Leaderboard

Great atticle defining a cult https://findingmyway12.substack.com/p/waityou-grew-up-in-a-cult

Thanks for the replies. Growing up in this cult really did a number on me. I was afraid to ask questions and instead of thinkign that was not OK, I thought I was being decieved by Satan and it was him who was putting the questions in my mind. Think about being 9 years old and thinkign Satan himself is weaponizing your thoughts as a way to attack the Way. It's soul crushing. I just wanted the devil to leave me alone. In reality the devil had no interest in me at all. ugh

????????

Oh, they're full of it, alright.

Hey guys & gals, your old buddy Oakspear popping in for my periodic “hey” Life continues well: My wife & I will soon officiate our 900th wedding; 17 years marrying folks I gave up alcohol in 2022; too many bad decisions & the hangovers got to be too high a price to pay I got out of retail grocery 8 1/2 years ago & have been working as an analyst in the department of revenue, also training new hires & will be retiring in one year I do a lot of concert photography & sold a photo to Alligator Records I enjoy seeing some of you on Facebook or Twitter, and occasionally I get nostalgic for the days of yore on Grease Spot, including Weenie Roasts and weddings, but don’t really have the desire to be here as much as I used to. My tablet remembered my password, so I interpreted it as a sign to interact for a bit Love you guys!

Must have been when he wasn't busy inventing the hook shot.

The question is - will they bring back the shower tent? If you weren’t there picture a tent with hundreds of naked men or women all out in the open with no curtains showering off like cattle. I was a teenager and it was mortifying. Let’s not forget the drugs and orgies in tent city and LCM ranting for hours under the big top. Remember when the WOWs got cancelled for being “infested with homos”? Maybe they will bring back LCM to see if the new ambassadors pass his “homo sniff test.” Any other Rock of Ages nostalgia? It’s fun to reminisce. Their beliefs are too weird to attract any new people in large numbers so they turn to the good ol’ days and hope people will come back. Ironically, I had made peace with the way and never thought about it until I got one of those post cards which brought me back into looking at this site and revisiting how screwed up it all was. what a sad bunch of whack jobs.

That substack by Liz Childers is remarkable in that she shows so well what her cult experience was like and how it continues to affect her today. She writes in such a brave, down-to-earth way, with clarity and deep understanding. Cheers to Liz! Charlene

Yeah, see. That kinda leaves us between a rock and a hard place. We were either following the teachings of a man with devil spirits or he was wrong about what he taught. That means he could have been wrong about...well ... anything.

Was in church on Sunday. Our sermon series is about our identity as Christians. The curate, Ben, gave a talk was about being salt and light. Little bit different idea of "salt" but completely acceptable. Then he turned to a discussion of "light" and hiding candlesticks under bowls, cities on hills, etc - y'all know the passage. And then he said: "You are all lightbearers. Bearers of the light!" Lightbearers!!! Not a word commonly used by people. Never encountered it in ordinary conversation. Maybe the Olympics talks about that, but the expression is usually "torch bearer." I quite enjoyed Lightbearers apart from the hitchhiking. A nice, enjoyable, two week release from the stifling prison and rigid discipline of being at HQ. Stayed with, met, hung out with, some really nice people. Witnessed to some nice people - and some less nice ones. Overall, no regrets. I could even say, I have happy memories. Got back after one such expedition to have the whole group of us bollocksed for not being good enough. We deserved being kicked out, etc, etc due to our lack of believing. (Nothing about HQ's own lack of preparation or knowledge of the area!!) Our punishment: to be sent out again a month or so later, with the admonition that those who didn't get a class together needn't bother coming back as they would be thrown out anyway. No pressure, then. (All teams succeeded this time, in a different city.) Lightbearers! Ben, if you knew what you'd evoked, brought back, you'd've found a different word! But I'm willing to reclaim it and use it so that the ugly connotations get expunged.

