Twinky

Thanks, T-Bone. That "Corps Nazi" wasn't "me" at all, I've never been that sort of person. Not the way I was brought up; not the way I ever was before. Which shows you how badly bullied I was in WC training, that I should turn out like that. How my head had been screwed around with. Thankfully, I'm now with a truly outstanding, caring, church that really reaches out to the poorer part of our community. There's a strong, loving Christian presence in this city, and there are truly awesome people to look up to. I look on that WoW year and how I handled some aspects of it as my "What Not To Do" manual. And I have so much more compassion now than I had before going in the WC. We did see some awesome things, though, in that year. We saw deliverance in many people's lives (and in our own). Our twig was thriving, and people stuck around - one was so enthusiastic that we could hardly get him to leave our house (he was one of the two who went WoW the next year). We prayed, and lots of things came to pass. Once, one of our twig members went missing for some weeks. No idea where he was or why not responding. In a city of 1 million, we thought a bit, narrowed it down to a likely area, then went there as a WoW family, walked up some random street, knocked on the first door, and there he was. Bit like Acts 9:11.

Your daughter is a freak of nature to precisely the same extent that all of us are. And just like the rest of us, she is fearfully and wonderfully made. Made a little differently, perhaps, but still wonderfully. She's probably kind, loving, compassionate, and is clearly able to give joy to you, Tonto and many others. Which is unlike that aberration of nature, LCM, whose ability to be all those things is sadly impaired, and who left a trail of destruction rippling through many people's lives. T-Bone, have you read works by Henri Nouwen, in particular "Adam: Life of the Beloved"?

I can only say that I led a WOW team, we set goals at the beginning (I had to scale back on what some of my team wanted, they were so enthusiastic) we worked really hard and in fact I drove the team hard. Because in Corps training I had myself been driven really hard and had somehow lost my kindness and compassion. We had some good times, very good times, during the WoW year; we ran a couple of classes, and a couple of lads to whom we'd witnessed went out WOW the following year. Some amazing things, miraculous things, happened at various times. As a WoW family, we were successful. The other family in the team, led by my Corps bro, totally unsuccessful. But I made it unnecessarily hard for some in particular of my family, despite that I dearly loved them. I knowingly set a wrong example on many occasions (even a couple of times is too many). I wasn't the example of Jesus Christ that I should have been; I was the example of VPW and LCM and their thuggishness. Yes, I was the Corps Nazi that you all hated. Confession time: I made it hard for my WOW family and for my team (we were two families). If I could find any of them, I would most abjectly and humbly beg their forgiveness for giving them such a hard time. I am very sorry. I pray their hurt has healed.

I've felt inclined, at several points during this thread, to ask: "What do you think God is?" (note, that's a What, not a Who). It's not really the subject of this thread, so if you have any thoughts, just hold them for the time being.

Maybe in heaven - we'll all be autistic. Maybe "neuro-typicals" are in fact the oddities in the long scheme of things? Maybe that's why neuro-typicals make such a mess of things, are disobedient, and don't follow clear rules; whereas autistic people take things more literally and don't argue with themselves and their imaginations all the time?

Okay, you guys have considered whether an atheist can truly become a (Christian) believer, or vice versa. Now what of the (let's say) atheist, who converts to Christianity, then reconverts to (let's say) Islam. Or Buddhism. Or some Indian religion requiring worship of multiple gods. Has that person changed his/her mind? Had a true conversion experience? Still exploring, but never been truly convinced of anything?

