Tzaia

AT THE TIME, there was no legal requirement for reporting the abuse of underage children. Patient confidentiality in that regard in this day and age does not exist, as it did then. In fact, now you can be prosecuted for not reporting abuse. As others have pointed out, sexual abuse of adults by people of position is more of an ethical situation, whereas if people thought they would get kicked out or harassed by their employer, that would land under the sexual harassment EOE jurisdiction. At that time sexual harassment was very hard to prove; not like it is now. If your thinking and judgment are clouded (I believe RD referred to it as "stinking thinking") and if being "crazy" is the worst thing you could be, then the tendency to minimize would be very high. I was aware of the Scientology type stance on psychology and psychiatry, which I chose to ignore. My husband had been taking prescription drugs for OCD for years and had been called out by JAL because of it. I basically told people it was none of their business. In retrospect, the stance on psychiatry and psychology is common in people who need services and want a way to deflect. Most seriously (and hopelessly) mentally ill people deny they have a problem. Many, if not most cults, shun the use of social sciences because they are at odds with the values of the cult. I get the distinct impression that DWBH and others were trying to "fix" the problem from within and thought they had a handle on it.

Clarification: Obama has a law degree and was a practicing lawyer - briefly. http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/06/na.../na-obamalegal6 However, a law degree is not required to write laws, nor are all laws scrutinized for "legality" prior to becoming enacted - that's the purpose of the judicial branch. http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/judg.html Perhaps if WD had a clear understanding of the process, and not just an idealization of the process, he would stop the innocent until proven guilty rhetoric.

Exactly. so if people don't take the bait to argue with them on their terms and instead show them the error in their thought, according to the teachings of VPW, they might go away, or at least think before posting.

I admit I haven't paid much attention to WD and any of the other VPW apologists. In fact, I can't even name them. However, it's very easy to turn their own logic against them using the very words and teachings of VPW himself. Are they going to argue with the logic employed by the very person they are defending? Kinda puts them in between a rock and a hard place.

I understand what you are saying, but let me offer a bit of my perspective on ignoring trolls. Unless it can be done in such a way that it is unmistakable that the troll is being ignored, while being nothing but supportive to the victim, the troll will take it as acceptance of what he/she is saying. I don't think that's good. Bringing up VPW's very own words regarding "establishment" through 2 or more witnesses was my way of pointing out the error in his logic and I believe strongly that anyone with half a brain (which has been established is more brain than a "Way" brain) who is reading these posts will be able to discern truth from mere posturing. On the other hand, logic and the academically accepted standards for argumentum, is something that a way-brained person just does not get.

One must have more than first hand testimony? They've got to do better than that? That has to be one of the most illogical things I've ever heard. VPW will never be proven guilty by your standards because: a) he's dead and b) the chance there was a rape examination and DNA samples of semen fluid taken are probably non-existent due to the climate of the era, which includes looking the other way. There was more than enough of that kind of denial going on at the time, which is how it was able to happen. To discount testimony from the numbers of victims is even beyond the standard of scripture itself, and is nothing less than ironic since VPW himself claimed that man's problem was falling below the standards of God or setting a standard higher than what God demanded in living a godly life. According to scripture, witness by 2 is sufficient to get a death sentence in a crime punishable by death. So I'm wondering who you think you are to demand more to establish guilt than what is even demanded by the scriptures? Who are you to go beyond even what the man you are defending himself claims is wrong (i.e. setting a standard higher or lower than the word)? We're not conducting legal proceedings here, but if we were, the first hand accounts would serve as sufficient evidence of wrongdoing, due to the number of people who have come forward. A single witness could use additional evidence, such as identifiable physical characteristics, such as scars and moles which would only be seen if the man were naked to serve as an additional "witness." However, the point is moot because he is dead, and the dead can't have a criminal complaint filed against them, nor can one be prosecuted when one is dead. That does not make one any less guilty of what one does; it just doesn't allow for a legal remedy. All of your legal posturing is just that - posturing.