We had a Political forum on the GSC, and it almost shut down the entire site. It took many times more moderation than all the rest of the board put together. Pawtucket was about to shut down the entire GSC out of frustration, but elected to keep everything else and just jettison the politics- which is unnecessary anyway. When 9-11 happened, a lot of people wanted to talk about it. That's how the politics board started, a board on 9-11, that expanded. But discussions got ugly, and posters didn't limit themselves to just mean posts in that board. Some followed other posters around and attacked them on threads that have nothing to do with politics, And so on. It made for a toxic environment. So, someone else agreed to moderate a purely political forum, and Paw jettisoned the one here. As I understand it, the other one lasted a few months, then fizzled out. I'm not sure why because I didn't follow it. So, the rule at the GSC is, NO POLITICS.

UK maps have Gulf of Mexico (Gulf of America). If there's no good reason to change a name of centuries, why bother? Ah, says an orangeman, there is good reason. My ego! TBH if it were called Gulf of THE Americas, that would be understandable and maybe acceptable. The area is bounded by the continent of North America and the isthmus of Central America; and South America forms a southern boundary though arguably not exactly on the gult. The lengths of the Mexican border and the north American border appear to be about the same. But no. The orangeman thinks America means the whole of the continent of North America (sorry, Canadians). And sharing with other parts of "America" (ie, Central and South) just isn't in the playbook. It's likely the rest of the world with stick with Gulf of Mexico and the name will revert back in a few years' time.

Thanks, Allan. The current administration will be pleased. Really, it interprets itself, whatever one calls it.

I totally forgot this was here. I think there are a bunch of things that need to be revisited in light of dwindling participation. I want to find some way to preserve our testimonies and reconsiderations of what The Way taught. No solid answers here. We'll figure something out.

For anyone considering getting involved with The Way, or if you are and you're having doubts about the group, consider this. It is information you may not have already: The current Way organization still lauds the corrupt VPW as their founding "man of God?" About the Founder - Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille That's enough for me to categorize the current organization as corrupt. Its roots in Wierwille are rotten. Their current "tree" cannot be any good no matter how "nice" any followers might be. Many of us had first-hand experience with the authoritarian, narcissistic, predatory, abusive plagiarist named Victor Paul Wierwille. We know that he stole most of his teachings that are found on tapes and in his books. Many of those are still used today, or tweaked, or slanted this way or that. We know the women he seduced and raped and silenced. We know the emotional abuse he inflicted on anyone who questioned him. We now understand how cults work and how they make extensive efforts to hide their corrupt histories like the one The Way has and cannot escape. We know that no matter how many fresh coats of paint you slather over filth, the filth is still underneath. To any followers of this organization: ask where the money goes. Ask where the power lies. Ask what happens if you leave the group. Ask what happens if you disagree with the ideology. Think for yourself.

Well, it's been over 50 years since I first heard these things, but as I recall, it was covered in what we used to call the "13th" session of PFAL. After the 12th session, in which students *manifested*, there was a separate session on the unforgivable sin. Supposedly, this involved the seed of Satan being irreversibly instilled into people. Born again of the wrong seed, as it were. It was supposed to be the polar opposite of the new birth, and quite different from possession, which could be exorcised. There was lots of talk about many of the people of great influence being "seed boys", and, therefore, irredeemable.(prominent scientists, actors, musicians, world leaders and so forth) Of course, it freaked out lots of people and negated the euphoria of session 12. That's probably why it was eliminated and not revisited until it resurfaced in the Advanced Class teachings. I think it might be included somewhere in the original PFAL collaterals. edit: You can't really accept it as being possible without first believing in "once saved, always saved" because of the element of permanence. It's hard to look back at some of this stuff and not laugh at what a chump I must have been.

Just a little tune to sing to the kiddos in your life.

So glad to now be after having been unburdened from what has been....

I just wanted to point out for the record that Old Skool was one of the GSers who engaged in the repeated and false accusation that GSCafe had become hostile to Christian points of view. These posts on his own site put his criticisms into a larger context. We maintain that GSC is welcome to all former TWI members, whether you are Christian or not, and we encourage you to explore your faith (or loss thereof) on your terms. We've done our best to develop safe spaces where you may do so, and you can choose the extent to which you want to engage with opposing points of view. Thanks.

