you know friends? Is this what the future of GSC is going to be about? Who can we villify? How far down the line of leadership do you want to go? I think it is pretty twisted to post second hand rumors about behavior of sideline players from 30 years ago.
Also, when you laud "so-and-so" as the righteous one, be aware you will invite someone to make their own (also unfounded probably) rumors against that person. I'm just saying, have you read the label on the can of worms you are opening? Does it fit your dietary restrictions?
And there have been accusations leveled at one time or another against pretty much anyone who once wore an HQ leadership badge. Personally, I do not care what the sex life of someone was 30 years ago other than my own, and I barely can remember that!
Peace out,
HAP
EDIT: oops, I guess some of the posts were taken down while I was writing this, still, the can of worms is in the pantry.
Maybe if you had been the one who`s life had been impacted by a man whom presented himself as a minister, be it 30 years ago or not, it would hold more relevance. Especially if the guy was still presenting himself as a spiritual authority. Nice or not :(
At Rock of Ages 1995, the final ROA festival, Martindale, noting no members of the First Way Corps were active with The Way International, designated long-standing Way followers such as Don Wierwille and Dorothy Owens as "The First Corps.
This isn't quite true. It may have been when they were introduced to the general believers but they were designated on an earlier occasion. It took place in the Auditorium during some big Ministry event - maybe it was Corps Week the previous year? (I was present at the event, and very enthusiastic for the new designation for these fine upstanding members of the Way old-timers, but I had been banished by 1995.) Any offers on the date? Othewise, Mark, maybe you can change that in Wiki too?
Never knew that. How funny! I guess he figured, well, this'll show 'em.
But I wonder why in anyone's mind there had to be a hmmm...active, standing fully operational "First Corps"? It's denying reality to say that there wasn't one or that those who were part of it, weren't or to ignore them. Well, ignoring them wouldn't be that hard, and definitely - no Happy Holiday Ho Ho Trustee Picture card for them boy howdey. But to replace them with others is even weirder in the deny-reality department. :blink:
I wonder if they ran to the "Stop Sign" and back, just to show those whippersnappers how it's done? 5:55 in the BRC, baby! That would have been an even shorter lived First Corps!
To replace them with others is even weirder in the deny-reality department. :blink:
Denying reality was always a specialty in my little corner of WayWorld. "I don't care what my senses tell me, I KNOW I'm - (healed, got the job, got the money, have the ability, understand the guidance, on time for the teaching, ad infinitum)...
 I think it is pretty twisted to post second hand rumors about behavior of sideline players from 30 years ago.
Also, when you laud "so-and-so" as the righteous one, be aware you will invite someone to make their own (also unfounded probably) rumors against that person.
Hap, there has been many less than positive comments made on GS about JT by respected posters who've been around since Waydale days, this website serves a purpose of bringing the past hidden things of twi and it's leaders to light. Â Are you referring to their comments or are you referring to a specific poster's deleted post on this thread?
The meeting I went to was same old same old. The only thing that had changed was that he had solid white hair and was a little pudgier than in way days.
I gotta say, he WAS one of the good guys. He taught a tremendous amount about holding people even leaders accountable scripturally. I was readily forgiven, He and Naomi busted their bu tts to treat the wows well...I loved them very much.
Thing is, that great heart and kindness for people just made the poison that he had bought into and was selling palatable.
I think that he was a great fellow, the meanness that contaminated so many, wasn`t tolerated by them when I was around. He just believed and taught some really bad stuff.
Back in "the good old days" (nyuk, nyuk, nyuk), people who were moving up the leadership ladder had a tendency to mimic VP's idiosyncrasies, such as his quirky pronunciations, exaggerated facial expressions and machismo posturing. In essence, they became mini-VPs. Whether they did this intentionally or not is a whole 'nother kettle of fish-sticks. I'm not singling out any particular individual in this observation. On some sort of subconscious level, I think we automatically accepted them as good guys by virtue of similarity. Of course, at that time, we associated similarity with VP as a good thing. There was a guy in Cleveland (Bill Mc) who had a style that was the antithesis of VP's. People came in droves to hear him speak because of the message he conveyed, not because he was charismatic. (because he wasn't) So I guess what I'm saying is that sometimes you have to distinguish between the song itself and the arrangement to evaluate things in perspective. A terrible song can sound great with a good arrangement and the inverse is true as well.
