Rocky

Are you asking me to justify to you how I view that site? Why would you need me to do that? Fine, you believe/view it differently than me. I don't see that as a problem to be overcome. I don't need you to agree with me.

Why would it bother me? AI wouldn't be familiar with how wayfers talk. My favorites? What on Earth are you talking about. I am convinced the website was built by an AI. There was far more work that went into the site than any person or small group could have done. And a large group would not have been able to do it either. I also have no problem with you viewing the website differently than I do.

You and me (and many others who have survived to become "seniors") both. we[b] boast in the hope of the glory of God. 3 Not only so, but we[c] also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; 4 perseverance, character; and character, hope. 5 And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us. From Romans 5, NIV.

I'm thankful for the POV you share on your blog, that being, for the most part, you share YOUR experience and YOUR observations on TWI.

Yet cultfacts website notably differs from GSC. The cultfacts AI generated website doesn't have ANY first person accounts of the things it claims, does it? We tell the truth here? For the most part, hopefully, YES. Most significantly, when a person tells her or his first person account, they aren't slandering twi, per se. They are telling THEIR OWN truth.

I see them as exaggeration. Your dichotomy, IMO, doesn't represent the entire universe of possibilities. That a "footnoted" source isn't a bona fide truth, in some cases (e.g. making a claim it says is fact, but not necessarily from a credible source. If a footnoted source references an actual legal/judicial ruling, it can reasonably be inferred to be factual) If a claim is just "my AI found it in writing on line somewhere" it's not nearly as credible. That's how I, after mulling it over for a month or so, can reasonably infer some of the claims are exaggerations, some of them more exaggerated than others. The first claim on the cultfacts site, regarding TWI, is "up to 50 high-ranking members conspired to coerce..." Cannot be found to be credible on its face. "Up to..." is a rhetorical expression (often used in marketing contexts) reasonably understood to be vague enough to dismiss on its face (prima facie). 50-high ranking members? Legally speaking, there are no where near 50 "members" of TWI. In this context, one might reasonably expect the so-called members are voting members of the legal body known as TWI. Even IF there were 50 "high ranking" members, what's the likelihood of getting those 50 "members" to likemindedly conspire anything? "A conspiracy, also known as a plot, is a secret plan or agreement between people (called conspirers or conspirators) for an unlawful or harmful purpose, such as murder, treason, or corruption, especially with political motivation,[1] while keeping their agreement secret from the public or from other people affected by it." IOW, twi will likely bristle a LOT over this, but eventually will get over it without these claims having any legal impact. You may (reasonably) not be convinced the site was built by an AI, but I am convinced. Actually, it's not a bad first effort to do so. I appreciate your probing reflection on the situation.

Example of AI inaccuracies.

Thanks for bumping the thread. I just viewed this YT video from 60 MInutes coverage of AI, several segments, one of which is from 2109. One of the important points 60 Minutes made, is that AI is NOT always correct. When an AI makes mistakes and says things that are NOT true, the industry calls those instances "hallucinations." IIRC, when I first (or shortly thereafter) saw the cultfacts website entry for TWI, my impression was 1) it was built by AI, and 2) it was not 100 percent correct, even though it had notes/citations for the claims it made. Now, I am not as concerned about whether TWI will challenge the factual basis or legality of the claims. However, I still wonder how they've responded/reacted to it.

Selected resources Seven Habits of Highly Effective People by Stephen Covey The Obstacle is the Way by Ryan Holiday Stillness is the Key by Ryan Holiday Ego is the Enemy by Ryan Holiday Discipline is Destiny by Ryan Holiday The Road Less Traveled by M Scott Peck People of the Lie: The Hope for Healing Human Evil by M Scott Peck And because Two are better than One, The Different Drum: Community Making and Peace by M Scott Peck And there are MANY more. My son, if you accept my words and store up my commands within you, 2 turning your ear to wisdom and applying your heart to understanding— 3 indeed, if you call out for insight and cry aloud for understanding, 4 and if you look for it as for silver and search for it as for hidden treasure, 5 then you will understand the fear of the Lord and find the knowledge of God

Again, the question becomes who is WE. News enterprises, IMO, are not the readers thereof. When it comes to choice and choosing, I believe it's most important for US (us) to be mindful of that which we have within our control and choose wisely. When we try to choose for someone or something of which we have NO control or direct influence, we choose endless frustration and promote helplessness. Becoming mindful of what others (i.e. a news enterprise) choose that I/WE cannot control or influence, the inability to control or influence also breeds apathy. WE do need to choose wisely. But worrying about the euphemistic reporting about rape and other sexual offenses isn't necessarily productive... unless, you have a strong voice in the world/community and can make cogent arguments that convince your readers. Or any other human expression (ART) that moves the emotions of members of that community. I encourage your thoughts and actions along those lines.

