A couple of questions

[Mike]

2 hours ago, T-Bone said:

Contrary to a popular belief in TWI  there are many Bible passages that suggest there are degrees of punishment depending on the degree of sin - here are just a few:

Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town...Matthew 10:15 NIV

Jesus answered, “You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.” ...John 19:11 NIV

20 Then the Lord said, “The outcry against Sodomand Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.” ....Genesis 18:20, 21 NIV

13 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.[14] 

15 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are....Matthew 23:13-15 NIV

 

38 As he taught, Jesus said, “Watch out for the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and be greeted with respect in the marketplaces, 39 and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets. 40 They devour widows’ houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. These men will be punished most severely.”...Mark 12: 38 - 40 NIV

 

I tend to think wierwille pushed the idea of all sin is the same in God’s eyes so his sexual predations wouldn’t look so bad when compared to someone just losing their temper with their spouse.

 

Good points.  Some of these are new to my thinking. Some ponder time.

Here is something to separate out also: God's feeling or reaction to various sins VERSUS God's recognition that one sin may hurt another person more than a lesser sin.  Some of the above scriptures may connect to the later.

I tend to lean to the "no degrees of sin" idea when dealing with broader issues, like mankind in general.  When an individual human being is involved I lean heavily toward the more practical idea of "the greater the hurt, the greater corrective actions must be taken."

I don't see how Way people could get fooled very much on the "no degrees of sin" idea, but then again, I never saw it being applied to a situation that demanded big punishments for big hurts to humans.

 

[So_crates]

My original comments in black

Mile's response in purple

My response in red

 

So were you running on Waybrain autopilot when you wrote this?

No, not Waybrian. I liken that to the TVTs (Twi Verbal Traditions) we had in circulation back then.  For 20 years now I’ve been moving away from both by moving toward the written material.

 

What happened to the humans are complex creatures, they can do good and bad schtick?

Humans are usually complicated and can imitate good for a while, but the nature is evil. 

That's not what you said on another thread. You said himans were complex and capable of doing evil and good at the same time. I find it amazing that you have no problem with the everybody else is pure evil, but Saint Vic isn't.

 

Were Saint Vic's actions nice...for awhile, then his rotten heart reigned his affairs? You have no trouble telling everyone how rotten the human heart is, yet when you see that corruption in Saint Vic you have a million excuses.

No excuses.  We can rest in peace knowing in the long run God will repay.  What a person earns is what they will eventually receive. I do not look at VPW as having “gotten away” with anything.  He may be stuck with a lot less rewards than some grad who ministered love in life.

Not what I asked. I asked if his actions were nice for awhile..but then his evil nature, as you claim with the rest of us, reigned.

 I don’t know and don’t have to judge.

Odd, you have no trouble judging the rest of us, but when it comes to Saint Vic...

If I were working at HQ and saw something, then I’d have a decision to make. That never happened.  My big decisions in this category were connected with how well I could see PFAL line up with the KJV and whatever deeper research I was capable of. It fits; it works; for me.

You used the word “reigned” above.

I used the word reigned because that's the word you used.

  I don’t think that quite lines up with the 24/7 cycle at HQ and on the field.  There may have been a few times and places where that happened for a short duration, but I think “reigned” is an exaggeration.

It's the word you used, so you exaggerated?

  I think that’s a part of the Pure Evil model creeping in and taking over.

And here's further proof of your hero worship: You have no problem with the pure evil model of humanity, but the pure evil model of your hero, who's a part of humanity, is wrong.

 

[T-Bone]

18 minutes ago, Mike said:

Good points.  Some of these are new to my thinking. Some ponder time.

Here is something to separate out also: God's feeling or reaction to various sins VERSUS God's recognition that one sin may hurt another person more than a lesser sin.  Some of the above scriptures may connect to the later.

I tend to lean to the "no degrees of sin" idea when dealing with broader issues, like mankind in general.  When an individual human being is involved I lean heavily toward the more practical idea of "the greater the hurt, the greater corrective actions must be taken."