Back in business! Don't forget the Donate button. George

Thanks for this, Rocky. As for tactics TWI used in the past to find prospects. In the 1970s, one big time leader I won't name, told us to comb throught the obituaries to find the names of families who'd lost loved ones so we could approach them, offer "comfort," and try to sign them up for the PFAL class. I found that piece of advice so revolting I never did it. At least I had some good sense tucked in my mind somewhere back then ...

For many people, recovery is an on-going process. Think in terms of something like weight loss. You don't reach your target weight and suddenly abandon the effort. I think there's a bit of a parallel in the comparison, but maybe that's just me.

I don't know if they accept the science or not, but I suspect it doesn't matter to them either way because of the new earth. If anything, I could see them pointing to climate change as evidence of the coming eschaton. My fellowship ridiculed me for recycling because of the point above. My city no longer has a municipal recycling program because of ineptitude and corruption. Thankfully, a private upstart founded and operated by some young enterprising Christians has closed the void. Great guys doing great work. I wish I could afford to continue with their service, but it has gotten too expensive. On their cans and trucks is Psalm 24:1 (NIV) "The earth is the Lord's, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it." Pretty cool.

BTW, we've previously discussed and whether or not he was completely a fraud. That is, was he even a Christian at all, or was it all an act from the beginning? Was he a Christian once whose sins dominated his ministry, or was he a fraud from the beginning of his career? We know- by his own wording- that he chose ministry out of 3 possible careers, besides business or entertainment, and it was a toss-up. The only indications he was actually interested in God before his decision was 2 anecdotes- and vpw lied a lot. One anecdote was when he was a kid. A preacher showed up and preached at his local church. When the preacher asked him what he planned to be when he grew up, vpw supposedly said he wanted to be a man of God like the preacher. vpw followed this up with saying that he'd thought that he himself wasn't serious when he said it. "You know how kids talk." So, even he didn't believe that story. The other story was that he would shirk his chores as a kid and run off into the woods for hours. When there were no witnesses, he supposedly was off "preaching to the trees" and practicing how to preach. Naturally, nobody came forward and said they ever saw him do it, even once. Even more naturally, vpw- most obviously a big plagiarist- plagiarized that story as well as all the others he plagiarized. ORAL ROBERTS preached to the trees. He fought his own stage fright by going among trees and got used to addressing them as if they were the public, making altar calls and so on. Now, with the internet, that story is easy to find, and easy to trace to Oral Roberts. In vpw's lifetime, it was a LOT harder to catch him plagiarizing, without access to the internet. We know that his efforts in school leading up to the ministry were slack enough that his father had to get involved for vpw to be allowed to continue his education. By vpw's own admission, when he claimed to choose the ministry, his own father pointed out he lacked the discipline to be a decent farmer, and thought the ministry would require MORE dedication. When in divinity school, vpw chose the SOFTEST option available- preaching. He skipped studying church history, church languages, and so on. Later, he pretended to know both, but, as we've seen since. he was awful at both. His area of study was "homiletics"- or putting together sermons. How hard is that? Most of the posters here, if not all the posters here, have done it at some point, when in twi. We called them "teachings" but they were sermons by another name. vpw went to school for it, we did not. That's how soft an option that was. According to vpw himself, when he was first assigned a church to pastor, the local elders gave him