markomalley

I actually agree with the premise of what you're saying here, Oldies. There was a TWI dogma that had to be accepted in order to continue in TWI. (Their version of orthodoxy) There is a set of dogma that is required to believe in order to be in the Catholic Church. If you don't accept that set of dogma, then you have essentially excommunicated yourself (please to note, though, unless those heterodox teachings are very publically proclaimed, you aren't formally excommunicated) But, in truth, though, we would see that in pretty much any splinter group from the eastern or western schisms. Particularly in the west, that's why there are so many different denominations and unaffiliated groups. I think the real issue is that TWI doctrine deviated so severely from so many aspects of commonly accepted orthodox (small "o") Christian dogma that it essentially became some kind of a gnostic sect, rather than a Christian group. Now as to the original question, the "keys" to research that were taught through TWI were set up in such a way that it would be very easy to arrive at the conclusions that were derived. The basic technique was incorrect, and so the old computer premise of "Garbage In, Garbage Out" would apply. Let's look at it a minute (now, I don't have any TWI materials so I'm doing it by memory): First of all, the study was based upon a version of the Bible that used a form of language that is not in common usage. (i.e., KJV) It is indeed a beautiful rendition, but it is so old that it doesn't make sense to the modern ear that well any more. Secondly, the first order of interpretation was "in the verse." -- If one takes a verse and reads it out of it's context, it can totally distort the meaning of that verse. We don't think and speak in sentences (not really). We think and speak in paragraphs. That was the way that most of the books in the Bible were written. Next, it depended upon word studies. We might think it important to distinguish between dunamis and energeo (or whatever), and place that word study above and beyond the context within which a usage was given. Unfortunately, the tools that the TWI researcher used were primarily the greek/hebrew-english concordance and an interlinear. The TWI follower wasn't encouraged to consider the grammar involved and how the language was constructed. An emphasis was given to orientalisms. That's good, in of itself, but one of the primary sources for those orientalisms came from a former member of the "Indian Orthodox Church," a person who grew up on the subcontinent. The problem with this was that the culture of Palestine and of Mesopotamia, to say nothing of Greece and Egypt, was nothing like the culture of India. But the information was to be taken at face value. Corollary to this was the utter rejection of writings by the Church Fathers (particularly those pre-Nicene Church Fathers who wrote from 100-400 AD). The heterodox teaching about baptism would have never come up had even cursory attention been paid to one document: the Didache (written somewhere between 57 and 75 AD -- still "the first century church"). Next, the over-emphasis on the teachings of one man: Bullinger. Bullinger did some good work, but on a lot of things, he was way out in left field. Two examples: the over-emphasis on Figures of Speech (which TWI even took to the next level IMHO) and ultra-dispensationalism. The last thing I'd bring up (there are more, but I have little time tonight) is the old "literal according to usage." This perversion (and yes I mean perversion) totally twisted the meanings of a number of words so as not to be recognizable. "Agape" means affection. It doesn't mean "the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation." That is a private interpretation. And it twists the meaning of the word. And it is not accurately usable in all circumstances. Like I said...there's more, but I don't have time to list it all. But the point is that the framework set up by the TWI "research" technique would cause the "researcher" to arrive at largely the same conclusions as those done up in TWI orthodoxy. Garbage in: garbage out.

Mo, I think, as you will have noted in my postings, that this has been my thesis all along: that TWI doctrine was the enabler for the abuses.

Oldies, No need to provide you any information by PM. If I hold something in confidence, I hold it in confidence. If either of the alleged victims that I'm aware of chooses to disclose to somebody else, that's their business. It's not for me to do. I will state this, though: the description given to me was not a simple statement, "I was raped by LCM." I heard details that described how and the circumstances which they were raped. In both cases, it was a forceful attack, vice a potential misinterpretation of intent. Having said that, my original statement was, I personally know two women who state they were raped by LCM. Please to note that I didn't say, I know two women who were raped by..., I reported that I heard statements to that effect by two women. Therefore it is an adequately accurate statement of fact, not an conclusion of the veracity of those statements. If one or both happen to read this for some reason and choose to publically disclose or to disclose to you in private, that's up to them.

