure there actually prevented people from being born again in many cases - of course that's an individual thing. In practice are they a cult? You could make a case for that. Many of us sought after TWI initially because of the bigotry, hypocrisy, closed-mindedness, and lack of genuine Biblical research that was present in "the church". The fruit we saw there was certainly not of a Christian caliber. So we immersed ourselves in the Word, fellowship, and saw many signs, miracles, and wonders in our own lives. Most of that apparantly was in spite of much of the corruption happening in TWI leaders lives. Eventually that fruit turned sour as well. So here we are. Satanic blindness hides behind labels. God, however, looks upon a man or woman's heart.

So you are saying we are to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves? I would agree. That would include areas like forgiveness and vengeance. Good discussion, pond.

Vengeance does belong to the Lord. Yet when you look at that topic in the Bible it does deal with it. OT Law - avenging a death was lawful, there were even safe cities for someone to flee to for protection. Jesus forgave his enemies and instructed us to do the same. Yet when you look at setting up healthy systems on earth, there can be twisted applications of the vengeance verse too. For example, the Allen lawsuit. Vengeance is the Lords, yet a man consulted a lawyer and filed papers in a courthouse seeking damages. That could be considered taking vengeance. Yet it produced a healthy outcome in toppling a perverted predator. I've certainly heard TWI application of the vengeance verse discouraging people from taking action where common laws of the land could curtail behavior when people's moral conscience does not. People with no boundaries interpret the vengeance verse to mean they should not take any action to protect themselves. People with boundaries understand that vengeance belonging to the Lord means He will make right whatever has not been able to be set right.

I can see this functionally carried out in a marriage. There is a healthy blend of accountability and this level of forgiveness.

This topic of forgiveness is truly a precarious one. Jesus said "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do" of the mob assenting to his death. Yet what of those that do know what they do? Many times I've heard TWI leadership in very high places sluff off their atrocities with explanations like "I didn't know I was hurting anyone". Or they blame that people are hurt on the people, when they are the ones that hurt them. It's quite an exercise in dysfunctionality, twisting scriptures, and the true governer for life being politics. Functionally more like the Pharisees. When Jesus Christ comes back, all will be made right, healed, and we'll see clearly not darkly as if through a glass. In that, the scriptures can't be broken. People have to reap what they sow, or God is mocked. So in addition to being healed at the throne of Jesus, there will have to be some form of justice. Works being burned like stubble I guess are one form of that. But I've also heard TWI interpretation of that stuff saying to people that are hurt and wanting some form of justice that at the return people are only rewarded for their good works, so get over their bitterness. In love and forgiveness there has to be a form of accountability. Even with children, making them apologize to each other specifically for wrongs is a form of accountability that can allow forgiveness between people. If you have 2 children, and one never has to apologize to the other, and the other is always being told to forgive, one will grow up an abusing megalomaniac, and the other a victim. That's not God's love. Even people with mature love have accountability. I can think of God certainly being no less.

DWBH, Thanks for standing up for what is right. I respect all those who have continued to learn and help others be whole and healthy emotionally and in their minds. I can confirm any form of counseling training did not exist in WC training later than the time periods you mentioned that I have been familiar with. I don't want to narrow down dates too much at this point. -CF

Dang, kind of like all of us in TWI.

You see, here's is an interpretation that just doesn't quite have the correct SP & A. When you look at it a little closer, it contains the insightful background reference of a really mentally tough small guy who washes jock straps for the Notre Dame football team. You wouldn't want to call a guy that first of all because it might subconsciously plant a reference in his mind of being small, jock straps, or even worse, the mediocrity of Notre Dame as a football power.

