Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

Publically Critiquing Someone's Life and Choices Upon Death


skyrider
 Share

Recommended Posts

Publically critiquing someone's life and choices immediately upon death.......is distasteful, at best.  No one person knows the full extent or impact of that person's life.  If he/she was in Christian service for a decade (or two, or three), only God would know the full measure of his/her words and deeds and the far reaching effects.

The Way International's leadership used this tactic often at corps meetings.  For those who were never corps.....you were spared dozens of hours of drama and anguish when men like wierwille, martindale or geer would tear into a corps' soul.  Even death was no escape from their wrath....if there was a benefit in stirring fear and control to a higher level.  Haven't we heard the story about the corps at headquarters who were on the colon cleanse and two guys drove into New Knoxville to get some snacks..... and someone was killed in a car accident on the way back?  Wierwille, even days later, called the corps guy a murderer (in Karl K's book).

Another incident....a corps guy, on his way home from an evening fellowship out of town, stops to check on his deer stand.  He had planned to go deer hunting on that Saturday.  Anyways, shortly thereafter he gets into a fatal car accident.  Martindale rails on a corps night meeting how this guy was "out of fellowship" and should never have taken that short side-detour to check on his deer stand.  Imagine.....after 16-20 years of service to twi, THIS is how he's "eulogized" ???  What about ALL the great, selfless things he did to run his branch fellowship?  Nope.  Martindale's got to shovel dirt on his grave....before he's buried.

There have been dozens of corps who were laid bare as examples of what not to do.  Corps meetings were laced with them.  Oftentimes, it would be the centerpiece of what wierwille or martindale wanted to indoctrinate us with that night.  In hindsight, we were incrementally manipulated and herded into their agendas.  This was not education...... this was manipulation, indoctrination and exploitation. 

What about someone who was driving to the rock of ages and was killed?  Silence.  

What about someone who got into a serious LEAD ACCIDENT while riding in the back of a pickup?  Silence.

What about someone who had worked 60 hours that week and was driving home from an evening Twig fellowship and was killed?  Who's to say that that person should NOT have been working tirelessly for twi and maybe should have stayed home that Friday night?  To me, it was really disturbing and grating when twi leadership condemned someone's decisions and choices IMMEDIATELY UPON DEATH.

Sure.....maybe there's benefit to reviewing decisions/choices in a forum to learn from mistakes..... but after some time has passed, not during the grieving period.  Here at GSC, we've discussed wierwille's decisions to film pfal in 1967 staring into intensive lights for hours.  Was it a boneheaded decision?  Yes.  Did we discuss it publically?  Yes.  But we discussed it decades after his death.  Lots of learning from it.

Part of this goes into the Ecclesiastes file.....there is a time and place to critique matters.

And, there is a time for comforting and eulogizing the wellspring of one's life.

 

.

Edited by skyrider
typos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skyrider,

Is this about critiquing JAL's legacy and his words as he posted (or approved posting) them on YouTube?

If so, how long should one wait before calling out what amounts to, in the view of many, insane mythology that happens to put an indeterminate number of people who accepted his words in harms way right now?

I still have fond remembrances of JAL. But his words were often not innocuous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rocky said:

Skyrider,

Is this about critiquing JAL's legacy and his words as he posted (or approved posting) them on YouTube?

If so, how long should one wait before calling out what amounts to, in the view of many, insane mythology that happens to put an indeterminate number of people who accepted his words in harms way right now?

I still have fond remembrances of JAL. But his words were often not innocuous.

 

I think this subject is worthy of discussing here at GSC.

Yes, this came to the fore in the "JAL Legacy" thread.....and a sharp division came forward between viewpoints.  Interesting, for sure.  I look forward to hearing from others on this discussion.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, skyrider said:

 

I think this subject is worthy of discussing here at GSC.

Yes, this came to the fore in the "JAL Legacy" thread.....and a sharp division came forward between viewpoints.  Interesting, for sure.  I look forward to hearing from others on this discussion.  

I don't disagree that it's worthy of discussion. I want(ed) to clarify that the sharp division on the JAL legacy thread was not and is not the same as the character assassinations you referred to. John's character and integrity certainly were not my target in any of my comments even though I can easily disagree with and criticize the content of his teaching.

