T-Bone

WordWolf can respond to your comments – but I just wanted to add my own two cents about legacy and puppets: I’m neither qualified as a psychologist, nor informed of every detail to say if LCM was a puppet from day 1…but I will say this – being manipulated and groomed by wierwille may have got LCM the transfer of authority…some on Grease Spot have suggested LCM was a place-holder for someone else wierwille had in mind to carry on his legacy… I’m pretty sure in his delusions wierwille thought the heritage he was leaving to TWI was all that mythology and propaganda of wierwille being some kind of super-duper-apostle-prophet-evangelist-pastor-teacher-in-this-day-and-time-and-hour who had written the equivalent of Ephesians with his “epistle” of plagiarized, adulterated and discombobulated material known as PFAL… I’m also pretty sure LCM as president acted on his own accord…now there's probably some twists and turns down the road – after wierwille passed away, I tend to think proof of him cutting any ties to wierwille would be doing things like making his own foundational class – The Way of Abundance and Power…and as was talked about on another thread, LCM even saying people could get possessed if they sat through the original PFAL class. When it comes to harmful and controlling cult leaders and their successors, I think there’s enough blame to spread around on all the a$$holes…hey, here’s a fun little reading exercise to give you a different perspective. Imagine Jesus Christ, at some point during his ministry, reading about the self-centered, cruel, and abusive shepherds of Israel in the book of Ezekiel…and note “shepherds” is plural…this could very well apply to wierwille, LCM and any other cult leaders of some pseudo-Christian group: "The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy and say to them: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Woe to you shepherds of Israel who only take care of yourselves! Should not shepherds take care of the flock? 3 You eat the curds, clothe yourselves with the wool and slaughter the choice animals, but you do not take care of the flock. 4 You have not strengthened the weak or healed the sick or bound up the injured. You have not brought back the strays or searched for the lost. You have ruled them harshly and brutally. 5 So they were scattered because there was no shepherd, and when they were scattered they became food for all the wild animals. 6 My sheep wandered over all the mountains and on every high hill. They were scattered over the whole earth, and no one searched or looked for them. 7 “‘Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord: 8 As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, because my flock lacks a shepherd and so has been plundered and has become food for all the wild animals, and because my shepherds did not search for my flock but cared for themselves rather than for my flock, 9 therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord: 10 This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against the shepherds and will hold them accountable for my flock. I will remove them from tending the flock so that the shepherds can no longer feed themselves. I will rescue my flock from their mouths, and it will no longer be food for them. 11 “‘For this is what the Sovereign Lord says: I myself will search for my sheep and look after them. 12 As a shepherd looks after his scattered flock when he is with them, so will I look after my sheep. I will rescue them from all the places where they were scattered on a day of clouds and darkness. 13 I will bring them out from the nations and gather them from the countries, and I will bring them into their own land. I will pasture them on the mountains of Israel, in the ravines and in all the settlements in the land. 14 I will tend them in a good pasture, and the mountain heights of Israel will be their grazing land. There they will lie down in good grazing land, and there they will feed in a rich pasture on the mountains of Israel. 15 I myself will tend my sheep and have them lie down, declares the Sovereign Lord. 16 I will search for the lost and bring back the strays. I will bind up the injured and strengthen the weak, but the sleek and the strong I will destroy. I will shepherd the flock with justice. 17 “‘As for you, my flock, this is what the Sovereign Lord says: I will judge between one sheep and another, and between rams and goats. 18 Is it not enough for you to feed on the good pasture? Must you also trample the rest of your pasture with your feet? Is it not enough for you to drink clear water? Must you also muddy the rest with your feet? 19 Must my flock feed on what you have trampled and drink what you have muddied with your feet? 20 “‘Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says to them: See, I myself will judge between the fat sheep and the lean sheep. 21 Because you shove with flank and shoulder, butting all the weak sheep with your horns until you have driven them away, 22 I will save my flock, and they will no longer be plundered. I will judge between one sheep and another. 23 I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd. 24 I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the Lord have spoken…" Ezekiel 34:1-24 NIV Now after reading that, when you read accounts like in Matthew 9: 35-38 NIV where Jesus “saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd” it's easy to connect the dots of Ezekiel to the Gospels and maybe get an idea of Jesu Christ's perspective - knowing the seemingly can of worms he was opening up. …or read about those shallow and selfish shepherds - callous and uncaring over lost sheep as they criticized Jesus for welcoming and eating with sinners in Luke 15: 1-7 NIV …passages like John 10: 1-21 that show Jesus as the good shepherd who lays down his life for the sheep, stand out in such stark contrast to the self-centered, cruel, and abusive shepherds referred to in Ezekiel.

