shazdancer

Yeah, Belle, John married me to my first husband, and he was my Limb leader in NY, but that's about it. I agree with you about the "I love you" part. I'm willing to chalk it up to a sincere desire on his part to love everybody, but I also get the sense of him maybe using that to try to win me over. My boyfriend half-jokingly told me I should write him back and say I have a very jealous partner! Regards, Shaz

Dear Oldies, I have a posthumous bio of Wierwille that was handed out at Rock '85 (how I got it, I have no idea). It says, "...when Rev. Wierwille was ready to pursue his doctorate, he decided that attending Oxford University was not as important to him as studying under Dr. H. Ellis Lininger, a well-known homiletician who was then president of Pikes Peak Bible Seminary and Burton College of Manitou Springs, Colorado." A quick Google search of Lininger turns up nothing about him except that Wierwille studied with him. Hmm, not so well-known? Okay, so let's say it's true: Wierwille put in the work. He could have just said that he studied under Lininger, but he didn't do that. He insisted on tacking "Doctor" to his name, even though the institution was unaccredited, then OR later. That's about like saying that I read all the same books and wrote some papers, so I want to be called a doctor of mathematics, or science, or whatever. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. The work needs to be reviewed by professors of an accredited institution. So does that mean that Wierwille taught bunk? Not necessarily. There are two aspects of TWI here. One is the doctrine, the other is the behavior. Many people were hurt by the actions of Wierwille and his minions. Even if the doctrine were perfect (which neither you nor I believe), still Wierwille's behavior, to put it mildly, sucked, and many were hurt. They need to know that Wierwille had an agenda that (at least in part) was not about helping people. It was about power. Regards, Shaz

Just to clear up a point... Princeton Theological Seminary is not a part of Princeton University. It is a legitimate institution, but is not in any way affiliatred with Princeton U. Our own Plotinus is a grad of Princeton Theological, and has mentioned this before. Regards, Shaz

I originally was not going to respond to sky4it's post about "an attitude of pride or superiority" of those who belong to other churches, but I think it is absolutely relevant to JAL's posts. Here is part of his response to my letter, quoted above. (Part of it, addressing me personally, he did not give permission to post, although I have asked him if I may.) Hi {Shaz,} **** I agree-in TWI we did often forget the weightier matters, but please remember that STFI/CES is not TWI, and the closer you look, the clearer you'll see how different it is. If you were familiar with us and what we have done and are doing, you'd know that we are doing all we can to learn truth from any source. In fact, that is why we looked into Momentus, and we have taken flak for being so eclectic. I've often drawn the analogy that we are perpetual trick-or-treaters, going from ministry to ministry to see what they have to offer. "OK, we'll pass on the apple with the razor blade in it--we'll take the Snickers." Then we put it in our growingly diverse bag and move on. As one who could very possibly be considered "the apostle to ex-Way saints," I fully understand and appreciate what people like you are trying to do on G-spot. That is because I have done the same thing for 17+ years at kitchen tables around the country, as well as via countless phone calls, emails and letters. And the truth is that what we are doing is the most effective thing I've seen to heal the hearts of people abused by that system. That is simply my experience, and Those encounters were far more than "sound bites," and, I'd guess, even more personal that most G-spot interactions. Please don't hear me saying that no one else is doing anything. Obviously you were badly burned by TWI, and judging from the generalities you speak about Christian ministries, it sounds as if you have since had little contact with any that are doing much good. Again, STFI/CES is not TWI. We do not "just throw Scripture at people," and yes, we have referred many believers to many sources of help that are outside our immediate bailiwick. I must say that it is sad to me that you do not seem to be able to make the connection that if someone is truly "believing God" (that is, His Word), he will do what really helps another person. 1 John 2:5 says that if one hides the Word in his heart (and obeys it), that (and only that) will enable him to maturely love others. May I suggest that, like hundreds of other dear ex-Way saints who I've met through the years, you are still bound by the fear of getting "bitten by another dog." I deal with this analogy in more detail in a tape I did in 1991 titled "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Fear But Were Afraid to Ask," and much of the information about the mechanics of fear came from a book about trading in the stock market. Here's how it works: You were "bitten" by TWI (the dog). From then on, when you see another "dog," a very real fear rises up within you. The question is not whether the fear is real--it is. The question is whether or not the fear is VALID based upon the circumstances, and if we are speaking of literal dogs, such fear is not valid 95% of the time, because most dogs just want to play with you or be petted. So how do you find out what kind of dog you are dealing with? You must push through your internal fear and interact with the pooch. there are ways to do so more carefully, but it must be done if you are to experience the benefits of loving and being loved by a dog. Ditto for a ministry. If you only stand at a distance, allowing your fear to dictate your never getting close, you will never benefit from the ministries that really could help you. Perhaps that is one reason why our websites are proving to be so beneficial in people getting to know us "from a distance." The more they read, the more they like what we have to offer. And when they work up the courage to come to a f-ship or a weekend, most are thrilled, and that is a fact. I love you. John {edited to take my real name out of the post, tho' it probably is not that important!}

