Leaderboard

An Apology About an hour ago I implemented my decision to apologize and stop posting. I started with a long letter of apology to So_crates, and then followed with shorter apologies to others. I’m re-writing the letter to So_crates below for all to consider, so that this decision is not well buried. Please allow me to apologize to others here for the way I have been. After a week of soul searching I have come to realize that the main reason I returned to post here was NOSTALGIA. I just miss grads and grad talk. Part of that nostalgia kick has been reading up on posters stories and other threads by the current frequent posters. In doing so I’ve come across lots of emotional reminders of the problems that happened at TWI. Most of those problems hit me much lighter than the others whose stories I was reading. In general, I’ve come to realize that my nostalgia thrills are not worth it, seeing the commotion and stir that my posting has been. I really thought that after a 10 or 12 year hiatus, things may have calmed down. They did not; some ways they are worse. Some of the problems posters recounted that hit me hardest were in how families were disrupted. It reminded me of hurt grads, close friends of mine, of long ago who got ground up in the ministry machinery. I had forgotten their pain. *** I think I was wrong in posting, seeing my topic causes grief. Grief causing was not my intention. I now feel it’s my moral duty to stop posting my message. I honestly thought the hostilities would calm down after a month of my recent posting. I was wrong. I honestly thought the hostilities would be GONE after my being gone for 10 years. I was wrong. *** I see better now the lingering hurt of TWI that still bothers MOST people here. I should have seen how something that I consider good news is not so good an association for me to bring up over and over here. I owe apologies to all here, and I have sorrow for what I’ve done. This has been going on and off in my head for a week now, and it’s not been letting up, but getting worse. I want to learn from this. I will stick around for a little (like a few days), hoping for a means to make some kind of token amends. Possibly, if I offer to answer questions (best of my ability) that may help, but I also can’t see anyone losing any sleep if I just split immediately. I will stick around long enough to try and clean up any issues, if possible. My usual style and agenda for using questions as mechanisms for getting my message out is in the trash can. Instead of dodging questions that may interrupt my message flow and/or be useful later, I’ll just try my best to answer them. I have no plan, but to stop posting my message. Maybe if I stick around a tiny bit people can get some closure on this episode. I’m sorry I didn’t read all those personal stories first, before I started posting. Peace.

An Insidious Plan..........(proceeding in a gradual, subtle way; intending to entrap and harm) Where spiritual abuse intersects with multi-level marketing scams People are disposable......keep payroll and any "retirement pensions" at minimum levels Whitewash the history......and laud programs and classes with International wayspeak Love-bomb the newbies with all the "benefits" to their biblical research Keep polishing the bannisters and manicuring the grass.....newbies won't see deception Entrap them in dependency to commit/give to the cult (gain access to their wallets) Generic website and way magazines......all information and contact lists centrally controlled The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine.

Chockfull, I'm amused by our brief interaction here, and while I think it opens up a fascinating discussion, it is one that is off-topic here. Agree? Everyone else: If you're wondering where I am in this discussion, there are multiple explanations for my relative lack of participation. First and foremost, I consider Mike's thesis factually debunked. There is nothing to discuss. He has never answered for the plain and obvious factual errors and contradictions in PFAL and the writings of VPW that discredit his thesis conclusively all by themselves. If he ever gets around to it, maybe I'll jump back in. But I see no need to revisit the endless cycle of "dodge, deflect, deny, anything other than admit an error is an error" that is his stated m.o. Honestly, why debate someone who announces upfront that he will not debate with integrity? My apologies if this sounds like a personal attack. I'm struggling to separate criticism of the person from criticism of his stated m.o. I have nothing to say about the person that would not result in a violation of GSC rules. Which brings up another reason for my relative silence: I humbly recognize that a decent portion of the GSC rules appear to have been developed to address the various ways I behaved in dealing with Mike. Lots of things I said and did would be considered blatant rule violations today. While I have not discussed this with anyone recently, and I only discussed it minimally with people years ago, I do not believe this is a coincidence. I also do not believe I am able to disguise my feelings enough to avoid rule violations if I should re-engage in the discussion. Housekeeping: I DO believe I am capable of behaving fairly as a moderator. So for no one has asked for that, and if that should happen, I'll see if any other mods are available to take action before I step in. And I will advise Mike personally if there is something I do that he would like to challenge. Somewhere in this list of why I'm not participating is the fact that my beliefs have changed between the original discussions and today. As such, it would be too easy for people to dismiss my comments because I do not believe ANYTHING can be "God-breathed," so how can I fairly judge whether VPW's writings are? (My answer: By holding VPW's writings to their own definitions of the characteristics of the "God-breathed Word." Surely it cannot be God-breathed and yet be incorrect about what God-breathed means!) All said, in the olden days these discussions were shipped to doctrinal. I am inclined to move it again. The only reason I haven't done it already is that the GSC has changed so much that this conversation may not be the nuisance in About the Way that it once was considered. Nonetheless, the question of whether a written work is "God-breathed" automatically falls into doctrinal, for the record. In any event, happy debating.