I also look forward to hearing from others on this topic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It also occurs to me to wonder whether when this happens in twi, they point people to video of the person boldly proclaiming that which they disapprove of.

Is character assassination vs calling attention to specific words behavior at all parallel to teaching children that what they do is unacceptable as opposed to saying they are bad children?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, skyrider said:

 

I think this subject is worthy of discussing here at GSC.

Yes, this came to the fore in the "JAL Legacy" thread.....and a sharp division came forward between viewpoints.  Interesting, for sure.  I look forward to hearing from others on this discussion.  

Maybe we forget our real world manners . I usually avoid politics and religion - and nowadays even among some people I’ve known for a long time.

 

I don’t know - I think a memorial should not be a time to “speak ill of the dead”. I wouldn’t do that at a real funeral. Let’s make another time and place for debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, but a DIFFERENT thread is a memorial.

I was going to leave that thread completely alone. I had no PERSONAL dealings with JAL, and thus no memories to share.  I also wasn't going to make a new thread JUST to call out dangerous teachings. 

However, since this one was started, I consider it fair game. :)

 

It's one thing to go out of your way to do a character-assassination on someone. Somebody leaves twi, and immediately the spin doctors grab the microphone and begin a smear campaign with vague connections to reality. The person was a model Christian up until the moment before they left twi, NOW they're scum!

 

It's another to point out that someone-who made himself a PUBLIC FIGURE and worked hard to do so- has disseminated dangerous misinformation to the public.

For this post, Í'm going to skip the dangerous "Momentus" push he did where people were hurt, and the dangerous "personal prophecy" movement that ruined lives and wrecked marriages.   I'm JUST going to go by the video that was linked, and what he said about the global pandemic, during its height.

 

Only going by this one video....
A) He said masks are useless against COVID.  That's false.  That was known `100 years ago with the "Spanish Flu" and it's true now as well.  He said all the authorities speaking up were wrong and that if you listened to the "right sources", you'd know that. No mention of WHO those right sources were, can't fact-check if he's correct, of course.  At that level, he's floating a rumor.

B) He said COVID was no worse than a flu.  Outside the US, this isn't a political thing in many countries- it's acknowledged this is a worldwide killer.   Again, no sources for his outrageous claim.

C) Claim the CDC said many of the cases (he said "MOST") of the cases were due to comorbidities, so that meant that COVID wasn't to blame there. That shows an ignorance of basic epidemiology. With an "opportunistic infection", something occupies and wears down the immune system, and something else- which normally wouldn't be dangerous- gets in and does a lot of harm or kills someone.  So, if there was no COVID, the "co-morbidity" would not have been a significant issue.  So, his own words there, for those with a layman's grasp of medicine, show he doesn't understand what he's passing along. He may believe it, but that doesn't make it true, and it doesn't make it harmless. 

D) He said it's worse to wear the masks than to risk catching COVID.   

E) He said the isolation protocols have been keeping people from attending church.  He hasn't gotten around that much.  Virtual church-going got REALLY popular during 2020.  

F) He said "most" vaccines- with COVID the context-  are "HARMFUL",   No medical authority has embraced this, and they keep refuting this.  All the medical experts rushed out to get vaccinated as soon as was possible. In fact, many people who got on the media and claimed there may have been problems with the vaccines were all quick to get vaccinated.   Again, no source,  just another rumor he floated. 

G) He said the US death rate for COVID was 0.0 something death rate. He said he doesn't "worry about it at all", and repeated that the masks were useless, and tells nurses not to bother with them.  He mentioned "the true science" with no mention of where one can look it up.  So, hidden (OCCULTED) knowledge where he refuses to cite his sources.  
 

All of that, if followed, runs between "highly-suspect" (hidden sources)  and potentially fatal (skipping the vaccines.) 

 

In a lot of the world, this isn't about politics, it's about PUBLIC HEALTH and bipartisan support for measures were common.  In countries where this was a political football, the body counts for COVID shot up (like Brazil.)     Comedian Gabriel Iglesias is in poor health. He's morbidly obese, has diabetes, and other health problems. He caught the Delta variant of COVID, and took 1 day of bed-rest.  He was fine afterwards- because he got BOTH vaccination doses. 