Which choices are you suggesting WE (including you) have the right to change? Lawmaking bodies made specific verbal choices in writing laws. The journalistic style issues have to do, as I understand it, with news gathering/writing enterprises choosing purposely vague wording, perhaps to sound euphemistic, so they can continue to sell newspapers without offending tender sensibilities. When a news enterprise dares use more abrupt terminology and/or rhetoric, it probably runs increasing risk of sounding like a publication with an ax to grind. Not that doing so would necessarily be a bad thing. What other choices might be involved that I haven't understood thus far?

Who is the WE to which you refer?

Did Victor Wierwille write this song?

Is this the link you got that info from? https://www.laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-271.html? If so, this is Canada's criminal code. In the US, sexual assaults (i.e. rapes, when they are prosecuted), are generally prosecuted by the various states. In Arizona, the criminal code is A.R.S. Title 13. Chapter 14 of Title 13 is Sexual Offenses. There are 29 sections in Chapter 14, covering a wide range of offenses. Section 1406 specifies what constitutes (provides the definition of) sexual assault. C. For the purposes of this section, "sexual offense" means any of the following: 1. Sexual abuse in violation of section 13-1404. 2. Sexual conduct with a minor in violation of section 13-1405. 3. Sexual assault in violation of section 13-1406. [A. A person commits sexual assault by intentionally or knowingly engaging in sexual intercourse or oral sexual contact with any person without consent of such person.] 4. Sexual assault of a spouse if the offense was committed before the effective date of this amendment to this section. 5. Molestation of a child in violation of section 13-1410. 6. Continuous sexual abuse of a child in violation of section 13-1417. 7. Sexual misconduct by a behavioral health professional in violation of section 13-1418. 8. Commercial sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of section 13-3552. 9. Sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of section 13-3553. I am confident the Arizona Legislature omitted the word rape in favor of more specifics about conduct which includes rape rather than to treat the offense euphemismistically. Obviously, "inappropriate behavior (or conduct) IS a euphemism. But this is a matter of journalistic style, not legal terminology. I mention this not to minimize the significance but to be specific about the origin of the annoyance.

Indeed. Seemingly ascribing insight to meaning of certain scriptures, based on another certainly private interpretation. NUMBERS IN SCRIPTURE E.W. Bullinger 4.30 230 ratings16 reviews A perennial bestseller and the definitive guide to the study of Bible numerics. Over 150,000 in print! Bullinger's two-fold approach to the subject of biblical numbers first examines the supernatural design of the Bible. He notes the patterns and numerical features of the Scriptures that [HE BELIEVED] are evidence of their Designer. The second section highlights the spiritual significance and symbolic connotations of numbers that are repeated in different contexts throughout the Bible. A balanced, biblically solid examination [according to whom, or what standard?] of the numbers throughout Scripture Widely referenced, monumental work First published January 1, 1894

Yeah, hopefully. Thanks for these posts, Charity.

Wow! That too is very profound.

There's deep metaphor in those sentences. Indeed, I've come to appreciate the importance of story to humanity. Now I'm reading George Lakoff and Mark Johnson's Metaphors We Live By. In their book, they argue metaphor is not simply or only a verbal mechanism for communicating certain concepts. Rather, metaphor is HOW we think. Our capacities to touch, hold and handle the fires of shame determine... That's a powerful statement in itself. I appreciate HOW you think. Our capacities to touch, hold and handle the fires of shame... that, even though it's not the entirety of your sentence or your comment, is in itself a very powerful statement. It puts into a context HOW you look at the world. I think your last two sentences (which I quoted above) are quite profound. It shows how you think about shame. Its a metaphorical thought process. It awes me to consider the profundity.

First published 53 years ago. Nouthetic counseling has been criticized as narrowly conceived, with a confrontational focus upon sin and behavior, which fails to deal adequately with emotion, grief, and suffering, and which lacks understanding of complex human motivations. Yeah, this definitely qualifies under a rubric of not necessarily biblical. Expanding on the notion of being narrowly conceived, with a confrontational focus on sin... it also fits in the framework of Christianity and other religions setting people against one another.

There's a few salient points in WWs comment. It's also likely there are many former wayfers who have horror stories about how they treated their children. This may be my life's biggest regret, and certainly my biggest regret about involvement with the fundamentalist cult we've known as The Way International "biblical research, teaching, fellowship and horrendously BAD life example ministry." It's also most reasonable to surmise Victor (who really wasn't, in the entire scheme of things a victor) had absolutely NO CLUE about anyone except himself. Isn't that the definition of sociopath or psychopath?

Yeah, sometimes the learning is especially emotionally painful.

That's fair insight. Even without first hand knowledge of victim experiences/stories, The issue of sexual abuse in any social situation with such disparate power differential as twi (and many other religious groups, political, or economically obvious situations) makes it abundantly obvious it has been pervasive. Thanks for that comment.

https://www.amazon.com/Marxist-Minstrels-Handbook-Communist-Subversion/dp/B0006CPX8Q

https://www.amazon.com/Hunt-Close-Realistic-Close-Working-Conditions/dp/1558212647/ Currently going for ~ $59 on amazon, used