WordWolf

Well, I know Raf can probably name this one, but I got here first. ;)--> This was the turkey known as "Hot Dog-the Movie".

Was that the movie where the guy bragged about his breakfast towards the end? "I had sunny-side up..."

Uma Thurman Batman and Robin Alicia Silverstone

Well, TempleLady IS on-topic with Allan's posts. Allan has expressed some interesting opinions about hurts in twi... (TempleLady gave one answer to why we don't hear from some.) Well, in some cases, it was "the courts" or "nobody" who prevailed, as TL pointed out. Since that was supposedly the case for Allan, However, Allan's experience was hardly UNIVERSAL, as TL showed.

This is interesting, and I'll need to sit down at some point soon and read all that. I'm initially dubious that this program itself was used in twi. It's not inconceivable that techniques used in this program would resemble techniques used in a LOT of places for conformity or other things, and thus they'd resemble each other without a common origin. Rather than leap to a theory of common origin, I'll remain skeptical of that until and unless sufficient proof is presented otherwise. (Which, of course, may be in those links I haven't reviewed yet.)

The approach advocated by twi had its strengths (it played to some of my strengths), but it also had its glaring weaknesses (which played to mine as well as to others.) It's a cold, intellectual style that fails to touch the heart. If you do things in ADDITION to that, there are benefits. However, to do things ONLY twi's way-which is true for ANY single style- is to adopt their weaknesses as your own. The more time I spend looking at the implementation in twi, the more I become convinced that vpw taught a mechanized path is because it can be observed, and it covers his own deficiencies in understanding deeper matters of God that are NOT dependent upon cold intellect.

Alan, that was truly uncalled for. You don't act very "Christian" to me. From one Christian to another, I would much rather hang out with the so called pagans, witches and new agers than with you. Don't know why I didnt feel the need to comment on this before, but... Allan, I get more respect from pagans and atheists than I get from you. I also GIVE them more respect than I get from you, which, I think, is an important reason I GET respect from them. Please remember that the best way to have friends is to BE one. Further, consider these 2 examples. Example 1: I interact with non-Christians. I refrain from hitting them with a 2 x 4 at every opportunity, and I maintain a firm conviction that the Bible is true (without insisting they agree.) When the subject comes up, I demonstrate SENSIBLY that there are reasons to believe it's true, and not just a matter of "blind faith". As a result, I've seen some of THEM whack non-Christians who say ALL Christians are fools- they have counter-examples. Example 2: Someone arrives on a board, insists he knows better than everyone else, derides non-Christians present, and slams Christians who say things he doesn't like. Christians and non-Christians remind him that there are RIGHT and WRONG ways to behave. Of the 2 examples, which poster is behaving in the manner that CHRIST would recommend? Which poster is behaving closer to the style of the Apostle Paul, who was all things to all men that by all means he might save some?

Times changed longer ago than you think. I, personally, am aware that there were Roman Catholic CLASSES, Roman Catholic CHARISMATICS, and BOOKS on Charismatics in the Roman Catholic Church in the SEVENTIES. twi didnt exist in a void. Just as other groups benefited from the Jesus People movement, many groups were talking charismatics at the time, back when vpw was putting forth he was the "only" one teaching them.

Did you get your attention to detail (close reading skills) from The Way? Or were you already predisposed to it? One from Column A, one from Column B. I was predisposed towards it, but I never had a SYSTEMATIC approach, and exposure to Bullinger's keys from "How to Enjoy the Bible" (featured in pfal-the class and books, and the bookmark with the keys) fit my approach and helped me REFINE it. At the same time, I DO think there are times that a systematic approach can find excruciating minutiae and turn out to be completely WRONG, so I try not to worship my techniques, either. ("Must know when to break the rules.") That's because I didn't give her ALL my musings. I had a list of suspects for the HBP, and NONE of them were in the ballpark. In fact, my initial suppositions on figuring him out were wrong. Also, in all fairness, I do have the benefit of OTHER people's musings-I'm not claiming that WWP's books are my own. ;)--> (You can look them up on Mugglenet-the Unofficial Guide, the Plot Thickens, etc.) My best skill there is filtering between guesses and educated guesses. Meanwhile, I thought we were discussing twi...