I don't see how Way people could get fooled very much on the "no degrees of sin" idea, but then again, I never saw it being applied to a situation that demanded big punishments for big hurts to humans.

 

Perhaps you’re overthinking the issue...many cultures / societies past and present follow a similar dictum of “punishment should fit the crime” whether in criminal or civil cases...and usually within a judicial framework- many details are taken into account such as if others were harmed and to what extent by the perpetrator of the crime.

[Mike]

52 minutes ago, So_crates said:

You have no problem with the pure evil model of humanity, but the pure evil model of your hero, who's a part of humanity, is wrong.

 

 

Not using pure evil models.

I see all of us, me, vpw, David, Saul, Paul etc more like checkerboards, oscillating back and forth between good and evil. It's a battle.

With humans the end battle is sure doom. With the Savior, Jesus Christ, who in several ways overcame this in himself, we have hope of escape from this eventual sure doom that natural man is facing.

Get it? Individuals are complicated and go in and out of fellowship. I have seen myself do this many times in one day, during unstable phases of my life. Other times I  do better. I think this is the way it works for all of us.

Mankind in general tends toward the pure evil, but in a checkerboard style, not a pure style.

[Mike]

44 minutes ago, T-Bone said:

Perhaps you’re overthinking the issue...many cultures / societies past and present follow a similar dictum of “punishment should fit the crime” whether in criminal or civil cases...and usually within a judicial framework- many details are taken into account such as if others were harmed and to what extent by the perpetrator of the crime.

I totally agree... after the overthinking comment.  
I was saying that God can do the same. In fact, I think He did when David's situation deteriorated to killing Uriah.

[T-Bone]

26 minutes ago, Mike said:

I totally agree... after the overthinking comment.  
I was saying that God can do the same. In fact, I think He did when David's situation deteriorated to killing Uriah.

Yes, there were some pretty harsh consequences for David’s sinfulness – and I don’t think that comes as a surprise to anyone who studies the cultural background of the Bible or for that matter, anyone that has some sense of right and wrong…but your comments here make me want to touch on something you said in the previous post:

1 hour ago, Mike said:

(SNIP)

I don't see how Way people could get fooled very much on the "no degrees of sin" idea, but then again, I never saw it being applied to a situation that demanded big punishments for big hurts to humans.

 

I think it’s only a matter of time for the moral ambiguity of TWI to wear down - or perhaps anesthetize the conscience of followers…like bringing a pot to boil slowly, the frog will probably sit in it until he cooks…many former way corps on Grease Spot have attested to fact that wierwille taught one thing to the general public “the word means what it says and says what it means” for example…but to the  way corps he would often promote the idea that one could become so spiritually mature that you could handle something that a lot of less "spiritually minded" folks couldn't - - like adultery...that's probably one of the biggest tricks of  how people got fooled into thinking there's no degrees of sin.

Edited February 18, 2018 by T-Bone
clarity

[waysider]

Just an IMHO here:

I believe Wierwille's "all sins are equal" was really a preemptive  ploy on his part to silence any dissidents . It certainly explains the lock-box and "not thinking evil of your brothers and sisters in Christ"...like a  "You're just as guilty as me." sort of thing.

[Rocky]

17 minutes ago, waysider said:

Just an IMHO here:

I believe Wierwille's "all sins are equal" was really a preemptive  ploy on his part to silence any dissidents . It certainly explains the lock-box and "not thinking evil of your brothers and sisters in Christ"...like a  "You're just as guilty as me." sort of thing.

I tend to agree.

Btw (not a response to waysider), I tend to think Mike is in quicksand over his head in this discussion. He can't even recognize rhetorical questions (that answer themselves). It takes me back to when I said something about his quasi-intellectual bull$hit.

Mike doesn't even come close to writing as if he has a background of examining anything in detail to suggest he has analytical or research skills on par with academic practitioners.

Edited February 18, 2018 by Rocky

[So_crates]

1 hour ago, Mike said:

Not using pure evil models.