Maybe if you had been the one who`s life had been impacted by a man whom presented himself as a minister, be it 30 years ago or not, it would hold more relevance. Especially if the guy was still presenting himself as a spiritual authority. Nice or not :(
Certain things not only impact a life. . . they alter it. The amount of abortions pushed in TWI. . . . some coerced. . . . many from illicit sexual liasons. . . .also coerced. Please, these things cannot be undone. They shape a life. Most of the women affected were YOUNG!!
This evil was the result of some real rotten twisted bible teaching. . . . by twisted rotten men. . . who just continue on like nothing ever happened. Or, it is over so "Get over it". Or we fix this error and it will be okay. . . . . our "New" group has a handle on the truth now. . . . just needed tweaking.
"What's that over there?" "Oh nothing. . . don't look" "It is just the wake of destruction we have left in our path on the quest for a better truth"
Altered lives. We are still talking about fellow human beings that were hurt. People have been shaped by their experiences. People still buy into this cult's teachings.
It is sick. . . . they opened this can of worms the first time they compromised on basic human decency and hurt another for the integrity of "their groups version of The Word". Or, to cover for some sorry pervert "Minister"who was filled with greed and lust.
Wasn't an isolated incident.
God doesn't hurt people, He loves them. He doesn't actually like abuse in His name. He wants people to come to Him to be healed not maimed.
Paw - first of all I can corroborate his initial post via personal intervention. Secondly - you might want to edit all posts in doctrinal since they cannot be documented or corroborated generally speaking either.
M&A me. I think that level of censorship exceeds ethical boundaries.
Johnny Townsend (who did a great imitation of VP Cornfield, "bless your heart") ...Sure why not...
I first met him in 1975 when he was limb leader of New York...he used to mow the grass at twi hdqrts...I guess he kissed Vic's arse enough to fall into his favor.
...and yeah. last I heard, he was playing the "Geer card"...a weasly punk in my estimation.
Rascal, my post was referring to the second hand charges made here. In no way do I make light of the pain and suffering many victims go through for a lifetime. I apologize if I sounded as though I do, that was not my meaning.
When I referred to "30 years" it was a, perhaps exagerrated, reference to the time since someone had "heard" a second or third hand claim.. If you yourself were attacked by a trustee, and chose to divulge that here, you would have my support.
I just hate to see this place become a gossip fest of hearsay, where anyone can make up some pretty serious "I heard" charges regarding anyone they want.
you know friends? Is this what the future of GSC is going to be about? Who can we villify? How far down the line of leadership do you want to go? I think it is pretty twisted to post second hand rumors about behavior of sideline players from 30 years ago.
Also, when you laud "so-and-so" as the righteous one, be aware you will invite someone to make their own (also unfounded probably) rumors against that person. I'm just saying, have you read the label on the can of worms you are opening? Does it fit your dietary restrictions?
And there have been accusations leveled at one time or another against pretty much anyone who once wore an HQ leadership badge. Personally, I do not care what the sex life of someone was 30 years ago other than my own, and I barely can remember that!
Gee Hap, thanks for the White Dove 'gotta-have-all-the-documented-evidence-in-the-world-or-else-the-accusations-are-unsubstantiated' wannabe imitation there. <_<
Guess what boys and girls, one thing that backs up and 'documents' an accusation is other like accusations/witnesses that verifies a pattern of like behavior initially illustrated by the first witness. Ie., for those who want to use the Bible to weigh in on this, there is the 'by two or three witnesses is an accusation established' principle, and there is a _helluva_ lot more than 2 or 3 witnesses documenting the sexual abuses (ie., rapes) that has happened.
(White Dove, I am hoping that you are reading this. Hope this answers your 'issues' about viable and verifiable proof given. ... No extra charge. ;) )
Update: Hap, I just saw your latest post. Cool beans, dude! )
RumRunner has NOT been disabled. If he told you that he isn't telling you straight.
If someone wants to make claims, let the person that was involved say something first. I am not saying it isn't true, but at this point I've gotten no corroboration.
Gee Hap, thanks for the White Dove 'gotta-have-all-the-documented-evidence-in-the-world-or-else-the-accusations-are-unsubstantiated' wannabe imitation there. <_<
Guess what boys and girls, one thing that backs up and 'documents' an accusation is other like accusations/witnesses that verifies a pattern of like behavior initially illustrated by the first witness. Ie., for those who want to use the Bible to weigh in on this, there is the 'by two or three witnesses is an accusation established' principle, and there is a _helluva_ lot more than 2 or 3 witnesses documenting the sexual abuses (ie., rapes) that has happened.