Dear sky4it and oldiesman, My experience differs with yours. I have visited several churches since leaving TWI, and I worked at one church (for their dance choir and performing arts center) while I was still in. I have also worked alongside many people who have no problem speaking about their involvement in mainstream churches. Although I got an elitest vibe from a few, mostly I found people to be very laid back and tolerant about their faith. People go to a church that they feel comfortable with. They probably agree with most of the tenets of that church, or they wouldn't go (except for some who feel an obligation to attend the church of their family's tradition). But there is a difference between going where you feel comfortable and hoping that you are believing rightly, versus "knowing" that you are right and feeling a need to demonstrate that to others. Regards, Shaz

Hi, everybody, John wrote back yesterday, checking to make sure that I posted both of his emails. He also said he would not discuss Momentus via email, there was too much to say, but he would be happy to speak to me by phone (I declined the offer). He DID say that a lot of the criticism he had read about it (he didn't say where) was "bunk." So there ya go. He also asked if I still live in NY -- I don't. Here's my reply to John: Dear John, Yes, thanks, I did receive both emails, and they are posted on Greasespot. I've got to say that I hope you also will not "throw out the baby with the bathwater," and continue to appreciate what people from all walks of life can teach us. I think that many times in The Way, we reveled in making the Bible "fit like a hand in a glove," but forgot the weightier matters of walking in love, understanding, and mercy with one another. The Word was written for people, not people made for the Word. Truly helping one another cannot be done in a sound bite, in my opinion, but comes from taking the time to listen and care. I am glad that in my instance, you took some time to listen and consider. The regulars on Waydale (and now Greasespot) took the time to post about what was going on behind the scenes at The Way International. Being able to ask questions and read postings helped heal the hurt and confusion I had over that time in my life. I hope that you and others who have gone on with the things of God will appreciate that we are not just a bunch of bitter naysayers, but a motley crew that takes a few moments out of our regular lives to help those that are still hurting and still looking to understand what happened to them in The Way. 'Course, if you don't understand it, we'll keep on doing it anyway... ;)--> I also have a personal concern that those of you in a Christian ministry be aware that sometimes, people need immediate help that is beyond quoting Scripture at them. "Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime" is all well and good, but I would add, "Teach a starving man to fish, and he might die before he learns how." I hope that your organization is not against referring people in need to experts that can help, be they doctors, lawyers, mental health professionals, welfare agents, detox programs, or what have you. It is not a shame to get help when help is needed. I think The Way was so caught up in "believing God" that they sometimes did not steer people to the help they needed in a crisis. No, I haven't lived in NY in a long time, although I have visited back from time to time. I currently live in Maine. Excuse me if I don't take you up on your offer to call, but sorry that you do not have the time to discuss Momentus. Take care, {Shaz}

Welcome to the Internet, where people say a lot of strange things for a lot of strange reasons, but do it more often online, because they are anonymous. ("Just because I could," as Clinton said.) Regards, Shaz

Ah but maptl, if the leaders actally trusted us to be able to walk with God by ourselves, they couldn't sell nearly as many tapes amd classes.... ;)--> Shaz PS -- If you break your paragraphs up into smaller ones, they will be easier to follow on the computer screen -- thanks, appreciated your post.

