doojable

Sometimes it's not about being a Pharisee... it's about making sure that you're not wrong. I have no idea what has transpired in WhiteDove's life and I won't pretend to. The following does not pertain to him: Someone I've known for a long time reverts to logic and fact on a regular basis. The reason? (And this is the reason HE gives for the way he is.) When he was in first grade, he was answering a question in class and the teacher said, "Be quiet! You don't know what you're talking about!" The end result is that this person does whatever he can to be "right" - including bullying someone with logic. We all have wounds that we deal with...

I'll take "Dooj" ;) I'm not sure what your opinions are regarding VPW - so I'm leaving it alone. I posted the definition and that's all - because you said that the word was being used incorrectly. I wouldn't change careers yet ... I said: I think this is where you might be finding the flack you're receiving here. You have no eyes to look into - and the cold hard logic is just not cutting it. Lawyers prove everyday that logic doesn't always get you to the truth - it only gets you to what you can prove. Lawyers get advice and information from experts in fields they have no knowlege in. They do this not only to get cold hard facts, but also to gain insight into those things that logic simply cannot reach or cover. Even if the testimony isn't used in the courtroom -an expert can help them gain incredible insight. Profilers are used to help pick juries as well as to help find criminals. Parts of your posts tell me that you might handle this differently if you were dealing with a person who's eyes you get to see. This is what is Catcup's specialty - her training. While it doesn't fit in with logic - looking at patterns is equally valuable - while you may not want to live your life and make decisions based on this skill - it is still a valuable part of getting to the truth. You say you're dedicated to the truth. The truth is not only about what you can prove. It's deeper and doesn't always fit into a neat little syllagism.

WhiteDove - I have been around lawyers for the past ten years. If I'm not mistaken, you're approaching this matter with the logic that a lawyer would use - and logic is by nature, cold and hard. Math, science, logic, statistics - all based on fact and data. This is not a condemnation - it's fact. Arguing with an attorney is supremely frustrating because part of the training in the law includes arguing from the other side. Law students are given a set of facts and told to come up with a legal argument. THEN they are told to come up with an argument that would win against their own. (I'm not implying that you're just wanting to win an argument here.) My point here is that both sides use logic to prove their case. If logic alone were enough, we wouldn't have criminals being set free or innocent people sent to jail - and we all know that both of these things happen. The really good lawyers also know when to just look in the jury's eyes and see if they are getting through to them. Sometimes, especially with an emotional case - cold hard logic does nothing more than set a jury against the attorney. (I can cite a case that is not nearly as emotional as what we are dealing with here - but I think you are smart enough to understand what I'm saying.) I hear you (have heard you several times now) say that you are not doubting that VPW did those things ( I hope I've got you right - since I'm going by memory) I also hear you that you want to take things on a case by case basis. Is there anything that I'm missing up to this point?

