Please note the operative words being really successful marriages. Ie., where they are the shining examples of what a marriage should be. Apparently yours falls more or less into that category.
Just because a marriage isn't 'really successful' doesn't mean that they are headed for divorce, cheating on each other, domestic violence, that sort of thing. They might even have learned to still be together despite the things that can cause them to leave each other and wind up becoming successful over the years.
My main point was to challenge this idea that Christians/religious people have it locked down or are the ones who know how to have a successful relationship/marriage, and 'the infidels' don't, particularly when this idea is portrayed according to the TWI/John Lynn model. It is that model that really has the holes in it, illustrated not only by the stark reality of what really went on in TWI, but also by the many examples of unbelieving/non-religious people who have had about as much as a successful rate of marriages/relationships as religious people have.
You find things like that out when you actually talk to and get to know 'the other side' so-to-speak, ya know? Helps drive away many misconceptions and stereotypes.
;)-->
And as far as the yesteryear image, are you sure that they had it all that much better during the 'yesteryears'? I mean, when you look past the 'Andy of Mayberry', I-Like-Ike, 50's propaganda pawned off by the 700 Club sponsered, "I sure wish for the Good Ol' Days When Men were Men ..." yadayada, you find out that each 'age' had its ups and downs and achievements and 'embarrassments'. And likewise the relationships between men and women always had (and always will) have its ups and down throughout the years also.
Hope this clarifies it for you.
My own secret sign-off ====v,
Rational logic cannot have blind faith as one of its foundations.
I can sympathize with Cherished Child's story of the WOW and twig coordinator meeting run by LCM. He pulled that same stunt on another guy in front of us all at the 1992 Rock. I was apprentice Corps then and kept my mounth shut, but his treatment of people made me second-guess my involvement in the Corps. He was the leader and I didn't want to end up like him.
At the Advanced Class special I was reprimanded for being late to a teaching at the WOW Auditorium. Of course, they did not seem to think that helping move a roommate of mine onto International grounds all night mattered and that I slept in a couple of hours. And no one would have noticed if it had not been for a snitching Corps sister that I had sponsored throughout her Corps years. I third-guessed my involvement in the Corps and then had doubts about the ministry. Then a believer employer ripped me off of a paycheck, he was my fellowship coordinator, so I did not go to his fellowship. He and others in the area black-balled me, falsly told Corps HQ that I was dropping from the Corps and spread that rumor causing some people to call International asking for their sponsorship money back. I had to write and advise them I hadn't dropped but they would be the first to know if I didn't show up. (That didn't go well).
I then decided after going broke supporting the ministry and being black-balled for nothing, being reamed for nothing, to leave and chuck the whole ministry. I wrote a letter to the area coordinator who later announced it to the area Corps and I was marked and avoided.
It took me about six months before I got over the feeling God was going to punish me.
"I think it's one thing to say that God designed marriage and, as such, marriage in theory should work best for those who are closest to God."
"It's quite another thing to say marriage is only for God's people, not for anyone else. Even in the Genesis account, Cain took a wife. God did not seem to discourage this activity."
True.
The Bible talks about marriage so much and defines family context as set within marriage that it is fairly obvious that such is the design for humans.
Bonnie in our wedding wanted to use the phrase from Ruth 1:16 "Entreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God: 17 Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried: the LORD do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me"
Even though Ruth was saying it to her mother-in-law, it is still the closest thing to a marriage vow as found in the Bible.
It is rather humourous that the same book (Ruth) contains the only marriage ceremony found anywhere in the Bible (Boaz and Ruth). From that ceremony is the tradition found concerning the Groom's canopy, or skirt being spread over the bride's head while she makes her pledge. Many people dont realize where the Jewish tradition comes from, but from that point on such a 'covering' as referred to many times, even in the New Testament.
I was confronted a few times by corpse-nazis on this issue (S. Strezpec being the most spectacular in 1982). Most times they were insistant that marriage is only reserved for mature-fully-instructed-corpse. It is not for an average beleiver, and certainly not for an un-beleiver. Though even on this issue there was not complete argeement among the corpse.
Our twig once did an exhaustive word-study on: marriage, family, husbands, wives, sons, and daughters. We wrote it into an essay and published it about. I still have it around.
My wife and I were married by a TWI minister. I don't remember any teachings over almost 20 years that it was reserved for Corps. The recommendation back when was to wait until you were an AC grad but it wasn't a requirement. Did that change later?
well, GT--maybe I could package deal 'em to offshoots in need...or mark 'em up to retail and see if the bod/bot is interested in some ole ex-wafer retreads at a good deal.....