Great points! Luring people in with great promises is the old get-rich-quick-scheme for suckers who seek to improve their quality of life, fast and cheap. “A get-rich-quick scheme is a plan to obtain high rates of return for a small investment. The term "get rich quick" has been used to describe shady investments since at least the early 20th century” . From: Wikipedia - get rich quick scheme (…just an FYI from a former-sucker: don’t waste your time and money…) Speaking of gurus – popular experts on the law of believing/magical thinking – they feign generosity saying they want to let you in on their little secret…Well, here’s a secret within a secret – the only ones getting rich by the law of believing/magical thinking are the con artists selling books on the law of believing/magical thinking. I remember one of wierwille’s spiels ages ago - using a small part of Proverbs 23:7 as a proof-text of how everything about your life is shaped by your believing: “For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he”…whereas the context of the passage Proverbs 23:6-8 is actually talking about a selfish person who has the goal of taking advantage of others for their own personal gain. Here it is in The Amplified Bible of Proverbs 23:6-8 Do not eat the bread of a selfish man, Or desire his delicacies; For as he thinks in his heart, so is he [in behavior—one who manipulates]. He says to you, “Eat and drink,” Yet his heart is not with you [but it is begrudging the cost]. The morsel which you have eaten you will vomit up, And you will waste your compliments. And here’s an interesting sermon I found online that also challenges the proponents of the magical thinking slant on Proverbs 23:7: “There is a widely held belief that the following verse “For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he..” (Prov 23:7 KJV) means that human beings have the power to visualize and shape their reality and then manifest a new creation from the probabilities of their thoughts. Some even believe under the erroneous guise of Quantum Physics, that they can mentally turn thoughts into physical matter in a given place and time, and create their life experience physically, financially, relationally, emotionally and spiritually. However, the Bible says the complete opposite. "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD. "As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.” (Isa 55:8-9 NIV) In the original Hebrew, Proverbs 23:7-8 is very different. It says “for he is like one who is inwardly calculating." Eat and drink!" he says to you, but his heart is not with you. You will vomit up the morsels that you have eaten, and waste your pleasant words.” (ESV) The verse is actually saying that a mean, cheap and stingy person watches every mouthful of food his guest eats in bitter resentment as he counts what it is costing him. It is very clear that it has nothing to do with thoughts changing or shaping reality… … It is true that thoughts are very important because they can INFLUENCE and AFFECT reality, (i.e., one’s health, attitude, behavior, success or failure). They can also create the perceived SUBJECTIVE mental reality by how a person positively or negatively reacts to their surroundings or events, but they cannot create their own OBJECTIVE physical reality and control time and space, or matter or even people….” from: Sermon Central - As a man thinks in his heart, so is he? I think one of life’s great protracted and sublime lessons is that there are no shortcuts to anything worthwhile – whether it’s a career, relationships, self-improvement, whatever…if it’s anything that’s truly rewarding it’s going to take time and effort… reflecting on my own former attitude when I was in TWI, “investing” my thoughts, hopes and dreams in magical thinking and pipe dreams fostered at least two bad habits: 1. Being impatient (listen to the inner-baby whine: “I want it now. Wah, wah, wah. When am I gonna get it. Wah, wah, wah…Who do I have to badger to get what I want? ...uhm…er… oh yeah, forgot about God… hey God, when are you gonna get it for me – I’m only asking for the millionth time! Wah, wah wah.”) 2. The misappropriation of brain power. The number 2 point – the misappropriation of brain power is a big deal. In light of my earlier post which talked about things like self-fulfilling prophecy where our beliefs and expectations influence our behavior at the subconscious level or the placebo effect - a patient’s beliefs effects the “treatment” they experience – that is perhaps the real and often untapped pragmatic powder keg...or rather power keg…with a time-release fuse …. …in my opinion, a good use of brain power is to periodically evaluate our mental habits - are they developing useful skills? Are we focusing our brain power on realistic goals? Do we assess our behavior to see if the things we do over and over again really serve our best interest? …followers of magical thinking might want to take their definition of “believing” down a notch or two – to maybe just some good old-fashioned self-reliance…you know, that pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps stuff…to improve your situation…develop a skill set…whatever, by your own hard work and self-determination rather than getting titillated by some pie-in-the-sky-sales-rep.

Exactly, OldSkool !!!! …Sometimes the words get in the way of what I’m trying to say. I too feel for the good people still involved with TWI…I always hope conditions improve for their situations. Makes me think of conversations my wife and I have had about different companies we had worked for – some of them were as treacherous as a snake pit. We're both retired now - but we still keep in touch with some former co-workers. We’re always curious about the latest drama and office politics. I know this is comparing apples to oranges – comparing a harmful and controlling cult to a secular job – but some manipulative and toxic environments bear similarities…when our friends are looking for someone to lend an ear, we don’t say “why don’t you just quit and find a better job” – cuz that would be the harda$$-dispassionate-way-corps-response. Most of the time they’re just wanting to vent and find solace in a sympathetic ear…you can also look at it from the perspective that’s all they know what to do for right now (whether it's that particular job - or - life in TWI)…of course, we also rejoice with them when they tell us about some a$$hole manager getting the boot or they talk about some new manager who is more competent and actually has some people skills. Maybe a little off-topic here – but I read about Laura Prepon, actress known for “That 70s Show” and “Orange is the New Black” – in a few recent interviews, it came out she left Scientology about 5 years ago – I thought it was interesting how she explained her leaving the group – she credits motherhood for the change in her viewpoint: “…However, it does seem like being a mother may have had something to do with her growth and saying her farewells to the church of Scientology. When she spoke of her family, which includes husband Ben Foster and a four-year-old daughter and sixteen-month-old son, she reflected on how much motherhood has changed her life and outlook. She said: “As a brand new mother, I was reflecting so much on my own upbringing and the way I was mothered. I was forced to look at a lot of things in my life that I wasn’t looking at before. If motherhood has taught me anything so far, it’s that something can work out for a period of time and then you move on and evolve from that”. From: Film Daily My point with this digression is – that in the bigger picture of people involved in a harmful and controlling cult – not only can we (by we I mean those of us who have left and feel for those still in) be hopeful about any positive and constructive changes to the inner workings of a cult – but among other things we can be hopeful there is something indominable about the human mind – how it is resilient…capable of critical analysis…solving complex problems…and most of all, I believe the mind has an innate desire to be free and to thrive....also...realistically...and sad to say it’s possible some good folks get seduced to the dark side…and they don’t want out. From a personal perspective, what I think it all comes down to is that when a cult member has grown tired of the cultic-entanglement – and they sense some synchronicity (like coming to Grease Spot and something hits them right between the eyes) …when the moon is in the 7th house and Jupiter aligns with Mars …when for a brief moment they see past the smoke and mirrors…or maybe they have a profound life-changing experience (like Laura Prepon becoming a mother)…and presto change-o they start thinking about an exit strategy.