That, in my humble (well maybe not...) opinion, is the fundamental disconnect between TWI and orthodox (small "o") Christianity.

Some of my Protestant friends have. The context was a purely spiritual one (akin to counseling), as opposed to the TWI usage. I personally know two women who state they were raped by LCM. Obviously it's not my place to disclose personally identifiable information...so you'll have to just take my word for it...

There is a fundamental issue that I don't think has been adequately addressed here: Saul, the one who persecuted Christians, versus Paul, the apostle. Saul was not baptized. Paul was (Acts 9). In baptism, your sins are washed away and your old man is reckoned dead with Christ (Rom 6). That makes a HUGE difference. And that, as others have pointed out, is a major distinction between any comparison of VPW/LCM/other TWI leaders and Saul's persecutions.

And that's the point. You can't. For you, to deny Christ is to deny yourself. I understand this.

Although this is a fun thread, We won't know. That's the bottom line.

I just finished my taxes a little while ago. Last year, I ended up (not including sales tax) paying 45% of my income to the government (well over $15K to the state alone). I'm afraid I don't know where I'll come up with more money to pay for it. After all, when somebody is "willing to pay," it's usually people like me who end up picking up the tab. Don't get me wrong, in principle I agree, I just don't know where the money's going to come from. I, too, would like to see more research. But two points:- what about the agenda of the researchers? - are we willing to do what the research recommends? What if they recommend the first amendment get restricted to exclude porn? To exclude political speech? To exclude some kinds of music? etc. You may be right.

Well, how do you propose to fix that? Kill them all? With our imperfect and politically-driven justice system, a lot of innocents would end up executed Imprison them all for life? Are we going to be willing to pay an average cost of $40k per year per prisoner for maybe 10% of our society for the rest of their lives? Look at what's happening to California with their 3 strikes law...and the Supreme Court has mandated a fairly comfortable existence for these people...so it's not like you can dump 'em in a hole Exile them? Who is going to want to give up their private little island? Or other plot of land? Don't get me wrong, Abi, I agree with you...but I don't know how to solve it.

SudoSuda, I cannot comprehend how difficult it would be to live with an apostate (please note, the word is the technically accurate word for his condition, it is not being used as an accusation), particularly one who announces that he is condescending to you...would have been far more "loving" of him to just keep his mouth shut...particularly after he made the decision for so many years to actively go through the motions... I know for myself, it took a number of years before I would go back to the Catholic Church because I didn't want to cause a bunch of strife with my wife...until she wanted to convert...on her own terms. But with you, it's not like you want to become an apostate to keep peace in the family, is it? Godspeed...

A wish for all that you have a joyous solemnity of the Resurrection of the Lord...regardless of how you specifically celebrate/or not celebrate it.

Happy Easter to you too Smikeol!

We do, after a manner of speaking, as part of the Triduum. After the Holy Thursday Mass, the lights in the church were plunged into darkness (only candlelight). The blessed Sacrament was transferred in procession to another chapel (conveniently, we have a Catholic HS across the street from our church), representing the Lord going off to the Garden to pray... (the Taize song, "Stay with me, remain here with me" is chanted throughout) The Liturgy of the Hours from that point on (the Office of Readings and Morning Prayer, in particular) are done in near darkness. Interestingly, there are no masses celebrated from that point (i.e., Good Friday or Holy Saturday). Good Friday service begins in darkness with that chant going on, as well (Stay with me...). Readings appropriate for the occasion are read (this year, cycle B, the readings were: Isa 53, Heb 4, and John's account of the Passion)...etc., etc. Again, the lights are dimmed on the way out and "Jesus, remember me" (Taize) is chanted on the way out from the Good Friday service. On the Easter Vigil, the service starts in darkness. And then the Easter fire is started, the candle is lit, and the church is again, slowly, lit up as the candle processes to the front of the church. Then, as the Exultet is chanted, the Church is suddenly brought into full light. It is a very moving set of services... Glad to see you enjoy them as well...

