oldiesman

Pawtucket, Blaming adultery on mind control and PFAL isn't where I'd like to be, and those views disgust me. But thanks for letting me give my opinion on this website.

Raf: The way I see it, she's blaming it on something Wierwille said in PFAL, that's now being used as an excuse why some assented to the adultery. It was never ok. Even if that's true (we really don't know if that's the motive in every case) it still shouldn't be used as an excuse by any participant. Doesn't mean anything. If people said that the MOG said to go out in the backyard and shoot your neighbor, would you do it? Again, its hard to definitively say why folks committed adultery, it obviously was a mess. But blaming PFAL isn't the answer. This is something like saying "TWI taught that Christ was absent", which you assent to. It's a damn lie. We all know what Dr. Wierwille taught and the spirit and context in which he taught it. If you want to say we got off the deep end with Bible Worship, go ahead. But we loved Jesus in TWI, read about him all the time, knew him and prayed in his name. But take a word, sentence or phrase out of the context in which it was presented, and twist its meaning, present it as a reason for sin... seems to be no problem for some folks.

Zix, this is where you (and presumably most posters on Greasespot) and I vehemently disagree. The way I see it, just because some leaders erased adultery as a trangression, doesn't give those who engage in it, a free pass. Where did you get that idea? Any biblical references? A person engaging in an activity, provided they have all their marbles, is responsible for their actions in that activity. I think some folks can't accept that and that's unfortunate. What if certain leaders acted as though stealing was ok? Does that mean we condone stealing? You can if you choose, or you stand against it. But the bible says reprove, rebuke and exhort. If you coexist with leaders who condone it, that's your choice. Another choice is to leave. Another choice is to reprove, rebuke and exhort, and some women did, when confronted with the temptation to commit adultery. I'm sure some still do. As far as punishment, hopefully we can say we've all asked (and continue to ask) God to forgive us for our transgressions.

MO, blaming PFAL on blowjobs is #1 right now, but I'm sure you and Coolwaters will put something together that tops that one! hhahahha ha ha ha

Being called a woman hater because I expect folks to accept some responsibility for their actions?Hope, are you ok?

Having sex with someone else's husband is NEVER ok. That's why it had unwritten and unspoken acceptance, cause everybody knew it was wrong. BUT THEY DID IT ANYWAY. But you see, instead of owning up to one's own actions, shifting the blame was commonplace. There had to have been a reason, and it just can't be the participants weakness of moral character. What happened to "just say no"? Thumbs up to those who did.We learn that adultery is sinful from a very early age. We learn from our past religions, our parents, the marriages we know about and the vows expressed. All of us knew adultery was wrong, yet some engaged in it anyway. And so, they were too young to figure out that adultery was wrong? Too stupid or demented? That's why the victim mentality blame-the-BOT on everything propagandists must portray young females who engaged in adultery as very very young teenagers, too young to know that adultery is wrong, or too stupid, too helpless or demented, to know that adultery was wrong. They get a free pass, and voila, the entire blame goes to Wierwille and the BOT. But NOW, and new theory has developed: This is one of the more insane theories I've heard. The one making this claim commits adultery, doesn't accept personal responsibility for her own actions, and to add insult to injury, blames PFAL! And get's HUGS at Greasespot Cafe! I guess I just don't get it.

The last thing on my mind and heart was to try to dish out any guilt or remose on Imbus. However, I think one would do well to own up and have some personal responsibility in cases like this. I mean, she's suggesting that PFAL was the spiritual cause for her giving a blowjob?

In the late '80's/early '90's there was a rumor floating around that George H.W. Bush was born of the wrong seed. I wrote a letter to Craig, and asked him. He said "no, but he is being influenced by them." I was kinda hoping he said yes, cause I couldn't stand bush. "read my lips"

Imbus, I'm got getting on your case and pray not to offend, but do you see in that instance where you too committed adultery?

That's cause those records were dematerialized by devil spirits. What was TWI's greatest practical myth? "The Proportionate Giving Principle" "God will open the windows of heaven the moment you lay your tithe at "the apostle's feet."

JustThinking, My initial comments about this thread have been about the article quoted. My later comments are about others' comments about my posts. So how am I redirecting anything? You seem to be belittling and trivializing my posts. Trivialization demotes the respect for another person leading to oppression, abuse and condescension.

Insurgent, I agree with this statement and hereby assert my equality, and say my posts are just as important as everyone else's. Trivialization demotes the respect for another person leading to oppression, abuse and condescension. How can I possibly trivialize their situations? I wasn't there. The only thing I can do, is relate my experiences and opinions. You seem to be saying that by me doing that, I'm trivializing others? geeze, you may be right, I should just be quiet, quit while I'm behind -- seems that would make you happy.

JustThinking, Politically correct? Talk so much and say so little? You seem to be disparaging my posts because I'm not responding the way you would like me to. If I would only think like you, the world would be a better place.

Goey, To the extent that a participant of GS has an opinion about a topic, it IS about that person, and how that persons thinks and believes. To be fair, the opinions of one participant shouldn't trump the opinions of another participant. If you gave your opinion about a topic and I said "it's not about you", which is another way of saying "please be quiet", or "your opinion doesn't matter", I'd be going overboard.