Nice post, WW. You hit my point exactly, that we have a lot to learn from "mainstream" Christians in the areas that most matter. Regards, Shaz

Additional from John, came in last night... P.S. to my 8/17 reply: You said that in TWI there was "arrogance in our knowledge of the Bible versus the rest of Christianity's." I agree, and I think in large part it was because the man at the top, VPW, had a big chip on his shoulder toward the denomination that fired him. That, plus his own ego, contributed to our adopting an "us vs. them" mentality, and the persecution we got from other Christians served to exacerbate that. The way we have put it through the years is that, generally, we did not relate to the truth we had in the most godly way. Too often we used it as a bludgeon against those who disagreed with us. But that doesn't mean it was not still truth. In Scripture, there are two sides to the "truth coin," and in TWI we basically saw only one. The first is doctrinal/propositional: "Your word is truth" (John 17:17). We had that one down pretty well--we knew the Word. The other is practical/relational: "I am the truth" John 14:6). We too often missed that one--we didn't live it. The point of knowing the truth is to BE like Jesus in the way we relate to other people. Rather "Gnostically," we reveled in the knowledge we had, but often failed to apply it by BEING true, that is, living it in love. HOWEVER, in regard to what we were taught versus what most other Christians believe, the fact remains that we did hear the Word as it had not been taught since the first century. How could that be? Simple--most everyone else has been believing too many Roman Catholic fables. Now we dare not backlash into a mindset like: "Well, I don't know if what I was taught was right or not." Or: "How could everyone else be wrong about the Trinity?" etc. Rather than throw out everything we were taught, we have diligently studied it all, deleted some significant errors, and gone far beyond where we were in TWI. Actually, it was VPW himself who often told me that he hoped "you young guys" (sigh) will go much farther than I have. All of the prevailing errors believed by the vast majority of Christians are easily traceable by studying both the Word and Church history. I don't think it is at all "arrogant" to say that what we teach is far more biblical than what most Christians are taught. It is simply factual. Think about it: either the Bible does or does not teach the following: Jesus is God, a part of the "Trinity." There are no "dispensations" ("administrations") in Scripture, and the Church is a continuation of God's program for Israel. A Christian can lose his salvation if he behaves in such a way that...well, it's not exactly clear, but.... The Book of Revelation is regarding Christians, who will go through part or all of the Tribulation. If a Christian dies, he is actually still alive in some incorporeal form. Christians will live forever in "heaven," while unbelievers will suffer fiery torment forever in "hell." The "Holy Spirit" is the third person of the "Trinity." Speaking in tongues, etc. are "gifts" of the spirit, and only some Christians can do them. God is in control of everything that happens, and nothing happens unless He wills or allows it. God has absolute foreknowledge, that is, "in the beginning" He saw the future as a present reality, including the socks you are currently wearing. We do not believe that any of the above statements are biblical, and we have books and/or tapes that set forth from Scripture what we do believe it says regarding these absolutely critical issues. What is at stake? The quality of your daily life. Why? Because John 8:32 says that knowing the truth will make you free, and the converse must be that believing error puts you in some degree of bondage (or bandage).The more important the particular truth, the greater the freedom--or the bondage. If our work does not convince you of our biblical position, God bless you. All we ask is that you thoroughly consider it. Honestly, most of those who have done so have been very blessed.