Grouch has such a way with words! Catcup and I had a PM conversation that I have been given permission to share here in the forums. She is about to get real busy - so please remember that I have no training in her field and I cannot answer for her at all. Here is my question: When I was in college a friend of mine - a very, very, very quiet and meek girl - was raped in the lobby of her apt building. Within months she became HIGHLY promiscuous! I mean - she was screwing anyone she could find. It was almost like she had said to herself, "Okay, THIS time I get to choose!" Here is her answer: Although I do not have the time to get involved on a thread regarding this subject, you may post this if you want to, as long as my statements are posted in their entirety because context is essential to understanding. This information is part of my education and training in counseling women and men who have been victims of rape. In response to your question regarding the behavior of the woman you knew, it's not necessarily that they say to themselves "Okay, this time I get to choose!" Rape gets to the core of your very being and deeply affects your self-image. In response to the assault, many victims blame themselves for what occured, and are at risk to begin to think they contributed to the situation somehow by their behavior or the way they dressed. Was my makeup too heavy? Was my skirt to short? Was my shirt to lowcut? Were my jeans too tight? Was my walk too suggestive? They begin to minutely pick themselves apart all on their own. Add to that, the offender many times truly believes the woman "wanted it," and will finish up by telling her so, anlong with threats that if she goes to the police, either (a.) No one will believe her, or (b.) "I know where you [or your loved one lives, works, shops, goes to school, etc.] and I will and xyz..." Especially if the attacker is someone she knows, at this time any power or authority the perpetrator possesses which he can use to intimidate her will be employed. The immediate almost universal response afterward is to feel absolutely filthy, and an overpowering, almost irresistable need to get clean causes many victims to head to the shower. It is very common for these people to wash themselves repeatedly for hours, even scrubbing themselves to the point they bleed, if they aren't bleeding already. I will repeat: The urge to do this is so overpowering after a rape, that this is part of the reason rape is difficult to prosecute. The evidence is easily washed away. That is why the advice given to women in self-defense classes and such is that if you are raped, DO NOT SHOWER OR CHANGE YOUR CLOTHES. CALL 911 AND WAIT FOR THEM TO ARRIVE. It is hard enough to get people who are raped by strangers to do this. Unfortunately, people who are raped by someone they know, are even more likely to doubt themselves, and delay filing a report. and increase the likelihood that any evidence is lost by waiting days, weeks, months, or even years to say anything, because they so heavily blame themselves. Another part of the way people respond to rape, is how rape victims have been routinely treated. Even the questioning by the police officers who are attempting to help you, will by its very nature be intrusive, which at this time adds to the trauma, and even the way it is done can unfortunately reflect personal attitudes of the interviewer(even though they are supposed to not allow that to happen), which can be either good or bad. That can help or hurt the victim. Questions are asked about the type of clothing worn, the activities just prior and immediately after the incident, and this adds to the victim's trauma. In the courtroom, the typical courtroom defense tactic is, and always has been, to attack the victim's character. Why? Because they know that is the tactic that works and is the most likely to get their client off the hook, which is their job. Every bit of dirt about your past, no matter how distant and unrelated, is fair game for an attorney to dig up and throw out into the public domain. So, typically, traumatized rape victims don't want their lives on display like that. The trauma of retelling the event is like being raped all over again, this time, in public. And then on cross examination, it's even worse. Knowing the gauntlet they have to run through in order to prosecute the crime, many remain silent and limp on with their lives. Many times, not only do they not prosecute the crime, but they also don't tell anyone. It is a very personal, embarassing crime, which many feel a great deal of shame about, for all the reasons I have outlined. As a result, they also do not get counseling. Consequently, the damage to their self-image is severe, even to someone who was well-adjusted to begin with. However, those who have been victims of any kind of violent crime previously, or previously abused in any way, or have any other mental health issues, can fall deeper into depression and even develop psychosis. It is quite common for ANY rape victim, no matter what their background, to at this time develop post traumatic stress disorder. Also common, is due to the blow to self-image, depression, and identity confusion, many women see society as having branded them as "damaged goods" because of their experience, and lose and begin to develop self-destructive behaviors, like the promiscuity you mention. It's not that they say "Hey, I'm going to choose now." It is the fact that they, as a result of the trauma, believe they are the scum they've been told they are, develop a self-loathing, and begin to engage is self-destructive behavior like promiscuity. Others develop other self-destructive behaviors like self-mutilation. Others drink heavily or abuse drugs. Some turn to food and suddenly will gain 100 or more pounds, in an effor to destroy a once-beautiful body they feel betrayed them. The subconscious belief is, the fat will insulate them from another attack, because now they will be repulsive. Others turn to criminal behavior such as shoplifting. This is all self-loathing behavior. So that is all I have time for at the moment. Yes - there are "Millions now smoking!!!!!!!!!!" Here's a question for you Reverend Lingo: How are we going to treat them when they come to us in their pain? Will we tell them to "Just get over it?" "Prove it?" "Go take a pill?"