(White Dove, I am hoping that you are reading this. Hope this answers your 'issues' about viable and verifiable proof given. ... No extra charge. ;) )
Update: Hap, I just saw your latest post. Cool beans, dude! )
Well someone is pulling my feathers again.......
Your correct Garth witnesses support an accusation ,but an accusation is just that, nothing more, it is not the same as a guilty verdict. Accusations are given due process of law such as in the Duke rape case. They are examined and collaborated with hard evidence, questioned ,cross examined and so forth and a verdict is rendered. I believe in that case there were a couple of accusations, which did not stand the test of the law. Good thing for them they did not see things with your view. Just because several say so does not guarantee it was so, or that it was not so. It seems you have the issues Garth you want to render a verdict without the system of justice we have in this country. I prefer innocent until proven guilty, despite what I may or may not personally believe.
Please forgive me if my memory is wrong, but wasn't it our dearly beloved (truly) Don'tWorryBeHappy poster who audibly said on the podcast that all other participants in the infamous "Yak" twig partook in old pervy vic's plan of each one win one adultery outreach ministry, save Art Pol*ing? Â How can it be more first hand than that?
Lift the veil just a little and you might see all sorts of yuck.
With no disrespect intended to other posters whose input is highly valued:
The Bible says that "By their fruits you shall know them".
Personally, I would take this as an indication that we are to take responsibility for weighing things up ourselves, particularly what we see in other people's lives (RD being a case in point).
If this is the case, surely it follows that we don't need judge or jury to pass sentence. In fact, doesn't the Bible tell believers to avoid going to court before unbelievers since we should have enough wise men amongst ourselves?
I see no harm in posters stating their concerned opinions as a basis for discussion by others. If you don't agree with what is said, you have an absolute right to respond, but preferably in a measured and diplomatic manner. Questioning someone's right to voice their honest concerns doesn't impress me at all. Please do not post something here for the purpose of distorting or derailing the thread, just because you don't like something that's been said. If you don't want to add constructively to the thread, go post somewhere else!
So, to look at the fruits produced in peoples lives is not some Greasespot initiative, but it is God's initiative.
I would hope that most people posting here have enough self control and character to ensure that they post in a decent manner and avoid misleading assumptions, but surely we must be able to make representation here without formal legal substantiation?
If people are innocent until proven guilty. . . . bail should NOT exist. . . . holding people WITHOUT bail until trial. . . . would be illegal. . . . you can't jail an innocent person until proven guilty of something.
Geeze that is ONE standard!! Roman law.
Let's set a new standard. . . which is an old standard. . . Common law. . . . until proven innocent.
I may pull my hair out if we have to hear another lecture from the resident law professor.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
19
9
14
8
Popular Days
Feb 12
42
Feb 10
15
Feb 9
12
Feb 13
11
Top Posters In This Topic
rascal 19 posts
WhiteDove 9 posts
Ham 14 posts
Bolshevik 8 posts
Popular Days
Feb 12 2009
42 posts
Feb 10 2009
15 posts
Feb 9 2009
12 posts
Feb 13 2009
11 posts
now I see
There were some caught up in the vpee BS that realized the errors of their ways, changed and got out of it like Pat Ly*n...Commendable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HAPe4me
you know friends? Is this what the future of GSC is going to be about? Who can we villify? How far down the line of leadership do you want to go? I think it is pretty twisted to post second hand rumors about behavior of sideline players from 30 years ago.
Also, when you laud "so-and-so" as the righteous one, be aware you will invite someone to make their own (also unfounded probably) rumors against that person. I'm just saying, have you read the label on the can of worms you are opening? Does it fit your dietary restrictions?
And there have been accusations leveled at one time or another against pretty much anyone who once wore an HQ leadership badge. Personally, I do not care what the sex life of someone was 30 years ago other than my own, and I barely can remember that!
Peace out,
HAP
EDIT: oops, I guess some of the posts were taken down while I was writing this, still, the can of worms is in the pantry.