I’m hopeful about the changes to the inner-workings of TWI…I wonder what it will look like 10 or 20 years down the road – provided it would last that long, of course… …is it possible for a cult to transition into something less harmful and controlling     ? (pardon my shameless plug of another thread…oh how subliminal of me )…I’m not rooting for TWI or endorsing the organization in any way – just saying I can’t help but feel hopeful anytime I hear of what seems like positive changes and that just might eventually gum up the works. Imagine some techno-thriller fantasy about a monstrous piece of machinery especially designed to irritate and frustrate others…saboteurs that were assumed to be maintenance personnel are afoot periodically pouring just a tablespoon of sand directly into the carburetor of the engine of this machine…sand in the machinery of strife …now the system designed to irritate and frustrate others gets a taste of its own medicine…The sand particles will grind between the pistons and cylinder walls, degrading them…eventually the seals are compromised…combustion efficiency goes way down…performance gets worse and worse…smoke pouring out the tailpipe…sluggish acceleration…the engine guzzling more and more oil… …voila ! You’ve got a veritable WOW-mobile on your hands !!!!...eventually the WOW-mobile goes kaput…a lot of folks leave the field and go back to normal lives…a few diehards get the WOW-mobile towed to Big Daddy Vic’s Shady Chop Shop and turn it into a Klunker-offshoot…end of story…or is it?

Are you speaking about cult leadership or in followers - or both? "Internal versus external Narcissistic mortification can be: Internal - occurs when an individual is overstimulated by their emotions. For example, while debating with classmates on the importance of stem cell research an outspoken student loses his temper causing an uproar. The student has just exhibited an overstimulation of his emotions and used this outburst to relieve internal tension. External - occurs when something out of one's control influences a situation, for example, an individual who is held at gunpoint while having their wallet stolen. This individual does not hold any control over the scenario nor the actions of the gunman, but their reaction to being held at gunpoint influences the next scenario and what the gunman does next. In cult leadership To escape the narcissistic mortification of accepting their own dependency needs, cult leaders may resort to delusions of omnipotence. Their continuing shame and underlying guilt, and their repudiation of dependency, obliges such leaders to use seduction and manic defenses to externalize and locate dependency needs in others, thus making their followers controllable through a displaced sense of shame.” from: Wikipedia – narcissistic mortification

Well, if we’re going to make conjectures about board of directors newcomer Angela, I would speculate on the character references given by OldSkool and Watered Garden, that she will bring some good on a personal level to others…when I was in, it was the genuinely good and kind folks who crossed my path that made life in TWI tolerable…and yet I know it’s a bittersweet thought that TWI exploits people like that…I venture to say if TWI was filled with only harmful and controlling people it would be a veritable hell on earth with no chance for escape…I mean…who would want to? what person in their rotten heart would pass up oodles of opportunities to screw over others? …and besides that if TWI was all leeches it wouldn’t fare too well…parasites depend on its host for survival…imagine if TWI issued name tags with your designation under your name – either “parasite” or “host”.

That’s some great points, Twinky ! Depending on who you’re talking to, the word “cult” can have various shades of meaning: “In modern English, a cult is a social group that is defined by its unusual religious, spiritual, or philosophical beliefs, or by its common interest in a particular personality, object, or goal. This sense of the term is controversial, having divergent definitions both in popular culture and academia, and has also been an ongoing source of contention among scholars across several fields of study. The word "cult" is usually considered pejorative. An older sense of the word cult involves a set of religious devotional practices that are conventional within their culture, are related to a particular figure, and are often associated with a particular place. References to the "cult" of a particular Catholic saint, or the imperial cult of ancient Rome, for example, use this sense of the word. While the literal and original sense of the word remains in use in the English language, a derived sense of "excessive devotion" arose in the 19th century. Beginning in the 1930s, cults became the object of sociological study in the context of the study of religious behavior. Since the 1940s the Christian countercult movement has opposed some sects and new religious movements, labeling them "cults" because of their unorthodox beliefs. Since the 1970s, the secular anti-cult movement has opposed certain groups, and in reaction to acts of violence which have been committed by some of their members, it has frequently charged them with practicing mind control. Scholars and the media have disputed some of the claims and actions of anti-cult movements, leading to further public controversy. Sociological classifications of religious movements may identify a cult as a social group with socially deviant or novel beliefs and practices, although this is often unclear. Other researchers present a less-organized picture of cults, saying that they arise spontaneously around novel beliefs and practices. Groups labelled as "cults" range in size from local groups with a few followers to international organizations with millions of adherents.” from: Wikipedia - cult For purposes of distinction I usually tack on some descriptive adjectives like “a harmful and controlling cult”…I realize in even those adjectives there’s a big gray area because we have no metrics, surveys or sociological studies to provide an accurate threshold of when involvement in a group becomes harmful to the followers or how to describe and quantify the undue influence a group has over its followers…but I don’t let that stop me from voicing an opinion . I think there’s a lot of good anecdotal information online that provides the typical characteristics of a harmful and controlling cult…to cite a few: Cult Research.org – characteristics of cult FECRIS.org – identifying characteristics of a cult Psychology Today – cults: the mind/body connection Psychology Today – clues to what makes a pathological cult leader The Guardian - telltale signs of a cult Cult Research.org - cults today a new social psychological perspective I don’t have a beef against any organized religion. One thing I do have a problem with is when some megalomaniac supersedes the basic tenets of their faith…but that’s just my opinion. And that’s why I posted some open-ended questions in my first post – I anticipated…and I welcome other viewpoints – all this stuff is a matter on which differences of opinion are possible.

