satori001

If something truly nauseating, like seeing TWI's behavior first-hand, does not nauseate you, it means you have become hardened to it. When the nausea response returns, I would think, it is a sign of returning to health. That's not to say we should remain forever nauseated, but it's a stage through which we pass, as with many other addictions.

jen-o,I have no friends when it comes to unbelieving ways. I'd get my needs and wants parallel if I were you.

George, you wouldn't have such crappy taste in gifts if you were walking by the spirit. (Just a little loving reproof - please accept with all due humility and thank me next year.)

The question presupposes there is uniformity in either male or female homosexual behavior. I think every case is unique, and the result of individual and unique personalities, as much as the larger culture. To use a couple of stereotypes, "bull dykes" are probably as a rule less accepted (or socially acceptable) than "lipstick lesbians." It may have to do with social manners or just appearances. People rely on visual and behavioral cues to navigate social interactions. When confronted by someone whose appearance/behavior is atypical, others may become defensive, and all the moreso if the person projects aggression or hostility. Masculinized women tend to project, if not cultivate, a "testosteronized" persona, which is by nature aggressive and territorial. They would probably not exemplify the Dale Carnegie principles. Feminized men, on the other hand, may exhibit more passivity, which is perceived as less threatening by most people. Because it may also perceived as weakness, it may bring out the opportunistic and more aggressive, territorial nature in ordinarily agreeable, heterosexual/masculine males. That said, I think lesbians usually have it easier in general, and if not, it's due to their own issues. I've had lesbian friends who were extraordinarily hostile toward the heterosexual roles we take for granted. They sometimes referred to "straight" females as "brood sows," among other things. On one level, they seem to have been traumatized by the image of heterosexual behavior, especially male aggression. Ironically, it's the same behavior they often tried so hard to emulate. Why do you ask?

LLP, he was (and is) a "shining example," but it should take on a new meaning for you now. It's unlikely anyone will jump in with "we told you so," because we've (mostly) all been there. And your feelings are appropriate, by the way. They are telling you the truth.

Isn't it just amazing how Craig just manifests his believing and excels in just every category of life? I mean, I began to read this thread, having reserved every last ounce of contempt for someone who would molest a child, and Craig barges in, like some snarling, drooling creature in the throes of a rabid frenzy, and steals the show! Who else but "Reverend Martindale" would publically "ream" a dead woman - who JUST died, and in childbirth for God's sake, and her husband too? What sorta surprises me is that he didn't "ream" the baby too. Hey, give him some credit. He probably did. If this wasn't a true, psychotic episode, it is only because he must have chosen only to behave like a psychotic. Psychotics generally don't have that choice. They just are nuts. Mental freakshows. But Craig, he was always WORKING at it. It takes a man like Craig Martindale to renew his mind enough to act the part, and so convincingly. And on God's behalf, folks. In God's name. And all those people sat around and watched him do it, and... what were they thinking? What were any of us thinking?

Gosh you guys. Can't you overlook these little matters when you think about how big the Word was moving in people's lives? Kids cry no matter what. When you realize that His kids (and really, they are truly His kids, right?) were surrounded by God's people, endeavoring to bring His matchless Word to a new generation, you can really believe that He healed their little bruised arms and egos. As for the sex stuff, it's a blessing that must be understood in its spiritual context, which is His will for us to live more than abundantly. Natural man has perverted it in such a way that children are deprived of the opportunity to bless their elders in a beautiful way. The Family Corps leadership were (in some cases) blazing a trail of the renewed mind in these key areas of blessing. It's a pity that unbelieving parents and others in a world in darkness would deprive the household of such a blessing. Thank goodness for GB, and Doctor, and other leaders who walk the walk according to the rightly divided Word, no matter what the world says. Amen. I think I feel sick.

There's also a hypnotic drug going around ex-cult sites called Credulex, which is slipped into your Koolaid unawares. It makes you believe whatever you read on the internet without first checking it out. Beware!!

RL, there was a discussion of WTB on the Open Forum. You may need to go back a few pages, but it wasn't that long ago.

"A" for effort. But... UH, why is Slick Vic's mouldering, frost-bitten, Drambuie-breathed ghost made out to be some kind of glorified Ghost-of-Christmas-Past/Santa/Moses? Why is he, the author of corruption at Way World, taking revenge on his greatest and most LOYal protege? Envy, is all I can think, but you imply some kind of retribution. For what? Then again, Craig hasn't been tiptoeing through the tulips outside the Corps Chalet for some time. Seems a bit dated.

