WordWolf

Well, they progressively ran off all the people who WANT to think for themselves every few years, intentionally or no. Those they have left are the "diehards" the ones that won't escape even with a ropeladder lowered from a flying chariot being driven by Jesus Christ himself. They're either convinced they're gaining benefits worth the hassle, which won't vanish in the wind, or they're afraid the world outside twi is worse than the world INSIDE twi. Yes, it's approaching all the freedoms the rest of the Christian world enjoys. But supposedly, it's still better than all the rest. Here, have some Kool-Aid.

Preacher, are you part of some religious order or something that requires you to cut-and-paste the EXACT SAME WORDS FOR SEVERAL PARAGRAPHS for the first 1/2 of EVERY SINGLE POST you make here? You can shove all that into your profile, or in a "my story" thread, and post a link to it for the curious. Otherwise, you're discouraging people from reading the whole post, especially since they've read it before. Since you thought it was important enough to post, I expect you'd consider it important enough to read. Posting it the way you're doing now is interfering with that. And whether or not I agree with you on anything, I don't want anything interfering with whether or not I can read your posts properly.

Well, the ones I've known do.... Both in internal consistency, and in not committing felonies and just trying not to get caught.

I'll agree with all of that. I can't disagree with your experience.You received benefit, and acknowledge not everyone did. That matches my own experience in both respects. A number of ex-corps have said much the same, and it's comparable to what many of us non-corps have said. I agree about the acquaintances, and I agree it's of benefit to discuss new ideas, even when I disagree with the conclusion. Therefore, I find this thread of merit either way. Since I'm a guy, I didn't meet a husband anywhere, so I can't match your experience on that one.

For those arriving late, the standard in God's Word that advocates things like NO SEX IF YOU'RE NOT MARRIED TO THE PERSON, and ONLY MARRY ONE SPOUSE, which 99.999999% of the Christian world has no difficulty understanding (whether or not they actually OBEY this, they understand they're acting against Scripture) has been transformed in Mikean theology. There, the injunctions which were even given in the CFS class by vpw HIMSELF are morphed into a "societal-cultural" set of rules rather than Biblical ones. Why do they suddenly lose their authoritative status? Well, Mikean theology is all about elevating books with vpw's name on them, and tapes with vpw teaching on them- and downgrading any actual BIBLES in comparison. The word of vpw is the NEW word of God, and the word of the creating thing has replaced the Word of the Creator, and labelled accordingly as the word of that Creator. In the process, vpw gets elevated to the status of a demigod, someone who strides the earth and shapes destiny, someone, who, to quote Mike directly, was "born with an overabundance of brains and brawn", someone "overgifted", someone who "when he walked, the earth shook." (Those are direct quotes, mind you, not ironic paraphrases.) So, vpw has to be ABSOLVED or EXONERATED of all evil deeds he performed. So, when vpw did something, and the Bible disapproved, according to Mikean theology, THEN THE BIBLE IS WRONG AND VPW IS RIGHT. Having been unable to wish away all the accounts of the witness and victims, and unable to justify the rapes, questionably-consensual sex initiated by vpw, and the drugged rapes as "attempts to toughen up the corps spiritually", Mike has labelled them as perfectly-acceptable behaviour, which means vpw was right, which makes the Bible WRONG. Therefore, when God says "don't have sex with your brother's wife", Mike labels that a societal rule, not a rule from God, and the injunctions get downgraded to "societal-approved sex". Since some people keep claiming things like "vpw never did it", "the women all wanted it", "it was for their own good", the more conscientious GSC posters feel it is necessary to wade into the same tired-old discussions and point out, once again, that vpw's actions were sinful. It gets tiresome to have to keep reposting on the same subject- but some people are determined to whitewash the truth, and rewrite both the past and the present, sacrificing truth to salve their own conscience. In the case of the Mikean belief system, "societal-approved sex" is not a god, but vpw-worship IS. Thus the need to turn God's instructions into a society-based set of rules and removing God Almighty from the picture. For the reasons mentioned above, likewise, Mike has attempted to make all ofvpw's criminal actions-including the felonies of multiple plagiarisms- perfectly acceptable activities. After attempts to say vpw never plagiarized, and that it was acceptable for scholars to do so went flat, he went on to "God told him to plagiarize", which is where he's at now. Since some people-like Mike-keep insisting either that vpw didn't plagiarize, or that it's perfectly acceptable or persist in perpetuating completely false meanings of plagiarism, it becomes necessary for the more conscience-driven GSC posters to repost and set the record straight, over and over and over... monotonous, but with posters (often the SAME posters) keep acting to popularize falsehoods, it becomes necessary to repost to keep things honest. vpw went out of his way to violate copyrights AND to plagiarize on a grand scale, while making sure all "his" books had copyright notices on them. That's illegal AND hypocritical. However, since vpw did it, Mike has to "anoint" it as holy and sacred- so long as vpw did it. Mike thinks it's idolatry to report the truth about vpw's plagiarism, but that it's NOT idolatry to consider vpw's "writings" sacred, and his actions sacrosanct. Thus, his claim that OTHERS have made false gods- of reporting rapes and reporting plagiarism- fall a little flat in the ears of many people even slightly familiar with Mikean theology. For Mike, who operates under the umbrella of vpw reverencing and devotion, his regard for what is any criticism of vpw, no matter what the evidence and the backing of Holy Scripture- is that such criticism is a sin and totally unforgiveable. LoneWolf, unless you're ready to proclaim the Bible as everyone knows it DEFUNCT(ignoring all the historical/archeological data of the last CENTURY), and vpw's "books" as a new Bible, Mke will consider you unreachable with any "reasonable appeal." His gods won't allow any other position. In other words, if vpw did it, it was ok. If it contradicted what vpw did, it's not civilized, loving or thoughtful. Oh, and vpw stamps a copyright on plagiarized materials, that's fine. vpw plagiarizes materials of others, that's fine. Plagiarizing vpw, now THAT'S wrong. And it's time for the commercial...