For the past few weeks, a couple of ideas have been buzzing around in my head. One thought is - what happens when the original cult leader is gone? The other idea is – can a cult make a transition into something less harmful and controlling? I debated over which forum to put this in – About the Way or in Open – I finally decided on Open since most of my references draw on other cults. I literally Googled the above two questions and came across a wide variety of possible scenarios – I posted a few interesting websites below…I wasn’t planning on doing anything with this stuff – until I saw OldSkool’s thread Hey we got a new bored member After reading the provided link here I was surprised by my own feeling of hope after finding out the newest member on TWI’s board of directors is a woman of color with a PhD in clinical psychology…racial/ethnic diversity broadens the potential talent pool inviting new ideas and approaches and maybe she’ll address some of the cognitive dissonance issues too. I think…I hope this is a step (or another step) in the right direction for TWI… I know what some of you might be thinking. How can I talk about hope when I’m usually very critical of TWI being a harmful and controlling organization…well unlike a certain former mindset I used to have that was incapable of empathy and wrote off anyone that didn’t wholeheartedly accept the teachings of wierwille - - I view everything (situations…people…ideas…life) a lot differently now - - and that’s probably due in a large part to having the freedom and responsibility to cultivate a personal worldview… I always have hope for people…and situations to change for the better. TWI is not an automated machine – it is an organization run by people. People can change. People are not perfect – neither are organizations. I’m not saying what’s past is water under the bridge and is no longer important or a source of concern…but looking forward, do we tend to think “that’s the way things are…irreversible…hopeless”? When is a thief not a thief? When the thief is sleeping? Nope – still a thief but just off-duty. A thief is not a thief when he or she becomes something else: “Anyone who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with their own hands, that they may have something to share with those in need.” Ephesians 4:28 A thief is no longer a thief when he or she becomes an honest worker and actual has something from an honest day’s work to share with someone in need. * * * * What Happens when the original cult leader is gone? Kosta, raised in a cult from 11 to 14, had this to say on Quora: “What happens to cult members when the cult leader is gone, either through death or jail? It depends on the cult and whether it successfully transitions into something more mainstream. Many smaller cults that are centered entirely around a powerful and charismatic figure die out when their leader does, but others often transition into something resembling a more mainstream religion, usually when someone slightly less narcissistic takes over. The Mormon/LDS church and the Seventh-day Adventists are examples of these types of cults that transitioned. Some cult leaders are so fanatical about their own cult of personality that they can’t stand the idea of the cult even existing without their presence and actually hamper any attempts to transition it, making sure they surround themselves with yes men rather than people who could take their place afterward. These types of cults tend to die out pretty quickly after the leader does (or in the case of Jim Jones, along with him). The cult I was in was very much a cult around one person and when he left, the people around him would leave pretty quickly too. Since he was a bit nomadic and seemed to move around from place to place every few years, there was about a 4–5 year turnover in the cult, with only a few core members staying with him. This could have happened to the LDS if Joseph Smith had lived, but they after his death the leadership of the more moderate and organization focused Young changed it from a cult of personality around Smith to a cult of an organization around the church itself.” from: from Quora - what happens when the cult leader is gone? * * * * Here’s an old 2013 post from psyborgue on Cult Education Institute forum: “Sometimes the cult dissolves without a leader. Sometimes, like Scientology, it lives on with a new leader. Sometimes, as in the case of Synanon, followers start their own "clone" groups with the teachings they've learned. This thread is intended for discussion of what exactly causes each outcome, and how these outcomes have played out throughout cultic history. How is a new leader selected by the group? When a leader dies without naming a sucessor, how is one chosen, and what causes followers to bond with this new leader? To what extent is the new leader limited by the revelations and established doctrine of the old one (how much can change)? What causes a group to dissolve? Is it because of a lack of instruction/doctrine and too much reliance on the leader's daily orders to maintain the thought reform environment? Is it because the very death of a leader contradicts the leader's beliefs (ex. dying of an illness when claiming to have the cure for same illness). What happens to these followers left without a leader? What causes followers to create their own groups? Are they acting out of self-interest like the often sociopathic cult leaders, or are they merely mindlessly carrying on bringing the one true message of X to the world? How many stick to the doctrine and how many change it? How do the new leaders justify changing the immutable words of the great leader?” from Cult Education website * * * * Can a cult transition into being less harmful and controlling? “The greater Christian community has observed much publicity regarding the Worldwide Church of God’s attempt to mainstream into Evangelical Protestantism these past several years...Note: Worldwide Church of God changed their name in April 2009 in the United States to Grace Communion International. (Some local church areas and countries may still carry the former name or a different one.) Many dedicated Christian ministries have followed unfolding events through the writings of Ruth Tucker, Hank Hanegraaff and a select few who have been approached by the current administrators of the multi-million dollar WCG empire. As many would agree, the publicity regarding the WCG change has been most positive and effective, leaving few to question what is actually occurring within the tightly controlled organization. Few have the connections or ability to deeply research or investigate the validity of changes occurring within this sixty year old organization. While many Christians see this “historic” change (as Hank Hanegraaff often describes it) as real, it is a fact that the critical information regarding the entire story behind Worldwide Church of God has not been disseminated or considered. The face value acceptance of the WCG into the greater community is of major concern to thousands victimized by such a destructive force. That concern extends to honest Evangelical ministries and those yet to be approached by the WCG’s sophisticated system of deception. During these past few years many have been dazzled by the well orchestrated propaganda. Sincere Christians have been captivated by the doctrinal changes they read or hear about. Throughout this past decade major cults have maneuvered their way into the mainstream Christian arena and society in general. Their successes have increased their power while achieving significant inroads with their political agendas and financial pursuits. It is true that most cult educated Christians feel they would never succumb to manipulations generated by Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormons. We must ask why then have some accepted and endorsed the relentless manipulations put forth by one of this century’s most destructive cults. Is the power of Jesus really behind this “historic event“?” from: Exit Support Network * * * * "A trend in pop culture is a mix of current affairs and anniversaries, and saturating the media landscape is documentary storytelling about cults in popular culture. Last year was the 40th anniversary of Jonestown, and this summer marks 50 years since the Manson Family murders. 