Yes you are.  You wrote:

Humans are usually complicated and can imitate good for a while, but the nature is evil. 

Another way of writing the above sentence is Human nature is evil, but it can fake being good.

Or Human nature is pure evil, but occassionally fakes good.

Got it?

If humanity is by nature pure evil, then Saint Vic, being part of humanity, is also pure evil.

The only was he could escape not being pure evil in your humanity is pure evil model is to not be human.

Quote

I see all of us, me, vpw, David, Saul, Paul etc more like checkerboards, oscillating back and forth between good and evil. It's a battle.

That's not what the above sentence says. Backing up the evil nature quote above is another quote of yours:

Some actions can be nice… for a while, but the human heart is rotten and it eventually reigns in human affairs.

So does the above quote hold to Saint Vic, too? Were some of his actions nice for awhile, but his rotten human heart eventually reigned (your word, not mine) in his affairs.

Quote

With humans the end battle is sure doom. With the Savior, Jesus Christ, who in several ways overcame this in himself, we have hope of escape from this eventual sure doom that natural man is facing.

Get it? Individuals are complicated and go in and out of fellowship. I have seen myself do this many times in one day, during unstable phases of my life. Other times I  do better. I think this is the way it works for all of us.

Show me in the above sentence where it says in fellowship or out of fellowship.

Quote

Mankind in general tends toward the pure evil, but in a checkerboard style, not a pure style.

Pure evil is pure evil. "Soup is soup, apple butter is apple butter..." Pure evil is pure evil. Got it?

Would you accept it if I said Saint Vic was pure evil, but the checkerboard style?

Second, all those people your accusing of using the Pure Evil model, how do you know they're not meaning checkerboard style?

 

Edited February 18, 2018 by So_crates

[Mike]

1 hour ago, T-Bone said:

Yes, there were some pretty harsh consequences for David’s sinfulness – and I don’t think that comes as a surprise to anyone who studies the cultural background of the Bible or for that matter, anyone that has some sense of right and wrong…but your comments here make me want to touch on something you said in the previous post:

I think it’s only a matter of time for the moral ambiguity of TWI to wear down - or perhaps anesthetize the conscience of followers…like bringing a pot to boil slowly, the frog will probably sit in it until he cooks…many former way corps on Grease Spot have attested to fact that wierwille taught one thing to the general public “the word means what it says and says what it means” for example…but to the  way corps he would often promote the idea that one could become so spiritually mature that you could handle something that a lot of less "spiritually minded" folks couldn't - - like adultery...that's probably one of the biggest tricks of  how people got fooled into thinking there's no degrees of sin.

That “spiritually mature” part rings a bell. Several years before JS and the adultery paper I was a twig leader in a small way home. We had a carload of young people arrive one day from the State of Maine. I knew bad things had happened there so I braced myself.

After a few months some mild events occurred, but eventually one person in the twig was getting confused and hurt, and highly distracted from the word. I made an announcement that for the next few weeks, whenever no new people showed up, we’d do a grad night and work “adultery” and “fornication” from KJV, Young’s, Bullinger, Interlinear, etc.

We also collected about 9 rationalizations to casual sex that had floated around sparingly for years. I think the “spiritually mature” thing was one of them.

I was surprised and delighted when I first saw the JS paper on adultery. He had about 14 appendixes that were the same rationalizations we had 9 of.   We had done a mini JS paper in 1979ish.

I could see someone who was dulled to questionable behavior, and therefore a pushover for any rationalization.  Dulled to it yes; spiritually mature, pretty unlikely. Even more unlikely computing in the changing of minds days or years later. Maturity can be easily miscalculated.  It can also go down.  It always sounded like the thinnest of ice to me, if solid at all.  I lived in a nerd world where these things never happened in real life. I missed out on a lot of fun, but it looks like I missed out on a lot of misery also.

 But the “degrees of sin” thing didn’t seem capable of lulling people into something they had boundaries against. Luckily, I was spared all this.