almost no instructions. Rather than focus on what his congregation needed, he supposedly spent the entire first month focusing on going completely against what the local elders had said, and mouthed off to them when they confronted them on it. The story rings hollow and sounds made-up because they didn't have him removed and the church locals didn't stop attending when he spent his entire first month focusing ALL of his sermons on giving money to the church. However, as a lie, it shows his frame of mind- that he thinks that this is an appropriate lie to tell of his early days as a preacher. And he didn't spin this as "but I learned better and I thank God I'm not like that any more", he gave that as an example of his frame of mind, that he chafed at authority so much he would preach "up" if he was told to preach on "down,", and focusing all his sermons on talking people into giving him money was fine. Did you think it was a new thing with him that "Christians Should Be Prosperous" (why I should give twi my money) was mandatory reading for all pfal students, a book they paid for with their pfal tuition, a book they paid retail prices for, a book printed in-house for a LOT less than they paid? He got a job editing the sermons and articles of other Christians. Shortly thereafter, he got used to re-preaching whatever they'd worked at. In short, in his entire career, he plagiarized freely whenever and wherever he was able. He himself admitted that he's completed his entire divinity education, and spent his entire first year preaching BEFORE he ever believed the Bible was the Word of God. Is it even possible to believe a man could spend that much time as a GENUINE ministry student and preacher and not have that as A foundation for everything if not THE foundation for everything? By his own admission, TWICE in his first year as a preacher, he considered giving up as a minister. I'm supposed to believe he was a dedicated, GENUINE minister when he kept looking back and considering hanging it all up. What changed everything? All evidence points to him ripping off/plagiarizing BG Leonard's class, and JE Stiles book, both in the same year, and making those the 1.0 version and following of pfal. (The very first pfal class, "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today", was a ripoff clone of Leonard's class in EVERY detail, and remained so until he added Stiles' work, then Bullinger's work.) All evidence points to him being a fraud from the beginning. Every step was calculated as a business move, and none of it was "at the behest of God Almighty." When all of this came up, the counter-argument- the claim that vpw was always actually genuine, was entirely based on four things. A) Everything he taught was accurate, and of God, so he must have been connected to God to be that correct. vpw claimed to work by revelation, so he must have been working by revelation. As it turns out, the main reasons to believe he worked by revelation were his own claims he did so, and certainly all claims everything he taught was accurate run the same way- since we've examined some of his work and found errors all over it. Understandable as human error, but a problem if supposedly it was ALL by revelation, and so on. B) vpw claimed "the 1942 promise." vpw claimed God Almighty spoke to him, and that was the basis for his preaching, and of the material he presented later. It didn't take a lot of work to show that these claims didn't hold water. They fell apart easily when examined. Once again, vpw, a chronic liar, had lied to his congregation. C) I feel really blessed when I hear his teachings, and I felt really blessed when I was in twi, so vpw must have been genuine. Well, genuine Christians were in twi, and there was genuine, plagiarized material. I could see either blessing someone, even if vpw was a complete fraud. Furthermore, by vpw's own admission, feeling really blessed when he himself taught meant nothing- some people make similar claims about sitting on a Psychiatrist's couch (something he denigrated, probably because he was in competition with Psychiatrists who completed medical school.) So, those