Edited by HAPe4meLink to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Maybe if you had been the one who`s life had been impacted by a man whom presented himself as a minister, be it 30 years ago or not, it would hold more relevance. Especially if the guy was still presenting himself as a spiritual authority. Nice or not :(
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
HAPe4me
yeah well, what the third-cousin-of-my-sister's-WOW brother's ex-girlfrined said might not even rank as high as "unsubstantiated".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Guess you would have to point out which particular post that was.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Never knew that. How funny! I guess he figured, well, this'll show 'em.
But I wonder why in anyone's mind there had to be a hmmm...active, standing fully operational "First Corps"? It's denying reality to say that there wasn't one or that those who were part of it, weren't or to ignore them. Well, ignoring them wouldn't be that hard, and definitely - no Happy Holiday Ho Ho Trustee Picture card for them boy howdey. But to replace them with others is even weirder in the deny-reality department. :blink:
I wonder if they ran to the "Stop Sign" and back, just to show those whippersnappers how it's done? 5:55 in the BRC, baby!
That would have been an even shorter lived First Corps!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
Denying reality was always a specialty in my little corner of WayWorld. "I don't care what my senses tell me, I KNOW I'm - (healed, got the job, got the money, have the ability, understand the guidance, on time for the teaching, ad infinitum)...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
now I see
Hap, there has been many less than positive comments made on GS about JT by respected posters who've been around since Waydale days, this website serves a purpose of bringing the past hidden things of twi and it's leaders to light. Â Are you referring to their comments or are you referring to a specific poster's deleted post on this thread?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
What I wonder.. does jt still closely mimic his fader in da verd's little heart tugging mannerisms?
is one of his meetings like an old day in da way?
Just curious..
if so, I think it's kind of pathetic, past the midway point in life..
did he get any real life skills, or training? Go to college?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
The meeting I went to was same old same old. The only thing that had changed was that he had solid white hair and was a little pudgier than in way days.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
I gotta say, he WAS one of the good guys. He taught a tremendous amount about holding people even leaders accountable scripturally. I was readily forgiven, He and Naomi busted their bu tts to treat the wows well...I loved them very much.
Thing is, that great heart and kindness for people just made the poison that he had bought into and was selling palatable.
I think that he was a great fellow, the meanness that contaminated so many, wasn`t tolerated by them when I was around. He just believed and taught some really bad stuff.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Back in "the good old days" (nyuk, nyuk, nyuk), people who were moving up the leadership ladder had a tendency to mimic VP's idiosyncrasies, such as his quirky pronunciations, exaggerated facial expressions and machismo posturing. In essence, they became mini-VPs. Whether they did this intentionally or not is a whole 'nother kettle of fish-sticks. I'm not singling out any particular individual in this observation. On some sort of subconscious level, I think we automatically accepted them as good guys by virtue of similarity. Of course, at that time, we associated similarity with VP as a good thing. There was a guy in Cleveland (Bill Mc) who had a style that was the antithesis of VP's. People came in droves to hear him speak because of the message he conveyed, not because he was charismatic. (because he wasn't) So I guess what I'm saying is that sometimes you have to distinguish between the song itself and the arrangement to evaluate things in perspective. A terrible song can sound great with a good arrangement and the inverse is true as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
Certain things not only impact a life. . . they alter it. The amount of abortions pushed in TWI. . . . some coerced. . . . many from illicit sexual liasons. . . .also coerced. Please, these things cannot be undone. They shape a life. Most of the women affected were YOUNG!!
This evil was the result of some real rotten twisted bible teaching. . . . by twisted rotten men. . . who just continue on like nothing ever happened. Or, it is over so "Get over it". Or we fix this error and it will be okay. . . . . our "New" group has a handle on the truth now. . . . just needed tweaking.
"What's that over there?" "Oh nothing. . . don't look" "It is just the wake of destruction we have left in our path on the quest for a better truth"
Altered lives. We are still talking about fellow human beings that were hurt. People have been shaped by their experiences. People still buy into this cult's teachings.
It is sick. . . . they opened this can of worms the first time they compromised on basic human decency and hurt another for the integrity of "their groups version of The Word". Or, to cover for some sorry pervert "Minister"who was filled with greed and lust.
Wasn't an isolated incident.
God doesn't hurt people, He loves them. He doesn't actually like abuse in His name. He wants people to come to Him to be healed not maimed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RumRunner
Paw - first of all I can corroborate his initial post via personal intervention. Secondly - you might want to edit all posts in doctrinal since they cannot be documented or corroborated generally speaking either.