You can find yours by clicking on "My Space" at the top of this page (the blue banner above the first post on each page). When you do that, a menu will pop up. Click on "Private Topics."
Recycling can be a pain in the butt sometimes, but useful.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if TWI WAS doing a little head-hunting for the upper echelon ~ they need some flash or something ~
...and retreading, while not creative, lol, as that's a big no-go there (but you are certainly creative) might fill the empty meets, I mean seats, at the main circular table.
"My wife and I were married by a TWI minister. I don't remember any teachings over almost 20 years that it was reserved for Corps. The recommendation back when was to wait until you were an AC grad but it wasn't a requirement. Did that change later?"
To our experience in 1982, we were told that non-corpse should never be married and it was okay for clergy to lead them on in the mean time in the hopes that someday they could be married within TWI. Steve Strezpec (here after known as "L.S.S." lying sack of s*h*i*t) seemed very upset that we had exposed his lying to the couples that he had been mis-leading in this way.
In California 1984-87, we were again performing weddings for beleivers in an area where there was no TWI clergy, and some corpse told us that it was probably okay but to keep it low profile.
In Connecticut in 1990-92, the limb had no TWI clergy so we were performing weddings and the Limb Leader was cool with it. He even loaned me a video by LCM teaching how to perform them the TWI way. Then in 1993 we got a different Limb Leader, he blew a gasket at the idea that a non-TWI clergy was doig weddings of TWI followers. He insisted that I was insulting TWI clergy by doing the weddings myself (even though the limb had no TWI clergy). He was also upset that these weddings were happening for non-corpse couples. They would have rathered that the weddings were done by a Justice of the Peace.
In Washington in 1993-1997, I performed weddings as needed. Though by then we had learned to keep what was happening within the twig, far away from the occasional corpse visit. Things in the Twig went much better so long as corpse-nazis did not know about it.
To our observation there was not complete argeement among the corpse.
Maybe that explains part of it. We were married in the 80s but did have clergy in the state. We weren't even AC grads though. ??? Not that the policy of the day would surprise me though.
(Wow, have we wondered a bit from the original topic or what?!)
No, I'm not a Reverend. I have no formal ordination from anyone, TWI, offshoot or anything.
I _did_ get an ordination from the Universal Life Church, which is one of those internet ordination mills. I did that half as a goof, but it is legal and I can perform weddings. I've performed one so far.
[This message was edited by Rafael 1969 on December 18, 2003 at 17:16.]
As far as that is concerned, you ARE a revvie, Raffi :D--> ;)-->
Maybe I should get one of those ordinations myself, I've always wanted to perform marriages. Maybe that can be a second income for me ;)-->
JT and Galen I was married by TWI clergy back in 75. The only recommandation at that time, was to take the Christian, Family, & Sex seminar. I guess as the years progressed, you had to be a bigger "grad". If TWI had kept going at that speed, guess you would have had to be clergy to even think of marriage.
"Spirit and Truth Fellowship" ????<BR><BR>what in the wide wide world of sports kind of name is that?<BR><BR>sounds kinda spooky if ya ask me!<BR>(also kinda high minded)<BR><BR>... I've been here and I've been there and I've been in between...
Sorry - I was doing a search on Momentus and found this thread. There was a "name the church" "contest" and I use that term because that's what it was touted as, but I'm pretty sure the name had already been decided upon and the "contest" was simply a waste of time.
As far as what kind of name is that, I asked the same thing. I thought the name was dorky and said so. I was told that it embodied what the organization was all about. So? It's a dorky name. Can't you possibly call it something that isn't so weird? Can't say it as an acronym without snickering. I got a weird look, so someone asked the young guys if what I was saying was so. Duh! Kept the name, but dropped the "i" in the website.
Hmm. This thread is so "delightful".. how'd I miss it Taz?
It's almost like.. they moved from a more "masculine" Christian educational services.. to a more in touch with their femine side.. "spirit and truth international.." It's almost like.. they've submitted themselves to some kind of "operation".. but somehow, they've retained the raging male egotism..
Maybe I'm wrong.. or maybe the squirrel has had a little too much cabernet or something..
if it makes sense here.. good. If offensive, or nuts.. just ignore me..
Hmm. This thread is so "delightful".. how'd I miss it Taz?