If you are connected to the internet AT ALL, you need a firewall- dialup connection included. There's a number of free, reliable firewalls. (Usually, there's at least one free, reliable program for EVERYTHING.) I've never had a problem with ZoneAlarm. Others here have sworn by Avast! and Kerio. There are other free firewalls people like-like Tiny Personal Firewall and Sygate- but those 3 have been recommended by users HERE. ==== If you want to see how desperately you need a firewall, go to http://www.grc.com and run the online test "Shields Up". That will simulate actions by hackers and give you the results. To give you a basis of comparison, my results say something like "not only can't we get in, we can't prove there's a computer on your end of the connection", and I use free programs only. :)--> ======== You can find the download sites for ZoneAlarm, Avast! and Kerio pretty easily. Just use THEIR websites and not a 3rd party. ======== Now, EVERYBODY should use a software firewall. A router is a good addition as a hardware firewall. The reason you should STILL have a software firewall is that a hardware firewall does NOTHING to affect OUTGOING traffic. So, if something DOES sneak in, a router is useless against it. A SOFTWARE firewall, however, will still control outgoing traffic, and notify you of attempts to dial out from your computer, thus telling you something's trying to dial out. A software firewall thus forms a last line of defense for a router-user.

I believe I learned some useful Bible stuff. Whether I learned anything else WITH it, or whether I would have learned it elsewhere, are outside the scope of this thread.

WhiteDove, rascal? I believe you two are mature adults who've just had a bit of a miscommunication and a derailment. Can I ask for a few deep breaths and pretending we all just have been chatting affably over cheese and crackers? (I'm offering the same, WD.)

They've only scratched the surface. I'm sure it's news to you that all entrants to the way corps were required to write an autobiography called "From Birth to the Corps." Actually, THAT part is common knowledge. What was NOT common knowledge was the 2 uses to which they were put. A) vpw marked those women with histories of surviving abuse- since abuse survivors make easier victims for future predators- and THOSE women were targeted for molestation, rape, etc by him B) when people left twi, those "confidential" papers were dug out, and used as "proof" the person had "backslidden into old sins" rather than escaping because twi was evil. Most people have NO IDEA twi has done these things, at the directive of vpw and others.

True. To a degree, it's perfectly understandable. Some of it just sounds ridiculous when you say it out loud- until you look at dozens and dozens of eyewitness accounts. vpw did such a complete job of controlling information (before the internet) that it was almost impossible to think of him as anything OTHER than "the next man of God to rise up after Paul's death" ("the Way:Living in Love", page 43.) wierwille hid all his sources, then lied and said he had a special connection from God and that's where he got such fantastic material. He put forth that it was the result of "research and teaching for 30 years" ("the Way:Living in Love, page-34) rather than a handful of ORIGINAL writers whose work he cobbled together. The purpose of doing THAT was to inflate himself and elevate himself to that position. His GOAL was for everyone to think he was far above all other Christians, and only HIS group had "The Truth". That way, when it came to evil things, A) It was hard to believe such a "godly" man could sin so greatly (Well, it was based on the false impression that he was a "godly man" based on the knowledge he supposedly originated.) B) he was able to use a veneer of godliness to confuse people and get some to think that God was all right with him sinning At first, it sounds ridiculous to hear of incidents of exhibitionism by him, acts of rape, drugging THEN raping women, rationalizing adultery in his own life, and so on. It's only after account after account pile up that the weight of the evidence becomes inexorable. It's not as ridiculous to examine his chain-smoking, his chronic alcoholism, and his love of luxuries both at hq and when travelling, and see that they DON'T paint a picture of a humble servant of God. It's even sicker to realize that he's not even original, and other conmen have abused the office of Leader among Christians to cover despicable acts. lcm didn't come out of nowhere and just started raping women-he was indoctrinated and trained by vpw, who chose him as his successor for the sole reason of his LOYALTY to vpw (which explains why he lacks any leadership ability). lcm was not WORSE than vpw-he was just worse at covering his tracks. ======== Jewel? Those are good questions, and there are a few answers. The "WayGB" are concerned with what we say here for many reasons. First of all, people who are still in sometimes post, and the WayGB is fixated on uncovering their identities. Second, they resent that they are unable to control information that is posted here. Sometimes, things happen that they want hidden away, but that information gets posted here for the whole world to see. Posts here and other websites were the main reason twi had to make lcm VANISH, and not simply keep him as "Head of the Research Dept" after he was found guilty of crimes. Posts here and other websites have fueled lawsuits. Posts here and other websites broke the news when twi decided to stick Mrs Wierwille in a nursing home, and ignore all committments they had to her. That one was SUCH a public relations nightmare that they insisted-after years of telling people to stay away from the GSC- that their side of that story be posted here as well. This was, in essence, an admission that their own members get MORE news HERE than thru twi official news channels. twi would LOVE to see us all silenced tomorrow. When people nowadays want information, they go online. When they hear of twi, they look and find US. The information here helps them stay wary or clear, which denies twi the chance to sneak up and trick them. This helps maintain "negative growth" in twi, which has been the status quo since at least 1989. As to them knowing what is right in their hearts, I doubt they do. Remember, your heart contains what you place in it. They've been feeding their hearts on a steady diet of twi propaganda and never trying any other "food". So, their consciences are severely malnourished. Yes, I would recommend reading all the links. I would also recommend reading ALL the documents and editorials on this site, even if it takes a YEAR. It's worth having all the information.

