satori001

John Lynn probably waiting for the latest Dement-Us (Momentus) seminar on internet bulletin boards before he posts again. Speaking of Momentus, I didn't realize Bo Reahard was on the Mashiyach Ministries Board of Directors. It's on their website.

In light of Greasespot's history and purpose, it is a PRIVILEGE for John Lynn to be HERE, and to address the many people who post, and many more who frequent Greasespot. That is reason enough for him to "pursue communications" here, if he so desires. There are no special guarantees of safe passage for "VIP's." He gets what everybody gets, no more or less. If he, or his handlers and peeps, sense mortal, spiritual danger, he can just retreat back into the safety of shadows (a.k.a. "CES"), from whence he came. Even so, John has nothing to fear. After all, fear is only false evidence, appearing real. And besides, if a few posters got really out of line, with language or accusations, Greasespot would protect him. He wouldn't have to resort to "spiritual anger." And that's best.

And how do they decide, oldiesman? How do we make an informed decision when we only have one side and it's a polished production like CES? Do we wade through hundreds of pages of CES tracts, calculated to cajole and persuade, rather than engage and inform? No, they take advantage of a collective "dialogue" like this one, if they're going to have a fighting chance. Why not look at the pro's and con's? Becaues CES' tradition is beyond question? Are you kidding me?This is the only way to avoid being conned by the pro's, oldiesman. It's essential. And ESPECIALLY when CES leadership are all alumni of the same miserable cult, we need coherent arguments, valid questions, public "dialogue." CES is strangely silent though. I think it's because they have plenty to hide. They can't answer the tough questions, so they hide. Didn't CES endorse something called "Dialogue" once? As Invaluable Dan points out, they've changed its name (if I got that right). (They should have changed it to "Demagogue " - but they didn't ask me.) oldiesman, here is what you are saying, in so many words, and in so many ways: "PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN!!" Sorry Toto. You may be logging in from Oz, but most of us are back in Kansas.

Exactly, oldiesman, and they represent themselves as the alternative to "Religion in the USA, 2004," and therefore they are misrepresenting themselves. I had to connect the dots for you, but a very good observation on your part. How does dedication and hard work somehow justify the promoting of shakey/shady doctrine? That's a new one.

Thanks again Paw.

Thanks Cynic. Enjoy your trip to Hedonism!

dmiller, When I posted that, you seemed a lot less reasonable than you now seem to be, so put that last line in the context of the moment. Regards...

I can't help but think how Martindale gave new meaning to that quote.

dmiller, I don't know if that post would live up to its notoriety at this point. There really wasn't that much to it. ** Cynic, Pawtucket advised me by private topic that I could re-post the one in question. Since he hasn't seen it, I don't know if he will then allow it, or go with the original moderator's decision. Only one way to find out. Since you have the only copy I know of, either you can post it, or p/t it back to me, and I will post it again. I don't know what other posts were deleted along with that one. Maybe we'll find out later on. Regards...

I did respond to dmiller's post, mentioning a specific conversation with Schoenheit as a basis for my presumptions about CES. Now it's gone.

Is this true?

That is not an official website, Lifted Up, is it? You can find anything on the internet. Show me the legitimate, sanctioned Vatican equivalent of CES's "research." Show the equivalent of CES's (pretense of) accessibility. And by the way, even without an implicit invitation, plenty of people do question denominational standards and beliefs in whatever forum is available. With the internet, those forums are growing rapidly. CES needs to come clean.

Are they exempt from the same request they make of others? "Any individual willing to examine his beliefs... will perhaps profit..." That is from their "What is CES?" page. They are proselytizing, oldiesman, s e l l i n g, in other words. They are selling what appears to be Vic Wierwille's warmed-over, schlock "bib-olatry," looking for new suckers and lost ex-Wayfers alike to support them. They want to change your mind. Right, John?If there is a shred of integrity in the CES management, they should acknowledge the validity of questions and be willing to answer them honestly and forthrightly - not on a "personal phone call" where nothing is overheard, or "private e-mail" where the content may be later denied, but in a public forum of dialogue and debate, OPEN to one and all. Let the chips fall. Why is that a problem for you, oldiesman? Why is it a problem for CES? Something to hide? That might explain why they are in hiding. edited for spelling

oldiesman, The Baptists and Catholics make no pretense of being in the truth discovery/recovery business. You never hear about their "biblical research." From their website: Nobody is questioning more or less than what CES claims about itself. Why is that a problem for you?

While it's true that many arguments are better avoided, there may be a few that, for whatever reason, pass for entertainment. This flame was recommended courtesy of JanH of the ex-JW board (Refiner's haunt). It may not be for the whine, cheese and spritzer crowd, but some of you may get a laugh. Jan writes: The first post is a spoof, beautifully written.A "good laugh" is an understatement. Read it and weep. PS Some of the posts contain bad words. Very bad words. Really, very bad words. If you are under age, ask your mom to read it to you.

