Rocky

Or several books.

Apparently, I forgot to include the link in the original post above... now I can't find it. sorry. :confused:/>

Of course, many of us know the answer to that question already. I saw a post this evening on Facebook that inspired me to think about the question. Were you ever subject to Wierwille's angry rants? Or Martindale's? If you're curious, here's an interesting resource that provides a list of 10 questions to reflect back on your relationships with those "Mogs." For our younger greasespotters, perhaps you might have some insight on whether the organization (TWI) currently demonstrates a narcissistic personality. A couple of days ago, I found that the Power for Abundant Living book is for sale (from third-party vendors) on amazon.com. I found some of the reviews and comments on those reviews quite revealing. This is what I saw on Facebook that reminded me of Wierwille. Narcissists hurt people, they carry shame, low self-esteem, endured neglect, or deprivation, as a child, they create a container to keep the shame in, and repress it, they aren't aware how damaged they are, when held accountable, they deny and blame, subconsciously they feel unworthy, they can't bear to think there is something wrong with them, so they project, make it your fault, so they won't feel, the pain of their own self-judgement... - Marg - inspired by Ross Rosenberg

NO. They are NOT. None of them are. Not even legitimate democracies. All government systems are nothing more than different ways to organize societies and the collective power that arises from the people therein. That said, there is wisdom in adhering to the rules and laws of society. But there can also be godly wisdom in rebelling against some in certain situations.

<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8qssWO8NSq0?rel=0" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="420"></iframe> Indeed... which is why the Hulu original series "The Path" invokes twi and scientology both. It may be also worth considering that being out of twi control (30 years for some of us) for so long and not dying of some awful attack from Satan really blows Loy's declaration about greasespots to smithereens.

1) Indeed, because they controlled the flow of information, a key component for controlling the people. They couldn't get away with demand for submission quite as easily if they couldn't control what the submissees could consider, especially about the cult itself. 2) Cute word, purulency. Yes, twi was full of pus. And the PoP may have lanced it. But it never healed. That's also why it was important to indoctrinate the followers on political beliefs.

I doubt they'll answer at all.

Given that ALL of the intent of VPee's "teaching" was to establish HIMSELF as MOGFOT, and that the plagiarism directly subverts that concept, YES, anyone with even half a brain would have been able to rethink their life decisions

If you don't remember Wierwille's demand (suggestion? encouragement? or however you want to characterize it) to stop reading anything but the Word according to Victor, I don't know what to tell you. The younger people who more recently rejected Wierwillism/fundamentalism have stated unequivocally that the current interpretation is that the only approved reading material are "the collaterals." As much as you seem to be saying that I or others (like skyrider) are suggesting everything was either/or aka black/white, I don't see it that way. Group cohesion was absolutely dependent on submission, as the premise for this thread suggests. But of course there were degrees of submission and rebellion. VPee tamped down rebellion whenever it reared its ugly (to him) head... which was any time anyone dared to openly challenge ANY of his ideas, any of his plans, any of his actions, any of his words. As a young adult, I didn't look at it that way either. But I can look back and see it in the rear view mirror with extreme clarity. I was in residence with the 9th corpse for the first year. The interim year was problematic for me. I ended up splitting from Ft. Dodge, IA at Christmas time and high tailed it back to Arizona, where I moped for several months, not attending any fellowships. Following a phone call out of the blue from a 7th corpse fellow I knew, I reconnected with way believers and attended fellowships. Eventually, I went out wow during the 11th corpse interim year. My family coordinator was 11th corpse. He was all about demanding submission. Yet, the little "success" we had in proselytizing that year was a result of my resistance to that demand. After that year, I returned to AZ started back to college, graduating from AZ State in 86. I've shared other aspects of my experience elsewhere on gsc, including that my college studies (accounting major) she light on my study of Acts. I realized how bass ackwards twi's accountability structure was. That prepared me for kissing the whole cult buh bye when the big exodus occurred. So, yes, I know that not everybody who fellowshipped with twi believers got caught up in the submission to the same degree. That doesn't change obvious intent of Wierwille's organizational structure.

It seems like, in the comments I quoted above, 1) you're arguing semantics, 2) trying to claim you didn't always submit and/or that 3) it wasn't necessarily the original intent. My impressions, however, are that despite your own possible original intent to not get caught up in the submission, you eventually did anyway. Have you ever heard of Peter Senge? He was (is) an MIT professor. His book, The Fifth Discipline, is about learning organizations. Wierwille's cult learned and developed alright, but not the way Senge suggests it should have. Twi adapted as it grew to become more like what VPee wanted it to be. I also suggest insight can be gathered from Noam Chomsky and his writings on manufacturing consent. Chomsky focuses, regarding this subject, on mass media. In twi, Wierwille controlled the media. It began with his directive in the PFLAP class to put away all of your other reading material for months. Of course, if you stayed around that long, you were hooked and then dismissed philosophy, "world wisdom" in favor of VPee's "wisdom."

