Rocky

Wouldn't it be interesting to find a forensic psychiatrist/psychologist who would volunteer to examine as much as can be known about Wierwille to actually get a professional evaluation of whether he was a psychopath. Bolshevik's link suggests pretty strongly that he was.

Nailed it. People often don't realize that psychopaths' career choices are not limited to becoming serial murderers.

It's certainly not out of the question.

I find it interesting how cultural artifacts propagate. (that's not a Wierwilleism, but a reflection on Bolshevik's post).

Well, it was 42 years ago... but what I do remember is... the date I first met the guy who "got me in the word." It was October 31, 1974. I was in the USAF overseas on a Portuguese island. A small AFB. I had been attending chapel services and fellowships. This guy showed up and he had a confidence and claimed to have answers. The drunk story didn't really mean much to me (it was only the following summer when we had enough people to "run a class"). The combination of being on an isolated island, away from familiar American culture, not so many peers to have much in common with, and a confident guy who claimed to know "the answers to life." I continued to be a twi follower for the next 12 years. That would be 1986... after VPee died and Geer popped the poop paper on everyone.

That makes a helluva lot of sense!

More or less agree... well, with YOUR main point. Obviously, fiction writers do this all the time. But, Wierwille implied, even if not explicitly stating, that he was setting forth an account of something that actually happened. Indeed, the parable was obviously a story, never implied as being actual events. Yep, I was 20.

Because the head of the subculture did not understand, respect or honor anyone's space, boundaries or privacy. That's my observation. Though perhaps your question was rhetorical. ;)

Assumes facts not in evidence. Essentially, everything Wierwille taught has been brought into question. Basing your life on "spiritual warfare" might be a waste of your life's resources. It's also part of the fundamentals of what enabled the "overlords" to gain control of the lives and minds of so many people. Basing your life on loving your family and community and serving out of love seems a much more worthy endeavor. Yes, in this case, I do see it as "either/or."

Hate toward you? Nah... just disagreement. Like, disagreeing that the issue for many here is "revenge." I would suggest you may simply not be aware of the emotional ramifications of the spiritual abuse many of us lived through.

You think you stipulated appropriately? Is that the same as you believing you made your point adequately clear? If somebody doesn't understand the message you intended to send, whose responsibility is it to clarify... in the event the reader/listener asks for clarification or otherwise indicates that what they understood you to mean is not what you intended to say?

I second that motion! One interesting (to me anyway) side note on SIT. I took the FLAP class in June or July 1975. Just under two years earlier, I was in tech training at Keesler AFB, MS. I attended a charismatic fellowship during those months (was there about six months). During that time, they tried to help me SIT but I could never get it. I didn't realize how freakin' easy it was and that all I had to do was "start moving my lips, etc...." Don't be. You're human. That you are able to be aware of it and admit it demonstrates significant emotional intelligence.

Good one... worth a chuckle. ;)

Expecting to take hits, eh? Perhaps that would be because you are projecting your expectations as such. I would suggest that you might benefit from some of the research of Daniel Goleman. As far as rules for staying on topic, wouldn't that be a courtesy to your fellow posters? ;)

I think a more fair characterization would be concerted effort to debunk Wierwille's teachings, which contain a LOT of bunk. Eradicate what value?

Very funny... thanks for posting.

True. Whether or not there's anything to be afraid of depends on how you respond to people disagreeing with you. But disagreement really isn't a bad thing. At minimum, it provides a framework on which those nuances Spectrum mentioned can be expounded on or expanded. And it really takes more than one person and at least a little bit of disagreement to come to greater understanding... that's how I look at it anyway.