Socks, I totally get what you are saying. To a large extent TWI gave me a sense of grounding I had not experienced before and it was good, for the most part, until our first son was born. He was sick and we were blamed for his illness through negative believing and inadequate abundant sharing. It kinda went downhill from there and I had fewer good experiences until we finally left. We didn't know that the sex stuff was a top-down problem and kept ourselves isolated as possible from corp people. After TWI we went right into CES, and I found the open talk to be refreshing. Momentus was the final blow for our involvement there. We did continue to partner because I had worked as a volunteer and contractor for CES, and I thought that a lot of what was written in the early days was good. As CES continued to develop its theology, I started seeing more of the same arrogance that crippled TWI. Finally I quit giving my time and they claimed they couldn't afford me, so we parted ways. The partnership money stopped shortly thereafter. If what was going on at CES's home office was anything like what was going on at HQ and the various campuses, I don't understand how anyone in his or her right mind could stick around. The emotional and verbal abuse towards women was intolerable, and the "us against them" mentality kept getting more pronounced. I didn't feel that way. I was happily going to a Presbyterian church and feeling normal for probably the first time in my adult life.

Ok Ex, I'm going to get graphic here. What were these women thinking? VPW was stinky and gross. I mean at least LCM was somewhat easy on the eyes, if you go for the flaky blond types, but VP was just gross. Don't people have any standards, for cryin' out loud?

Standard tactic is to use a logical fallacy when the facts don't fit the view. I wasn't all that enamored with the guy when he was alive. I was never sure what all the fuss was about. He was a lecherous, vile, stinky, coarse, crass guy that had a huge sense of entitlement - and that's what I thought of him BEFORE I knew that he screwed around. The fact that he was a plagiarist with a diploma mill doctorate was also well known outside Way circles, but I chose to ignore those things. After all, the guy took Calvin's idea of irrevocable grace to a whole new level. That was something I could go along with as I wanted to continue doing what I was doing and still know that I was gonna sit in the kitchen.

Ex, It was meant to be funny. The thought of VPW naked makes me want to puke.

I think JAL's response amounts to wondering why people don't simply let it go, which is easy to say if you are in his position. I think that many responsible people continuing to dance around this issue is what contributes to keeping the fires burning. Why are any of these predators being protected? I have never understood that mentality.

Socks, I was never able to get a straight answer from JAL about this, and I did ask. I also asked PL and how she could involve her kid in all of this (much of which came out through Momentus) and she couldn't tell me exactly how she wrapped her mind around it, but I knew she felt awful about what her child experienced. I found that the good-looking single corp guys seemed to be groomed to help bring ladies to the class by whatever means deemed necessary. I had one girl who served on the one team I was a part of tell me that she was in what she thought was a relationship only to have the guy break off the relationship once she took the class. She felt used, but struggled with why she felt used. The guy told her that now that she was a sister in Christ that it was inappropriate for them to have that kind of relationship, and she was kinda buying it, until I told her it was just wrong. I confronted him about it and I was told that anything was acceptable to "bring people to Christ" including sex. I asked for a chapter and verse on that one and was told that obviously I was not spiritual enough to understand. He was trying to play some of that mind-sh1t on me and I told him I wasn't buying it. I also told him that it was really a sad thing that he was unable to bring a woman to Christ without being dishonest, and how that reflected poorly on him and TWI. He got pretty sh!tty with me, and I dished it right back, which he was absolutely not used to. He reminded me that he was in the corp and I told him I didn't care; he was wrong to do what he did. I told him that as his sister in Christ that I was obligated to reprove, correct, and instruct and I didn't give a crap whether he was corp or not. It got ugly. I came home and told my husband who had been WOW and taken about every class available, including the advanced class. He knew nothing about the ok to use sex to bring people to Christ thing, so for a long time we assumed that it was not a normal thing - even though VPW once gave me the once-over that only a lecher can do. Once things broke open, it appeared to be something that was a part of the corp experience if you were deemed "spiritual" enough. I see it as how someone feels people out for whether they do drugs, are into swinging, or open to adultery. Someone who is up for those activities responds to the "hints" one gives. I knew that VPW was throwing out hints, but my husband didn't believe me until other people came forward with stories of his behavior. How did I know? Because I've done the same thing. As I told my husband, it takes one to know one. VPW was very good at being subtle in finding targets and he had a whole group of people who were dedicated to seeing that the MOGOTW got what he needed. He built it into the curriculum.