Lifted Up, Your question disregards the specifics of Dan's letter. What is your opinion of those points which he suggests CES might need to reject upon further scrutiny? Furthermore, doesn't he also suggest they might accept elements of that body of Christian work which they have, after Vic W's own fashion, apparently rejected out of hand? You seem to ask, "Why not give them the benefit of the doubt?" But there is little doubt there, and Dan has made a pretty good case. Maybe you should scrutinize his letter a little more closely before rejecting the "message" you may have read into it.

Indivisible Dan, The letter was an eloquent appeal. Wouldn't its modest proposal send the CES trio packing off to somebody else's seminary for some actual book learnin'? Can you see those three sharing a freshman dorm room? It could get mighty stuffy in there. The odds may be better they will form the next great boy-band. For a name, I suggest they call themselves "In-CES'ed." First CD title? "In-sist on In-CES'ed!" Brilliant? No? Awww, man! Well, I give that better odds than their giving your thoughts any creedence. Other than the possibility of taking a few research-oriented utility/technical courses, I don't see them ever going back to school (figuratively or literally), much less re-examining their own beliefs, much less surveying "over 200 years worth of textual critical studies." You're asking old dogmatists to learn new tricks. They are the new defenders of the status quo. Regards...

Cherished Child wrote: CC, I happen to know this isn't even a possibility, given his adamant stand against smoking. I never realized that's what "SOB" meant. Anyway, I disagree here too. I don't care what his position might be. I'd just like him to come out from behind your skirt and run the Greasespot gauntlet. Is that too much to ask? When he held a position of authority, he was pretty confident. Without his badge, he vamoosed outta Dodge pretty quick.Some posters are depicting Greasespot as the "spiritual" equivalent of the famously grotesque Star Wars bar scene. What a convenient image for John to hold, by the way. We aren't "greasespots." We aren't losers, by any stretch. We aren't embittered and disgruntled ex-Christians looking for sacrificial scapegoats to appease our inner demons. Hey, if we only were, that would be easy to deal with, right John? But we are largely good, responsible, thoughtful, educated, introspective, and loving people who, because we wanted to know the truth, gave many years of our youth to a fraudulent organization. Having found one another years later, compared notes, and understood at least in part the human cost of TWI's deception, we would like an accounting, not only for the past, but from those out of our past who appear to perpetuate still the very same lies that once deceived us. What we want (if I may say "we") is reasonable, just, and right. We are realistic enough to know a full "accounting" probably won't happen in this life, but determined to make the most of any opportunity, just the same. That's a much tougher audience, isn't it? - real people? John wasn't ever really "here." How do I know? He won't put anything of his own in writing. Probably following a lawyer's advice. That's why we got the "form letter" - approved by legal. (Yes, we're still under the law, in some ways.) Who can fault him for that? Liability is a big deal these days. John wouldn't want to publish anything for which he might be liable. The truth, for instance. edited for spelling

I rest my case.

Uncle Hairy said In reply, Cynic said: Sky4it and Garth both mis-read the above to mean, "Your life isn't as important as my theology." Not content with mangling the meaning of one statement Garth goes on. He characterizes Cynic's reference to Jesus' "eschatological statements" (concerning the end times, in other words) as "Verbal flatulence?" Garth doesn't even "apologize" without adding further insult. And what are "escotological dogmas" anyway? He mis-spells the word though it's right in front of him, removing all doubt that his only purpose here is, not understanding, not communication, but pure harrassment, even on his way out.And what does this have to do with John Lynn? EVERYTHING! Garth's attitude is nothing less than a caricature of John Lynn's own mocking and derisive attitude. Who is better known for belittling those biblical issues over which he is advised quietly by others not to worry his little head? He'll leave the intellectual "heavy lifting" (to borrow George Aar's phrase) to Vic Wierwille, John Schoenheit, Jay Leno, Shaq, Latrell Sprewell and others. JAL is the Master of Ceremonies for CES' dog and pony/medicine show, softening the audience up by wise-cracking through the (mostly lame) jokes, and then sweet-talking them with a canned sales-talk calculated to keep them coming back for more. Eschatology? What's that got to do with anything?

Garth, your own posts border on trolling, stalking or personal harrassment. What exactly are you doing here? You've avoided the topic, so it obviously doesn't interest you. You are interested soley in annoying Cynic. Will you grow up?

"Hi, It's the real me - John Lynn."It sure is.

Thanks niKa.

You keep bringing up TWI-1. Wierwille was the corrupt and corrupting influence from the get-go. He just couldn't keep up with the droves of new "believers" early on, so the place was kind of nice to be around. All that was temporary. When people read the bible and embrace Christian love and believe they are free from guilt and shame, you'll have a very up-beat bunch. In time, the organization grew large enough to contain and control them. Once martialed by the megalomaniacal martinet into the international sales force of his dreams, "believers" incrementally assimilated VP's predatory personality. The Corps was the worst of the lot. WOWs could be a pestilence too, especially under the Corps' influence. You will still find "TWI 1" anywhere you have a new group of Christians around the bible, before somebody gets a bright idea to organize them into a business model. Is CES' new name the beginning of the end? "The Spirit & Truth International" not only stinks with dubious ambition, it's absurdly close to "The Way International." I wonder if they aren't in preliminary merger talks with New Knoxville already. The apple doesn't fall far from the (Way) tree, does it? edited for spelling