Follows is an interesting article in light of recent threads on the subject. You may or may not agree with everything it says or the group that published it, but I think it brings up some discussion-worthy points: 1 [/sup] Stop and read it again until you get it. Men are flying home to dinnerwith the wife and kids after having sex with a kid. Who doesthat? Most people can't even handle thinking about it, so they mix more mythand some truth to relieve their discomfort: They're all pedophiles. All child molesters are pedophiles. There are more pedophiles than I realized. Pedophiles probably get married and have kids to hide whothey are. Pedophiles are only into kiddie porn. Regular guys stick with adult porn. No guy I know would have sex with a kid. I'm no guy who would have sex with a kid. Not every guy who has sex with a minor is a pedophile. Most aren't. Youmay need to read that again too. There is a difference between pedophiles who prefer to have sex withchildren and child molesters who prefer to have sex with adults butwill have sex with a child if the situation presents itself. And itpresents itself big time on the Internet. For the kids' sake, educate yourself by reading ChildMolesters: A Behavioral Analysis , authored by KenLanning for TheNational Center for Missing & Exploited Children.spent 27 years investigating and apprehending child molesters of alltypes and training thousands of law enforcement officers the skills todo the same. America's parents and children are forever in his debt. For the child, it couldn't matter less what the clinical definition ofhis or her molester may be. What should matter to the rest of us isstopping "regular guys" from becoming child molesters. According to Gates and Goodman: Half of the street-level prostitutes in Atlanta are believed to beunder 18, according to experts. Others are booked through Internet sexsites and from social sites like Black Planet, where girls innocentlypost profiles. … In March, police arrested a Canadian manmeeting a 14-year-old girl he found through the Internet. …Another man drove from North Georgia, with a bag containing a teddybear, a love note and condoms, snorting methamphetamine on the way. Heexpected a 13-year-old girl, but instead found Heather Lackey, acorporal with the Peachtree City Police Department. … Duringthe 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, one man kept boys and hosted sex partiesnightly.2 Just last week a congressional committee heard the gut-wrenchingtestimony of a 19-year-old telling how he began operating his owncommercial Web site where men could view sexually explicit photos hetook of himself. Justin Berry's nightmarish story is that of a13-year-old boy in a broken home allowed unsupervised access to aWebcam and the Internet. A lonely boy looking for friends and love inall the wrong places immediately "found" adult males who seduced himwith attention, gifts and money. Personal meetings led to his sexualabuse, which led to him sexually exploiting other boys by encouragingthem to join the sordid business.3 The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children's latestweekly report indicates that its Cybertiplinehas received "2,589 complaints of unsolicited obscene material sent toa child" from September 1, 2002, through April 9, 2006. Worse yet arethe "15,995 complaints of online enticement of children for sexualacts" in the last six years. Here are just two recent media reports: Lawmakers from both parties continued on Thursday toquestion the commitment of the Justice Department and the FederalBureau of Investigation to halting the online exploitation of children.… William W. Mercer, a U.S. attorney for Montana, testifiedthat the caseload of the child exploitation section had increased 445percent in the last four years, adding that federal prosecutions ofchild pornography and abuse cases increased to more than 1,500 caseslast year from 344 in 1995. 4 The Department of Homeland Security's deputy presssecretary appeared in a Maryland state court and refused extradition toFlorida, where he faces charges of using the Internet to seduce adetective he thought was a 14-year-old girl. … Over time,the authorities said, Mr. Doyle sent the detective "hard-corepornographic movie clips" and used the chat room service of AOL and histelephones "to have explicit sexual conversations." The sheriff'soffice said some of the exchanges "are too extraordinary and graphicfor public release." 5 Men and boys: Beware before you click the mouse one more time and takea step closer to becoming one of the bad guys. Part II will show how the porn industry is paving the road tothe perversion it pretends to condemn by pandering "teen porn," withadvice from lawyers who help them cash in on the big demand and skirtthe law. JanLaRue, chief counsel for Concerned Women for America, thenation's largest public policy women's organization, is an expert inpornography law. She has covered this issue for 14 years. End Notes Verna Gates and Mickey Goodman, "Sex Tourism Thriving inU.S. Bible Belt," Reuters, April 6, 2006, as found at http://today.reuters.com/News/CrisesArticle.aspx?storyId=N03210934. Ibid. Kurt Eichenwald, "Through His Webcam, a Boy Joins a SordidOnline World," The New York Times, December 19,2006, A1, as found at http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/07/us/07porn.html. Joshua Brockman, "FBI and Justice Dept. Are Faulted OverChild Predators On The Web," The New York Times, April7, 2006, as found at http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/07/us/07porn.html?_r=1&oref=slogin. Michael Janofsky, "Official Resists Extradition on ChargeInvolving Internet and Sex," The New York Times, April 5, 2006, A22, as found at http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/06/washington/06doyle.html. This article first appeared on HumanEvents Online. FWIW and YMMV Oh, by the way (fair usage notice): the authors have no problem with reproduction of their articles as long as credit is given: Concerned Women for America 1015 Fifteenth St. N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, D.C. 20005 Phone: (202) 488-7000 Fax: (202) 488-0806