JAL never left TWI of his own volition - he was fired, and no one should ever forget that. He got disgruntled enough after being fired that he wrote at great length about what was wrong with what LCM and CG were doing, but I can assure you that he never felt that way about VPW and TWI. I believe his goal with CES was a new and improved TWI modeled after all that was good and true within TWI. I believe that because that's what he's said to me and I believe the letter makes the same point. He has never strayed far from that belief as witnessed in one of his early letters which said, "Rest assured that there is life after The Way. Although many of us have been victims of wrong doctrines and practices to varying degrees, I view my involvement as a steppingstone to greater scriptural truth. I can no longer grow spiritually within The Way’s tightening confines." For those who wonder why he hasn't been going after fresh meat - he has. It's just not been successful. The internet is a terrible thing in terms of moving the word. Just how many of you would have bitten if you had the resources available then that you have now? I am honored to be among what he refers to as the disgruntled.

Hey Rejoice, I'm running this through StyleWriter and it got a 158 (dreadful) in style index and a 63 (unreadable) in the average sentence length because it's 63 words. upon = on from a doctrinal standpoint = often wordy enthused = prefer enthusiastic and recast the sentence multi-lingual = usually written as one word.

That's not what I said. I would let anyone have their say - and correct them when I believe their reasoning is flawed. To kick them off just fuels that sense of self-righteousness. The compassion is because many have been in the same place. Most of us have turned a deaf ear to the reality of what TWI is really all about. CES - every last one of those guys would have still been at TWI if they hadn't gotten the boot.

You are presenting an irrational argument. This is not about vindictiveness. What we are talking about here is about perceptions. What some of the people here are sharing is not your reality. Why is that so hard for you to accept? Some people became involved with TWI to receive some sort of affirmation and protection. They believe TWI fell short in those areas and they feel betrayed. Maybe their expectations were unrealistic, but TWI did "sell" a sort of reality that seemed like a haven to some. I feel sick about what some of these women have experienced. I know several parents who have to live with what their children were exposed to under their watch at the various TWI campuses. I can't even imagine. I've got to wonder if those of you who think it's no big deal what these women went through are people who also willingly handed your wives and daughters over to be comfort to the leaders. Maybe the way you wrap your brain around your part in this is to minimalize the experience of others. I don't know, but my experience is that people who lack compassion for others have their own issues.

The reason for letting them stay on here is compassion; plain and simple compassion. How many stood to the side and let us have our say when they told us outright that we were a part of a cult and we weren't buying it? How many times did we shut down a conversation when it wasn't going our way? I did it on more than one occasion. I know my family waited for me to wake up and get a clue. Maybe the ones who are sticking it out and defending TWI are the ones who have disrespected their families and friends to the point where they aren't waiting around. Perhaps TWI is all they have and they will defend it beyond the point of reason, because being "right" is more important than relationships. Maybe they are abusers and simply like abusing. Think about it. What kind of person would denigrate another person's telling of their own story? Someone who can only make it in a system such as TWI, which is all about abuse. Of course that kind of person will use "reasoning" as a method of belittling someone else's experience. For those who defend TWI and ask how these women fell prey, it's because they really don't get it. It's hard to be sympathetic towards people like that, but isn't that what we're supposed to do? I genuinely feel sorry for people who lack compassion. I genuinely feel sorry for people who get their kicks out of being buttheads. I genuinely feel sorry for people who think that it's somehow "Christian" to behave like an a$$ho1e towards others because they aren't involved in their organization, or worse yet, treat people who they claimed to love as people to be avoided. In the internet world, we call people who disrupt threads trolls . Don't feed the trolls. Better yet, use my troll spray:

