JeffSjo

Thank you Geisha, My computer doesn't have the sound working now for this type of stuff. But I am pretty aware already of how much of the traditional Christian version of hell was taken straight from Greek/Roman mythology. So I understand the concept even if I can not hear your post right now. :)

O.K. Roy, So is it hard or impossible to deal with somebody believing that the part you believe is God is wrong? I find it hard, but not impossible. And in some cases considering my TWI and splinter group history I have found that input directly contradicting things that I "THOUGHT" were "the God part" have been the most valuable of all. But sometimes folks are soooo reactionary that they immediately get offended and declare the one who contradicts their own private "God part" as a heretic or worse. (added to for clarity)

Hi Act2, Even though my education level is not even in the same universe as those who you seek I am certain that "seniors' " signifies the plural form and "senior's" signifies a singular senior citizen. :)

Does anyone else thin this section in Corinthians is amazing if applied to a sect filled modern Christianity as I do. I think it is amazing to consider that what Paul revealed to the Corinthians applies to each and every denomination and sect in Christianity. The Lord will judge them all. What I wonder sometimes is how is it that so many of the individuals in sects of every kind think that all the others are going to hell!? I think that if anyone swings too far to one side of the pendulum they may think everyone but the folks in their own sect will burn. And at the other side of the pendulum IMO is assuming that we all should get along because the Lord will accept all sects. Paul runs right down the middle between these extremes IMO. But I find it fascinating that Paul, Peter, and Apollos were ministers and the Corinthians were fighting each other because of percieved differences, pride, just generally being puffed up name droppers, but maybe some genuine issues too, I cannot say for sure. Paul's warning to the other builders was "Take heed how you build" and then explaining how the Lord's fire would burn all the flamables in His day. I bet Apollos had a lot to consider when he considered how the Corinthians related to him, an eloquent, educated, believing Alexandrian Jew. I'm thinking that the next time Apollos saw people getting puffed up because of him he knew how to help the churches stop their carnality. After all...he got to witness Paul, the wise master builder deal with carnal, divisive loyalty to even good ministers in Corinth. (Edited for spelling and grammar) (added in editing) I think the opposite of Paul's example is when carnal leadership seeks to build their own power base and tries to carve out their own circles of influence after the founders death. They prove that they are far, far worse than minister wannabes. They then are the blind leading the blind into a ditch or wolves in sheep's clothing seeking to make prey of the Lord's flock.

In my part of Wisconsin we get many people from Minnesota who come here just because they may smoke in the bars. The bar owners around here are probably happy that they can't smoke in those bars across the river, it means more business for the Wisconsin bars. The thing I keep going back to about church in a bar is that I have a hard time picturing it not causing more problems than it solves. But who knows, it still might mange to help someone I guess?????

I bet Wierwille's justifications were just as sickening darlin..... But it seems to me that some sect leaders relish the absolute authority and potential for abuse that the position offers. But if Paul warned the Corintians and Apollos (who was a much less sickening man than Koresh or Wierwille) for the results of carnality in how folks relate to a genuine minister as Apollos (Paul's sentiment not mine) imagine how much trouble these sickening pervs are in, who do such things in God's name. Such abuses make it seem that how I refer to God's garbage fire is appropriate. (a little added in editing)

Hi Roy, It's been a while since we exchanged points and it did not go badly last time. :) One time I brought up that I would wait and see if a particular dream was from God or not. You took it well and admitted that such things would be proven and are worth questioning. It was a very good exchange that we left off without coming to any premature conclusions. I have heard that you have said a few things that the mods just flat out removed from GSC because of the content. If what I heard that you said was accurate I would have been more than happy to explore your willingness to debate issues. Since the mods removed the items I see no point in getting into any further than this though, so I will let it rest. I think you meant that "It does NOT mean I do not want to listen to yours." But that is not why I posted, it is a small thing. The reason why I posted is I am wondering how you would do if I chose to take you up on any given day on the fact that you feel that YOUR VIEW is GOD'S VIEW. And while I think it evident that we all have the right to seek God's will on any given topic as it relates to our own lives, I have never met anyone I would consider to be sound who could make such a boast as you did. Maybe you did not intend it as a blanket statement Roy, maybe I misunderstand how you really mean it, but if you made that claim in a particular topic that I found objectionable I would very likely take you up on your offer to debate and/or exchange opinions. (added the second paragraph in editing)