BF, can you imagine any circumstances where someone's behavior was so wicked they might just belong in Hell? Any at all? As for the "crimes" of plagiarism and adultery, you've removed them from the context in which they were committed, making them sound so casual, so harmless. I don't think anyone really minds if you plagiarize the back of a cereal box to make a prop for the school play. Nor do too many more people get worked up if adultery is committed between equals, where the marital status of the participants is rocky to begin with. But here we have a self-proclaimed "man of God," ripping off the teachings of others, presumably not so he can share the light (he could do that anyway) but to ELEVATE himself to a status where he might have considerable power over others. We also have a man who, as a self-appointed MOG, preyed upon women, some very young, others married and until then, faithful, using his "calling" and "godly vocation" to seduce them, or just as often as not, intimidate them into bed. How does that grab ya, Dave? What if she were your little sister, or your wife? Or your very own daughter? Hell, what if she was only just in your fellowship, and you were her "leader?" And slick Vic or Craig cornered her, and forced himself upon her? Would you wonder if God set aside a place like Hell just for such Wiermin (pr. "vermin") as Wierwille? And of course, where Rat Man goes, so goeth the Loy Wonder. Would you just tell her to "get over it?"

Jesse is just keeping the faith alive, since the facts are against him. It's an ugly little faith, but it keeps the cash rollin' in.

He sounds like a really great guy, so let him down gently. From what little I know, she's way out of his league. On a side note, to spare anyone the possibility of embarrassment, this could be a good example of something that could have been a "private topic."

Belle, The picture is the "map." The term "mind-mapping" isn't really accurate. The map's center represents an idea, not a mind. Each line, an aspect of that idea. You're familiar with outlines. It's another way of outlining an idea. Rather than using a linear, stepped format: I.World History A.American History 1.Revolutionary War a.Revolutionary Generals i.George Washington It places the core idea (like "world history") at the center, and branches out in different directions. Why bother? Well, if the brain works better with spatial diagrams than linear lists, why not? We're each different, and just as some of us love math and others hate it, this technique will appeal to some and not others. It appeals to me, I think, but I'm wondering well how others have made it work because I may benefit from their experience. Looks like there aren't many devotees around here though.

Those of you who don't wish to judge - I absolve you of that task. But don't go away. Without judging yourselves, you can imagine how they might be judged by another, can't you? Again, we are not going by TWI's suspect theology, which interpreted the bible for us for years, and which has taught us a form of "grace" which permitted LCM & VPW to sin big, that it may likewise abound. Again, we need not be the judge to say "fry," to say, they'd probably fry. The question is, do you see them poolside in Paradise, sippin' pina coladas and checkin' out the chickies again, just like old times? Or do you see them sweating out the big fire, paying for the lives they poisoned for a hell of a long time to come? Think of it as a hypothetical prediction if you prefer that to playing final judge.

No. I asked for opinions. Having no opinion is not an opinion. So why say anything at all? It's more of a derail than your first non sequitur.

Okay, for those of you not willing to play St. Peter at the Pearly Gates (I hadn't intended that anyway) - where would you EXPECT VPW & LCM might end up, based on the lives they've lived, based on the information you have now?

dmiller, I'm not comfortable with your relativity perspective. Why do VPW & LCM's decades of abuse, in the name of God for that matter, need to be seen in light of our own failings? Shouldn't they stand on their own?

So johniam, where are you saying the original idea came from? And what is the acceptable alternative to eternal punishment? Eternal reward? There are two choices here.

OK, it's not up to us. Rather than debate the doctrine of "once saved, always saved," let's just say (for argument's sake) that eternal salvation is based, not on reciting Romans 10:9 & 10 with all the conviction you can muster, but upon the content of your character, which is to say, what you've done with your life when the book finally closes. Are any lives redeemable? How despicable a person should one be, to finally trip beyond the pale? Let's try to omit references to Hitler and Osama bin Laden, and keep the focus on more accessible "evil-doers," such as Vic and Craig. Which is it for these two? Sky or fry? Opinions only.

Mind Mapping was invented (or maybe popularized) by Tony Buzan, who wrote numerous books on the topic of thinking effectively and creatively. So you were able to adapt it to your own purposes. I guess the colors and doodles could tap into the subconscious currents of free-association, which may offer the occasional glimmer of a new perspective. Like panning a creek for bits of gold.

It seems to be a "right brained" attempt to make something holistic and useful from the "left brain's" catalog of data.

Does that brain look a little like Sponge Bob, but without the pants?

Wasn't a version of this taught to the Corps? Could have been as a note-taking technique. Knowing TWI, they would have shunned a term like "mind mapping." Too hookey-pookey.

What is it? Do you use it? Do you use MM software? Is it a drug/cult/escape strategy/gimmick/geek toy/snake oil/fad or other foolishness?