claims don't hold water, either. D) vpw sounded really sincere when he taught for decades, and supposedly nobody could sound sincere faking it for decades. YES THEY COULD. Now, none of US could do that, because we have a conscience. A true sociopath (like vpw) could brazenly go for decades, presenting things he didn't believe, to people who did believe them, in order to bring in the money. Certainly, any half-decent actor- or any half-skilled CON ARTIST- could do it for an entire sermon, given the right materials (like being able to plagiarize all the materials, the presentations, and so on, from real preachers.) So long as it was clear it was all for the stage, any decent actor could keep doing it- like Steve Martin performing in the movie "Leap of Faith". But his conscience would bother him if he pretended to be real while faking it and actually preaching at the pulpit. Heck, early acting exercises have actors practicing to speak convincingly while speaking literal gibberish. Any number of politicians have gone and given speeches they didn't really believe, and delivered them with gusto, as if they believed them. (No examples, please, politics is off-limits at the GSC.) I once saw comedian/actor John Candy deliver an example of that. He got onstage pretending to be a member of the Canadian Parliament. All of the MPs are supposed to be bilingual in English and French, but many don't know much French, and that was the basis for the joke. With lots of florid hand gestures and looking "genuine", he delivered a speech in French- in poorly-pronounced French. The subtitles clued English-speakers in on the jokes. "Good evening and welcome. I do not speak French. This speech was written for me by someone else, and I don't understand a word I am saying. I am a fat English pig." The entire time, that was delivered every bit as if he was giving a genuine speech. It's the example I know best, but it's common enough for actors. Faking it can be done if someone's conscience doesn't stop them. So, the only remaining objection doesn't hold water, either. Oh, there was also the "argument" that vpw was real because he spoke in tongues. No matter what twi said and says now, speaking in tongues can be faked, speaking in tongues with interpretation can be faked, word of prophecy can be faked. We had some heavy discussions as to whether or not they WERE ALL faked, or if they simply WERE faked LOTS OF TIMES. We know some were faked because some of us faked them at the time- all while trying to be genuine and meaning well, but faking it anyway because that's how we were taught. Now, I actually changed my position as a result of these discussions. I once believed it was all real, and now believe all the "speaking in tongues/interpretation" of twi and that style was and are all faked. (I'm convinced most of the "word of prophecy" was faked, but not all of it, I believe some of it was genuine.) Nobody is required to agree with me, but it's clear enough that SIT CAN be faked. So, the idea that vpw should be believed to be genuine because he was seen to SIT doesn't hold water either- it can be faked. Why do people believe it can't be faked? That's what we were taught by vpw- a man who lied to us all the time. Do you know the difference between "sincere" and "insincere"? vpw didn't. He said that the man who tries to sell you a toothbrush with only one bristle has to BE really sincere. UNTRUE. The man has to FAKE sincerity, he has to APPEAR sincere. Unless he is a complete moron, he would have to know such a product is defective and useless for its proclaimed purpose. He would be trying to con you, and APPEAR sincere while he FAKED his sincerity. Why would vpw be unable to understand such a simple distinction? It was part of his character. To him, there was no difference between BEING sincere- meaning it from the heart- and FAKING sincerity- looking like you meant it from the heart but faking all of it, making a performance with a genuine appearance. All evidence points to vpw having been a fraud from Day One. Oh, perhaps something, somewhere was genuine, but being 100% fake and being 95% fake pretty much look the same.

