Nathan_Jr

Mmmph

If one has the impression that the data is not 100% correct, the website offers a way to submit corrections. https://www.cultfacts.com/contact-us

We have the right to choose to pay attention to this. Just look at it. See it for all that it explicitly and implicitly means. Whose brittle ears are we choosing to protect from offense by reporting "sexual assault" instead of rape for the glory of Allah?

Everyone, including myself.

It’s a peculiar stylistic choice. I can appreciate the spectrum of crimes captured by “sexual assault.” I can see a potential utility there, but often the stylistic choice misleads and minimizes. In Israel on October 7, many (dozens? hundreds?) of girls and women were raped by Islamic jihadists. Some were raped to death. Read that again. Raped. To. Death! But many journalists reported "sexual assault" on Israeli girls and women. There are contexts where this stylistic choice moves beyond frustratingly ambiguous to dishonest vulgarity. We need to make better choices.

I really despise these euphemisms, but charlatans and criminals wouldn’t leave the house without them. The media seems to have normalized this linguistic apologetic by referring to rape as sexual assault, which is easier on the conscience, I guess. Hearing or reading about rape is supposed to make people uncomfortable. Euphemisms are anesthetic.

Wow. This explains so much. Thanks.

Though it has yet to be written, except in the stars, the revelation has been established (2nd time did it): If victor paul wierwille had only learned how (H-O-W) to believe big enough to live long enough, he would have fellated that TRUMPet while squatting over and defecating into the mouth of God. Enjoy it while you can.

Thanks. I had to look up the “Marxist Minstrels” by David A. Noebel. Wow. It is fitting that the paranoid little charlatan would promote this book. A review found on Amazon… “So bad that it's good Reviewed in the United States on March 17, 2009 Ah, the halcyon days when the Birch Society, the Christian Anti-Communist Crusdade, and the like had not yet metastisized into the later "Moral majority" form! This is the written equivalent of a combo of "Reefer Madness" and "Plan 9 From Outer Space"! Here, the subject is the well known Communo-Athiest conspiracy to morally subvert American youth through rock and roll. (What energy those commie preverts had! You'd have thought that their energy would have been sapped just trying to get American water supplies fluoridated.) The text is priceless. You'll read commentaries on perversities going back to Woody Guthrie, Pete Seeger and other commies up to more recent moral degenerates like Dylan and the Beatles (the commentaries on the Beatles and their groupies alone justify acquisition). Probably, though, the most valuable part is the appendix that lists (in order of commiedom) the "most communistic" performers. (Yes, "Joannie Phony" is up there, but not #1.) It will serve as an invaluable buying guide for your acquisition of prime, quality, classic folk and rock.”

Tell me you’re in a cult without telling me you’re in a cult. Why the vinyl?

IHOPKC Statement From Victim Representatives, BozLaw PA https://bozlawpa.com/news/statement-from-victim-representatives/ Along with local counsel, Caleb J. Aponte, I have had the privilege to work with several individuals who have reported being abused and traumatized while being a part of the IHOPKC community. I can assure you that this group wants the full truth to surface with the hope that those who have perpetrated abuse will be exposed and held accountable and that the system which fostered such a harmful environment will be genuinely transformed. Tragically, the actions of IHOPKC and its current leadership seemingly demonstrate a very different agenda. As many may know, IHOPKC initially engaged a law firm to conduct what it touted as an “independent investigation” in relation to sexual misconduct allegations against Mike Bickle. At no time were any of the reported victims, or those who have publicly advocated on their behalf, ever been consulted by IHOPKC regarding the identity and/or qualifications of the “third-party” investigator nor provided any information regarding the process, protocol, and scope of such an “investigation.” All of it was simply dictated by IHOPKC with the expectation reported victims and witnesses would participate. When it was discovered that the unilaterally selected “third party investigator” was a law firm who has a fiduciary duty to its client (IHOPKC, not the reported victims), it became clear that this was an internal investigation being publicly labeled as “independent.” Shortly thereafter, we learned that IHOPKC reportedly dismissed that law firm and subsequently retained an attorney who is also a congregant of the church to conduct the “independent investigation.” This attorney also has a fiduciary duty to her client (IHOPKC, not the reported victims). I informed this attorney/congregant of IHOPKC that though she seemed like a very pleasant person and capable attorney, she was anything but “independent.” At that point in time, I suggested to her that IHOPKC move forward with a legitimate, qualified, and experienced third-party investigator who is not an attorney. I even offered to provide IHOPKC with some suggestions since I've been working in this field for almost thirty years. I also communicated to this attorney/congregant that it was imperative that IHOPKC expand the scope of any investigation beyond Mike Bickle to include allegations of sexual abuse perpetrated by anyone in leadership and/or on staff at IHOPKC as others have recently reported such allegations. I even suggested a two tier investigative approach where the allegations related to Mr. Bickle would first be investigated followed by investigating allegations related to others in leadership and/or staff. At the time, the attorney/congregant told me that she would pass along that suggestion up the chain. I never heard back from her about it. In context of the above, I was quite surprised to receive an email on Friday, December 8th from yet another attorney from yet another law firm requesting to interview my client. At no time did they ever reach out to seek input from my client or any other reported victim regarding this process. Once again, they assumed that reported victims would participate in a supposed "independent" process that they had unilaterally determined. It was disheartening to many that we were right back at square one with IHOPKC engaging another law firm to conduct what it defined as an “independent investigation.” Only this time, the law firm is one that proudly touts its representation of defendant organizations (including but not limited to the Catholic Church) in sexual abuse related litigation. The law firm website proudly mentions such work, including but not limited to, the following statements: Obtained a complete dismissal of a private high school and an affiliated diocese in an action involving a volunteer coach who sexually assaulted a member of the girls’ softball team. A prompt and thorough investigation by our team allowed the client to assess its liability risks and whether its policies had been followed. The trial court granted motions arguing there was no duty to protect the plaintiff from sexual assaults that were unrelated to any school activity and occurred on private property. Represented a Roman Catholic diocese in a group settlement of 52 claims and a subsequent group settlement of 32 claims, resulting in per-claimant awards of less than one-third the national average. Obtained a complete dismissal of all claims against a religious organization in a case involving claims of sexual abuse. Why would reported victims of sexual abuse and misconduct sit down with an attorney from a firm that represents churches in sexual abuse matters and then boasts about its successes? I have no doubt that this law firm well-represents organizational defendants in sexual abuse litigation. However, it cannot be all things to all people. It cannot represent and defend institutional clients in such cases and then turn around and invite reported sexual abuse victims to meet with its attorneys and to trust them. It simply doesn’t work that way. In an attempt to help the new attorney understand our position, I provided a copy of an article I wrote a few years ago about the difference between internal and independent investigations. Despite the profound concerns raised above regarding the law firm's representation of churches in sexual abuse cases, in a good faith effort to evaluate the attorney's claims that she is "functioning as an independent investigator and nothing more" and is "perfectly capable of reaching unbiased and independent conclusions" I requested a copy of her engagement agreement with IHOP. She responded by writing "As a matter of practice we do not release entire engagement letters to non-parties". Wouldn't the attorneys who represent a Jane Doe be a party? If not, who are the parties? Also, since she is functioning as only an "independent investigator and nothing more", will they agree to waive all attorney-client communications? She then offered to send us a portion of the agreement that she unilaterally has determined demonstrates the independence of the investigation. This response simply confirmed my concerns that IHOPKC is in the driver's seat in a process that they alone have dictated. The approach IHOPKC is taking is clearly focused on maintaining control and protecting the institution. As one who has been on the front lines of addressing abuse within faith communities for almost 25 years, I can assure you that such an approach is not consistent with best practice standards...nor the standards of Jesus. It is not too late for IHOPKC to change course and begin working with representatives of the reported victims to come up with a process that is genuinely independent and one that ensures that those stepping forward to share their trauma are made to feel comfortable and safe. Until then, it is highly unlikely that reported victims and witnesses will participate in such a fundamentally flawed process. December 16, 2023 Boz Tchividjian, Esq. Caleb J. Aponte, Esq.