I've long given up getting an answer on that issue Doojie, the dictionary don't lie though, I do find it interesting if one of us VPW "apologists" would use a word incorrectly like that it would not slide for a second every intellectual on here would be explaining in essay form how wrong we were. But not a peep have I heard. yeah that's the level playing field here. Please don't call me "Doojie" Now as to your statement: Apologist <SNIP> a·pol·o·gist /əˈpɒlədʒɪst/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[uh-pol-uh-jist] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun 1. a person who makes a defense in speech or writing of a belief, idea, etc. <SNIP>

I'm assuming the facts you're referring to are ONLY in reference to a person saying they are an eyewitness...

Here's another example of why I think threads like this often go south: Let's say that you're a teenager and you go to a party. As the night progresses, without the benefit of beer and mary jane - you have a GREAT TIME. In fact, you just can't believe how good a time all the folks are having. Kids who once fought are now talking and becoming friends, girls aren't playing their teenage girl games, the guys are getting along and not being all macho and stuff. You all go home. On the way home - four of your best friends from childhood die in a devasting car wreck. Neither drugs nor alcohol can be blamed - it was a freak accident - but devastating just the same. Weeks later, months later, years later when you remember that night you find that even though YOU REMEMBER THE GOOD TIMES it is still hard to celebrate them because you also remember the friends you lost that night. You especially wouldn't dream of talking about how great that party was in front of the relatives of those that died. NOW - I'm not saying that TWI was a party. I'm merely giving a much more benign scenario that has a lot less emotion tied up in it , to illustrate a point: It's normal to consider the pain that occured even though you might have learned a lot and made great friends.

I'm sorry, but the sheer idiocy of this statment befuddles me. I keep trying not to comment on it since so many others have already. I can't be silent any longer. Oldies, just tell me how this makes sense in your world. You think that by having sex with her he would heal her of her childhood troubles?!!! WTF? Let me say that again for emphasis: WTF??!! So by that logic: I was burned very badly as a child, someone should set me on fire to take care of that scar. I broke my leg when I was 5 - maybe you better amputate it since it sometimes aches when it rains. I broke a tooth as a teen and I was teased. So now maybe you should remove all my teeth and send me out in public. Yeah...right....THAT would heal me. That Kool-aid must have been pretty strong. Just what Gospels have you been reading?

And is it NORMAL for a 50 something year old man of the cloth to want to drug a girl and have sex with her?

The Nehemiah account takes place after Israel had been in captivity for some time. The walls of Jerusalem had been destroyed and the Word of God forgotten or ignored. So, this is not just a verse pointing to "accuracy." (Context is still a good thing. ;) The record in Judges is a dispute over land. It seems to me that it's more than "accuracy" that gave Jephthah the advantage. He knew the history of the land and he made an appeal to the king's logic, Judges 11:24, 27 ( I'm leaving out the other verses just to save some time.) Wilt thou not possess that which Chemosh thy god giveth thee to possess? So whomsoever the Lord our God shall drive out frome before us, them will we possess. Wherefore I have not sinned against thee, but thou doest me wrong to war against me: the Lord the Judge be judge this day between the children of Israel and the children of Ammon. Luke's reference refers to revelation. It's senseless to say that accuracy doesn't matter at all. Of course a NASA scientist needs to be accurate but, there is a balance to the "demands" of nit picking religious accuracy. You look at the Gospels and you see the Pharisees constantly trying to get Jesus to walk their "accurate" walk. He always sidesteps them with the true walk of God's brand of accuracy: grace, mercy and love.