The books: "The Hoax of the Twentieth Century", by Arthur R. Butz, "The Myth of the Six Million," by David L. Hoggan, "The Thirteenth Tribe, " by Arthur Koestler.

I call "shenanigans" on that. They were saying that back when nobody'd ever HEARD of Colin Powell. And a search for this saying or anything like it came up blank. The copyright on his only book is 1996. Which means vpw, who died in 1985, was quoting a book that came out 11 years after he died. Neat trick. Bushwah, I say.

If you stick around, maybe review some of the past threads, and ask some questions politely (some people are willing to ask questions, but only in nasty, accusatory tones, then get surprised when people don't fall all over themselves trying to help), you can learn a lot. There's a sticky with a welcome and advice for new arrivals. I recommend it.] There were a LOT more problems than you were aware of, but you have a basis for seeingthere WERE problems, so it might not be the total shock it is for a lot of people. (It was a total shock for ME, for one...) If you REALLY want an answer to that last question, kindly make a NEW thread and make that the subject. Giving it the answer it warrants would derail this thread- and it's serving its OWN purpose. There's a lot of information about how you got the information in that class, all available in this forum and across this board. I recommend looking some of it over. There's a LOT of surprises.

We are a versatile community! We can accomplish BOTH, and more besides! For example, some of us are also playing games, and we have a lot of information compiled as well... :)

Too easy, I suppose....

Well, while we're waiting.... "You're both humble and lovable." "Bless you, sir."

In NYC, all those worth appointing as leaders took off by the '89 split if not sooner. Those that remained were relatively few in number, and were mediocre at best. "Mediocre at best" is how I categorize twi after '89. A number of the remaining wits took off before ROA '90, and I have to wonder if they remained before then as some part of a long-term exit strategy, i.e., "get everyone's contact info before leaving" or something.

I feel the need for a little reminder. vpw had no background in the military whatsoever. He claimed he wanted a program patterned after the military, but he had no exposure to the military, so any training in the corps was not based on any training IN the military. In fact, in TW:LiL, he said one corps student-who had been in the military- didn't know how to work, so he considered his program SUPERIOR to the military. So, what did he use for his military comparison? He gleaned some things from a handful of movies, and he liked the ceremonial aspects, the saluting, the obeying orders, the "yes, sir" to higher-ups. He came out with "the suggestion of a general is tantamount to a command", which never came out of any general's mouth. So, the so-called "military" aspects of twi came from a handful of fictional sources, style over substance, demands for loyalty, and a truckload of bs. This hardly should come as a surprise by now. vpw cherry-picked anything for an idea he liked, then troweled it into his structure with lots of manure for a fixative. THAT's why the corps was woefully inadequate compared even to basic training. vpw could hardly be bothered to learn the details- he was only interested in "his" results, which centered around loyalty and ceremony. Frankly, I think the only reason he never had a uniform issued was because he would have had to pay for it.