Actually, I had the benefit of reviewing an entire week at once. It's hard to do spin-control across an entire ROA-which was one reason why they were cancelled. And, I went in with the intention of looking-since I had already gotten the "all your local leaders are corrupt!" letter, and I knew that those I'd interacted with were NOT. So, I was already aware there was a "disconnect" somewhere. Heck-it was theoretically possible that the top guys were all in the zone and the locals really WERE corrupt. So, I had to kick the tires myself. ============== TheHighWay, so, you're saying that people greeted your entrance with a form to fill out- and you put ACCURATE information on it? The new-person card that is intrusive is just BEGGING for inaccurate information, starting with the person's name.

Jewel, a few things you may want to know. A) seaspray may be reluctant to give personally-identifying information because twi goes out of its way to dig up identities and so forth. He may also be reluctant to put his full name on the internet for other reasons, mainly that it would be available for search engines all over the place. Privacy is a BIG concern in the Information Age. He may be willing to give information privately. B) Before seeking private communication with seaspray, one may want to know that he has posted (and has not posted that he has since changed his mind) that, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, that pfal was NOT the by-product of assembling the books and class of several writers, but that it was "theopneustos", God-breathed. Feel free to access his previous posts for many examples. If this does not bother you-or you believe the same thing-then you may not have any misgivings about communicating privately with him.

Allan replied Oakspear responded Allan replied rascal replied Good question. Allan had CAUSE to apologize, claimed others hadn't apologized previously, then claimed he HAD apologized. Of course, no such apology has been posted, but Allan claimed there WAS one. Allan doesn't let a little thing like "what happened" affect "how I remember things happening". Of course, he also won't do his homework before making a statement. I admitted making a mistake LAST on GSC 8/17/05, 2:39pm. I made an apology LAST on GSC 8/12/05, 9:34am. I've offered apologies a number of times here, in public and in private. That's because I believe that, in polite discussion, when a gentleman has been shown he has made a mistake, he offers an apology. That's why I said that. I'm unsure the specific reasons Allan is pretending he offered one, and unsure the reasons he claimed none of us offered any.

Allan posted the word Oakspear said Allan replied === http://www.dictionary.com said Since I'm on the subject, Allan also said and Dictionary.com said Allan also used the word in another thread.Dictionary.com said which I thought was an interesting coincidence. Since the term seems to have an inconsistent spelling, one would expect at least one to be wrong. (Or, as is the case, all of them.) ====== Now, someone might think I was taking this too seriously. To this I say 2 things. A) I didn't take out a collegiate dictionary, thumb thru it, and post the results, but I COULD have. This would have required caring enough. B) I actually WOULD have let the original post go, but Allan WAS the one wrangling about words... and when Oakspear pointed out the error, Allan DENIED he made a mistake

*points to the "Friend Tracker" forum*

the Little Mermaid ("and stared at each other. It got very boring.") Rene Auberjonois ("Le Poisson! Le poisson!") MASH (the movie)

Stated as a category, which most closely resembles your current belief-system? Please forgive the lumping of categories-I'm limited to 5, so I grouped into "non-religious", "Paganism types", "all common religions not Christian and not pagan", and 2 types of Christian. We can always narrow down the results with a new poll. So, what's the closest to your current beliefs?

Allan? In polite discussion, when a gentleman has been shown he has made a mistake (like attributing one person's post for another), he offers an apology. It's up to you whether you would offer one or not, but I thought I'd mention that it applies ONLINE as well as face-to-face, in case you were uninformed.