I need to go home and get my Bible later, but from what I remember of the book of Nehemiah, this took place after the people had allowed the temple to fall into ruins and their understanding came from being reminded of the scriptures. The Jephthah example - has to do with accuracy - so far - (still need to look at it later.) Luke - as far as I can see this has to do with revelation. God is accurate. I trust Him to be accurate. I do my best but I don't see Him needling us on every little point the way Pharisees (both modern and ancient) are so fond of doing. He got His own word right - I get my own word right. That does't guarantee that I'm going to get someone else's word right. As accurate as Jesus was in his life, he also showed how pointless it was to strain at gnats.

oldies - you are completely ignorant on these matters. You lack compassion. Apparently, one of the big things you learned was how to be a Pharisee...

There is a reason why vpw chose these women carefully. There is a reason why he had every one of us write a paper entitled, "The Way For Me - From Birth to the Corps" Predators like to chose their victims. He chose his victims and his Yes-men, apparently he chose the latter even better than even he expected...

Jonny - you can be such a ... Ok - Here's something I remember from my time in rez: J*hn Sch*inh*it was teaching some branch meeting He asked a the group, "What did you learn this morning when you read the Word?" Hands flew up (not mine) and answers started pouring in: Corps: I learned I was seated in the heavenlies. J: What?! You didn't know that already? Corps: I learned I was born again. J: You're in the Corps - a Christian leadership training program - you came here without knowing you were born again!? As you can imagine, the hands started going down pretty quickly. The point is that learning something involves getting new information. What did I learn from PFAL? Not much really. I had most of the info already given to me from my upbringing. I guess you can say that I learned how to research the Bible. But then again - since I don't place high value on a lot of those skills anymore - well why would I make a big deal out of it? It was very clear to me when I picked up a copy of Bullinger's How to Study the Bible that most of the class was lifted. That told me that the information was out there and I just found one of the various ways of acquiring it. Why do threads like this ultimately end up in the same mode? Perhaps this is why: It is hard for many people to separate the good from the bad. (I'm NOT pointing fingers here!) It is very hard for many more people to say they learned anything when they see in hindsight that PFAL was a portal into a ministry that ended in pain and dispair for many of their family and friends. It's one thing to start out on a road not knowing where it will end. It's quite another to talk about a great "road trip" when you know that the end of the story ends in disaster. This is a reasonable response IMO. So in a nutshell - What BIG things did I learn - nothing really. On a sidenote: VP was wrong. He treated women like trash.

Dove - This was the only part of the post specifically addressed to you. Please note the use of the plural in the next sentence: I used this example because this story always gets dragged out of the closet. You of course must know that there are plenty of crimes where there is no verification. That is why even in a court of law, expert testimony can be given by a professional. Psychologists and psychiatrists are called frequently to help assess whether or not a person is telling the truth in addition to helping to identify a person's state of mind. No, you didn't accuse anyone- but others on the thread have... You don't say VP could well be guilty as charged nearly as loudly and as often as you say that the women had a choice. (IMO) The following is addressed to anyone that wants to argue that VP shared responsibility with the women he took advantage of: I said all this (following) for a reason: That was to shut up all those who are so fond of saying that these girls had to bear some blame because "they went back for more." (Yeah, I'm paraphrasing here. ) Drugs or not, rape or not, even if they liked it (ugh -that's not an accusation I'm making BTW) VP was wrong. Vp used HIS position and power to get what he wanted. Note please that God never puts Bathsheba's ability to "just say, 'No"" on trial. He never even mentions whether or not Bathsheba was moral. He didn't compare her to the woman down the street who didn't open her home to David. He didn't put her on trial at all. Nathan never went and visited her. That tells me that GOD placed responsiblity and accountability on DAVID'S shoulders. The resposibility and accountability for VP's actions rests on VP - not the girls who ended up in the motorcoach. It doesn't matter how they ended up there - HE was wrong.