Maybe you will explain to me how this is suppose to work Shellon. But let's make it later, when your patient self can explain to my generally computer illiterate self. :)

I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. 1 Co 5:9 I guess sects whose top leadership have twisted, abusive, predatory, and systematized sex as TWI should have been easy to deal with after all, huh? But even folks who saw these things up close seemingly fell for the imaginary spirituality that TWI still promotes. LEADERS!? Hah, we shouldn't ever have even hung around them scripturally. But even if sex is not a particular sect's issue, will not the Lord judge any group who substitute carnal loyalty for spirituality? (A little added for clarity)

For when one says, "I am of Paul," and another, "I am of Apollos," are ye not carnal? 1Co 3:4 (NKJV in this post) Now if anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each one's work will become manifest; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one's work, of what sort it is. 1 Co 3:13 IMO, no matter which of the many, many Christian sects any of us happen to belong to it seems to me that the Lord has a plan. I think that even though many have built, many will burn. Many handle these scriptures like they are the arbiters of how these thing apply, as Wierwille and my former splinter group leader has done. People still say, "I am of Wierwille" and "I am of Barnard." Since they built their groups upon fleshy and carnal confessions such as these isn't almost a forgone conclusion considering the straightforward way that Paul warns Apollos and the church of Corinth about these carnal loyalties that they will inevitably reap the reward for their sects.....FIRE! (edited for grammar) Heck, as a matter of history, even Luther had people who after his passing talked about he was the Man of God for his Day and Time. And looking back it seems that they fell into error and left aside reason in their carnal loyalties for even Luther.

I hear you WG! But even a Missouri Mule can be reached sometimes. I say that to remind myself that perhaps any of us who happen to have a stubborn streak may be reached. But in your situation it seems that being cooped up with an unwise yet startlingly aggressive younger man who thinks he's doing a good job of trying to engage the things that are going on in your life would be understandingly uncomfortable. In your case it seems that a younger man being too full of himself and a ministerial method that IMO resembles carnival fortune telling in some ways did not work for you. But like TWI did for some, perhaps if this minister's methods had caused you to face some deep, dark secret along with him you might have even now been extolling this younger man's greatness as this younger man seems to be doing when it comes to his teachers. I'm just saying that for consideration WG. Not because I think you would have fallen for it. I'm just glad you did not. (edited for spelling and grammar)

This point has me thinking W.G. I've been thinking and it seems like that folks who are led into this kind of unhealthy kind of authority figure worship are most likely to be full of themselves. Maybe it is because they are youthful and in such a ministry have no example to show them the cost of being puffed up with pride as the scriptures say happens to young leadership. But is has struck me as something to consider that often those who idolize men tend to be very full of themselves as young men with a so-called ministry. I think Paul really, really meant it when he told people to count him as the Lord's servant and again to not think too highly of men in Corinth, beyond that which is written, which in my mind seems to be something that was clearly a very important issue to Paul. Not handling these things correctly seem to be more along the lines of being fleshly sect makers, and there is plenty of warnings about that kind of thing in the scriptures too. (spelling)

Thank you darlin, sweet heart. :wub: I keep considering what else to share. I thought about adding more details from my conversation with Mike, but not now anyhow. I thought about filling folks about the other folks that I talked to, but I wouldn't want to spill the beans for those thugs and cretins of Barnard's that are doubtlessly aware of what I am sharing here. besides the plight of some of these folks who think that serving Barnard is synonymous with serving God just tears my heart out and I do not really want to expose them to GSC and this strange, out in the broad daylight kind of thing here that they might not be able to deal with right now but maybe will be able to do someday. I am sure that eventually I'll want to add something.....

Too bad it worked that way for you W.G. I don't have any reason to doubt your assessment of the minister. But I do regret that your experience in that church was still something that you had to recover from, even if it wasn't as bad as your TWI aftermath.