Quick answer, it's the Pressmans, who run a well-regarded clinic for people with post-traumatic stress disorder, in New York State, if memory serves. From the book's bio: "Stephanie Donaldson-Pressman is a therapist, consultant, and trainer. She is known for her work with dysfunctional families, particularly with survivors of incest. Robert M. Pressman, PhD is the editor-in-chief and president of the Joint Commission for the Development of the Treatment and Statistical Manual for Behavioral and Mental Disorders." Regards, Shaz

Yeah, sockster, I think that has been my one-note song of late, that God's Word was written for His people. The people are more important than the book. It is not God's will that they be sacrificed on behalf of the book. Sheesh, God knows what His will is, He doesn't need a book! Regards, Shaz

PS Regarding sexual abuse by clergy... I've quoted this one before in GS, but it bears repeating: From the book The Narcissistic Family by Stephanie Donaldson-Pressman and Robert M. Pressman: quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Individuals who have been the victims of traumatic abuse, especially caretaker sexual abuse, feel uniquely shameful. The damage done when the person who is supposed to be protecting and nurturing the child is the one abusing him or her is singularly damaging. The person to whom the child would usually turn for comfort when hurt is the person doing the hurting. That is why we now classify sexual molestation by clergy as incest: the priest (or nun, or minister, or the like) is set up by the family in the role of -- as well as often being called -- father (or sister, brother, and so forth). And these individuals' role as spiritual caretaker, as a person of God, sets them apart in importance/validity from all other in the children's lives except their parents or primary caretakers. Adults who were molested by clergy, whether as children or as adults, tend to take on the same degree of responsibility in their victimization as do individuals molested by their parents. ------------- Regards, Shaz

Dear Simon, I have no problem with you understanding how tough abuse is on the victims, how ethically wrong it is, but not necessarily seeing clergy/congregant sex as against the law per se. I'll just release all your friends into your custody. That'll teach you.... ;)--> Shaz

Dear Exy, I liked your link a lot, and I think it absolutely contributed to the discussion. Why apologize? Dear Simon, Lots of congregants ARE patients of pastors, in the sense that they went to them as mental health professionals for advice. I don't know what the courts do with this, but I would have no problem legally making pastors liable if they take advantage of the counselor/client relationship. Beyond that, I would be happy to take lawsuits against Twig leaders who are NOT counseling but are held in esteem as spiritual leaders (to use your example) on a case-by-case basis. I think it would have to be established in court that the "leaf" revered the Twig leader, and the Twig leader knew it and took advantage of it. Tough to prove, I think. Aren't you glad I'm not a judge? ;)--> Shaz

Yeah, I thought so, too! Even sicker when an apprentice Corps gal told me that if I didn't get a divorce, it might be because that was my problem. Sweet, huh? ;)--> Shaz

I gotcha, socks. Paul seems to say, "I'm just glad they're talking about Christ, so now I can come in and explain about him in more detail." But what about the guy who, in JAL's words, is "a person with right motives teaching error?" I'm thinking of Apollos of Alexandria (Acts 18), who preached what he knew, but only knew from water baptism. Sounds to me like the saints took him under their wing. Surely doesn't sound like they, or God for that matter, preferred right doctrine over right intention. Regards, Shaz

