Tzaia

Sort of Walter Martin(ish) in his pursuit. A friend had me read the Kingdom of the Cults book and my main thought was how mean the guy was. Where's the heart? Where's the grace? Where's the compassion. Despite what some believe, the trinity is not the deal maker/breaker.

I think that the biggest lie TWI told us and the splinters propagate is that right doctrine and only right doctrine is going to earn someone a place in the kitchen with a liberal dose of how much you do for the organization or believe that the organization is right liberally added for good measure. Of course this is taught in mainstream churches as well. What disappointed me about TWI was its unrelenting bashing of other's belief systems in the context of a "research" ministry. When I figured out TWI's research was nothing more than its own form of proof-texting, I put it in the same category as any other religious organization. I'm not sure exactly when I leaped from TWI's doctrines being something I believed in to something I could live with - as long as I was left alone, but it was pretty early on.

Rhino, Thank you for those remarks. While I agree with much of what JJ says regarding JAL's reasoning, I found his attack on the non-trinitarian thing to be a bit much. JCING was mostly about who Jesus was not and was lacking in its discussion of who Jesus was. I believe that is because there is no clear concept in TWI of who the risen Christ is and what He is doing. Although I don't have the book written to plagiarize, I was the one who started talking to JJ&M more about the functional equality of Jesus to Father God in his resurrected state. I am also the one who questioned the body-soul-spirit teaching of TWI and pointed out the clear verse in Genesis 5:4 that states that Seth was made after Adam's image, which I believe is in contrast to the image of God. My argument was that Adam didn't need "spirit" as his pre-fallen state without sin was the image of God. Jesus fit that criteria as well by not having an earthly father. This also led to his special designation as the "second Adam." That concept had never occurred to any of them as they were still very steeped in TWI doctrine. My original discussions with them were ultimately fleshed out and made it into the OGOL book. I did notice I was never given any credit for pointing them in that direction but what else is new? Right now I am reading an interesting book by Bart D. Ehrman called Misquoting Jesus. Dr. Ehrman is a textual critic who has spent years comparing manuscripts. His research and reasoning is very high quality in contrast to John S's The Bible: You Can Believe It, which I believe starts with a flawed premise: that people couldn't alter text because it is God breathed. Dr. Ehrman correctly points out that the first century church was very fractured and dis-united in its doctrines and teachings, so VPW and JAL's claim that TWI (and CES) is teaching "the Word" as it has not been taught since the first century ignores the historical reality. Another historical reality that TWI ignores is that the explosive growth of Christianity during the first 2 centuries was not because of a single unified teaching system, but because of the multiple doctrinal models and TWI (as JJ rightly points out) never experienced that sort of growth. TWI is largely a legend in its own mind. SIDEBAR: CES/STFI used to have (and maybe still does) Wednesday morning staff meetings. It was at one of those staff meetings that I suggested that STFI adopt more of a "seeker" model of church experience as opposed to a "seeker of truth" model. I believe these are 2 very different models. A standard "seeker" service in a church setting is light on teaching specific doctrine and is more aimed at pointing a person in the direction of Christ. A "seeker of truth" model is more aimed at pointing out what is different and unique about the organization and doesn't necessarily point anyone to Christ, except in the context of what that particular group teaches. I guess, based upon how they looked at me, that my face must have suddenly changed to a peculiar color and grew a rather large something on it. I tried to explain that by focusing on all the nit-picking little details that have little to do with salvation and Christ, that the big picture was lost. All I got was this blank look. That's when I realized how steeped they were in TWI think - it's all about the details and how those details are different from mainstream thinking. It's really not about bringing people to Christ, but bringing people to a non-trinitarian understanding of Christ. Dr. Ehrman also has many college-level lectures on audio and video available through The Teaching Company that are also offered through many major libraries. His lectures and books offer a historical background that end up highlighting how ridiculous TWI's view of its impact on Christianity actually is.

I have no idea why anyone ever did listen. I have authority issues. I'll follow, but you'd better give me an excellent reason. Ok, I so laughed out loud over that last comment you made. I am so lucky I hadn't taken a drink of my Coke Zero, or it would have hit the screen!

Because while VPW was a charismatic leader and could sweet talk his way out of just about anything. LCM was not and could not. He was a "leader" by position, not by calling. That's why he simply got rid of anyone who wasn't "loyal" to him. I'm sure it was hard for him to realize that the people's loyalty to VPW did not translate to him.

I disagree. It appeared that he taught that the human body is beautiful. While I have never had the experiences with leadership that some had, I have no doubt that all this "teaching" was designed to break down barriers. Why? because I know what it is like to be "groomed". I know how he looked at me and I wasn't "so inclined," but I knew what it was like to be around the "so inclined." You don't teach that the body is "beautiful" and show explicit pictures in the context of a "Christian" ministry - unless every last one of those people is married and they know up front that it's going to happen, and we know that didn't happen. I have taken Christian marriage courses where discussions about sex are frank, but not explicit, and certainly not offered to people not married along with people who are married. If this is so good, right, and pure, why is this not the way all Christian organizations handle the topic of Christian family and sex? While you can't believe it could happen, I am amazed at how good he was at doing what he did. He operated openly and yet most never saw it, or they denied it, or turned a blind eye.