M&A me. I think that level of censorship exceeds ethical boundaries.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Yikes...I just talked to rumrunner on the phone and he told me that he has been "disabled" from posting here...
what's going on?...is this place "changing" or what?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
change is good . . .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HAPe4me
Rascal, my post was referring to the second hand charges made here. In no way do I make light of the pain and suffering many victims go through for a lifetime. I apologize if I sounded as though I do, that was not my meaning.
When I referred to "30 years" it was a, perhaps exagerrated, reference to the time since someone had "heard" a second or third hand claim.. If you yourself were attacked by a trustee, and chose to divulge that here, you would have my support.
I just hate to see this place become a gossip fest of hearsay, where anyone can make up some pretty serious "I heard" charges regarding anyone they want.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Hap4Me,
Gee Hap, thanks for the White Dove 'gotta-have-all-the-documented-evidence-in-the-world-or-else-the-accusations-are-unsubstantiated' wannabe imitation there. <_<
Guess what boys and girls, one thing that backs up and 'documents' an accusation is other like accusations/witnesses that verifies a pattern of like behavior initially illustrated by the first witness. Ie., for those who want to use the Bible to weigh in on this, there is the 'by two or three witnesses is an accusation established' principle, and there is a _helluva_ lot more than 2 or 3 witnesses documenting the sexual abuses (ie., rapes) that has happened.
(White Dove, I am hoping that you are reading this. Hope this answers your 'issues' about viable and verifiable proof given. ... No extra charge. ;) )
Update: Hap, I just saw your latest post. Cool beans, dude!
)
Edited by GarthP2000Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
So, unless there are two or three witnesses, nobody signed a green card?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pawtucket
Groucho,
RumRunner has NOT been disabled. If he told you that he isn't telling you straight.
If someone wants to make claims, let the person that was involved say something first. I am not saying it isn't true, but at this point I've gotten no corroboration.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Well someone is pulling my feathers again.......
Your correct Garth witnesses support an accusation ,but an accusation is just that, nothing more, it is not the same as a guilty verdict. Accusations are given due process of law such as in the Duke rape case. They are examined and collaborated with hard evidence, questioned ,cross examined and so forth and a verdict is rendered. I believe in that case there were a couple of accusations, which did not stand the test of the law. Good thing for them they did not see things with your view. Just because several say so does not guarantee it was so, or that it was not so. It seems you have the issues Garth you want to render a verdict without the system of justice we have in this country. I prefer innocent until proven guilty, despite what I may or may not personally believe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
now I see
Please forgive me if my memory is wrong, but wasn't it our dearly beloved (truly) Don'tWorryBeHappy poster who audibly said on the podcast that all other participants in the infamous "Yak" twig partook in old pervy vic's plan of each one win one adultery outreach ministry, save Art Pol*ing? Â How can it be more first hand than that?
Lift the veil just a little and you might see all sorts of yuck.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pete
With no disrespect intended to other posters whose input is highly valued:
The Bible says that "By their fruits you shall know them".
Personally, I would take this as an indication that we are to take responsibility for weighing things up ourselves, particularly what we see in other people's lives (RD being a case in point).
If this is the case, surely it follows that we don't need judge or jury to pass sentence. In fact, doesn't the Bible tell believers to avoid going to court before unbelievers since we should have enough wise men amongst ourselves?
I see no harm in posters stating their concerned opinions as a basis for discussion by others. If you don't agree with what is said, you have an absolute right to respond, but preferably in a measured and diplomatic manner. Questioning someone's right to voice their honest concerns doesn't impress me at all. Please do not post something here for the purpose of distorting or derailing the thread, just because you don't like something that's been said. If you don't want to add constructively to the thread, go post somewhere else!
So, to look at the fruits produced in peoples lives is not some Greasespot initiative, but it is God's initiative.
I would hope that most people posting here have enough self control and character to ensure that they post in a decent manner and avoid misleading assumptions, but surely we must be able to make representation here without formal legal substantiation?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
If people are innocent until proven guilty. . . . bail should NOT exist. . . . holding people WITHOUT bail until trial. . . . would be illegal. . . . you can't jail an innocent person until proven guilty of something.
Geeze that is ONE standard!! Roman law.
Let's set a new standard. . . which is an old standard. . . Common law. . . . until proven innocent.
I may pull my hair out if we have to hear another lecture from the resident law professor.
Close your eyes WD and pretend you are in the UK.
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.