Okay, here's my follow-up email to John (in boldface), and his response: Dear John, Thanks for your reply. I did post it on Greasespotcafe, and it has gotten a fair number of replies, mostly from people who question the doctrine taught at CES. (Which reminds me -- why the name change?) I have just a few more questions and comments, if you would be so kind to listen.... You mentioned the "heart of the organization [TWI] going south" before you left. I would put to you that the organization was pretty corrupt right from the beginning, we just didn't know it. Wierwille plagiarized Kenyon, Stiles, and Bullinger in his books. His adultery was constant. His insistance on special privileges in the name of "protocol" was evident. His temper tantrums were legendary. He drank to excess frequently. I have trouble respecting a man who claims that God gave him an abundance of revelation, while all the while his lifestyle is less than I would expect of any decent man, let alone a man of God. His mess went far beyond the category of "for all have sinned." He lived in sin. One of the things that contributed to corruption at the top levels was a lack of accountability. Underlings were not to question the men that God had put over them -- in fact, many were told that they would be "blessed" for obeying, even if the leader was WRONG. So my question to you is, have you found a way to avoid this pitfall; are the heads of your organization accountable to anyone? Another thing that I see contributed to bad relationships between top leaders and followers in The Way was arrogance. A pecking order developed (PFAL grad, Advanced Class grad, Corps, clergy, Trustee) and many of those in the upper echelons felt entitled to lord it over those below. Nametag envy. It was one of the reasons that I DIDN'T want to go Corps, I didn't want to be on a pedestal, felt I shouldn't be. So what is your organization doing to prevent having its leaders treated differently than the rank and file? There was also arrogance in our knowledge of the Bible versus the rest of Christianity's. I hear some of that in your response to me. We may have to agree to disagree, but I have found plenty of people who believe that the Bible is inerrant, and minutely accurate. Some I met while I was still "in." I remember reading the brochure for Oral Roberts University: one of the qualifications for admission was that the student must speak in tongues. The page expounding on it could have fit right into PFAL. That was in 1974. I have since been impressed by the lives of many people, both Christian and non-Christian, who exhibit more godliness than I saw in many people who were supposed to "know the Word." So what is your organization doing to teach and exemplify humility? My next question has more to do with purpose. The Way taught about a relationship with the heavenly Father. Well and good. So then what about this life? There is a lot of need. What does your organization do to help people in THIS life? Lastly, I can't let you go without asking you about Momentus, which I understand was promoted by members of CES. Descriptions I have read on CES describe it as a sort of confrontational encounter session, a kind of actors' workshop intent on getting to core feelings and beliefs. Could you talk about the program and CES's involvement in it? Thanks for taking the time, John -- but hey, if the purpose of your group is to lead people to an accurate knowledge of God, I can see no better use of your time! Regards, Sharon Hi Sharon, God bless you. I'm happy to answer your questions, and I do hope it is profitable for you and others. I do hope you will post this reply also. As for those who "question the doctrine taught by CES," my first question to them is: Which of our books/tapes have you read/heard? And then: At what point, and how, in that book/tape did we deviate from what the Word of God says? We're right here, and willing to entertain the answers to such questions. Why the name change? Because "CES" no longer represents what our "full service" ministry is doing. Here's a link to back issues of The Sower--click on the September 2003 issue for the explanation. http://christianeducational.org/ceslibrary.htm As per 1 Cor. 11:17 (NIV), there was a point at which TWI, overall (though that is impossible to measure exactly) went from doing more good than harm to doing "more harm than good." If I had to set a date, I'd say 1979. But even after that, many people received incredible deliverance because the Word of God was often taught accurately and powerfully, and many people in leadership positions loved people with the love of God. VPW will stand before the Lord Jesus like everyone else, and he will be fairly judged for both the good and the bad in his life. One of the ways that Satan has tricked countless ex-Way folks is to get them to backlash against the kinds of sins you mentioned and throw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater. That is, "VPW was a bum; he couldn't have taught much that wasright on with God." Sorry, but the accuracy of one's teaching can be rightly judged only by the Word, not by his behavior. In that vein, Philippians 1:15-18 is a fairly shocking passage of Scripture. It clearly implies that if God had to choose between a person with wrong motives teaching truth and a person with right motives teaching error, He'd choose the former. Why? Because even if the teacher walked offstage and robbed a bank, his audience could still apply the truth they heard! Obviously God's goal is to get people with right motives teaching truth. Is it really arrogant for me to say that I know many such people in STFI/CES? I don't think so. That passage, and countless others, of course, show clearly that God is HEAVILY invested in His Word. Because there is such a lack of knowledge ofit on the earth, He does everything He can to help/heal/straighten out anyone who is teaching it accurately. Yes, there can come a point when that person gets so far out that God cannot help him. Speaking of backlash, one response to the profligacy of many TWI leaders is that some former followers, like my old New York Marathon buddy Vince Finnegan, have adopted the false doctrine that a Christian can "reject"(and thus lose) his salvation. Hello-o? It wouldn't be "salvation" if you could lose it. Terribly underestimating God's grace and mercy, and contradicting a vast number of clear verses in the Bible (especially the truth about being born again of incorruptible seed--how can you lose seed?), adherents to this practically debilitating lie are arguing for a lesser possibility than the glorious truth that God sets forth about what we have in Christ. In that vein, here's another shocking passage--Galatians 1:6-9. God minces no words about what He thinks of "another gospel," that is, salvation by works. That, by the way, is the hallmark of every false religion--Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Roman Catholicism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormomism, et al.Only Christianity, which is not a religion, teaches salvation by grace through faith in the work of Jesus Christ. Amen. Yes, there was very little true accountability among the leadership ofTWI--I was one of those whom few people ever confronted (and not because I was always right!). Once again, the basis of wrong practice is wrong doctrine. Because there was no teaching about an intimate, personal relationship with Jesus as Lord on a daily basis, and no teaching about facing the "sin that dwells in us (who would want to face it without Jesus?)," and the erroneous teaching that the Bema is for rewards only (not so--all unconfessed sin will still be "on the books," and will be brought to light), sin abounded. Excuse me--I was "in The Way" about as much as anyone. Therefore, I recognize the evils, errors, and pitfalls very well. So do those in the STFI/CES servant/leadership nucleus with me. NOW HEAR THIS: we therefore havea proportionately GREAT desire NOT TO REPEAT THOSE ERRORS! (CES tape: What is Christian Leadership?) During these past 17+ years, a number of people have asked the same question you did: "What is going to stop CES from becoming like TWI?" My first answer: YOU!!! How so? Because we value people's individuality, and encourage them to speak up if they do not like something. That doesn't mean wewill agree with them, but they know we will not treat them badly if they disagree with us. Another answer to that question is--correct teaching about authority (CES tape: A Biblical View of Authority) in the Body of Christ. Yes, there is authority, but all authority is relative to thelordship of Jesus Christ, and subject to his ultimate authority. We have no "rank and file," no "pecking order," and no "pedestals." Why? Because there is no such thing in the Word, and we teach the Word. We do have nametages at our events, but they are all the same color! As for STFI/CES, I'd say that those who have made the effort to get upclose and personal with us know that the nucleus of our servant/leadership aggressively holds one another accountable, but honestly, I could never adequately express how true that is--you gotta be there. My own leave-of-absence in 2001, mandated by my closest friends, is an example of our refusal to compromise the standard of the Word. This is not a "good old boy" organization. Arrogance: "a genuine or assumed feeling of superiority that shows itself in an overbearing manner or attitude or in excessive claims of position,dignity, or power or that unduly exalts one's own worth or importance." No one with a real relationship with Jesus Christ as Lord, who is surrounded by people also trying to become like him, will manifest arrogance. In fact, knowing Jesus as the Savior from the sin that dwells in us brings you face to face with our own weaknesses day by day, and keep us in the light.That kind of "humiliation" drives one to Jesus, where he finds a genuine, godly sense of self-worth. I was surprised, and saddened, to see that you seem to think that one's relationship with his heavenly Father has nothing to do with this life. Gosh, that's what it's all about (see 2 Pet. 1:2-4: esp. "...all things that pertain to life and godliness..."). The whole point of knowing God and the Lord Jesus Christ is to shine as a light in this dark, sick world, living with joy and peace amidst trials and tribulation by holding to the Hope of a glorious future.(I think that JAL stops just shy of saying what johniam was talking about, that his organization just teaches the Bible, and has nothing in place to formally cope with those in need.) OK, that's it for now. Go ahead and post this, and I'll get to your other questions later. Much love to you and all the Greasespotians, John Be sure to visit us online at: http://www.cesonline.org/ http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/ http://www.truthortradition.com/