If one follows JAL's counsel on COVID, one runs the risk of getting the disease, and possibly dying, or possibly passing it along to other family members and friends.  Places where vaccination has been up are often maintaining social distancing and mask-wearing, and otherwise are returning to normal- as much as one can while doing both. The places where the highest rates of people getting COVID and dying of COVID correlate directly to places where people remain unvaccinnated.  That's a problem for 3rd world countries that can't get vaccines, and that's a problem in the US in counties where people say their personal freedoms are being infringed upon.  I agree with what Arnold Schwarzenegger said on this.  Your personal freedoms have responsibilities.  

JAL had the courage of his convictions, and practiced what he preached- which, apparently, led directly to his death.  At least he was CONSISTENT. 

 

If this post ends up getting chopped up by staff, I'm sorry. I tried to stick to the medical facts and as clear of politics as I could manage. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, skyrider said:

 

I think this subject is worthy of discussing here at GSC.

Yes, this came to the fore in the "JAL Legacy" thread.....and a sharp division came forward between viewpoints.  Interesting, for sure.  I look forward to hearing from others on this discussion.  

I think the sharp division of viewpoints is ever present and not really caused by John, though he very likely exacerbates things due to some of the views he held. Personally, I don't think the sharp division of viewpoints is necesarily unhealthy unless it becomes adversarial due to disrespectful attitudes to those who differ. My personal opinions on John Lynn are entirely different from what you may infer. I actually do not agree with a lot of the things he did, or believed, and am more than happy to discuss any of the things he said or did as a public figure. It's a respect thing with me. As for covid mandates and implying he would still be alive if he wore a mask and got a vaccination. None of us know the gory details of his personal health issues and they are just that - his personal health issues. That part to me is distasteful and done all too often for political gain by our politicians and mass media. On the other hand, respectful discussion of his view points and advocated positions is fair game and I am more than willing to delve into any facet of what he publicly taught. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My original post made NO reference to any one person.  My intent was to start a discussion about the CONCEPT.  As I've said, twi leadership would go into attack mode on the individual immediately upon death.......lest the ministry be blamed.  More often than not.....it funneled the end of one's life down to a fraction of minor decisions.  This topic could be worthy of discussion if we delve into the wide spectrum of life and lilving.

If others choose to make this thread all about the recent passing of John Lynn, then I will bow out.

Peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, skyrider said:

My original post made NO reference to any one person.  My intent was to start a discussion about the CONCEPT.  As I've said, twi leadership would go into attack mode on the individual immediately upon death.......lest the ministry be blamed.  More often than not.....it funneled the end of one's life down to a fraction of minor decisions.  This topic could be worthy of discussion if we delve into the wide spectrum of life and lilving.

If others choose to make this thread all about the recent passing of John Lynn, then I will bow out.

Peace.

I wasn't aware that Lynn had died. But I was aware of the character assassination that took place upon death on occasion, often of people who, up until death, were 100% cheerleaders for whatever Martindale or Wierwille were peddling. If these people were suck F-ups, why were they in leadership positions in the first place? (not saying they WERE F-ups, just that post-mortem, LCM SAID they were). For a group that was so hot on "discerning of spirits" and "in-depth spiritual awareness", they sure were terrible at spotting spiritual issues until it became completely obvious. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Oakspear said:

I wasn't aware that Lynn had died. But I was aware of the character assassination that took place upon death on occasion, often of people who, up until death, were 100% cheerleaders for whatever Martindale or Wierwille were peddling. If these people were suck F-ups, why were they in leadership positions in the first place? (not saying they WERE F-ups, just that post-mortem, LCM SAID they were). For a group that was so hot on "discerning of spirits" and "in-depth spiritual awareness", they sure were terrible at spotting spiritual issues until it became completely obvious. 

The sickening part is they used these tragic incidents for their own gain. LCM rants were probably the worst, but I have heard VPW be just as mean spirited on old corps tapes that I wasn't supposed to listen to when I was in-residence. They were full steam ahead white washing VPW so they pulled all the old tapes and such that showed his true nature from circulation and from the Gunnison library when I was in-residence. To my knowlege the only place anyone can access all the old tapes and such is from the library at HQ, which is only accessible to staff, and maybe followers at certain times such a the AC. I digress somewhat, but all of this is leading to my point. 

