Rocky

Intriguing indeed... especially if I still held to the intrigue of fundamentalism and parsing of meanings of individual words. Note: I do not mean that in any way as criticism of you or your reply to Skyrider. Of course, we DO describe harmful, controlling pseudo-Christian cult leaders and the systematizing of deception and control.

Failures of imagination.

It's available, though not for free, on Amazon.

IOW, synchronicity is subjective. It is perhaps both intangible and tangible at the same time.

I should also note the book Jesus and John Wayne goes beneath the surface to explore how religious culture holds a good bit of responsibility (blame?) for the abusive environment pervasive in too many Christian churches/denominations over the last century or so. We know Wierwille holds plenty of responsibility. It's important, IMO, to consider the religious culture from which he emerged.

Women Talking won, for Sarah Polley and Miriam Toews, the Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay I haven't viewed the movie yet, but I hope to very soon. It occurs to me this story may provide an archetype of how to conduct a discussion forum like GSC. Do nothing. Stay and fight. Or leave. In 2010, the women of an isolated religious community grapple with reconciling a brutal reality with their faith. Director Sarah Polley Writers Sarah Polley Miriam Toews https://ew.com/the-awardist-podcast/women-talking-ben-whishaw-claire-foy-awardist-podcast/ is a film about community — so perhaps it's no surprise that the cast found real-life fellowship on set. Writer-director Sarah Polley adapted her film from Miriam Toews' 2018 novel, which was in turn based on a true story in Bolivia. The film centers on an isolated group of Mennonite women, all of whom have suffered violent attacks, drugging, and repeated sexual assaults. When the women learn that the perpetrators are men in their own community, they decide to meet secretly in a remote hayloft to decide their next steps. Their options: remain silent, fight back, or leave and try to forge a new future elsewhere. It's heavy subject matter. But there's also a surprising lightness to Women Talking, and the film shines with a communal warmth and flickering humor that lights up even the darkest moments.

Then there's Paine's exposition on The Age of Reason. Paine challenged superstition, but didn't prove the impossibility of synchronicity.

Oh. Okay. How would you explain how such "knowing" came or comes to be? I am aware there are things beyond what humans are capable of perceiving by way of our five senses. I also understand such phenomena aren't limited to bible believing Christians. Others, not from a Christian perspective, I've read describe such as synchronistic events.

Always. Would you please explain how you came to believe spiritual understanding goes further? I don't believe that claim, but I'm open (at the moment) to considering it.

A wonderful description of the very human need for belonging, which is the real reason many of us "stayed too long" after finding out there was more to twi than getting that human need addressed.

People "understand" what's familiar to them. Isn't that really just another way to grasp the concept of indoctrination? It's in the news these days from the fearful perspective of parents afraid of the indoctrination their kids might get in public schools, right? Do we want our children indoctrinated to accept reason or superstition? IOW, do we view indoctrination from a perspective of the future, or from our own accumulated body of knowledge and how we understand the world? Well, children are inherently gullible, aren't they? Weren't we, way back when? It seems to me Raf made a reasonable, likely quite sound argument. "Magic decoder ring" seems like an apt description of what was taught in the Advanced Class on PFLAP. I remember clearly, during that indoctrination session, pondering my thoughts (stream of consciousness) wondering whether I was receiving revelation. Then in residence with the 9th corpse (just a few short months hence) when the entire student body at Emporia was asked for clues to some actual mystery (not so fictional whodunit) and all I could come up with was one person's name. My thoughts were out of the blue and irrational. I offered my "revelation." My "insight" was never acted on.

Geer? I emphatically recommend people read Jesus and John Wayne. I got it at my local public library where I like to check most books. If I think they are important enough, I'll buy a copy. I'm hoping to pass my Kindle library as an inheritance to my grandchildren (hopefully not soon).

For example, (page 12) The evangelical consumer marketplace was by then [1970s] a force to be reckoned with, but this expansive media network functioned less as a traditional soul-saving enterprise and more as a means by which evangelicals created and maintained their own identity--an identity rooted in "family values" and infused with a sense of cultural embattlement. Christian publishing, radio, and television taught evangelicals how to raise children, how to have sex, and whom to fear. And Christian media promoted a distinctive vision of evangelical masculinity. Finding comfort and courage in symbols of a mythical past, evangelicals looked to a rugged, heroic masculinity embodied by cowboys, soldiers, and warriors to point the way forward. For decades to come, militant masculinity (and a sweet, submissive femininity) would remain entrenched in the evangelical imagination, shaping conceptions of what was good and true.