2019 saw the trial of NXIVM members, and Netflix’s “Wild Wild Country” piqued interest in a peculiar unfolding of events in the 1980s of a group called the Rajneeshpuram. Popular podcasts include a series on Heaven’s Gate, along with a host of explorations of cult groups and religious sects, both heterodox and not. But what differentiates a cult from a religion? Followers see themselves as believers, even disciples—not cult members. Families, law enforcement, media, and other religious leaders, however, rely on the word “cult” to discredit, call out, or accuse these groups. Who has the final word, and what is behind the word itself? Cult is a term that doesn’t refer to religion at all, but is applied to a social movement. People have intuitive feelings about how the word cult should be used, even when an organization or movement meets the criteria of a new religion. Take, for example, Scientology and Mormonism. Both were new religious movements that have evolved into a general understanding or definition of a religion. However, according to Pew Research, non-Mormons in the U.S. are more likely to label Mormonism as a cult. Scientology and Mormonism have outlived their charismatic leaders. They have openly published their beliefs as scripture. Both religions seek truth by offering its followers a roadmap for their place in the universe, along with a moral code. Those who accept the beliefs and rituals are members of the religion. But many outside consider the movement, and its followers, to be a cult. How have the two been conflated? “The word ‘cult’ originally designates a practice of religious veneration and the religious system based around such veneration—for example, the cult of Our Lady of Guadalupe,” says Robin Clark, a linguistics professor in the School of Arts and Sciences. “However, the word was co-opted in the first half of the 20th century by sociology, and has come to denote a social group with ‘socially deviant’ beliefs and practices, like a UFO cult.” Cults versus new religions is a matter of perspective, says Ori Tavor, a senior lecturer in the Department of East Asian Languages and Civilizations, who teaches a class on new religious movements. “New religious movement” is a new term from academic discourse, and is applied to religious movements from the 19th century onwards. “Remember,” says Tavor, “that the religious landscape of the U.S. was about freedom of religion. Anyone can create a new religion, and can appeal to the government for new religion status and get protections and recognition from the government.” What they have in common may be reason to conflate the two: a charismatic leader. Buddhism and Christianity are both named after a charismatic leader. Islam, originally called Mohammedanism, is also named after its leader. Religions and cults often follow a leader who claims divine, or at least special, access to different models of knowledge and revelations. Many are martyred. Jesus of Nazareth was famously crucified. Joseph Smith, Mormonism’s founder, was lynched, leaving Brigham Young to lead followers west... ...If one factor can determine the difference between a cult and a religion, according to Tavor, it would be time. Scientology is now recognized by the state as a religion, with tax-exempt status. Mormonism was considered such a deviant form of heterodoxy its founder was lynched. Now the Mormon Church has more than 14 million members worldwide. “It takes time for a movement to establish itself as a legitimate part of the religious landscape,” says Tavor. “A cult doesn’t have anything to do with the content of its religious ideology. It is a term to demonize a movement that is controversial. It is considered a threat to mainstream society.” NXIVM, for example, is labeled a cult of personality because, like Jonestown, it is a group that has followed a charismatic leader to its detriment." from: penntoday.upenn.edu  – webpage of University of Pennsylvania * * * * Mack Moore , a cult survivor, cult resistance educator, anti-fundamentalist said this 2 years ago: “Few people understand the personalities of cult leaders, because their PR campaigns and perpetration of cult mind control enshrouds the real personality in a cloud of disinformation. Few insiders ever see the real person behind the campaign. Some cult organizations don’t even have a single charismatic leader. That’s one of the myths: That if it doesn’t have such a leader, it can’t be a cult. That’s false. Cult organizations are recognized by their methods. What all cult leaders (leadership bodies) have in common is that they all employ the same tactics of cult mind control (each with a slightly different style, each centering around a different ideology). By learning to recognize those tactics, you can protect yourself from all cults. It is the methods or tactics, not the ideology, and not the personality, that makes a cult what it is.” from: Quora - what do cult leaders have in common * * * * Rate of progress depends on the size of the project. There’s always setbacks and bumps in the road…Two steps forward, one step back… I was in TWI from 1974 to 1986. I’m some 35 years out of touch with it. How much has it changed? I don’t know. I like to hope for the best - that it is still changing for the better...I'm not a perfectionist...I guess ideally my wish would be it all falls apart - justice is served appropriately - everyone who is dirty comes clean - everyone moves on in life...but realistically - I take what I can get - any kind of change for the better is good... ...honestly, I don't give two hoots about the organization...It's people I care about...because I'm a people too ...empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of another...I've been there...I would not wish being in a harmful and controlling cult on anybody...sure it would be great if it all came to a screeching halt real soon - but you know that's not going to happen - so in the meantime it will be the genuinely good and kind people who will make a difference... ...There was a strange duality during my involvement with a harmful and controlling cult. There I was in a supposedly Christian organization and yet it seemed like their agenda and their way of doing things brought on most of my hardships, frustrations, heartaches and resentment. Since I left I have thought about Psalm 23: 4 many times - “Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me...” I believe God often helped me through tough times in spite of what some bad people did; and I also believe God helped me through some tough times by what some good people did... Hooray for the good folks in TWI !!!!! If you're in TWI or in some other supposedly Christian group and got a little uncomfortable reading this stuff...well, stay on the phone and let me ask you a few questions... What would happen if a narcissistic sociopath with delusions of grandeur started his own ministry? Is it possible for someone to hijack Christianity? Could a parasitic organization have a symbiotic relationship with Christianity? Could a Christian think they are serving God and not realize they are being sidetracked and exploited by a phony pastor? Are there any telltale signs that someone is a charlatan? Why do we ignore red flags? Are we afraid the warning signs are true? Do we think our intuition or feelings are wrong? Does my line of questioning seem outlandish? Does it sound scary or unthinkable that there might be counterfeit Christian groups “out there”? Before you brush me off, look at the warnings from Jesus of false prophets, wolves in sheep’s clothing, bad fruit from a diseased tree, hypocrites who say they follow the Lord but do not do the will of the Father…cult leaders who build their house on the sand and encourage their followers to do the same – click here to read Matthew 7: 15-29 for yourself...Jesus spoke of these religious charlatans as a diseased tree that bears bad fruit, and every tree that does not bear good fruit is to be cut down and thrown into the fire. He did not say the diseased tree should be healed, salvaged or reformed. It is a wise thing to learn from your own mistakes...and you're really... really... really wise if you can learn from the mistakes of others...that's what Grease Spot is all about. so in the meantime... Hopefully TWI is becoming less harmful and controlling than it was when I was in. Hopefully TWI-followers are becoming more openminded and empathetic to outsiders than I was when I was in. I’m interested in hearing the thoughts of Grease Spotters – you can comment on any of the websites I quoted from, reply to any questions I've asked or share your own ideas about: what happens when the original cult leader is gone? can a cult make a transition into something less harmful and controlling?