Since the Allen lawsuits they don't publicly slander any longer because their lawyers taught em that. All of the slander is kept in house at confidential meetings amongst the way corps leadership. Even the way corps meetings were dry white toast and (at least under Rosalie) and sanitized to the point of being disinfected of anything meaningful. I used to pretty much doze off during corps meetings anyway. 

They have no in-depth spiritual awareness and them using discerning of spirits is laughable. The directors are so insulated in a world of their own choosing that they really have no idea what's going on in the world anylonger. So, the f-ups were usually good lap dogs, like I used to be, that eventually get a strong dose of reality and wake up out of the TWI induced slumber. A true in-depth spiritual awareness, and/or truly using discerning of spirits at TWI HQ would lead one rather quickly to the exits. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NPD has a far greater fear of his/her own demise than the average person.  

 

It's the fear of death projected onto the world at large.

 

Lots of folks know not to worry about what they can't control while they still have breathe.  Unlike the NPD.

 

 

I'm sure that applies somewhere and everywhere.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Since the Allen lawsuits they don't publicly slander any longer because their lawyers taught em that. All of the slander is kept in house at confidential meetings amongst the way corps leadership."   OldSkool

Reminds me of this thread years ago......... ....and you're not recording is that correct?

Twi did NOT trust field corps to not record corps meetings......so every week, the a/v guys would ask the same three questions.  

If corps teachings were simply about teaching the Scriptures (educating minds).......they WHY the repetition of the same three questions each week?  Was twi recording THE RESPONSE of each field corps person.....so if a **recording** was attempted to be introduced into a court case, then twi-lawyers would step in and show that twi's policies were to NOT RECORD CORPS MEETINGS.  Perhaps, as well.....twi didn't want the masses hearing the verbal assaults and slander that was often common at corps meetings.

Interesting how LOSING a couple of court cases ( and lots of settlement money )..... got twi to change its slander tactics.  Although, I'm sure that in tighter circles, the slander is prevalent.......just like the "mark and avoid" policy that twi denies that exists. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, OldSkool said:

That part to me is distasteful and done all too often for political gain by our politicians and mass media.

JAL was not, except to long ago ex-twi followers, a public figure. I have not read anywhere that he has been cited by politicians or mass media. Do you understand otherwise? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, WordWolf said:

If this post ends up getting chopped up by staff, I'm sorry. I tried to stick to the medical facts and as clear of politics as I could manage. 

I personally see nothing in your post that would warrant any censorship. It's cogent and on topic, at least for the subject person whose passing brought the issue to the fore. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Rocky said:

It also occurs to me to wonder whether when this happens in twi, they point people to video of the person boldly proclaiming that which they disapprove of.

Is character assassination vs calling attention to specific words behavior at all parallel to teaching children that what they do is unacceptable as opposed to saying they are bad children?

 

10 hours ago, skyrider said:

My intent was to start a discussion about the CONCEPT.  As I've said, twi leadership would go into attack mode on the individual immediately upon death.......lest the ministry be blamed. 

To this point you made, brother, I don't see the current situation as analogous to what twi would do to go into attack mode to "protect the ministry" from blame. Which twi practice obviously is sinister and narcissistic.

It's also difficult, based on the timing of JALs passing and this discussion arising, to separate the two.

I'd welcome your further insight on issues surrounding the twi practice.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, OldSkool said:

The sickening part is they used these tragic incidents for their own gain.

That's the nugget in this discussion. A situation which, with emotional health and maturity called for compassion for the person's family, was made all about them. Hence, apparent evidence of the cultic and narcissistic nature of the organization..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rocky said:

JAL was not, except to long ago ex-twi followers, a public figure. I have not read anywhere that he has been cited by politicians or mass media. Do you understand otherwise? 

Relatively speaking to grease spot cafe, which is all about the way international and it's splinter groups. Is Rosalie, Vern, Bill, John, or Angela public figures? Yeah same logic applies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll just say here what I said there: if be had promoted cigarettes and dismissed studies showing a link to disease and then died of lung cancer or COPD, the point would have been raised and there would not be a shred of controversy about it.