Honey, he didn't leave - he was fired. Not too sure why he got involved in writing the letter at all as he was married with spiritual "benefits" as well.

Hubby took a lot of TWI classes - including this one. Ironically, he never suggested I take it. Come to think of it, he either shielded me from a lot of this stuff, or shielded TWI from me had I actually sat through something I thought was crap. There was more than one instance of attending something where I point-blank told him to never subject me to "that" again. Gonna somewhat derail the thread by recounting an experience. There was some sort of "family" type class - maybe it was CF&S - I can't remember. I had a 7 week old nursing baby, who was with us because of what all the doctors considered was a medical miracle (or negative believing according to TWI). The twig leaders wanted us to attend the class, but I was told to leave the baby home - so he wouldn't "disrupt" the class. Now I wasn't nearly as quick on my feet then as I am now and this directive left me temporarily speechless. When I recovered, I said to the wife-leader something along the lines of: so you, who starved your baby for 2 months because you weren't smart enough to understand that when the doctor was talking about feeding every 4 hours he was talking about bottle-fed babies, are telling me to leave my 7 week old nursing baby with someone so there's no opportunity for him to possibly disrupt the class? We are recovering from a frightening experience and not only does he need to nurse on demand in order to make sure he is properly hydrated, I need to be able to nurse him for my comfort. Also, I'm not comfortable leaving my baby with anyone right now. If that's how you want to handle your family, that's fine, but I don't agree and I won't do it. The irony is that this is a "family" class and babies fall into that category. Either he comes with me or I stay home. Should he fuss, I'll leave the room with him, but I won't substitute my own common sense for someone's that took 2 months to figure out she was starving her kid. I didn't say exactly that, but close enough. I know that was harsh, but I learned that unless you were willing to be blunt, people felt entitled to tell you how to live your life based on the number of TWI classes they had attended verses how many you had under your belt. In my mind, based on results, the number of TWI classes attended was not an accurate indicator of common sense. So, of course I was the only one there with a baby (who slept peacefully most of the day and only woke and nursed during breaks) and was largely ignored by my fellow classmates for breaking the rules. Oh well.

I would have to say that all of them are wildly intelligent; just not too well endowed with common sense. At first, they were willing to look at anything. It was like opening up a box of chocolates and sampling everything. I really enjoyed that time because it was like going from a dark room into a bright light. For the first time there could be some honest discourse and people felt free to have opposing viewpoints. Then there came Momentus. In my view, that was the beginning of the big shutdown. If you didn't feel that Momentus was what you wanted to do, then you were somehow just not spiritual enough. There was more than a twinge of corp attitude among those who had attended and it stepped up a notch for those who assisted or worked on teams - to the extent that some of them actually began to strut like corp guys did when walking into a room (was that taught?). I flat out said that if I wanted to put up with that kind of crap, I would have stayed in TWI. At that point, we quit fellowshipping. Sunday morning fellowship (God forbid that it be called "church") was supposed to be a spontaneous display of gifts, when it was just as staged as tongues and prophecy at TWI. I found that out when I showed up early and found people rehearsing so the "spontaneity" would flow better. I also found out about the true lack of "spontaneity" when I actually tried to inject some. Talk about rocking the boat. Then "Dialog" was renamed "Contender". CES went from a willingness to exchange ideas to assertion that its ideas were correct, and therefore not up for debate. By the time DG arrived, CES was pretty much there in terms of shutting down any dissension. I read DG's "rules" for being allowed to run a CES sanctioned fellowship and believed those rules were every bit as oppressive as any twig. Strict rules regarding liturgy (not that it was called that) and what would be taught and how. I pointed out the similarities and got this dazed look that comes across the face of most TWI indoctrinated guys when confronted with logic emitting from the mouth of a female. The only difference between TWI and CES is there is no clear charismatic leader. JAL is pretty tarnished. JS has no charisma, unless one is enthralled by drywall. DG does and in a slick VPW sort of way. Not sure the wife would go for the antics that appear requisite to being a charismatic leader as defined by TWI, but Dan's the only one that has the recognized type of charisma.

Interesting you brought up bylaws. As a legal entity, TWI had to file articles of incorporation and have a set of bylaws.

I gave my copy away to MGraeser. The reason why I liked it so much was that it wasn't along the lines of simply get over it, or even necessarily restoration. It took into account anger and the fact that this isn't an overnight process. I'll see what I can do about getting you a copy. It'll be a while as I'm taking a grueling class right now and time is pretty valuable.

I've not been able to take ex-wayers too seriously regarding counseling, especially someone who minimalizes someone else's experience. I think someone who has been in a cult and realized how bad it was could offer some insight. Here's a great forgiveness book. I thought it would be a great addition to the CES bookstore and gave my copy to MG. I'm going to get another as it was a great book.