Understood, Raf. But I hope you'll also understand our caution about going into hypothetical situations, because some people really want to apply those situations to the young women who were abused in TWI. They want TWI clergy and BOT off the hook, by saying that the women must have done something to contribute to the abuse. I was not abused by TWI clergy, but I WAS abused in my marriages. During exit counseling in the first marriage, the female counselor wanted to pin some of the cause for the marriage's failure on me. "It takes two to screw," is what she literally said. Yeah, I probably did some things wrong, everybody does in a marriage. But compared to him getting drunk and disappearing for days at a time, committing adultery, and throwing me across a room by the hair, I think the balances weighed against him. His responsibility as a strong man to keep his strength in check far outweighed any "wrong" I might have done in contributing to his anger. That is, unless I took a bat to him! ;)--> I am also thinking about Wierwille's teaching that a battered woman has the spirit of masochism, and somehow wants to be abused. Again, the blame shifts to the victim spiritually "wanting" it, and we can turn away from the woman in disgust. So could there be a theoretical scenario where the follower seduces the young minister, or the male follower rapes the female pastor? Probably. But I would watch very carefully that the theoretical discussion doesn't lend itself in anyone's mind (I know it doesn't in yours, Raf) to the conclusion that somehow those abused women did something that "made" Wierwille succumb to temptation. Regards, Shaz