My very first RoA (and first time at HQ) was spent as apprentice corps skivvying in the dishroom and in the meal tent. I had looked forward to a RoA and all the things it supposedly brought, and saw little to none of it. I also saw very, very few of my home twig, which was just a bit unkind since they'd flown from the other side of the world (as had I). And so proceeded all future RoAs that I was at. I often got lumbered with cleaning the portaloos, which I was glad to do because everyone likes a clean toilet; but it would have been nice to have enjoyed some of what was on offer. Funny story: one year I was scrubbing out toilets and a "roving minstrel" came to find me and sing me a song. The people who had asked this person to do so was a lovely family that I'd met at Family Camp a little earlier in the year, and they'd sought me out with great diligence because their little boy had really taken a shine to me. I was seriously surprised at this minstrel's visit, came out to see the family, we had a brief chat and I returned to duties. Soon after, that set of toilets blocked up. I'd been so surprised that I'd dropped the toilet brush down the portaloo...! A less funny story: my home twig were at my last RoA (diligent lot; very big airfares involved) and wanted to spend a little time with me. I was kept too busy and on the very last day was begrudgingly given 1/2hr to spend with them. It was a very cold day and one of them gave me a winter sweater (!) and I gave them a load of materials to take back to the home country, all my Corps notes etc, because I would be leaving myself in a couple of weeks after cleanup. How mean-spirited, though. Here I am, away from my twig, in the US; my twig from another country come to visit, and I'm not allowed (kept too busy) to see them... three years running. You'd think, half an hour or even an hour, over a week, wouldn't have been too much - but it was, apparently.

Nah, T-Bone, I knew you'd write a lot.

OldSkool's post on another thread encapsulates that "evaluation" I referred to above:

(I'm sure T-Bone is going to weigh in bigtime on this thread.)

It befits us all to gain new information, check facts as best we can, and evaluate the information and facts with the best critical thinking skills we can manage. That can lead us to change our mind on many issues. It's wise to gain further information from as many reputable sources as possible, not just stick to, say, only one or two news channels, only one or two authors/publishers/etc. Read widely, read divergent viewpoints, look at other cultures and their history etc. There are things that can be "taken for granted" because we have to have a starting point in this mass of information, but be prepared to evaluate those things taken for granted as well. Some "for granteds" aren't quite the firm foundation that they appear to be. We also need to separate "religion" or "belief" from rites, rituals and dogma of any particular church denomination; perhaps from any particular religion at all. The biggest thing to remember is that God cannot be contained in a box, and certainly not in the box of the human mind or imagination. Have a review of Jeremiah 29, and in particular consider the context of this: For I know the plans I have for you, declares the LORD, plans to prosper you and not to harm you, to give you a future and a hope This is part of a letter to people in exile, in Babylon. "Settle down and be happy," says God. "I'll come and get you later." The promise was to be fulfilled decades later. Some of those in exile died there. Some were able to return. But there was still the admonition to settle down in the land of exile. Perhaps some of those who have walked away from the faith will return to it. Perhaps they will die in their exile from the faith. God is not a vengeful God but will, I believe, still do what is possible to prosper those people and not allow harm. After all, "...your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous." (Mt 5:45) We can all have times of doubt in the wilderness of our minds (however well organised our thoughts may appear to be). Some do walk away; they might return. Some enter a different sort of spirituality; who are we to judge? It's God who is the searcher of hearts. In western culture, which is primarily a Judeo-Christian based culture, it may be harder to really walk away, since very ancient tenets underlie our cultural norms. Is the walker-away then rejecting the "tat" surrounding religion, or is that person rejecting God? Upon what, then, does that person subsequently base his/her values? It may be easier to turn one's back on Christianity completely if raised in a different culture altogether - say, in China (no gods, or Confuscianism) or India (plethora of gods), an Arab-speaking country (Muslim) or an animist culture such as Amazonian tribes or in Borneo (animist), or in an African country that wasn't overrun with missionaries. If one returns to these backgrounds, a rejection of Christianity is more easily to be seen. For people with those backgrounds, they might be said (perhaps) not to have fully believed in the first place: but then, they have huge obstacles (social propriety - including risk to life and family) to overcome that unless they were serious in the first place, they wouldn't have claimed to be Christians.