That's pretty much where my thinking's reached so far. I'm not asking the right questions, and I'm not applying the right data to get the answer. I'm not obsessed with this, but I'm still looking for a better QUESTION if not a better ANSWER. And Sudo, apology accepted. It didn't sound like your normal posts, anyway. (IMO.)

Here's how the quotes broke down: "What is it?" "The sound of treachery." Nemo, in response to Gray's actions. "We'll be at this all day." Dorian Gray, immortal, to Mina Harker, vampire, as they dueled, cut each other, and both healed instantly. I still keep picturing Johnny Depp as Dorian Gray. "Empires crumble. There are no exceptions." Gray, refusing the Fantom's offer to join his regime. "You're sweet... and you're young. Neither are traits that I hold in high regard." Mina Harker to Agent Sawyer. ""The empire is in peril." "You're probably too young to know, but the empire is always in some kind of peril." Alan Quatermain, responding to a panicked recruiting agent. "My dear girl, I've buried two wives- and many lovers- and I'm in no mood for more of either." Alan Quatermain, telling Mina Harker he wasn't flirting with her. (Nor wanting her as a teammate.) "They told me European women had funny ways." Sawyer, after Mina Harker takes out her attacker.

CORRECT! About the title, at least.

Starting to sound familiar, but I'm not connecting an episode yet.

"What is it?" "The sound of treachery." "We'll be at this all day." "Empires crumble. There are no exceptions." "You're sweet... and you're young. Neither are traits that I hold in high regard." ""The empire is in peril." "You're probably too young to know, but the empire is always in some kind of peril." "My dear girl, I've buried two wives- and many lovers- and I'm in no mood for more of either." "They told me European women had funny ways." No.

This movie was in the theaters more recently than that, whenever that was.

Mc Quade, here, have some butter and lemon. A proper "grilling" just isn't complete without some marinade or something, and you're definitely getting grilled.... You can find some across "About the Way", and in "My Story".Be prepared to look around. This site is more "organic" than "mechanical" so you can't just pull casefiles in seconds. *gets out the A-1 Steak Sauce* And people in the Corps "confronted the evil that was there" on a number of occassions. That's why lcm had 4 goons with him to "dialogue" with this guy. Standard policy at twi: crush dissent utterly, using fear and other methods.

I did you the courtesy of volunteering what I did. I'm not extending it any further. You were NOT where I am now. And I'm not sharing my biography online, so you may conclude whatever you wish, but consider this a closed subject.

I wasn't there. Depending on the source, the Groovy Christians started with the House of Acts/Haight-Ashbury Christians in 1967 or 1968. (TW:LiL says 1967, the official timeline says 1968, and is probably correct.) If they arrived in early 1969 in Rye, by late 1969 there would be enough of them to justify a class. 1970 was when Life Magazine ran their article, and the Groovy Christians were already a reality by the time they WROTE it, let alone RAN the article. If I were to make a guess, I'd guess 1969-1970 was the class.

"What is it?" "The sound of treachery." "We'll be at this all day." "Empires crumble. There are no exceptions." "You're sweet... and you're young. Neither are traits that I hold in high regard."

Some of the evidence I'm working with, you don't have access to. Therefore, our conclusions need not agree. If I were to try to reach an agnostic or atheist position, I'd need to discard too much evidence that can't be accounted for by either position. You, of course, may reach any position based on any evidence you've accounted for. The most extreme position I can adopt would still fall under a monotheist or a Deist position. You're putting me on. Really? Ever toy with the conclusion I ended up concluding?

I would agree with this. I would not discount God giving revelation at any PARTICULAR moment, as sometimes what seems like a trivial detail may later prove to have been critical (I'm thinking of my own life here, some time ago), but the idea that someone's "channelling" Heavy Revelation 24/7 is just plain preposterous. God gave you a brain to use. I mean, if something's up with the breakfast, He may say something, but otherwise, you and your shredded wheat are on your own.