An argument can easily be made from this that Wierwille stumbled upon something bigger than himself, his outrageous claim that he was taught by God and his narcissistic dreams that sparked the beginning of his cult. But because he and his early followers didn't really have a clue as to the real reasons why it grew like it did, they couldn't keep it growing. There's no question it collapsed. What they've got going now isn't anywhere close to what took place in the late 1960s and into the 1970s. Evidence that "we see through a glass darkly..." Love never fails... but predatory licentiousness always will. Not only did VPee and his crew take their eyes off of the goal, did they really ever have them on it to begin with?

<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cb3TqXM1BtQ?rel=0" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="420"></iframe>

Indeed. I was definitely ready to leave in 1986. I had just completed a bachelor of science degree in accounting and reading the Book of Acts in that light and then seeing the bullspit that was twi made me intellectually ready. The fact that entire twigs left in the Phoenix area when JALvis, Reahard, Dubofsky, Belt and Pierce published their letter made it safer (socially) for me and plenty of others to leave at that time.

Further, the human social need -- to belong -- is extremely deep and powerful. It kept many of us in twi far longer than it took for us to realize VPee was a huckster. Not just Skyrider.

Clearly, the implication of the thread title question raise is to raise awareness of the methods and potentially the motives wierwille had for carving out his niche in the overall market known as Christianity. Personally, I think DWBH, in his essay yesterday laid bare those issues quite well. My question "when did Jesus start being God?" was intended to broaden readers' consideration of whether Christianity (and/or Judeo-Christian heritage) can legitimately be considered the ONLY way to a knowledge of and relationship with God. Somebody (probably not simply one charismatic person, but a community of people), at some finite point in historical time, adapted their notions of how the Earth and humankind came to be. That's directly relevant to any discussion of Christianity as "THE" only way to know or have a relationship with God. I'll grant that taken by itself, the question wouldn't necessarily be "about twi." But I posed it to inject some perspective into the discussion of this thread, wierwille and twi. VPee's frame of reference seemed to be that Christianity was the truth, i.e. "The Word of God is the Will of God." But how can any discussion of VPee and his personally engineered subculture be fully legitimate without consideration of the fact that up to some point in human history nobody had any idea about a coming Messiah? Plenty of people in the 21st century look at the OT and say, "That's a loving god?" But beyond that, how does Christianity in whatever flavor treat all of the humans prior to the Jews? As being damned to hell? My interest for this thread in posing the question is not to expand on the doctrinal tangent but to consider how in the world a loving God could be limited to what we have learned in the Bible.

Tough. It's related to the question posed in the title of this thread. What, are you now a self-appointed moderator?

BRAVO DWBH! That's an impressive and highly relevant essay. :eusa_clap:/>:eusa_clap:/>:eusa_clap:/>:eusa_clap:/>:eusa_clap:/>

I'd parse these points out. Technically, I don't believe we can truly know all of Wierwille's intentions. But, like Bolshevik indicated, Wierwille was a bad man. That's perhaps a valid assessment when considering what he did and the results thereof. To a degree, his intentions can be deduced from his words and actions.

I don't think in terms of PFLAP. My question relates to the real world of humanity and Humanities. From a historical perspective, at what point did some human declare that Jesus is God? It's really that simple. And I believe it's a salient question for this discussion. If nobody wants to discuss it, no big deal for me. However, doesn't the question "When did Jesus Stop Being God?" suppose that for all of human history there were people who believed Jesus was God? Correct.

No, you only get blocked by one person at a time. ;) But like (was it Raf?) said earlier, you don't have to use your real name.

Which word would you have preferred be inserted?

Okay, let's try this (related) question. When did Jesus START being God? From a historical writing standpoint, that is. I get that the bible says he was with God in the beginning. But there was a time before any people at all believed that to be the case.

Pay pal sucks. I much prefer gofundme. But I'm still donating donated via paypal.

Might another very significant question to ask be related to what people believed and did before Christianity, and before Judiasm? That is, why are we parsing the difference between trinitarianism and JCING anyway?

The "ladder" analogy does relate to scientology. But a good bit of the interpersonal dynamics also relate to twi. Perhaps the major departure from twi is that the meyerists eschew adultery.