Seems to me it's not only possible but happens, and has since the beginning of Christianity (as distinct from Judaism). 1 Tim 4:1 Now the Spirit expressly states that in later times some will abandon the faith to follow deceitful spirits and the teachings of demons, 2influenced by the hypocrisy of liars, whose consciences are seared with a hot iron. There's no indication here that the "abandoners" "didn't really believe" - but rather, they did have belief - which they abandoned - because they were "deceived." And isn't deceit the first sin we learn about, in the Bible? There's no news but old news.

Ridiculous, isn't it! Not even an accurate word. Phobias are unreasonable fears. "Phobia" doesn't mean "dislike." Like "homophobic." Or "transphobic." Does one have an unreasonable fear of homosexuals? Of transsexuals? Or rather, a dislike or distrust of same? Or even no concern of any kind at all I sometimes wonder if the people really pushing those agendas are "normal-phobic" and can't abide anyone who's not like them or as noisy about their "thing" as they themselves are. We're all so busy being pushed to be PC that at times it seems the world has become "rational-phobic" or "common sense-phobic."

Allan, this is how "Auntie" reported it. Speakers' Corner: Woman attacked with knife - BBC News This attack hasn't had a lot of coverage, but there has been some; it's not been ignored. That's likely because there is more concern over covid figures, which are rapidly increasing with the delta variant; and a pay award to the NHS is subject to some fierce argument ("It's derisory!" "It's too much!" "They're heroes!" "No other public staff are getting pay rises!" etc etc). The UK as a whole is pretty tolerant of other people's religious practices, as long as they don't interfere with others; but then, I suppose as a white female I can say that; if I were of a different racial background I may well have a very different experience of life. We have our own nutters that like to attack on the basis of a different skin colour/religion/way of tying their shoelaces. It goes both ways. Islam from what I gather is not a "forgiving" religion, especially towards those who become apostates to that religion, like the woman you refer to. The Islamic background is more of a "shame" basis than the Christian view, which is a "sin" basis; "shame" is alien to Christians. But Muslims that I have met have on the whole been decent folk with the same desires for their families that Christians and non-religious people might have. Some are radical, violent, fools;: just as some Christians are radical, violent fools. We don't have the shooting problems that the USA has. Gun owners need a licence in the UK and they are subject to fairly strict tests regarding mental health. Few ordinary people have guns, and not in cities (farmers of course have some weaponry, so do sportsmen), so the choice of weapon of attack is more often a knife (freely available in all household kitchens) which of course doesn't do the mass damage that an AK47 will do. It's not to say that criminals don't acquire guns (legally and illegally), but generally they use these to shoot at each other in drug turf wars. You'll be aware, no doubt, of the Ozzie white supremacist Brendan Tarrant, who shot up two NZ mosques. Pleased to say the whole community in Christchurch, and in all NZ, rallied to the aid of those injured and bereaved, and condemned the actions of this - this - this nutter. Christchurch mosque shootings - Wikipedia

I have to ask, but I think I know the answer: did you see Martindale among that "group of guys"? Oh, and a second question: did he open that very spacious log cabin that he lived in, so that some of those flooded out could be dry overnight? Even if only for just the mums with kids under 10? (Think I may know the answer to that, too.) Go on. Surprise me!

I think this is one of the best takeaways from TWI. Reading the Bible, attempting to understand customs of the time, looking at verses (and recorded actions and events) in context, etc, and engaging brain, are all good research tools. Not sure that "used before" is necessarily a good way to do research; might help or might send the reader off in completely the wrong direction. Whatever Greek (or Hebrew) we were supposed to learn was probably enough to be dangerous, rather than truly helpful, for most people. Just because something looks similar doesn't mean it's the same. And I'm sure distinguished scholars have put interlinears together; but "root words" may still be somewhat subjective. And, as we know, Wierwille put a lot of pressure on the research team that put together that supposedly Aramaic NT version with its concordance.

Interlinear was probably fine, but weren't the others bordering on heresy??

Tbone, your extract above brings to mind a certain other current political cult.

Some weird stuff out there.

Hey, new episode of The Handmaid's Tale this evening. Haven't watched it yet. Now we really are way LOL!

