Leaderboard

If I may, I'd like to tweak this just a bit. If you join/follow a cult, knowing or ignoring its true nature, you are responsible for your words, actions , decisions and emotions. If your involvement is the result of deception, the deceivers must share in the responsibility.

Followers use these "fathers in The Word" to back their own sloppy thinking. It's laziness. It's selfishness. It's their ego identifying with those men. They want to relieve uncomfortable thoughts of responsibility. It ties right into "leadership made me do it . . my hands are clean!" If YOU join/follow a cult, YOU are responsible for YOUR actions, words, decisions, and emotions.

Then....I posted this. Imo, that SAME pre-emptive strike was used when wierwille talked about critics [#4 above] who "go after the man of God" in a personal way.....his life, his clothes, his tie.... "pretty soon we get down to bare facts" (delivered for audience applause & laughter). Translation: Wierwille and his personal life is off-limits from public scrutiny.

Brilliant post, DWBH......thanks! Through the years, I've thought about the strategy of pfal and how certain teaching points, stories, or off-the-cuff zingers [ie....preemptive strikes] were strategically placed. 1) The mother feared the death of her little boy....and one day, it happened. 2) All the women in the kingdom.....belong to the king. 3) The town drunk who showed up at church....don't judge, you've never walked in his shoes. 4) If you go after the man of God....his life, his work, his tie....get down to bare facts. 5) I would need to read it line by line....before calling the great Apostle Paul a sex pervert. 6) Billboard sign -- millions now smoking.....subliminal message from a smoker? Some things seemed like preemptive strikes....and other times, when he was dismissive of things, he was simply ignoring it for reasons that railroaded his sociopathic agendas.

Maybe I'm soft, but I don't see a problem with inventing anecdotes to demonstrate a point. It's only a problem if you somehow assert the veracity of the anecdote to prove something demonstrably false.