I would like to agree with you, but I can't. The class, as it is presented, it designed not to be a study, but more of an indoctrination. Study involves reflection. For me, study involves discussion. With the format offered in 3 hour chunks with no discussion of points, it loses the study aspect, at least for me. It's been a long time since I've taken "the class," but one of the things I believe it does at the outset is set a tone for how other Christians are to be viewed - namely as stupid for believing things that are not the "obvious truth." Like most other Bible "studies," it is designed to lead you to a conclusion - one of those conclusions is that you are stupid to trust anyone outside of the organization because others have deceived you, perhaps unknowingly, but nevertheless deceived. I've sat through the class twice; once before reading the books, and then after as a team member. The second time I was bored out of my mind and found the continuous repetition mind-numbing. I was also more aware of the attempt to tap into people's emotions the second time. The other thing the class does is set a person up to feel "special" for having all this "information" that is not shared throughout the Christian community. I will tell you one thing that the PFAL class did for me - that was open me up to critical study of scripture, but I think that was an inadvertent side effect. I took the admonition to "don't take my word for it" as a kind of challenge. I didn't. Once through the class I read all the books and then started a critical review of the books compared to scripture and came away with my own conclusions, which didn't go over too well in my twig. I do believe the class will trigger critical thinking for certain types of people, but the typical PFAL grad has a huge need to stand out in some way and be accepted - something that was probably missing in a former life. Being told they are "called out" and "special" for having taken the class does something to these people, even as they are being abused by the system that tells them they are so special. I also think that it attracts more than its fair share of people with personality disorders, because it fills a need. I am reminded of Jesus' first great commandment, which is to love one another. I truly believe that instead of teaching the great truth - that we are to love one another - that the class teaches us to be wary of others and it leads to qualifying that statement, when I see no qualification. Furthermore, PFAL drills down the definition of "born again" to what is assumed is a very broad spectrum, but it ends up being just as, if not more restrictive, than a typical flaming trinitarian's view of what constitutes being "born again" or a believer. I believe that "knowing" whether believing equals receiving, it was 3 or 5 crucified, how many times Peter denied Jesus, or whether one speaks in tongues is the true sign of receiving the spirit is irrelevant to Jesus' basic message. That message gets buried in all the the details of "knowing that you know that you know" and becomes lost. Is that really what you want for these people?

All the while being told that you have never been more awake.

Family dynamics is probably a big part of the reason why you got involved initially. Rather than treat you as the Prodigal Son, they are continuing to harbor ill will towards you. That's ok. You probably turned your back on them in a big way. For years I considered my family to be poor saps because they lacked my enlightened viewpoint. Don't think they don't pick up on that. Give them time. My suggestion is to get involved in some sort of recovery ministry like the Vineyard and don't get so caught up in having to be with people who are "like minded," or who have necessarily shared your experience. For many, involvement in a cult was simply a coping mechanism like drinking and drugs. Take a step back, accept it for what it is, and forgive yourself. Read up on developing critical thinking and logic skills - not to beat others up, but to become objective about your thought processes.

I had to laugh. More than five (5) years after someone stored furniture and household crap at MY expense as they went about their WOW business and didn't bother to come back, they came back asking for their furniture, which was junk to begin with and I couldn't even give it away, nor could I afford to continue hauling it around. They were mighty bent out of shape that I said I threw it away. Or the guy who came looking for his freakin' can opener - after 9 years. I looked him in the eye and said, "Go buy one." I found my fellow TWIers to be the most disrespectful, antagonistic bunch of people in the free world, unless you were a member of the clergy or in a leadership position.