[T-Bone]

1 hour ago, waysider said:

Just an IMHO here:

I believe Wierwille's "all sins are equal" was really a preemptive  ploy on his part to silence any dissidents . It certainly explains the lock-box and "not thinking evil of your brothers and sisters in Christ"...like a  "You're just as guilty as me." sort of thing.

yup !!!! I agree...or as Grace would say "bingo"

[Mike]

1 hour ago, waysider said:

Just an IMHO here:

I believe Wierwille's "all sins are equal" was really a preemptive  ploy on his part to silence any dissidents . It certainly explains the lock-box and "not thinking evil of your brothers and sisters in Christ"...like a  "You're just as guilty as me." sort of thing.

I saw a completely different aspect of the lock box.

It exactly coincided with one of the good principles they had in the RC. This VERY STRONG principle of the secrecy of the confessional in the RC gave rise to the lawyer-client privilege we now have in the courts, as well as psychiatrists with their patients. I used the lock box in all my years in the ministry for both me getting counsel from leadership, and for me giving counsel to people who trusted me for it.

And and "not thinking evil of your brothers and sisters in Christ"  and   "You're just as guilty as me." sort of things were part of this noble use of lock box..

Edited February 18, 2018 by Mike

[So_crates]

I must say Saint Vic taught you well. You want to lecture, but when it comes to you following what your lecturing others to do, you go by the don't do as I do, do as I say motto.

 

17 minutes ago, Mike said:

And and "not thinking evil of your brothers and sisters in Christ"  and   "You're just as guilty as me." sort of things were part of this noble use of lock box..

Does this include accusing others of using pure evil models?

Does this include accusing others of trying to trick you?

Does this include accusing others of judging you?

Perhaps you should work on becoming a worthy example before lecturing us.

Edited February 18, 2018 by So_crates

[Mike]

2 hours ago, Rocky said:

I tend to think Mike is in quicksand over his head in this discussion.

I can agree. The closer the subject is to sex the less I can relate. It's mostly theory for me then. I just never was that close to any of the abuses or even the uses. Sorry if I disappoint you.

 

[Rocky]

2 minutes ago, Mike said:

I can agree. The closer the subject is to sex the less I can relate. It's mostly theory for me then. I just never was that close to any of the abuses or even the uses. Sorry if I disappoint you.

 

SMH... I have no expectations.

But I do have more questions relating to twi/pflap.

What is "spiritual maturity?" What does it look like to be spiritually mature?

Might that be anything like emotional intelligence?

 

[Grace Valerie Claire]

34 minutes ago, T-Bone said:

yup !!!! I agree...or as Grace would say "bingo"

T-Bone, 

[Grace Valerie Claire]

2 hours ago, Rocky said:

I tend to agree.

Btw (not a response to waysider), I tend to think Mike is in quicksand over his head in this discussion. He can't even recognize rhetorical questions (that answer themselves). It takes me back to when I said something about his quasi-intellectual bull$hit.

Mike doesn't even come close to writing as if he has a background of examining anything in detail to suggest he has analytical or research skills on par with academic practitioners.

Rocky, I think you are right!!

[waysider]

Hey, Mike, did you know "lock-box" comes from an old Aramaic phrase that can be literally translated "sweep it under the carpet."?

 

Don't tell anyone, though, it'll just be our own little secret

[Grace Valerie Claire]

12 minutes ago, Rocky said:

SMH... I have no expectations.

But I do have more questions relating to twi/pflap.

What is "spiritual maturity?" What does it look like to be spiritually mature?

Might that be anything like emotional intelligence?

 

Rocky, I too would like to know what "Spiritual Maturity," is.  Does anyone know?  

[Grace Valerie Claire]

20 minutes ago, waysider said:

Hey, Mike, did you know "lock-box" comes from an old Aramaic phrase that can be literally translated "sweep it under the carpet."?

 

Don't tell anyone, though, it'll just be our own little secret

Way, I didn't know that!  Thanks for the information.