It's almost like.. they moved from a more "masculine" Christian educational services.. to a more in touch with their femine side.. "spirit and truth international.." It's almost like.. they've submitted themselves to some kind of "operation".. but somehow, they've retained the raging male egotism..
Maybe I'm wrong.. or maybe the squirrel has had a little too much cabernet or something..
if it makes sense here.. good. If offensive, or nuts.. just ignore me..
Yeah, like I get offended easily...
I don't know about the feminine/masculine thing. It seemed natural to call CES something in the same realm as TWI because most of us were not so disenchanted with what we had believed TWI was as much as the behavior. At the time it wasn't believed TWI was rotten to the core; just misguided. It seemed like the CES principals were repentant individuals who knew why TWI failed, wanted to keep the good, and rework the bad. Fast forward a few years and talk of becoming a real church entity. By this time I was done with weird and I thought perhaps CES was at the same place, so I'm talking about getting an old church building with places for offices, a place where worship can take place, and for cryin' out loud a real band with real seeker style services. I was viewed as the nut. No CES wants to keep the home fellowship concept and give ourselves a dorky name so everyone will know immediately what we are all about <== an elitist, combative, dissociative group of people.
"STFI" just sounds in the mind like, well, something male. I think it's been brought up before and observed as hmmm, an odd acronym. Didn't anyone at CES catch the "stiffy" soundalike connection? Maybe it was too hard to bring up - no, make that difficult to bring up.
Have you gotten the latest STFI Newsletter?
No, what's up?
I know, it's childish and nonsensical and boorishly rude to make such a connection. Indicative of a small mind, so to speak, metaphorically speaking. I'm sure that all of STFI's plans and movements are big. But still, on the far end of the extreme of considerations someone must have blinked and smiled. Or maybe not. Guess not, by all appearances. Yet, there is sits like a duck - STFI.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
7
16
12
10
Popular Days
Dec 18
47
Dec 17
23
Dec 19
14
Oct 13
9
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 7 posts
Raf 16 posts
TheSongRemainsTheSame 12 posts
JustThinking 10 posts
Popular Days
Dec 18 2003
47 posts
Dec 17 2003
23 posts
Dec 19 2003
14 posts
Oct 13 2008
9 posts
GarthP2000
Evan,
Please note the operative words being really successful marriages. Ie., where they are the shining examples of what a marriage should be. Apparently yours falls more or less into that category.
Just because a marriage isn't 'really successful' doesn't mean that they are headed for divorce, cheating on each other, domestic violence, that sort of thing. They might even have learned to still be together despite the things that can cause them to leave each other and wind up becoming successful over the years.
My main point was to challenge this idea that Christians/religious people have it locked down or are the ones who know how to have a successful relationship/marriage, and 'the infidels' don't, particularly when this idea is portrayed according to the TWI/John Lynn model. It is that model that really has the holes in it, illustrated not only by the stark reality of what really went on in TWI, but also by the many examples of unbelieving/non-religious people who have had about as much as a successful rate of marriages/relationships as religious people have.
You find things like that out when you actually talk to and get to know 'the other side' so-to-speak, ya know? Helps drive away many misconceptions and stereotypes.
And as far as the yesteryear image, are you sure that they had it all that much better during the 'yesteryears'? I mean, when you look past the 'Andy of Mayberry', I-Like-Ike, 50's propaganda pawned off by the 700 Club sponsered, "I sure wish for the Good Ol' Days When Men were Men ..." yadayada, you find out that each 'age' had its ups and downs and achievements and 'embarrassments'. And likewise the relationships between men and women always had (and always will) have its ups and down throughout the years also.
Hope this clarifies it for you.
My own secret sign-off ====v,
Rational logic cannot have blind faith as one of its foundations.
Prophet Emeritus of THE,
and Wandering CyberUU Hippie,
Garth P.
www.gapstudioweb.com
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
oh my, marriage and divorce, i'd love to see statistics about christian vs. nonchristian
de wald
schoenheit
lynn
names only mentioned because they are CES or the truth spirit people
?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
and as far as reverends go, they're a dime a dozen
;)-->
?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
alfakat
hey, excie, i got a dime around here somewhere--u gotta doz revs fer me?????
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
i gotta special deal for you alfie
2 for 1
buy 1 get 1 free
?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ginger Tea
there not thought of nearly as bad by infidels as they perceive infidels to be...too bad, huh?
Alfa,
What are you gonna do to them?