JS is not arrogant in a pompous or in-your-face sort of way. He does believe with all his heart that he has a better understanding of scripture than any person on the planet. To drive that point home, his ongoing project is a rewrite of the Bible. I find that amazingly arrogant, but that's just me. His arrogance manifests itself in other ways. Several years ago, a finance committee was formed to study CES's financial processes and help CES conform better to 501© criteria. More than 18 months after the committee brought its findings to the board, not one suggestion had been implemented. Several people were perturbed about this, including JS's own sister - a member of the committee. JS spoke to me about how sad it was that all these people had "turned" on them. In order to gain a better understanding of the whole thing, I asked for a list of the proposed changes. None of the recommendations seemed particularly difficult. So my question was why hadn't the recommendations been implemented? The answer was that "we haven't gotten around to it, yet." I told him that was why the committee had "turned." Busy people do not like having their time wasted and that's exactly what the board did. He seemed oblivious to the fact that CES had wasted all of these people's time. I believe disrespecting other people's time is a sign of arrogance. He has (had) this belief that certain people's role in life is to meet his every need so that he can be free to do God's work. When he articulated this notion to me, I just looked at him with utter amazement. I told him that as a woman, I felt he should reexamine that belief. To me, that is a very arrogant belief. Since my "release" as a consultant, JS has not contacted me once. Not once. Years of intimate conversations, me going out of my way for him on numerous occasions, and not one word from him. I think dismissing someone from your life after that person has served a purpose and is no longer needed is arrogant (among other things). This is just me and my opinion based on my experience. YMMV.

These guys live (what I believe to be) a pretty secluded life. This does not allow for exposure to different ideas. JS used to have exposure to different people, but since moving to Bloomington, he and the whole bunch simply don't have exposure to different people except peripherally. You remember the "like minded" thing, well I think it's the guiding force in his life, as with the rest of them.

All of them are very sincere. John S is a good person. He's not evil. I do think he's misdirected.

I have a confession to make. I have been attending school for the past nearly 3 years and late last year I had a major epiphany. I am dealing with a major lack of faith in a risen lord right now. First of all, I went to Egypt last fall and spent most of my time there with Islamic guides. That was a real lesson in just learning how to be. I plan to go to the Middle East many more times, but only in a sociological context like I did the last time. It's very enlightening. Then I took a couple of humanities classes that covered early religions. I walked away with the gut feeling that Christianity isn't all that remarkable from a religious standpoint. Nothing has happened since then to change my mind. The more I try to reinsert myself into Christianity through reasoning and education, the harder it is to accept. Therefore, I can honestly say I'm doing nothing to move the "word" and find myself becoming more and more repelled by those who think they have all the right answers. Points: 1. We have a Bible based on manuscripts with no originals to use for comparison's sake. If you don't have a problem with that, then how can anyone possibly have a problem with the Book of Mormon, or the Qur'an, or any other "text" that is supposedly divinely inspired that has no original manuscripts? 2. We have a savior that is risen, and a few more people who apparently were raised (not sure to new bodies and even then it's glossed over), yet no one outside the Christian community seems to know about it - even Josephus. You would think someone besides early Christian writers would find it worthy of mention. The only place you can find the evidence is in the Bible (see point #1). 3. I think it's kind of strange that he's ascended into heaven and is letting us have at it. Why? There is absolutely no reason to have this time gap where he's in heaven and we're down here trying to sort it all out with the help of the holy spirit, who could be an essence or a "person," depending on your point of view. But it's remarkably convenient. 4. I am very troubled by Paul's subsequent treatment and handling of women, particularly since it is very much at odds with how Jesus viewed and treated women. Even then, I found myself telling my husband that the submission of women to men seems just a little too convenient for my taste (yeah, I'm a troublemaker). The more I look into it, the less convinced I am that this religion is significantly different than any other religion, and I find myself more and more put off by the claims of superiority and the notion that it is the final answer, when so much of it is still up in the air. Christians boast about how rapidly Christianity grew. It's growth is nothing compared to the growth of early Islam. Ironically, Islam's early growth was largely due to the amassing and assimilation of knowledge at a time when Christianity was putting a real damper on the notion of having an educated and enlightened population. Moreover, Islam is firmly entrenched in an area where Christianity began. Am I the only one that finds that remarkable? What I find is that groups such as TWI and STF and even most long-time organized groups rely on that sense of community, tradition, with a measure of guilt thrown in to hold people. The claim of having the truth is just that - a claim that could be based on a false premise. Personally, I've been putting a bit of time into learning about the Law of Attraction (you are and attract what you think, or as a man thinks, so is he) and I'm not all that convinced that it's a load of rubbish. Although I do think the way TWI taught it was a load of rubbish.