MO, I think saying to someone that the good they received from a religious organization was at the cost of those who were done evil, is trying to make them feel ashamed at their experience, and that it matters little. It's like, let's just focus on all the evil works and forget the good because all that matters is the evil works perpetrated in the past. Would you like to apply that to LDS? How about Roman Catholicism? And when did I ever claim that my godly experiences negated the evil ones? On the contrary, I think the opposite is more the case -- it seems folks like you claim the evil negates the good. Folks will decide for themselves how they choose to think on that.

JustThinking, At first I was going to comment line by line on what I thought of the statements made in the article. Then on second thought, I figured not because I didn't think I wanted to be that anal-retentive about it and start a big to-do. But the way I feel about it, there are two sides to every statement made in the article. Let me summarize my belief by saying that if one chooses to think VP and LCM as evil monsters, then it's easy for one to believe in and assent to the narcissistic theory. If not, then it's more difficult and probably unlikely one would give assent to the statements made. It doesn't matter whether I'm the sole person giving this varying opinion or whether 10 people are -- the content and relevance of the opinion is what makes it count. Do we give our opinions based upon who agrees with us? Hope not. Again I say, this isn't only about the actions/thoughts of VP and LCM. Just look at some of the statements and it talks about the so-called mind set of the participants and how they were victimized. That's me -- I was a participant, therefore my comments can relate and are applicable to the statements made.

JustThinking, This isn't just about how Wierwille acted but alludes to the alleged mentality of the participants. You don't see that? It's insulting to hear some of these things that comment on my alleged mentality, or my alleged victim status. "The narcissist is the guru at the center..." Yeah, if you put VP at the center of your involvement, he was at the center. If you didn't, he wasn't. "The often involuntary members of the narcissist's mini-cult inhabit a twilight zone of his own construction" So we're controlled, brainwashed zombies then? "He imposes on them a shared psychosis, replete with persecutory delusions..." I don't need someone's psychobabble, telling me all about my "psychosis"... Do you understand where I'm coming from? I could give you more examples if you wish...

This seems to be the propaganda that the purveyors of the victim mentality mindset (not accusing you George, just making a general comment) must convince folks of, before folks believe they were conned. It's got to be about the evil narcissistic monster who seduces. Can't be about you having a hunger for truth; and God's people working to help you find it. You finding it and thankful for the things you learned. Nah. Dr. Wierwille wasn't at the center of TWI in my TWI world...my involvement and commitment wasn't to him... He was the teacher, yes, but he wasn't the sustenance that kept me going. I suppose it's possible some folks can make that kind of commitment to a man, and VP in particular; but that's up to the mind set of those making the decision. I think it's insulting to suggest all of us fell in that same boat.

I question that people "never" developed...that seems off the wall. But the other side of the coin can also be true. Can holier-than-thou, self-righteous, know it all, legalistic, love-to-lay-on-the-bondage, know-every scripture on sin, finger pointing brethren help you develop a healthy and respectful relationship with the Lord?

It's less bad, and less contemptable, all the way around. Looking at this candidly, I don't think it was the fornication that got TWI folks (and ex-TWI folks) all angry, upset and offended, out for blood. It was the adultery. I certainly don't advocate that any religious group teach publically that fornication is ok; all I'm saying is, I think it's much easier to be intreated and tolerated than adultery by all but the most stringent and legalistic of our society.

I agree with Catcup. As a matter of fact, I'm willing to bet that even now, most TWI folks on the field would say that adultery is wrong and that TWI doesn't teach that it's ok. Just look at Craig's departure and the ever-lingering contempt for his adulterous affairs, to examine if adultery is ok with TWI. One thing though, I wish they would make it a definitive, no-mistake-about-it teaching like the John S. paper. Are the upper echelons still saying it's "ok", privately? If they are, they need to clean up their act.

Raf, I don't quite understand your question, but I think it's a fair conclusion that he manifested both good and evil, as the testimonies relate...

I can't argue with that...

The one recurring theme with all these anti cult articles is: you must have been a victim. You could never have been anything else. Dictionary "narcissus" -- a beautiful youth in Greek mythology who pines away for love of his own reflection and then turned into a narcissus flower... VP kept saying to us: it's the Word, the Word, and nothing but the Word... I have to say in all honesty that if he wanted us to focus on anything, it was God's Word, not himself. You may call that Bible Worship if you wish; I think that'd be more accurate than narcissism.

Uncle Harry, Maybe they don't. It depends on the situation and the people involved. You can either tell them the truth, lie, or say "it's none of your business". No. You can. No. Is not disclosing information, lying? Is everything, everybody's business? In the context of adultery, I agree with you. The point is that fornication is not necessarily abuse, as we are talking about abuse by TWI folks. But shooting your neighbor in the foot is much much worse than shooting yourself in the foot. Adultery is much much worse than fornication. Let's put it this way, i'd rather justify fornication, then do something worse like mandate a life of bondage by marriage to someone not wanted or loved. Yes, I know the bible equates fornication with sin. But it's not nearly as bad as adultery and in the context of abuse, fornication doesn't have to be abusive.