[waysider]

1 minute ago, Grace Valerie Claire said:

Way, I didn't know that!  Thanks for the information.

Hahaha! Just kidding.

The idea that someone would confuse the lock-box with personal confidence is beyond absurd. It's obscene.

[T-Bone]

3 hours ago, Mike said:

(SNIP)...

I could see someone who was dulled to questionable behavior, and therefore a pushover for any rationalization.  Dulled to it yes; spiritually mature, pretty unlikely. Even more unlikely computing in the changing of minds days or years later. Maturity can be easily miscalculated.  It can also go down.  It always sounded like the thinnest of ice to me, if solid at all.  I lived in a nerd world where these things never happened in real life. I missed out on a lot of fun, but it looks like I missed out on a lot of misery also.

 But the “degrees of sin” thing didn’t seem capable of lulling people into something they had boundaries against. Luckily, I was spared all this.

“dulled to questionable behavior, and therefore a pushover for any rationalization.  Dulled to it yes; spiritually mature, pretty unlikely.” Hmmmmm… wierwille supposedly the most “spiritually mature” in TWI had a knack for desensitizing folks to questionable behavior (please see the thread TWI's Sedative to the Conscience for details on that)…yeah “spiritually mature” was just code for religious hypocrisy.

ya know “great” sexual predators think alike –consider the recent scandal of that sexual predator scum physician of MSU and how he exploited privilege and trust; check out this link in  Psychology Today  here's a snippet of that article:  “Betrayal, violation of trust, and remembrance of the inappropriate acts can leave abuse survivors with trauma-related symptoms. Conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, depression, complex PTSD, eating disorders, substance abuse, alcohol dependence, or a disordered personality (i.e., borderline personality) are not uncommon after abuse.

Understanding the psychological and neurobiological impact of trauma on survivors can help the abused and those who love them pursue treatment and support.
Heinous acts that violate our trust and body often disrupt neurochemistry and lead to dysregulation of the emotional system within our brain. These neurobiological changes can leave a survivor in a state of suffering, pain, and anger long after the abuse.”

== == == == 

"I missed out on a lot of fun, but it looks like I missed out on a lot of misery also."   Mike, that seems like such a callous and flippant thing to say. please re-read the above excerpt from Psychology Today , think about this from the victim's point of view...what if you were one of the women victimized by wierwille? Then how much admiration would you have for him and all the stuff he preached about ? would you be so quick to come to his defense?

 

== == == 

as far as the rationalization goes – that’s what the predator does - NOT the victim! From Wikipedia on rationalization 

“In psychology and logic, rationalization or rationalisation (also known as making excuses) is a defense mechanism in which controversial behaviors or feelings are justified and explained in a seemingly rational or logical manner to avoid the true explanation, and are made consciously tolerable—or even admirable and superior—by plausible means. It is also an informal fallacy of reasoning.” 

 

== == == 

wierwille violated the privilege and trust of the people he supposedly served – he didn’t give two $hits about personal boundaries…you’ve heard of doctor’s without borders…wierwille was a fake doctor without boundaries.

Edited February 19, 2018 by T-Bone
clarity

[T-Bone]

1 hour ago, Grace Valerie Claire said:

T-Bone, 

Now, Grace please don’t be upset - I wasn’t plagiarizing    …just wanted to invoke your wonderful name and catchphrase    

I thought of yelling Yahtzee but that only works in Vegas

Edited February 19, 2018 by T-Bone
giggles

[Grace Valerie Claire]

1 hour ago, T-Bone said:

Now, Grace please don’t be upset - I wasn’t plagiarizing    …just wanted to invoke your wonderful name and catchphrase    

I thought of yelling Yahtzee but that only works in Vegas

T-Bone, Bingo!!

[Grace Valerie Claire]

1 hour ago, waysider said:

Hahaha! Just kidding.

The idea that someone would confuse the lock-box with personal confidence is beyond absurd. It's obscene.

Way, Nuts!!