So far, I'm impressed with how Du Mez isn't rehashing current history but providing intriguing insight shedding light on how women's points of view, voices, and such had been silenced by evangelical teachings and practice. Highly readable as opposed to boring academic speak.

Alas, one of the limitations of this form of communication. As an aside, I'm confident our "good friend" Mike might be able to provide some insight. So, otherwise, if I understand your point, you posed a rhetorical question, for all readers to ponder thoughtfully.

Yes, and examining the content and delivery of the perpetrator is, I hope, a potentially helpful exercise to further said goal.

Go for it.

I know that. As far as people not rejecting Wierwilleism, or any other cult, I don't know why. I suspect some cult researchers may have some insight. I haven't read them yet.

I appreciate your point. However, even (and especially) movies "based on _____ book" is not the same as claiming the movie is factually accurate. Take care.

That wasn't my point. Stories are stories. Everyone sees them differently and tells them the way they see them. Hopefully someone with a flair for words will write a history from a perspective closer to Lonnie's.

Recently, YouTube's algorithm presented this clip of some charlatan named Wierwille to me. I watched a little bit of the clip. Victor, taken by himself, without knowing any other background, can be overwhelmingly convincing. He convinced me 48 years ago. I followed his ministry for 12 years. It made a lasting impact on me. Especially when I realized there was more to him, his message, and his life than is conveyed in his preaching, including this video. Therefore, I invite everyone (again) to read UNDERTOW and the thousands of first hand accounts of the real Victor Wierwille you can find here at the Greasespot Café. https://youtu.be/LLP_lxLZPpM GSC is a good place to tear apart the message of Victor Wierwille.

Btw, someone close to my heart (ME) wrote this about UNDERTOW a few years ago: “Undertow is a gift to young people and their families who want to understand the inner workings of fundamentalist cults. Charlene Edge’s experience parallels much of my own twelve years as a follower of Victor Paul Wierwille’s ministry. Undertow sheds light on the decisions, questions, and longings that she encountered, and ultimately worked her way through. In the words of Canadian author Matshona Dhliwayo, ‘Books are kinder teachers than experience.’ May Undertow be a kinder teacher to you than Charlene’s seventeen years in The Way International were to her.” —Steve Muratore, publisher of award-winning political blog the Arizona Eagletarian

Elizabeth C. writes: I've read a lot of critiques of the research methods, unorthodox teachings, and spiritual abuse of the The Way International (TWI), but Undertow by Charlene Edge was the first look inside the research department I've ever seen. TWI billed itself as a research ministry. The introductory class focused on how to study the Bible, looking at Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic words, examining the context surrounding key verses, or explaining historical customs. Sounds great, right? Well, it turns out behind this veneer were wrong assumptions, shoddy Greek, and half-baked theories propped up with the idea that someday someone would find a text to substantiate the teaching. Edge writes about her recruitment into the Way, her many years in different positions, and ultimately her realization that the research department was a sham. Her disillusionment was similar to what I felt when I ultimately left, and it was validating to read that her inside knowledge corroborated what I’d felt for so long. Many people have left TWI thinking that the original teachings were good, but something got corrupted over the years. Edge shows that the whole foundation was corrupt. In addition to the look inside the research department, I enjoyed learning more about events that I only remember from the perspective of a small child. My parents joined around the same time as Edge, so it was interesting to read an experience similar to their early days. I also liked how she described the way Wierwille often accused people of not being spiritually on top of things. This vague standard continues to contribute to my anxiety, and it was helpful to see numerous examples of people being criticized over this. This memoir is for you whether you simply like reading about cults or especially if you’re a former member of TWI or one of the splinter groups. It’s available from Edge’s website or anywhere books are sold.

Hey Exidor, I haven't viewed the movie though I first heard about it weeks ago. IMO, the key to your post is "another side to the story." Do you know if the movie claims to be a true and factual rendering of the history in question? All stories telling about events which happened have "another side," don't they whether they claim to be a faithful? Everybody who witnessed the event(s) in question remember them differently to some degree? By all means, tell your side of the story wherever and whenever you can.