Worked BP at the ROA a couple of times in the early 80’s. One shift I was working at the entrance to the driveway leading to (I think) Wierwille’s home. We were specifically told only vehicles with a certain colored pass were allowed through. A black limo rolls up. We stop it. Driver arrogantly demands that we let him through. We explain about the pass. He, again arrogantly informs us that The Way only has one limousine & this is it. We don’t budge. Finally the back window rolls down & it’s Howard Allen. Yeah, we let him through, but how difficult would it have been for the driver to get the pass that BP was being told to require for entry? Other than that, I worked the swing shift, so I had a legitimate reason for skipping the main evening teaching. Also a female friend would stop by to make out after things slowed down

When in doubt, write: The Teacher Box 679 New Knockwurst, Ohio

Well... other than the "I'm right and they're wrong" aspect of your post I figure there could be some reasonable insight to looking at Jesus as fulfillment of OT law. I totally reject the paradigm of black/white, wrong/right interpretations of scripture. WE (humans/humanity) IMO are far too limited to be able to clearly define (most) interpretations of scripture as such. Stay curious and be willing to consider new ways to look at them. Just sayin'.

Hello, Greasespotters, This week is another anniversary for Undertow: in 2016, I was working with my editor on the final copy. In celebration, I thought I'd post something from the book. Enjoy. The following is the Preface to Undertow: My Escape from the Fundamentalism and Cult Control of The Way International. By Charlene L. Edge In its heyday in the 1980s, The Way International was one of the largest fundamentalist cults in America, with about forty thousand followers worldwide.1 Founded in 1942 by a self-proclaimed prophet, Victor Paul Wierwille (1916–1985), who marketed the group as a biblical research, teaching, and fellowship ministry, The Way still operates in the shadow of its dark history. I knew Wierwille personally. As one of his biblical research assistants and ministry leaders, I am a witness to his charisma, as well as his abuse of power and manipulation of Scriptures to serve his own agenda. I discovered his sexual abuse of women and chronic plagiarism. Today, those underbelly facts are hidden, denied, or otherwise squelched. The years of Wierwille’s authoritarian reign and the chaos after his death provide the context of my story. In 1987, after seventeen years of commitment to The Way, my life was a wreck. I rejected Wierwille’s ideology, escaped, and resumed my education. At Rollins College, my essay “Somewhere between Nonsense and Truth” laid the foundation for “An Affinity for Windows,” a short memoir in Shifting Gears: Small, Startling Moments In and Out of the Classroom. These writings are woven into this book. My recruitment story is included in Elena S. Whiteside’s book, The Way: Living in Love.2 This book is a memoir. It is my recollection of events related to the best of my knowledge and ability. The story’s crucial facts are true. Some events and conversations are combined in the interest of storytelling. Besides my memory and bits from others’ memories, my sources include my extensive collection of notes, journals, letters, calendars, books, newspapers, photographs, and copies of The Way Magazine. Names in this story that I have not changed, besides mine, are those of current or former public figures in The Way International: leaders at the state level or higher, Way trustees, and a few members of The Way’s Biblical Research Department. For privacy reasons, other identities have been changed or are composites. I recognize that others’ memories or interpretations of the events I describe herein may be different from my own. My book is not intended to hurt anyone. This is a recollection of life in a cult that in recent years has become a topic of public interest. My title invites the question, what makes The Way International a fundamentalist cult? Here is the crux of my answer: Wierwille believed in scriptural inerrancy, a cornerstone of Christian fundamentalism. As the biblical scholar James Barr tells us: “It is this function of the Bible as supreme religious symbol that justifies us in seeing fundamentalism as a quite separate religious form.”3 The Way International is also a cult, or at least was while I was in it. I use the definition of cult I found on The International Cultic Studies Association (ICSA) website: “An ideological organization held together by charismatic relationships and demanding total commitment.”4 Scripture quoted in this book is from the King James Version of the Bible. Any errors of fact, interpretation, or judgment in this book are my sole responsibility. I hope you enjoy reading my story. Charlene Edge Winter Park, Florida October 2016 Notes Preface 1. Author Karl Kahler states, “Cult numbers are notoriously hard to pin down, and are often inflated by anti-cult writers more concerned with sounding the alarm than checking the facts. Many writers have claimed The Way had 100,000 members, as if everyone who ever took the class were still a member. Around 1982, when [Craig] Martindale [second president of The Way International] was marching in Ontario and Way leaders were talking to the press, I heard consistently that we were claiming to have 40,000 members.” Karl Kahler, The Cult That Snapped: A Journey into The Way International (Los Gatos, CA: Karl Kahler, 1999), 110. See also: Zay N. Smith, “The Way—40,000 and Still Growing,” Chicago Sun-Times, Aug. 17, 1980. 2. Elena S. Whiteside, The Way: Living in Love. (New Knoxville, Ohio: American Christian Press, 1972), 142–149. 3. James Barr, Fundamentalism (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1978) 37. 4. The definition of cult is taken from “Cults: Theory and Treatment Issues,” a paper presented by Rutgers University professor Benjamin Zablocki at a conference on May 31, 1997; cited in Michael D. Langone, “Cults, Psychological Manipulation, and Society: International Perspectives— An Overview,” Cultic Studies Journal 18 (2001), 1–12. http://www .icsahome.com/articles/cultspsymanipsociety-langone.

Well.. this one deserves posted more than once. The Best of Chicago..

"What are we going to do with 200 Chevy Citations and 5,000 betamaxc machines?"

The list of things that Wierwille talked about that that he clearly didn’t understand would be a long one.