"This month the Board of Directors of The Way International welcomed a new member: Dr. Angela Priester. Angela is a graduate of the Eighteenth Way Corps. She and her husband, Perry, coordinate a Branch and household fellowship in Jacksonville, Florida. Angela holds a PhD in clinical psychology and has a proven, successful record of moving God’s Word. Angela will bring many wonderful qualities to the household of The Way in her new responsibility. We are thankful for her heart to serve in this capacity." A woman of color with a PhD in clinical psychology - - hooray !!!!!! congrats Dr. Angela Priester !!!!!

I think Steven Hassan's hierarchy diagram is spot on for representing how harmful and controlling cults function...hey don't bring calzones into this...I loves me some calzones - but can't have them right now - I'm trying to lose weight.

Excellent post Twinky !!!!

I was in Family 11…given my Roman Catholic upbringing which can make for a very sensitive conscience and the fact that I was so freaked-out-numbed by wierwille’s pajama party / porn video extravaganza – I was pretty much oblivious to any hanky panky going on…but there were a few times Tonto would make mention to me of suspecting certain couples of having an extramarital affair – and I would quickly blow it off in sort of a wierwille-esque-the-love-of-god-thinketh-no-evil-mind-numbing attitude - which probably complemented some Roman Catholic ghost in the machine psychological defense mechanism to safeguard my mind against feelings and thoughts that were too difficult to cope with…Speaking now from a perspective of having removed the wierwille-colored-glasses I don’t doubt there was hanky panky going on but to what extent I don’t know, because that was something that flew under my erroneously calibrated radar at the time…I don’t mean to come across like I thought was a goody two shoes since I never have cheated on my wife – but I guess I appreciate the moral code I grew up with – but more importantly I’m glad I left TWI while I still had a conscience…I’m human and just think the promiscuous and unprincipled mentality toward sexual matters that wierwille promoted to the way corps can wear anyone down if they stick around long enough…you play with fire you’re going to get burnt sooner or later.