SP & A means whatever the particular hotshot at the time you're dealing with wants it to mean. And usually it means that they have it and you don't. And usually the facts don't line up with that. In other words, how it is used in practice is that if you are too lazy to investigate the facts, you can just rely on your "SP & A" if you have clout. If not, tough. I mean, just look at the personal prophecy fiasco over in CES land they went through. "I saw so and so as a dog". "No, I saw her as a snake". "No, she's a can of Cheese Whiz". That can get real nutty real quick. I kind of look at all those revelation manifestations or gifts or whatever Christians call them as kind of like my underwear. Yes, I'm wearing some. No, you can't see it (and don't want to). They are for my personal benefit and comfort and to protect my private parts. You wear your own. Although, just for sheer entertainment value, I'd consider starting a thread called "Spiritual Perception and Awareness: Your Revelatory Mind Pictures of TWI Leadership". That would be awesome.

A more normal response for this guys wife would probably be a frying pan upside the head. But I guess the environment conditions out normal responses. I guess eventually it caught up with him. A normal Christian response of course would be that the BC would be reproved and relieved of responsibility for a lack of "good Christian character" like they say are qualifications for applying for the program. The BC guy sounds like the type who, outside of being married, you'd wonder if he'd ever touched a woman. That's just stupid behavior. You said he didn't come off as too bright. He was probably stupid. He was probably too stupid to be pimping, but trying to pimp. Did he have access to read your autobiography? The CC did probably, and he sounded a little more balanced (but as a CC he should have been correcting that kind of stupidity by the BC).

Krys, Thanks from the bottom of my heart for the truth and details in your account. I read in a book somewhere that people do not hide what is appropriate, they only hide what is inappropriate. And this is one in a whole series of stories of the inappropriate being hidden. Thanks for exposing it so those who wish to be informed can make decisions with more knowledge. I missed reading that on the benefits card for a Foundational Class under the "more harmony in the home" section - "use your wife as a sexual playtoy to be passed around, causing insurmountable psychological damage". Or on the prosperity section "have your belongings stolen and destroyed". Or on the believing and confidence section "be threatened with handguns by mooks for not going along with hotshots breaking laws, attempting bribes, and betraying spiritual authority". Did you ever find out from the DIL about how she was recruited for this? Or how the wrong doctrine was introduced to her? Did others condone the behavior and encourage her? King Okus just approach directly? Some of those details are the most hidden usually as they can prove collusion and collaboration. There are some stories of those in high places serving as pimps and what's the official court term "procurators" for these acts. It's amazing how deep the rabbit hole actually goes on some of this stuff.

Finding useful information in the forums is difficult. There is a pretty low signal to noise ratio. But you can find the podcasts easily, and those are all content. One idea that might be worthwhile is to have a new forum for people's personal accounts that is highly moderated with zero noise tolerance. Then we could leave the About the Way forum open for the normal shenanigans. So you believe people make up stories that are completely false to cause people to leave TWI?

Mr. Lynn, After 21 years, Momentus, and the stranger than fiction stories surrounding what you've researched leading to all of the personal prophecy "entertainment" in STFI, I would have to say that you and STFI are poster children for Jesus words "you can't put new wine in old wineskins". After your interpretation of the scriptures basically led to "catfight by prophecy", and "character assassination by prophecy", your credibility is at an all-time low among any who ever took PFAL. However, by your letter, it seems the one thing that hasn't suffered through all of this is the size of your ego and delusions of grandeur. Get a life, get a job, go back to school, and if you want to be a minister maybe you'll learn how to not fail. In the language of the kids today, You = Fail

Lucy, That's a nice letter. You are a good friend. Great example. -cf

No, but that web site provides some pure entertainment!!! Look at the Blodgett's pages under the Wolves tab. It reads like Passing of the Patriarch meets the Unabomber, and gives an overview about what life is like running that outfit! You just can't make up fictional stuff that funny!

Beautiful! Then they could have an offshoot that starts their own Research Teaching and Fellowship Ministry. Referred to as - drumroll - RTFM. I can hear the conversations now. Where did you come from? STFU What do you believe now? RTFM

When I rejected the "family" vs. "household" blatherings of TWI, it was amazing to me how much more I valued genuine Christian fellowship regardless of the doctrine or background of the Christians. I saw that it was I who had blinders on due to a condescending and judgemental attitude I carried towards brothers and sisters in Christ. They were not considered "household". Boy what a beam I needed to remove from my own eye.