Another very powerful rememberence from Good Friday are the Good Friday Reproaches: My people, what have I done toyou How have I offended you?Answer me! I led you out of Egypt, from slavery to freedom,but you led your Saviorto the cross. My people, what have Idone to you? How have I offended you?Answer me! For forty years I ledyou safely through thedesert. I fed you with mannafrom heaven,ù and brought you to aland of plenty; but you led your Saviorto the cross. Holy is God! Holy and strong! Holy immortal One, havemercy on us! What more could I havedone for you. I planted you as myfairest vine, but you yielded onlybitterness: when I was thirsty yougave me vinegar to drink, and you pierced yourSavior with a lance. Holy is God! Holy and strong! Holy immortal One, havemercy on us! For your sake I scourgedyour captors and their firstbornsons, but you brought yourscourges down on me. My people, what have Idone to you? How have I offended you?Answer me! I led you from slaveryto freedom and drowned your captorsin the sea, but you handed me overto your high priests. My people, what have Idone to you? How have I offended you?Answer me! I opened the sea beforeyou, but you opened my sidewith a spear. My people, what have Idone to you? How have I offended you?Answer me! I led you on your way ina pillar of cloud, but you led me toPilate's court. My people, what have Idone to you? How have I offended you?Answer me! I bore you up with mannain the desert, but you struck me downand scourged me. My people, what have Idone to you? How have I offended you?Answer me! I gave you saving waterfrom the rock, but you gave me gall andvinegar to drink. My people, what have Idone to you? How have I offended you?Answer me! For you I struck downthe kings of Canaan. but you struck my headwith a reed. My people, what have Idone to you? How have I offended you?Answer me! I gave you a royalscepter, but you gave me a crownof thorns. My people, what have Idone to you? How have I offended you?Answer me! I raised you to theheight of majesty, but you have raised mehigh on a cross. My people, what have Idone to you? How have I offended you?Answer me!

SafariVista The Stations of the Cross is a devotion that 'spiritually' has us walk the way of the cross with Jesus. There are normally 14 stations, which are stopping points along the path that leads from Pilate's condemnation of Him to his burial. It is an extremely powerful and intense set of prayers, scripture readings, and chants that never ceases to move me (at least) -- as well as any Christian that I've known (both Protestant and Catholic) that have participated in them. Since almost the earliest times people have made pilgrimages to Jerusalem. They would walk the way of the cross, recalling the Passion. However, since the Muslims took over the area, it became increasingly difficult and dangerous for them to make that pilgrimage. So, in the middle ages, they erected waypoints along an outdoor path to represent the spots they would stop at during a pilgrimage. That is basically the origin of the path. The markers for those waypoints were then moved inside of the churches eventually, making it more accessible for people living in cities. After the reformation, most Protestant churches did away with the stations; however, in the past few decades, there has been an increasing interest in this devotion. I know the Anglicans have always done it; many Lutherans have, in recent years, started doing it again, as have many Methodists. A good reflection on the way of the cross can be found here. A throughly Protestantized version can be found here. A good devotion for this day.