Amen. That summer of 1987 and through '88 I sat down with all the books and reread them. I sat with the verses (especially the ones used in the later books) with a dictionary and looked up every word I was unsure about, especially when the meaning was taken to be something different than was commonly understood. What an eye-opener for someone who was cynical to begin with. When someone says, "Don't take my word for it." Oftentimes that's not a challenge as much as they're saying it because people tend to believe people who allude to being open to challenge. As I told my friend who has a real doctorate in New Testament Studies from Princeton: There's nothing that's too sacred to question. He agreed.

Because it was never supposed to happen, and if it did you brought it on yourself - as I had someone explain to me when my baby was born severely ill. God was punishing me for (obviously) not abundantly sharing enough. I said I refused to worship a god who would hurt a child over a money issue.

Actually, I was amazed at the level of arrogance of people higher in the pecking order who (honestly) believed it was their right and duty to tell me what they believed was best in my life. How offended they could become when they were told to butt-out. Getting back to DWBH's initial thoughts. Women are groomed from a very young age to be people pleasers and this plays very heavily into sexual exploitation. Girls who have experienced emotional, sexual, and physical abuse see their bodies as instruments; there's nothing sacred about them. Predators, especially the ministerial types, exploit this error in thinking by attaching a sort of sacredness to the use of the women's bodies - in the context of servicing the ministry. This "specialness" attached to the act makes it worthwhile when otherwise you just become dead inside. I have not talked to anyone who have been abused in TWI, but my guess is that the women felt sick about what was happening, but believed the reason for that feeling was because they felt unworthy of being "chosen" by the leaders. Because the females were young, they had no idea why they were chosen. I can only imagine that some only felt shame and humiliation when they discovered that they were not the only chosen one. Others felt the shame and humiliation after being cast aside. I don't think many felt the exploitation at the time. What I believe they felt was unworthy. I was in my 30s before I realized how childhood sexual molesting had molded me; how it made me a target, how it robbed me of my innocence, how it kept me from seeing my body as the sacred thing that it is, and how I was exploited because of that. I have no memory of my body being mine alone as I was first touched inappropriately when I was around 2. I had no other point of reference. However, I started getting the idea that my body was sacred after PFAL - not that PFAL taught me that it was, but what PFAL did was get my mind into the teachings in the Bible, which frowns on adultery and fornication. That's why I found the sexual escapades of the corp on the field to be rather odd. Where were they getting the idea that this was OK? I talked to a couple who said they were taught that penetration before marriage was not OK, but everything else was acceptable. It was also OK to have sex with non-PFAL grads, but it wasn't OK after they took the class.

JAL is an "it-getter". Read this and see if you don't agree. TWI was the best thing since sliced-bread as far as he's concerned. He got to do exactly what he wanted - at least while VPW was alive and mom and dad were contributing handsomely. He had the right mix of rah-rah, boyish good looks, humor, and jock appeal. While I've never heard him say it, I would be willing to bet that he believes he could have saved TWI if VPW had put him at the helm instead of LCM. Now mind you, I don't dislike JAL. I rather like him. He's fun to talk to and I really like butting heads with him and messing with his head pointing out his absurd thinking. He tries real hard to be a servant leader, but servant leadership just wasn't taught at TWI and he's never gone anywhere else to see how it's really done. Instead of mingling with other Christians in other denominations, all he wants to do is take someone else's ideas and put a TWI spin on them.

You do realize that this video was shown to children as well under the same premise?

Hammie, he's been trying to recreate the moment since he was fired.

I'm highly in favor of spouses not bad-mouthing each other in public, or in private.

Yes, and oh heck yes. No one in TWI said it to my face, but I heard it at CES often. I would just laugh - in my typically devilish way. I knew I was getting to him when he flashed the possessed "card". What a crock of crap!

Yup. I met my to-be husband the week after he took the advanced class. He was engaged at the time and took the class with his fiancée. He broke up with her on the way home. I had been to a few twig fellowships and took the class because he paid for it. For a brief period of time I went along with things. By the time my first son was born, I was through. We were in and out until the whole branch left in '87. I wanted to be special. TWI's super secret information made me feel special. I wanted to have close "family" and friends. I had no really close friends going into TWI that weren't on drugs, so it was a step up socially - or so I thought. I wanted the relationships. Who better to fellowship with than the family of God? I have no relationship with any of the people I was so "close" to. Some of that was because we left, and they stayed, but mostly because the relationships were not real.

I know you didn't ask me, but... Wow. I missed that one. Judas. hmmm. Was he just some poor sap that got caught up in all the drama, or was he some evil guy? Since being "born again" was technically not available until the day of Pentecost, and he had already been dead several weeks - and replaced, wouldn't it be a stretch to believe he was born again and heaven-bound? The timeline just doesn't fit. Did TWI teach that? And why does it matter whether he made it or not?

The first time I heard that, I leaned over to my husband and said, "We have a name for that where I come from - schizophrenia." He heard a voice and saw something that couldn't be there, and people thought that was miraculous?

KJV 2 Peter 2:21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. NAS 2 Peter 2:21 For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment delivered to them.

Mine, too. Only he'd give me that goofy look of "are you really questioning me?"