Hi WG, I remember Jesus telling a man he healed after the fact,"Sin no more lest some worse thing come upon you." So while I hold it to be possible that this kind of thing may happen in truth, I hear no truth for you in how this minister talked to you about it. Jesus first healed the man then most likely told him something that the man himself recognized as true. And as such, Jesus words for that man must have an incredible weight of being true behind them. And whether or not the man sinned again in such a fashion I expect because Jesus was no false prophet that if the man sinned that something worse happened to him. But this minister's words don't seem any better than the words one may hear from a carnival fortune teller to me. Like a shotgun aimed in your general direct with any and all possibilities that you may even conjecture being the possible culprit. If you hadn't happen to be sitting on some deep, dark, hidden sin he is free to point out that he also said that because of fallen humankind it was inevitable, or just a fancy way of saying, "You were born that way." I can see why the effects of his words given in such a fashion may be as possibly harmful to you as any of the many, many false sayings given under the guise of spiritual authority as TWI leadership's many, many failings. Maybe the reason why you are recovering from this church better than TWI is because I would be willing to bet that even though this minister's belief system led to such foolish words that the minister and this church in particular do not deceive folks with their manic attempts to magnify insanely all false appearance of their own ruling ministries as TWI leadership cretins have done. Who knows, maybe this minister may clearly see his own sin someday? HHHMMM I haven't heard anything in particular in your story that would lead me to suspect that this minister was mean or cruel, so I think that I can not find it in me to get as worked up as I can get with TWI and my former splinter group leadership.

Hey T-Bone, T-Bone, T-Bone....HEY T-Bone,T-Bone,T-Bone..... T-BONE...T-BONE....T-BONE!!! Heeeeeyyyy...T-boneT-BoneT-BoneT-BoneTBone

Well, they didn't mention Wierwille's books....maybe they are really Wayfers. I would be very, very interested to see just exactly what they think is not devilish. But then again...I may feel obliged to poke it with my stick. I guess that would make me automatically devilish too. The King James Bible was thought of in most circles in the 1600's as a badly done compromise between the protestants of the day and catholic sensibilities that nobody liked except the British authorities who were pretty much forced to back it. They borrowed large tracts of Tyndale's translation but never even mentioned him in the credits....kind of like Wierwille did with many. Who's bright idea was it to proclaim the "King James Bible" the Word of God anyway?

Personally it seems butt ugly obvious to me that this supposedly bad environment here at the GSC is much healthier than these control-freak cowards who can't figure out how to work on figuring out their truth while treating folks with vastly different perspectives with a little respect. It would be most interesting to here exactly which questions inflamed Wierwille or troubled CES if anyone knows. For whatever it is worth I feel certain that these doubtlessly logical and pointed questions actually were good questions but ended up being thought of as dangerous and devilish. They thought they taught truth but could not even handle a challenging question or a challenging personality perhaps. They did not exactly live up to the examples of Solomon, Jesus Christ, Paul or others in the bible, did they? Dare I say their example in a gramatically correct sense was even anti-Christ? It sure looks opposite or opposing to me. (added in editing) Biblical examples of questions and answers that I can recall seem to have good and wise answers to hard questions on a public level. And no matter what any of us happen to believe these days I would hope that even those among us who do not hang our hats on the scriptures would have appreciated it if TWI or CES could at least scrounge together their best attempt to have handled public discourse according to the best biblical examples. But if anyone questions how I meant anti-Christ I can handle it here in a manner that I trust will not require a trip over to the doctrinal section to deal with. Anti as a Greek prefix simply refers to opposite or something in opposition as I can simply state it best. And in that sense the way that Wierwille handled this encounter I feel free to say without too many doctrinal questions is in opposition to how Jesus Christ handled questions. Eventually Jesus' critics were afraid to ask him questions, he did not shut their questions down, they did out of fear. So at best TWI and CES are a bunch of wannabes in comparison. At worst...well...we may need to take that point to the doctrinal section IMO. But I think that these wannabe turds like TWI and my former splinter group are able to handle things only behind closed doors and with evil intent directed at their harshest critics.....so much for "Love your enemies"..huh? and they can only destroy those who are timid or those who have already placed their lives in their hands as some kind of twisted and petty dungeon master might do to gamers that happen to be in their game.