So Dove let me get this straight - I'm really asking here... Is M's account not an eyewitness account? (She was there!) On another note, for arguments sake: Let's say that no one was drugged. Let's say no one was raped. Even with these two elements out of the picture, vp was wrong. Since you guys are so fond of quoting the Bible on this one, let's consider the David and Bathsheba story for a second. David was the one held accountable. He didn't rape or drug Bathsheba. You can argue that God wasn't angry about he and Bathsheba - that it was only because he plotted to have Uriah killed. I'm not sure that will pass muster because there's still a commandment that prohibits coveting another man's wife. David used his position and power to manipulate the situation to his advantage - he did it with Bathsheba and he did it to get Uriah killed. God never addresses how many times Bathsheba opened her home to the King. He never talks about whether or not she enjoyed it. He only says that David was wrong. Oh and Nathan didn't have any eyewitnesses either... Oh and yes - David was forgiven - after he was confronted and asked for forgiveness. He didnt' go out and do the same again, now did he? Oh and while Solomon was a good guy for a while; Rehoboam, (Solomon's son and David's grandson) made a mess of the kingdom.

Dmiller - I'll look it up when I wake up - but I know it's the first weekend in November the Saturday and Sunday.

I dunno Dove - why don't you call her up and ask her why she went back - then report back to us.

Okay, here goes... On Friday I got some scary news. It involved my health and was written in such a way that I wasn't sure where I stood and how my life and the lives of my girls would be affected by it. I wasn't sure if I had reason to be concerned or not - and I didn't want to have the "Pollyanna La La La everything is beautiful, don't fear" attitude. I also didn't want to accept what I feared - because I really thought that ultimately I had nothing to fear. The truth is that I was afraid. I was terrified. No matter what amount of mental wrangling I did I just couldn't shake off that fear that I was going to be very sick I found out today that I'm fine. Here's what I'm thinking - Fear is a natural reaction to things that threaten us and our loved ones. We were designed to respond to things this way. I'm just wondering how many people got real, real, real sick because they tried to "just believe" they were well? How many people never went to a doctor because that would "open the door for the Adversary?" We learned to ignore what GOD designed to help us. There's more... I just need to think a bit...

Thanks Catcup - I had those dots already... ;) I wanted to see what dots Oldies could pull out of his syllabi... AND... I also want to say... It's very easy to sit at your computer here 20 or 30 years later and say,"That girl should have..." or "Why didn't she..." or "Too bad she didn't have the guts to..." Twenty or thirty years of hindsight and growth, twenty or thirty years of maturity and living and perspective make lots of things crystal clear. How many of you fifty-something men out there would even think about doing half of what vpw has been accused of? I'd venture to say (hopefully!) NONE! You can sit there and pontificate all you want - it doesn't change a darn thing for those women. And yes, those gals DO have to live with the "Why didn't I just..." "I should have..." "If only I had the guts to..." Some of those women arent' alive at all. So what? BFD? Does that make it all okay? What good does it do to cover over the deed with "Well that guy did it too..."(whilst pointing to the table where your Bible is.) Here's an assignment for you, take the stories you love to pick apart and put the names of your wives, mothers, sisters and daughters in place of the authors. Then come back here and tell me how vpw wasn't any different from your favorite example of a Bible hero that was a fallen man. (Here's a clue - EVERYONE'S a fallen person - it's just that some don't try to pretend they're God Almighty to cover for their sins.)

What's your point regarding Solomon? He started out with a lot of potential. His first test of wisdom right out of the box was amazing. Yes, he is credited with having penned, Song of Solomon, Ecclesiastes and Proverbs. One might assume that he repented many times during his life of various sins... I know his major sin - at least the one most harp on - was idolotry (not rape) as I recall. He had many. many wives. He apparently liked the pagan idea of a harem. Are you equating this with vpw's lust for young girls? Connect the dots for me please...

I forgot the point of this thread... :blink:

But what about things like produce? Are they good about picking out nice fruits and veggies?

A Blue one...? I never did throw mine out when they told us to do that... hehehehehe.

Funny, I've never seen that here... You seem to have a thick skin and a fairly well working brain. I'm thinking that you're also pretty perceptive when you want to be. I think you know how to pick your battles; if not then you should learn. ;)