(;
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkedAndAvoided
I can sympathize with Cherished Child's story of the WOW and twig coordinator meeting run by LCM. He pulled that same stunt on another guy in front of us all at the 1992 Rock. I was apprentice Corps then and kept my mounth shut, but his treatment of people made me second-guess my involvement in the Corps. He was the leader and I didn't want to end up like him.
At the Advanced Class special I was reprimanded for being late to a teaching at the WOW Auditorium. Of course, they did not seem to think that helping move a roommate of mine onto International grounds all night mattered and that I slept in a couple of hours. And no one would have noticed if it had not been for a snitching Corps sister that I had sponsored throughout her Corps years. I third-guessed my involvement in the Corps and then had doubts about the ministry. Then a believer employer ripped me off of a paycheck, he was my fellowship coordinator, so I did not go to his fellowship. He and others in the area black-balled me, falsly told Corps HQ that I was dropping from the Corps and spread that rumor causing some people to call International asking for their sponsorship money back. I had to write and advise them I hadn't dropped but they would be the first to know if I didn't show up. (That didn't go well).
I then decided after going broke supporting the ministry and being black-balled for nothing, being reamed for nothing, to leave and chuck the whole ministry. I wrote a letter to the area coordinator who later announced it to the area Corps and I was marked and avoided.
It took me about six months before I got over the feeling God was going to punish me.
Marked and Avoided
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
i admire you so much, m&a
oh and i left you a little note on the pt place
?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
Rafael 1969:
"I think it's one thing to say that God designed marriage and, as such, marriage in theory should work best for those who are closest to God."
"It's quite another thing to say marriage is only for God's people, not for anyone else. Even in the Genesis account, Cain took a wife. God did not seem to discourage this activity."
True.
The Bible talks about marriage so much and defines family context as set within marriage that it is fairly obvious that such is the design for humans.
Bonnie in our wedding wanted to use the phrase from Ruth 1:16 "Entreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God: 17 Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried: the LORD do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me"
Even though Ruth was saying it to her mother-in-law, it is still the closest thing to a marriage vow as found in the Bible.
It is rather humourous that the same book (Ruth) contains the only marriage ceremony found anywhere in the Bible (Boaz and Ruth). From that ceremony is the tradition found concerning the Groom's canopy, or skirt being spread over the bride's head while she makes her pledge. Many people dont realize where the Jewish tradition comes from, but from that point on such a 'covering' as referred to many times, even in the New Testament.
I was confronted a few times by corpse-nazis on this issue (S. Strezpec being the most spectacular in 1982). Most times they were insistant that marriage is only reserved for mature-fully-instructed-corpse. It is not for an average beleiver, and certainly not for an un-beleiver. Though even on this issue there was not complete argeement among the corpse.
Our twig once did an exhaustive word-study on: marriage, family, husbands, wives, sons, and daughters. We wrote it into an essay and published it about. I still have it around.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
Galen,
My wife and I were married by a TWI minister. I don't remember any teachings over almost 20 years that it was reserved for Corps. The recommendation back when was to wait until you were an AC grad but it wasn't a requirement. Did that change later?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkedAndAvoided
Hi Excathedra...what's the pt place and how do I get there? I thought it meant previous topic.
God Bless!
Marked and Avoided
Link to comment
Share on other sites
alfakat
well, GT--maybe I could package deal 'em to offshoots in need...or mark 'em up to retail and see if the bod/bot is interested in some ole ex-wafer retreads at a good deal.....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
PT's are Private Topics.
You can find yours by clicking on "My Space" at the top of this page (the blue banner above the first post on each page). When you do that, a menu will pop up. Click on "Private Topics."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ginger Tea
Alfa,
yeah!
That's the spirit!
Recycling can be a pain in the butt sometimes, but useful.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if TWI WAS doing a little head-hunting for the upper echelon ~ they need some flash or something ~
...and retreading, while not creative, lol, as that's a big no-go there (but you are certainly creative) might fill the empty meets, I mean seats, at the main circular table.
(;
Happy Holidays to You and Yours
Ginger
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
JustThinking:
"My wife and I were married by a TWI minister. I don't remember any teachings over almost 20 years that it was reserved for Corps. The recommendation back when was to wait until you were an AC grad but it wasn't a requirement. Did that change later?"
To our experience in 1982, we were told that non-corpse should never be married and it was okay for clergy to lead them on in the mean time in the hopes that someday they could be married within TWI. Steve Strezpec (here after known as "L.S.S." lying sack of s*h*i*t) seemed very upset that we had exposed his lying to the couples that he had been mis-leading in this way.