OMG.....LMAO.....ROFL

I guess there is a big difference between Deutche and Douche.....

There two main conversations that I had with Mike. I am thankful that I got to talk to him because as I stated earlier, I think he is one of the men that has enough decency and toughness in him to stand up to Barnard if he chooses. To set the stage for my recent talk with Mike let me digress..... When he decided to keep his youngest son instead of giving him up for adoption as Barnard and co. desired he shared with me that day at the butcher shop that it was a hard decision for him to make and that he made it with a tremendous (IMO) amount of prayerful consideration. And when the first attempt to set up his youngest son with a good couple that were willing to take in his developmentally disabled child failed he shortly girded his loins (Biblical idiom) and changed his mind. I said,"I think you made a good decision Mike." Barnard's brother-in-law was obviously angry with me and said in front of everyone with a scowl on his face that some among us would never, ever be welcome on the property again. The fact that he was looking directly at me while he said it made it plain to me who he was referring to, but as River Road Fellowship had long since grown accustom to such abusive and threatening cowards who hide behind protocol and the like I do not know how many of the men present even caught it. Such cowardly proclamations as that leave the abusers able to deny accountability for their words and enable them to publicly project the prospect of mental instability at anyone such as myself who are willing to hold them accountable for their words and actions. But back to last Saturday's conversations with Mike..... I have just a couple of observations and considerations. The first is that their were two main conversations with Mike. The first one was right outside of the parking lot after I arrived and Steve was the only other one present. The second one started in the "beating room" but Mike asked me to go outside with him right after we started. I am not sure if Mike was directed to do that or just didn't want to have our conversation in front of everybody, maybe both. But outside the auctioneer was the only one within earshot. And no matter Mike's intentions were with that conversation I am sure that he knew the auctioneer was within earshot by the fact that Mike kept looking at him. It may be that Mike was trying to make me seem crazy in front of the auctioneer because in several cases he tried to deny or downplay things that he very well knew was the truth but I think may tend to embarrass River Road Fellowship in the eyes of the general public. No matter Mike's intentions my gut was to trust the auctioneer to listen to Mike and I if he chose and to make up his own mind. Mike had a couple of conversation habits that I consider symptomatic of trying to converse with a committed member of River Road Fellowship. The one he used the most is to respond to a point I made by saying,"I don't know what to say to that." In practise I believe it is a simple dodge of the point being made. And for a member of River Road Fellowship this condition of not knowing what to say is most often remedied by talking to leadership in order to be told what to say. The second dodge was Mike saying,"I don't know where you get that from." IMO this is another simple dodge for a member of River Road Fellowship. It has an element of denial to it and may have been used by Mike for the sake of the auctioneer or to attempt to salve Mike's own conscience, maybe both IMO. But my response went the route of something like,"Mike, it was exactly what happened, that is where I got it from." More than once I recalled exactly what someone else said in order to back up what I said. Like when I told Mike that I remember Amy saying in front of everybody,"We believe you Victor" right after he told us that we would be attacked by the locals or the government.

I too wonder what Wierwille may or may not have held himself accountable to at the end of his life too. But unfortunately it seems to me that the best TWI ever managed to do was supposedly quote obscure little sayings of Wierwille's that may or may not indicate that he took responsibility. That is how I remember POP as it relates to Wierwille's inner accountability. And also unfortunately but perhaps standard operating procedure for vary tip-top TWI leadership they seemed adept at giving out just enough information to allow anyone to come to whatever conclusion they wish while not being clear enough to allow any ACTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY for actions worthy of condemnation. But back to Waysider's point..... I think your assessment of how Wierwille formed his view of the spirit realm based mostly on his own delusions and insecurities is very reasonable Sirguessalot. And for me it also is reasonable that any organization built upon the self-serving delusions of a man like Wierwille would eventually allow the very perception of "devils" to be used to control people in such mean, damaging, sometimes evil, and often petty ways. And the consensus here seems to be that is exactly what happened in TWI. (edited for grammar)

I thought the analogy would be a better way than to just give you sh!t about your choices. (Pun intended ) Heck, I was in once too.

I hope you bring it to a good place, whatever it is. doechenozzle?... :o