Allan said Bramble challenge Allan's assertion of 'pushing' beliefs... rascal agreed with Bramble... Allan replied to them both... Those paying attention may notice that Allan asserted that non-Christians were pushing their POV, and then one non-Christian challenged him to find one place she did so-thus challenging his claim. Allan then dodged the challenge (refusing to acknowledge that HE said she was pushing her POV, and asked her to find one place he did. Now, I CAN find it, but I'd rather see Allan answer BRAMBLE's question FIRST. She asked him FIRST, he REFUSED to answer, then turned the SAME question on her. ==== BTW, Allan? "Pushing one's beliefs" is not "debating". Dictionary.com lists definitions of "debate" as 1-To consider something; deliberate. 2-To engage in argument by discussing opposing points. 3-To engage in a formal discussion or argument. "Formal arguments", BTW, are not "yelling at each other", which some people call an argument. Any Monty Python fan should be able to tell you that an 'argument' is a series of statements intended to establish a proposition.' Dictionary.com says it's "a course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating truth or falsehood". ========= Hm, now we have the latest "sole defender of the faith" here. Please note, everyone, that he has now said as of 8/17/05 5:33pm Eastern. This is sure to come up again, especially when he "stops" GSC from "being overrun by pagans, atheists, new agers and spiritualists."

"You live your life like a canary in a coalmine." Now you've got me humming the old song by "The Police". :)--> ==== Well, I should only answer for what worked for ME, and let others say what warned THEM. I moved pretty quick when I found things that didn't gel for me, more than once. ("Your sensibilities are shaken by the slightest defect..") When it came to twi, the first signs for me were the strife in the upper echelons. I told someone that they'd work things out among themselves-which I actually believed. The next thing I heard was the Trump imitation-"you're fired" said to everyone in my state's leadership. I went to ROA '89, the next ROA after that. I figured that it would be THE place to be. Either I would see leadership turn around-and be there for the announcement, or I'd get irrefutable evidence they wigged out, and get a last chance to raid the bookstore. So, there I saw a number of things that hammered across which way the wind was blowing. One was lcm saying that it was wrong to appeal to emotion, and then IMMEDIATELY show the one scene from AOS that was designed to tug on the heartstrings. I stood there seething at the sheer hypocrisy of that. Another was the way every wierwille who could be convinced was brought onstage and trotted out for the audience. They didn't take the microphone, so they were just there as display pieces, as bric-a-brac. Except for Mrs W, who said that she didn't think it was loving when people told her recently that they loved her but could not remain in the same organization as her. (Sorry, Mrs W, I heartily disagree with your comments. "What kind of love is this? It's certainly not 'agape-love.'" Actually, that's exactly the kind it is.) I also noticed that conversations were MONITORED, and the teachings were of lesser quality. Finally, the letter that was sent out that fired everyone said things that weren't true about them -that they were only in things for the money. I had interacted with a few, and the money seemed the LEAST of their concerns, although it was clear they were facing immediate loss of place of residence, vehicle AND source of income. (That's enough to get ANYBODY worried about money.) After that, I was wary when people concentrated power and were wary to share it. I saw people who were happier disempowering the young than either training them to do things, or even simply do nothing and let them develop their own skills. Further, the attitudes were one of exclusivity- only THEY had any competency, so any leadership training was either THEM or INADEQUATE. Finally, any mention of something they were thinking of doing-if someone else had already done it-would produce NO reaction, not even asking for input. That is, them doing something the first time was superior to others having experience. So, I let them go their way and went mine. Outside of twi entirely, I encountered Christians who were convinced they were THE group-and they were poor performers compared to twi. As far as they were concerned, knowledge only came from THEM as well. ===== So, what warning signs have I seen? Appeals to emotion, hypocrisy (leader teaches one thing then does the opposite), style raised over substance, control of information, outright lying, channeling of authority into the hands of a few, and the doctrine that only THIS group holds "The Truth", and all other Christians love lies, have no commitment to God, and so on. That last one's pretty popular when I'm running for the door.

This is of course just me talking, and just my opinion, but, can both of you gentlemen take it to a different thread if you want to discuss both of those things? I think this thread has been proceeding with one tone, and it might be a good idea to let it remain with that tone. ==== And if you don't see fit to agree with me, and feel like flaming me over it (as some have done in the past), please at least take THAT to a new thread. I think that's a small enough thing to ask.