Good. F this guy and all charlatans like him. Allegations of abuse spanning DECADES from several credible women. Wow. So much sorrow for merely “inappropriate” behavior. Really, his “sin” did it. It’s the sin’s fault. BULLSHONTA!!

Mmmph

Yep. It requires a real in depth spiritual awareness and perception to betray someone’s privacy and trust in this way - a real spiritual maturity. mmmph

Mmmph God must have told them to do this. What were they looking for? Did they ever find it?

Thanks. I agree with everything you just said.

Is it an accusation or simply a question? I can understand why (W-H-Y) such a question is asked. (Though, the advice for making accusations is fair.) Personally, I was betrayed, spied on and reported for making the wrong observations and looking at the wrong websites, this being one of them. And I wasn’t even IN The Way International, Inc.! I simply had the misfortune of marrying into a family living and teaching in accordance with TWI doctrines of the good ol’ days while standing firmly, above all, on the shoulders of victor paul wierwille - they believed they were more authentically TWI than TWI itself. When one starts to connect the dots, one realizes it’s all manipulation, lies and bullshonta. All. Of. It. The teachings at fellowship, the daily “emails of edification,” the unannounced, unsolicited visits to discuss uncannily relevant personal issues were claimed to be by divine revelation. But they were NOT. None. Of. Them. The topics were specifically relevant to me because of sycophantic spies. I know what it’s like to have personal trust betrayed and manipulated to prop up “leadership” and tear down the one refusing to drink the koolaid. I wasn’t hacked, but I was deceived and spied on, nonetheless. My fellowship didn’t know how (H-O-W) to hack social media, but if they did, I believe they would. I understand the paranoia behind the question.

Ahh. Yet another meaning of faith: it is assurance/conviction WITHOUT proof. Hmmm… I wonder if one might say to the author of Hebrews, “Either Paul's writings are a great lie or he's talking about something you know nothing about.”

I don’t want a different answer from you. I got your answer - faith is believing what has been proven. Got it.

Another assumption. I don't know if I like it or not because I don't know how you define faith, or, at best, I'm unsure how you define it. You said: Faith is believing what is proven. Is that correct? If not, could you phrase it another way? If I got it right, fine. I accept your definition, and I neither like it nor dislike it. STL provided a definition from Britannica and I provided my own very simple definition. I even contrasted faith with belief. Your definition makes three. Great! Victor said faith is what you have and belief is what you do. This may tie in with the Pistis Christou debate -- objective or subjective genitive? (Gal 2:16, Gal 3:22, Rom 3:22...) I imagine others posters might define faith differently, still.

Witness testimony is evidence, but class or sermon transcripts would be great. Do we need documentation of rapes?

It has been said that birth control was discouraged or forbidden for women involved in The Way, Inc, but abortion was approved, even encouraged and mandated, effectively making abortion a form of birth control. Does anyone remember how or why the prohibition of birth control was doctrinally justified?

Mmmph

I believe what has been proven to me, also. Until, of course, a new, stronger, more convincing proof is presented. But this is not the question. You said the Britannica definition of faith is laughably wrong. I knocked, asked and sought your insight. If you can’’t or won’t answer the question, fine.

I'm asking for and seeking your definition of faith. I'm listening.