Fear is... Fear is a state induced by perceived danger or threat that occurs in certain types of organisms, which causes a change in metabolic and organ functions and ultimately a change in behavior, such as fleeing, hiding or freezing from perceived traumatic events. Fear in human beings may occur in response to a specific stimulus occurring in the present, or in anticipation or expectation of a future threat perceived as a risk to body or life. The fear response arises from the perception of danger leading to confrontation with or escape from/avoiding the threat (also known as the fight-or-flight response), which in extreme cases of fear (horror and terror) can be a freeze response or paralysis. In humans and animals, fear is modulated by the process of cognition and learning. Thus fear is judged as rational or appropriate and irrational or inappropriate. An irrational fear is called a phobia. But yes, one of the main themes of the FLAP class (besides establishing Wierwille as the only authority for all things spiritual) was to get people to block that warning system. Btw, I realize what you mean when saying "everything is GOD'S." That's the rationalization for plagiarism. But really, everything was V-Pee's. He forbade anyone from having a name on any of the "research" publications... except his name, that is. It all belonged to him.

You nailed it quite well. Reading the book, it sheds tremendous light on how I bought into the con. Reflecting back on a Bolshevik thread, how to prevent cults... it seems one of the best things we can do is teach our children how to recognize cons and give them a clear sense of meaning in this life. Of course that's not to stifle curiosity and exploration. But perhaps if we are successful in giving a child confidence in an emotional framework, it can prevent some of the same mishaps we stumbled through. For the record, in Feb 2015, I flew to Washington, DC (and boy were my arms tired) to observe oral arguments at the Supreme Court. I landed at Reagan Int'l Airport and waited 40 minutes for luggage. But I got conned into a cab ride that probably cost me twice as much to get to the hotel as I should have had to pay. The guy grabbed my bag and quickly headed to the parking garage, NOT to the cab stand. But it was too late, if I wanted to not lose my bag, I felt I had to follow. The cab ride cost me $45, but should have cost $20. I got conned. In this case because I was a novice traveler to DC.

It was all a big con game. Wierwille was a masterful con artist. If he had one iota of empathy, his organization would have been much different. No, it was all about him. The Word of Wierwille is the Will of Wierwille. And if you "went corpse" and didn't make your life into serving his purpose, what did that make you? Not a good doulos, that's for sure. Yeah, part of the con was to teach indoctrinate the sheep that to be honored by God with rewards on judgment day , you had to be a slave.

Not only is plagiarism fraud, but what does it reveal (once you realize it's in play in the situation you're considering) about a man who built a subculture around other people's research, teaching and "fellowship?" Do (or did) you know, from your history and experience, anyone who exhibited the "dark triad" of psychological traits? "Lurking beneath the surface of people who use others to their own advantage is psychology’s “Dark Triad.” Defined as a set of traits that include the tendency to seek admiration and special treatment (otherwise known as narcissism), to be callous and insensitive (psychopathy) and to manipulate others (Machiavellianism), the Dark Triad is rapidly becoming a new focus of personality psychology." We all (who followed Wierwille and those who arose in his wake) fell for one of the biggest and oldest confidence games. For the last 15 years, people have speculated on the degree to which Wierwille was sincere or whether he knew from the start of his ministry that is was all BS. This thread, and the very succinct opening post to it, boil down all of those discussions to the very essence.

That's a pretty vague question. At minimum, wouldn't you need to define your terms?

Well, when you put it that way, of course massive amounts of new information, before people process and organize it for themselves, can be very confusing.

Well, I can't speculate as to degrees of control... but I think the research forensic psychologist Maria Konnikova set forth in The Confidence Game: why we fall for it... every time might provide some key insight. A compelling investigation into the minds, motives, and methods of con artists—and the people who fall for their cons over and over again. While cheats and swindlers may be a dime a dozen, true conmen—the Bernie Madoffs, the Jim Bakkers [and I will add the Victor Wierwilles and Craig Martindales, and their successors], the Lance Armstrongs—are elegant, outsized personalities, artists of persuasion and exploiters of trust. How do they do it? Why are they successful? And what keeps us falling for it, over and over again? These are the questions that journalist and psychologist Maria Konnikova tackles in her mesmerizing new book. For some reason, the link to Amazon.com for The Confidence Game doesn't seem to want to take. But if you go to Amazon and search for the book, it's very insightful.