This guy

When you consider the irony in this, it's almost comical in a perversely twisted way. Want something from God? Follow a complicated formula. Make sure to cross every T and dot every I. Want something from Satan? No problem. Just think it. It's yours. You want to know what killed that little boy? He spun 'round and 'round trying to make sense of it all and fell over dead from dizziness.

Abraham was rewarded for his intentions, for what was in his heart, for his faith, NOT his beleeeving. His intentions were to slay his precious son. Because that's what God commanded him to do. But it's such a twisted scenario! I've read that story countless times and it always gives me anxiety. It really is a well-crafted narrative. A nail-biter all the way to the cliffhanger when the angel says, "Psych!" I mean WTAF! What a test! As dark as a Jordan Peele or Jason Bateman film, just not as good. And if victor is right about burnt offerings (he is demonstrably wrong), what did they do with the ram? "Oh, well," says Abe. "I'll let y'all deal with getting the ram untangled from that thicket, if you don't mind. I need to vomit and lay down awhile. Really need some alone time. Thanks for the mindfock."

what or who is god, if prelearned ideas of god are eliminated then what could it be it's fine to not believe in god, it's mostly someone else's idea of what god is that has been introduced in some sort of biased way an old Indian/survival book I read once called it "the spirit that moves through all things" there will always be the old back and forth between ideas, but really what is god and what is it that is believed or not believed, something that should be answered to yourself

https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html Where does it come from? The Russian propaganda model of Firehose of Falsehoods.

William Lane Craig is the master of the Gish Gallop, a form of debate in which you efficiently spout as much bulls hit in the time allotted as you possibly can. Since it takes more time to clean bulls hit than it does to defecate it, the opponent will leave some arguments unanswered strictly because there's not enough time in the world to answer it. Then Craig cites all the points he made that were not refuted and declares victory. Meanwhile ALL his arguments are bulls hit. All of them, without exception or distinction.

Oh, those words are attributed to Jesus? (I admit to not reading The Apocalypse of John of Patmos carefully enough.) Who says the Nazarene said? John of Patmos? Let me guess, he had a vision. Riiiiight…

I can't explain how electrons move from the light switch to the bulb. What should I surmise?

I consider myself humanist as well. Since there is no hierarchy in humanism, no one really gets to define it. This website gathers various definitions that permit us to ascertain some kind of consensus. For me, it boils down to the following: * No gods (or devils) or spirits, etc. * Morality is derived from human experience and based on both empathy and the greater good. * Humankind is responsible for its future and well-being. There's much more to it, of course.

You know he wasn't a real doctor, don't you?

Can I do the flip charts? Lol

When I first came out as atheist, I started a thread you can probably still find here called "Are you more moral than Yahweh?" It took a look at a number of questionable OT positions (and I think one or two NT, but mostly OT) that are inconsistent with a God who is the author of morality. But if you are to take the position that morality is objective (spoiler alert, it's not) and that certain moral standards are absolute (like rape among humans is always wrong and the victim is the person who was raped), then you have to conclude that the God of the Old Testament is frankly not moral. Is it moral to prescribe the death penalty for picking up sticks between dusk Friday and dusk Saturday? No. Of course not. But Yahweh (allegedly) did that. It's sociopathic! "But it was another time." SO WHAT!?!?! So what you're describing here is a clash between what the Bible actually says about Yahweh (and by extension Jesus) and your own understanding of what actual morality is. And then you have to defend your own morality against the (absolutely and demonstrably false) premise that there is no such thing as morality without Yahweh because he is where we get morality from. HE MOST CERTAINLY IS NOT. Morality does not come from religion. Religion comes from morality. And it is not "objective," which is why our culture rejects a slew of Old Testament pronouncements as immoral. We may have once thought, incorrectly, that eating shellfish or mixing fabrics was immoral. We know better today.