a wise man once said It's like those French have a different word for everything

I re-watched the 1998 sci-fi movie Sphere the other day. It’s based on a novel of the same name by Michael Crichton. In my opinion, the book is a lot better than the movie – and I don’t know why cuz it has good actors who do a great job – maybe it’s the made-for-TV kind of vibe I get from the lackluster special effects…but that’s besides my point – which is the movie is a hypothetical approach to drill down into some unintended consequences if there really were such a thing as the law of believing. ***caution spoiler alert – if you haven’t seen the movie yet stop reading this and come back after you’ve seen it – I’ll wait right here *** One of the great thought-provoking things about the sci-fi genre is the philosophical perspective of “what if”. Take for example the 1933 classic The Invisible Man . IMDB’s brief summary gives the “what if” - “A scientist finds a way of becoming invisible, but in doing so, he becomes murderously insane.” Which brings to mind the proverbial saying “ 'power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely' conveys the opinion that, as a person's power increases, their moral sense diminishes. Origin - the short version "Absolute power corrupts absolutely" is the best known quotation of the 19th century British politician Lord Acton.” see phrases.org In Sphere, a spaceship is discovered under three hundred years' worth of coral growth at the bottom of the ocean. A team of experts explore this ultra-futuristic spacecraft under the sea, find a way to review the ship’s logs and find a large sphere hovering in the cargo bay…As the story unfolds we find out that everyone who comes in contact with this unearthly sphere gains the ability to make anything they imagine a reality…At first the team of experts (a marine biologist, mathematician, astrophysicist and a psychologist) are not even aware of this ability but as each creepy event plays out one of the ways in which the whodunit is revealed is by sedating a person with enough drugs to induce a dreamless state. What intrigued me about the premise of this movie was how the story fleshed out almost like a lab experiment approach – a controlled environment – limited to four people in an underwater habitat on the floor of the Pacific Ocean…In PFAL we were taught the law of believing works for saint and sinner alike…Being a big sci-fi fan I sometimes imagine stories of my own – don’t think I’ll ever do anything with any of my nonsense I just love to write (can you tell? ) – anyway I have one story called Planet of the Gods – and it’s sort of a Woody Allen-ish satire on the law of believing – everyone in this world has the ability to create their own reality – it’s chaotic cuz people, things, events, situations, whatever wind up getting undone…redone…cancelled…re-instated…created…destroyed…re-created…yada yada yada ad nauseum. What I didn’t consider in my own fictional story was the subconscious factor if there truly was a law of believing - the part of the mind of which one is not fully aware but which influences one's actions and feelings. The movie Sphere explores exactly that aspect! And instead of the setting be an entire world – it’s just four people trying to figure out why these terrifying events are plaguing them. The movie got me to think more deeply about the unintended consequences if the law of believing was for real. Just think if your deepest fears, desires, fantasies, imagination, loves, and hatreds were unleashed into the real world…literally brought into concretion, all because you failed to keep them in check, were simply unaware you had them…didn’t think it was anything to be concerned about…or regardless of anything else you thought it was your God-given privilege to exercise your rights… I’m not talking about self-fulfilling prophecy (where our beliefs and expectations influence our behavior at the subconscious level ) or the placebo effect (a patient’s beliefs effects the “treatment” they experience) in psychology and sociology - see positive psychology article . I think if there really was a law of believing as defined by wierwille – the world would be in a continuous fvcked up state of flux. We would be a world of little ugly fickle self-centered gods wreaking havoc on ourselves and others. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I worked in carpentry and maintenance for a few blocks - so I really enjoyed seeing those pictures! Thanks for posting that, Junior Corps Surviver !

well at least Penn does ...personally I'm attracted to the strong silent type.

yeah - clearing out cookies worked for me...thanks for the tip.

I agree - we are not blank slates – speaking of which – have you read Steven Pinker’s book The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature ? I thought it made a lot of sense – that we are not blank slates. Rather Pinker argues that human behavior is substantially shaped by evolutionary psychological adaptations. I did come across Jonathan Haidt in Pinker’s book – Pinker talks about some of the studies Haidt did on people’s emotions and… uhm …gross-out thresholds...some of the questions Haidt set up would push the buttons in just about everybody! But anyway that evolutionary psychological adaptations stuff is very interesting – I found this on Wikipedia: “Evolutionary psychology is a theoretical approach in the social and natural sciences that examines psychological structure from a modern evolutionary perspective. It seeks to identify which human psychological traits are evolved adaptations – that is, the functional products of natural selection or sexual selection in human evolution. Adaptationist thinking about physiological mechanisms, such as the heart, lungs, and immune system, is common in evolutionary biology. Some evolutionary psychologists apply the same thinking to psychology, arguing that the modularity of mind is similar to that of the body and with different modular adaptations serving different functions. These evolutionary psychologists argue that much of human behavior is the output of psychological adaptations that evolved to solve recurrent problems in human ancestral environments. Evolutionary psychology is not simply a subdiscipline of psychology—its evolutionary theory can provide a foundational, metatheoretical framework that integrates the entire field of psychology in the same way evolutionary biology has for biology. Evolutionary psychologists hold that behaviors or traits that occur universally in all cultures are good candidates for evolutionary adaptations including the abilities to infer others' emotions, discern kin from non-kin, identify and prefer healthier mates, and cooperate with others. Findings have been made regarding human social behavior related to infanticide, intelligence, marriage patterns, promiscuity, perception of beauty, bride price, and parental investment. The theories and findings of evolutionary psychology have applications in many fields, including economics, environment, health, law, management, psychiatry, politics, and literature.” From: Wikipedia - evolutionary psychology = = = = = = = I think we may be on the same page with a sort of nurture and nature combo…we are not perfect…there’s nothing perfect in this world…at some point everything fails…Wow this has been a real cheery discussion eh? Just kidding around – I really have enjoyed this thread!