In California 1984-87, we were again performing weddings for beleivers in an area where there was no TWI clergy, and some corpse told us that it was probably okay but to keep it low profile.
In Connecticut in 1990-92, the limb had no TWI clergy so we were performing weddings and the Limb Leader was cool with it. He even loaned me a video by LCM teaching how to perform them the TWI way. Then in 1993 we got a different Limb Leader, he blew a gasket at the idea that a non-TWI clergy was doig weddings of TWI followers. He insisted that I was insulting TWI clergy by doing the weddings myself (even though the limb had no TWI clergy). He was also upset that these weddings were happening for non-corpse couples. They would have rathered that the weddings were done by a Justice of the Peace.
In Washington in 1993-1997, I performed weddings as needed. Though by then we had learned to keep what was happening within the twig, far away from the occasional corpse visit. Things in the Twig went much better so long as corpse-nazis did not know about it.
To our observation there was not complete argeement among the corpse.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ginger Tea
How really sad and pathetic that twi trip was...not for me now much...but for everyone who buys into this junk!
It's clear as a bell, isn't it?
Sheer madness!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
Galen,
Maybe that explains part of it. We were married in the 80s but did have clergy in the state. We weren't even AC grads though. ??? Not that the policy of the day would surprise me though.
(Wow, have we wondered a bit from the original topic or what?!)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CKnapp3
As far as that is concerned, you ARE a revvie, Raffi
:D--> 
;)-->
Maybe I should get one of those ordinations myself, I've always wanted to perform marriages. Maybe that can be a second income for me
;)-->
Reverend Chuck, kinda has a ring to it
:D-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
JT and Galen I was married by TWI clergy back in 75. The only recommandation at that time, was to take the Christian, Family, & Sex seminar. I guess as the years progressed, you had to be a bigger "grad". If TWI had kept going at that speed, guess you would have had to be clergy to even think of marriage.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
Sorry - I was doing a search on Momentus and found this thread. There was a "name the church" "contest" and I use that term because that's what it was touted as, but I'm pretty sure the name had already been decided upon and the "contest" was simply a waste of time.
As far as what kind of name is that, I asked the same thing. I thought the name was dorky and said so. I was told that it embodied what the organization was all about. So? It's a dorky name. Can't you possibly call it something that isn't so weird? Can't say it as an acronym without snickering. I got a weird look, so someone asked the young guys if what I was saying was so. Duh! Kept the name, but dropped the "i" in the website.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Hmm. This thread is so "delightful".. how'd I miss it Taz?
It's almost like.. they moved from a more "masculine" Christian educational services.. to a more in touch with their femine side.. "spirit and truth international.." It's almost like.. they've submitted themselves to some kind of "operation".. but somehow, they've retained the raging male egotism..
Maybe I'm wrong.. or maybe the squirrel has had a little too much cabernet or something..
if it makes sense here.. good. If offensive, or nuts.. just ignore me..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
Yeah, like I get offended easily...
I don't know about the feminine/masculine thing. It seemed natural to call CES something in the same realm as TWI because most of us were not so disenchanted with what we had believed TWI was as much as the behavior. At the time it wasn't believed TWI was rotten to the core; just misguided. It seemed like the CES principals were repentant individuals who knew why TWI failed, wanted to keep the good, and rework the bad. Fast forward a few years and talk of becoming a real church entity. By this time I was done with weird and I thought perhaps CES was at the same place, so I'm talking about getting an old church building with places for offices, a place where worship can take place, and for cryin' out loud a real band with real seeker style services. I was viewed as the nut. No CES wants to keep the home fellowship concept and give ourselves a dorky name so everyone will know immediately what we are all about <== an elitist, combative, dissociative group of people.
Maybe I'm just disgruntled.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Disgruntled.. that's what they like to call it.. I think it's more like "just tired of the same old nonsense.."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
"STFI" just sounds in the mind like, well, something male. I think it's been brought up before and observed as hmmm, an odd acronym. Didn't anyone at CES catch the "stiffy" soundalike connection? Maybe it was too hard to bring up - no, make that difficult to bring up.
Have you gotten the latest STFI Newsletter?
No, what's up?
I know, it's childish and nonsensical and boorishly rude to make such a connection. Indicative of a small mind, so to speak, metaphorically speaking. I'm sure that all of STFI's plans and movements are big. But still, on the far end of the extreme of considerations someone must have blinked and smiled. Or maybe not. Guess not, by all appearances. Yet, there is sits like a duck - STFI.
This thread's got some hair on it. 2003!
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.