In OUR community, JAL counts as a public figure. He's not being interviewed in that video because he was such a private fellow. 

Further, we are not debating or discussing his life choices. Had he kept them to himself, it would have been distasteful.

JAL had a platform few of us have, and he used it to spread the kind of misinformation that is of a particular health risk to people in his medical situation.

I cannot think of a set of circumstances that would make a public discussion of his *public* stance on this PUBLIC HEALTH issue MORE fair for comment here. 

He didn't keep his misinformation to himself. The fact that he mocked legitimate efforts to control the spread of an illness whose threat he minimized, AND that illness contributed to his premature death, is absolutely positively fair game.

Let his legacy be a warning.

Edited by Raf
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Raf said:

PILL say here what I said there: if be had promoted cigarettes and dismissed studies showing a link to disease and then died of lung cancer or COPD, the point would have been raised and there would not be a shred of controversy about it.

In OUR community, JAL counts as a public figure. He's not being interviewed in that video because he was such a private fellow. 

Further, we are not debating or discussing his life choices. Had he kept them to himself, it would have been distasteful.

JAL had a platform few of us have, and he used it to spread the kind of misinformation that is of a particular health risk to people in his medical situation.

I cannot think of a set of circumstances that would make a public discussion of his *public* stance on this PUBLIC HEALTH issue MORE fair for comment here. 

He didn't keep his misinformation to himself. The fact that he mocked legitimate efforts to control the spread of an illness whose threat he minimized, AND that illness contributed to his premature death, is absolutely positively fair game.

 

I think that's the point skyrider was making when he stated the thread wasn't about JAL but TWI's rather sordid practice of character assasination of people who passed away. Why not move his stance on health care to another thread dedicated for that? Or does any post that could be remotely related to JAL become a public health pedestal? Obviously, there are people who realllllly want to discuss this facet of his beliefs based on the video that was posted in another thread where he was interviewed and his views ran cross purposes to the main stream medai's. Personally, I was really hoping this thread could stay on track with the OP's desires. If this has to be that platform then I will bow out as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, let me follow up on something WW said:

The misinformation he spread was NOT HARMLESS.

Not harmless to the public in general and not harmless to JAL in particular.

Let his legacy on that point be a warning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, OldSkool said:

 

I think that's the point skyrider was making when he stated the thread wasn't about JAL but TWI's rather sordid practice of character assasination of people who passed away. Why not move his stance on health care to another thread dedicated for that? Or does any post that could be remotely related to JAL become a public health pedestal? Obviously, there are people who realllllly want to discuss this facet of his beliefs based on the video that was posted in another thread where he was interviewed and his views ran cross purposes to the main stream medai's. Personally, I was really hoping this thread could stay on track with the OP's desires. If this has to be that platform then I will bow out as well. 

The discussions are inextricably linked.

Generally speaking, if a person is going to make a public figure of himself [a term that has different meanings in different contexts], then we are talking about different standards for "privacy."

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The nastiest bit of character assassination - well, two bits really - were these:

(1) Rev W1ll1e Thomas's daughter died - she'd been on drugs, reason she died.  The lovable LCM hugged and consoled him, right?  NO WAY!  He blasted W1ll1e at Corps Night and said he wasn't capable of taking care of his family, therefore wasn't capable of looking after people at TWI, and removed him from his position at TWI, and (if I recall aright) M&A'd him.  LCM also banned anyone from speaking with Rev T, consoling him or otherwise being in contact.  I never saw Rev T again.

(2) A young wife, Corps grad, wanted a natural birth.  She'd been at HQ and some higher-up started pontificating about how and where she should have the baby.  Things went wrong, she died, the baby lived, and the distraught husband and new father was castigated very unpleasantly for not having sufficient control of his wife.  I think that was most of another Corps Night.  I did see this young father and his baby later on grounds, though.  Perhaps he never knew of the calumny heaped upon his head.

These recollections are true.  I was there.  I heard it all at max volume at Corps Nights. 

I also heard much other denigration of people who left voluntarily, were kicked out, or died.  But these two events were outstanding.

  • Upvote 1
Link 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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...