I think your question might confuse the issue – and if anything, I think we exert more influence over our own intellect, feelings, beliefs, perception of experiences, awareness of what’s going on around us than we’d care to admit. I tend to think as a person grows – experiencing life…continually putting some aspect of their beliefs to the test in real-life situations they are regularly developing and revising their critical and creative thinking skills – and thereby gaining MORE CONTROL as it were, of their mind/beliefs/life skills. …the pictures of mental iceberg metaphors were to show some variety of psychology theories on how the mind works and that it’s still a vast field to explore – and believe it or not I was trying to bring it back to how people change their minds…with the iceberg metaphors – I see it as a two-way street in that there’s some interconnectedness between what’s above the waterline (conscious, behavior, ideas) and what’s below the waterline (unconscious, subconscious, deep feelings, intuition) – not saying they work in lockstep but maybe more like one can influence the other. Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it…Proverbs 4:23 This verse makes me think of that old IT axiom – Garbage In, Garbage Out – meaning incorrect or poor-quality input will always produce faulty output. I think one way in which Proverbs 4:23 could be understood is with my heart being like a repository where all my wisdom, experiences, desires, memories, deep feelings, etc. are stored – the whole iceberg, if you will. I am to protect it…supervise what I put in store there. Why? Because what goes in there winds up affecting my outlook and behavior… Here’s my two-bit psychology rap for this present discussion: Freud’s psychosexual theory is very narrow-minded for my taste – I think he placed too much emphasis on sexual motivation being behind behavior. And yeah, Jung and Freud were friends – but Jung later disagreed with some of Freud’s ideas – Jung became more interested in dreams, symbols, self-analysis, primitive psychology in various cultures and integrating the conscious and unconscious – the true self. So Jung is more my speed - currently I’m reading one of his books Man and His Symbols – fascinating stuff...when Gestalt psychology came along in the 1920s – I think that was a big step cuz that theory looked at the whole person – with the idea that behavior and the intricacies of the mind should be studied together – looking at the entire iceberg. one of the theories of Gestalt psychology is that the whole person is not simply the same as the sum of the parts. Btw, a lot of this stuff is new to me and I tend to go on about something like finding a new toy…I read a lot – online and books - some of the ideas on psychology stuff I mentioned I got from a book my kids gave me for Father’s Day - Psych 101 by Paul Kleinman …it’s not like I know what I’m talking about – so take everything (and to be safe make that everything without exception ) I say with a grain of salt… Some of the reasons I’m keenly interested in Jung, Gestalt, and other studies of the mental and behavioral processes is to better understand my cultic experience, cult leaders…and to better understand myself and people in general.

if wierwille was still alive I bet there’d be a lot of folks believing for him to share a prison cell with Harvey Weinstein and Larry Nassar.

wierwille pulled off a slow and remarkable transition … from “teacher” to taskmaster from teaching the truth will make you free, to the truth is you really work for me.

I found a weird workaround - or at least it seems to work most of the time...using Microsoft Edge, I sign in to Grease Spot...then I click to open a new browser tab and click on my Grease Spot link...I submit all my posts and do edits from the second tab...weird huh?

This might be an interesting tangent – going from discussing CAN a true believer truly change their mind to HOW that is accomplished. recent mention of the unconscious (or subconscious) and the collective unconscious brings to mind some of the ways people study HOW we change our minds...but first a few visual aids - I found these by Googling images of the mental iceberg - check out the various conceptions of how the conscious, subconscious and unconscious are to be understood: (note: if you stare at each of the bottom three icebergs long enough - they start looking like the rear view of a skull x-ray... from the movie Indiana Jones and the kingdom of the Crystal Skull ) When it comes to unraveling a cultic mindset, I'm more comfortable and most familiar with stuff at the tip of the iceberg - the stuff above the waterline - at the conscious level...I believe it's more productive to work at engaging the different levels of thinking that are more easily accessible – recalling information and experiences, analysis, evaluation, synthesis, creation, application, etc. I think it's referred to as meta-cognition - which is an awareness of one's own thought processes and an understanding of the patterns behind them...I'm not a psychologist so probing the subconscious and analyzing dreams seems like a lot of guesswork to me – only because I have no academic training in such things. But analyzing what is apparent I can handle...come to think of it – examining HOW we change our minds is a recurring theme on Grease Spot – especially in About the Way forum...in a group setting Grease Spot amplifies the process of analysis through Socratic questioning which is “a form of disciplined questioning that can be used to pursue thought in many directions and for many purposes, including: to explore complex ideas, to get to the truth of things, to open up issues and problems, to uncover assumptions, to analyze concepts, to distinguish what we know from what we do not know, to follow out logical consequences of thought or to control discussions” from Wikipedia - Socratic questioning ... From reading online about Socratic questioning I've found it''s often used in teaching and counseling situations to expose and unravel deeply held values and beliefs that frame and support what we think and say...using focused yet open questions that allow for differences of opinion, we “unpack” our beliefs and those of others. Howard Gardner says in his book Changing Minds that his focus is on changes of the mind that occur CONSCIOUSLY as a result of forces that can be IDENTIFIED - note his 7 factors for changing minds which is what the book is all about. ...He does not address how the mind can be changed through subtle manipulation, deception, brainwashing, etc. But as an ex-cult follower I found his book helpful in understanding the basic circumstances surrounding a typical change of mind. Professional leaders and sales personnel also get into using Gardner's 7 factors to change minds – and that also makes me think of Dale Carnegie's principles in “how to win friends and influence people” - which also brings to mind the unscrupulous way deceptive and controlling cults like TWI can warp ideas to their advantage. For instance Gardner's first factor reason. Gardner says “Especially among those who deem themselves to be educated, the use of reason figures heavily in matters of belief”. wierwille's abundant use of logical fallacies in the guise of thoughtful arguments for his point of view changed the minds of a lot of unsuspecting students in the PFAL class. And what's ironic is wierwille jacking up the hype in PFAL saying stuff like most people think that they think - don't remember exactly what he said anymore - but he said it to insinuate most people don't know how to think until they take PFAL. Wow isn't that a good one ! What I have found in my journey of unraveling the TWI belief system is what a house of cards it turned out to be.

deleted post - still developing ideas - will post later

Bolshevik, that sounds like a really scary experience...I don't know how I would have handled it. the young and naive were always easy targets for TWI to exploit...they could very well expand on that old familiar phrase “youth is wasted on the young” and turn it into a sales slogan: youth is wasted on the young so let us do that for you