According to Genesis 1-3, God creates a paradise and many different kinds of awesome life and everything is perfect. What a great God He is. Then everything is corrupted because of one single act of two humans (one who was deceived and the other who followed suit). All mankind has now become evil and worthy of death and is therefore in need of redemption. Now there are wars, murders, rapes, natural disasters, genocides, dreadful diseases and disorders of mind and body, hatred, lusts, etc. - SO MUCH pain and suffering century after century which God knew would happen because of Adam and Eve's disobedience. Why was such a cruel and severe punishment so necessary? All of this is explained away by saying “a loving God gave Adam and Eve free will,” so everything is their fault – not God’s. I now call that statement into question because God was GOD and so much GREATER than them: - God was incapable of doing evil, but Adam and Eve were created capable of doing evil. - God had foreknowledge of all that would happen if sin entered the world, but Adam and Eve were only told of “their death.” Who was in a greater and more powerful position to have the responsibility of the whole world placed on their shoulders – God or Adam and Eve? Yet God placed it on humans. I used to think this was how highly God thought of the perfect man He created, and they just went and blew it. Now, I’m thinking they were doomed from the beginning to fail.

https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/s/toPjST02Yg This thread talks about all the social advantages there are in being in a cult. Many “friends” easily accessible. This person talks about the JW app where they are connected to 500 people and are “friends” with 100 of them. Another insightful comment describes that as “forced connections with people whose real personalities are hidden under a facade”. I think many people trade their souls and morals for this fake connection. I certainly lost about 100 percent of those fake connections when I decided that the path of lifetime service to prop up “WOW” TM and self inflated nincompoops was not the best for my family. How many people disagree with the tenets of TWI but are too afraid to leave because of their “friends”???? Heres a tip. They are not your friends. They are less your friends than the neighbors on your street for the most part and than your average person in a community. Those ties aren’t worth the sacrifice. The juice is not worth the squeeze IMO.

Gaslighting is abuse. In the name of God or Truth, it is abject, reprehensible, wicked abuse. It is born of a spiritual poverty by those who beleeeve the spiritually impoverished.

Hi Greasespotters, The International Cultic Studies Association (I'm affiliated with them) sent this announcement today about a new series beginning March 28, 2024. New Docuseries "Cult Justice" Premiers on Hulu, March 28, 2024 (networkforgood.com) Cheers! Charlene Edge, author of Undertow: My Escape from the Fundamentalism and Cult Control of The Way International. https://charleneedge.com

In twi, things like that went on because vpw wanted it (as long as he was in charge), since he'd set up twi to have the Head Cheese wield autocratic power without checks or balances. (The same, obviously, applies to his successors, who also enjoy power limited only by the now-pitiful reach of twi.) So, vpw wanted it. The question then becomes....why did vpw want it? vpw was all about power- the wielding of power, and the appearance of prestige and influence. (It's why he got his doctorate at a degree mill and then INSISTED on being called "Doctor." I'm three times the fake doctor he was, and you don't see me insisting on "doctor.") So, some of it was to try to make twi seem influential, which made vpw seem influential. Another part of it was something different. Other than vpw's abilities to con people, he was actually pretty stupid. He always cut corners on his education, and never learned if he could plagiarize instead, and tried not to bother with anything else. When it came to other types of con, vpw fell for them. If you had a fake supernatural con, vpw would swallow it and teach the Advanced Class it was real and NOT a sleight-of-hand trick. (I believe there's real stuff, but it's a lot rarer than the cons, and conflating the two is wrong no matter what.) One of vpw's sources for conning was the John Birch Society, a bunch of tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists. He had a hotline to all their pet weird ideas. He would listen to them, then announce all of their stuff and pretend he was getting Divine Revelation about all of it. Rock and roll being of the devil? Yeah, the JBS and all their cronies. So, if the JBS endorsed candidates, vpw went along and endorsed them also. Stupid of him? Yes. It makes about as much sense as a news-anchor reading ANYTHING off the teleprompter, even if it made no sense or was inappropriate. But the same thing in the sense that it was mindless parroting of something from someone else. twi was actually pretty effective at teaching all sorts of people to do mindless parroting of all sorts of things. Society has LOTS of people who do that, but twi made a policy of it, and we're here discussing them, of course.