Somewhere between The Matrix and Brave New World, then?

Ah, yeah. Revelation. Direct from God himself. But seriously... we all know how sneaky abuse was, in TWI. And some women know better than others. And we've all heard of the abuses that took place in major denominations, that were covered up for decades.

My friend is the safeguarding officer at a big church. There have been over the years various issues. What exactly do you do with the paedophile in your congregation? The rapist? The man who beats his wife? Especially if the victim is also a member of the same congregation! The church recognises that ALL are sinners. ALL of us have sins; some are more obvious and some are still hidden away. And so the church continues to welcome these people into the congregation. Forgiveness, yes, but wisdom too. There is a price to pay. Perhaps an abuser may not attend certain services (which the victims attend). Perhaps an abuser may only attend if someone else (a nominated person) is also there. I don't know all the rules for ordinary congregants, I only know that each case is determined on its own circumstances. And every care is taken to ensure the safety of vulnerable people, of victims. The diocese would deal with abusive clergy; there are other rules for such. Safeguarding is taken very seriously these days. Pretty much all churches have safeguarding policies which are openly available on their websites. Nominated persons are named, with contact details. Anyone who has any contact in a leadership-type capacity with children or vulnerable adults has to get a police-type clearance certificate from the Disclosure and Barring Service. (This doesn't apply just to churches.) Where is TWI's safeguarding policy? I don't see a link on their website. Anyway, it'd probably still be the foxes in charge of the henhouse. Nor does CFFM appear to have a safeguarding policy.

Sarah was a victim, too, of her parents' nurture of her. As were all the Wierwille kids. An abusive father, domineering and fickle; and a weak mother, who knew what was right and didn't stand up for it. Some have said we're all victims of our parents. Maybe so. But as adults, we can also recognise that our parents were themselves flawed individuals. Be kind, be compassionate, be long-suffering: but do take off the rose-tinted glasses. There's quite a lot in the OT about the "sins of the fathers" being passed down through generations. That seems to me to refer to nurture, habits of raising children, poor lessons learned from parents by children. It doesn't mean that children "bear" the sins of their fathers and have to pay for them, it's more in the meaning of the children having learned from their parents' bad habits and not having learned better. It might not even about sinful, criminal or quasi-criminal acts. It might include patterns of speech, curtness or courtesy; habits of action - miserliness or generosity; ways of treating other people; habits of life - slovenliness or orderliness. Yet there are also promises of forgiveness if children shall turn away from the less socially desirable ways of their parents: a child of violent parents turns away from violence as his way of life; a child of a thief turns away from criminality as his way of life; a rude person realises it's not all about themselves and learns pleasantness towards others. And a child of an abuser turns away from abuse, in whatever form, towards his/her own children and others around him. Exodus 34:7 - Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation. Deuteronomy 24:16 - The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. Ezekiel 18:19-20 - Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live. Numbers 14:18 - The LORD is longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation. Deuteronomy 5:9 - Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me

There's a bigger picture here. There's the predator, with all that makes him a predator. What happened to him (usually a him) in his childhood, to make him behave like that? What love and care did he miss out on? Where did the nurture go wrong? And then, there's the predator's nature. Regardless of nurture, there's something innate in children, which is why some are talented artists, performers, mathematicians, writers, orators - and manipulators, awkward kids (even as babies), that no amount of nurture can quite extinguish. Some kids seem naturally cruel. And then there's victims, with all the nurture and nature that happened to them. Some kids seem naturally kind, or pliant, biddable. For some, abuse that happened to pliant kids would pre-condition them to accepting more abuse later. Sometimes circumstances or events occur that mean a child has to learn coping strategies that become more or less helpful as the child ages. Perhaps among other good qualities (such as kindness, gentleness, compassion, thoughtfulness, etc) that should be taught to children is SELF-RESPECT and the ability to say NO! and be respected for that. NOTE: I'm not excusing any predator for responsibility for his actions. Or any other criminal either. We all have the choice of what we do with our mind, our bodies, and our actions.