Nice letter Zixar! Too bad it won't do any good.

Linzee, Sorry, but I'm not terribly concerned with anybody's opinion of me. So if you're disappointed, that's your privilege. Likewise with anybody else who posts here. I started off being intensely disliked by many...I'll leave being intensely disliked by many. That's all part of life. I suggest you re-examine page one of this thread. The comment made in regards to his children did cause me to severely reduce the contrast on the picture...if you know what it is, you'll still be able to see it; else it won't be apparent. I think you'll be pleased. Keep in mind that the ONLY reason I did this was because of sensitivity for his surviving family members; no other reason would have caused me to do so.

My personal thing is that I don't believe it to be intentional on his part either. However, he took a bit from this and a bit from that and a bit from the other. He was educated in the _____ (Reformed?) Church, but then abandoned much of the orthodoxy from that denomination, taking on bits and pieces that worked for him. That much is pretty much what he said about himself in the Whiteside book, isn't it? What happens if the bits and pieces he took from this and that left out the critical parts of each piece that kept it within some type of orthodox Christianity (by this, I am not meaning Eastern Orthodox, or anything else, I'm talking about broader...) For example, (and somebody who knows better than I can feel free to correct me)...but the Reformed church didn't practice "Word-Faith" a la the Televangelists. They didn't practice "Charismatic," either, did they? Well, Word-Faith was the source of the believing=receiving heresy. It is very, very similar to the Word-Faith teaching, but not exactly the same. (That's possibly why so many here feel comfortable with Joyce Meyers and Kenneth Copeland -- it's pretty familiar territory) The Charismatic movement was the source of "all nine all the time" crock. Again, similar, but with distinct and observable differences. (As full disclosure, I don't subscribe to either Word-Faith theology or the methods of Charismatic theology...but what I'm referring to here is not my disagreement with either...rather disagreements with the VPW perversions of them) We've had boucoup threads where people have expounded on the negative impact that "the law of believing" had on their lives. Likewise, there are more examples than we care to think of on the impact of the application of the forced version of Charismatic doctrine. Put the two together and a very dangerous condition exists. Combine that with a ego that enjoys adulation (we aren't sheep, we're SONS OF GOD)...and there is naturally an environment which begs for abuse. On those who are dominant, they feel self-justified. On those who lack self-confidence, an environment ripe for acceptance of abuse. FWIW and YMMV...

The problem is that Allan would think I was being serious, rather than using a (unbalanced and extreme) form of Satire.

Mat 27:3 When Judas, his betrayer, saw that he was condemned, he repented and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders, Mat 27:4 saying, "I have sinned in betraying innocent blood." They said, "What is that to us? See to it yourself." Mat 27:5 And throwing down the pieces of silver in the temple, he departed; and he went and hanged himself. Mat 27:6 But the chief priests, taking the pieces of silver, said, "It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, since they are blood money." Mat 27:7 So they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. Mat 27:8 Therefore that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day. Mat 27:9 Then was fulfilled what had been spoken by the prophet Jeremiah, saying, "And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him on whom a price had been set by some of the sons of Israel, Mat 27:10 and they gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord directed me."

You don't think the Wierwille family already knows how much adulation was given to VP? You don't think the Wierwille family already knows how much VP abused that adulation?

There is a saying that "sometimes to get somebody's attention, you've got to hit them across the head with a 2X4" As to the rest of it, this is a discussion forum.

Eagle/Ex10/Linzee/David/Socks/et al: Well, I tell you what: 1) I won't remove the image 2) I can't change the post HOWEVER, I am amicable at substituting the image. So, the way I see it, there are two choices: 1) appeal to the mods to remove it (and discipline me appropriately) 2) try to help me with some ideas to graphically and powerfully visually depict the comment that there are many who place VP above Christ (i.e., idolatry) If you can suggest something that I can depict visually that would a) be less offensive to you and b) hit the targeted parties across the face with a 2X4, I'll see if I can photoshop something together and replace it in my online storage so that you won't have to see it anymore. But I've used the words before time and time again.