Absolutely my point, oldies. How could anybody align themselves with anybody, if they didn't even know what anybody DID? Regards, Shaz

I had read the Lynn letter before, and I just read parts of the clergy meeting. One thing that strikes me in all this is the funny Wayspeak involved. It is designed to get people to agree with them and align with them, without saying a single thing. For example, Chris reports, "Things are wronger [sic] than ever before. The situation is quite hostile." Wow, it must really be bad, thinks the believer. WHAT is bad? What did they do that was hostile? "...an initial flurry of random activity among the believers which was not based on logical or Biblical evaluation." What did they DO? write letters? make phone calls? talk to their Twigs? Read us one, please. How was what they did illogical or unbiblical? We aren't told what actually happened, but we are supposed to be righteously indignant against them. "[The Corps] forsook their Biblical responsibility and opened the doors for the adversary who has been very successful in enlisting Corps as his agents." Bad Corps, bad! Go to your room. We shouldn't trust you, you are the agents of the adversary. BUT WHAT DID THEY DO??? This same talk is in the POP, and JAL's letter. (Yeah, the parable is pretty silly.) Nobody had the guts to say what actually was going on. It all sounded so spiritual, to talk about it in black-and-white, us-against-the-adversary terms. But if they had dared to discuss the FACTS of the goings on, we would all have been able to discern right and wrong in the situation. Sheesh, Wierwille was recruiting women for sex. CHRIS recruited women for him. Wierwille taught (in CFS) that the Bible does not address sex outside of marriage. Schoenheit showed verse after verse that says adultery is wrong, and fornication is wrong. His paper never names Wierwille, yet Chris says that it did. If the facts had been put out on the table for all to see, Geer would have been laughed out of town, along with the BOT. Regards, Shaz

Cracking me up, Dan! You can either spare the middleman, and email John yourself at JALCES@aol.com , or you can email me at shazdancer@danceart.net (this same email is in my profile). I replied to John myself and hope he will respond in the next couple of days. Regards, Shaz

LOL, exy, shh, or Zixar might start another thread on your remarks... ;)--> Seeing John's response just strikes me how far I am from this mindset that I once had to some extent, that of "if you know the RIGHTLYDIVIDEDWORD, it answers all questions and relieves all stresses, and your flatulence won't stink." (That should get past the censors....) Regards, Shaz

After a couple of emails to say he would get back to me (and to say "I'm not going to type my life away to anonymous people in a forum") he wrote this...

Well, he said to email him personally... ...so I did. I sent him what was essentially my post on page 1 of the "Hi, It's the Real Me -- John Lynn" thread. Here is his reply. Pardon the length. My remarks are in bold, followed by his answer in the next post. Dear John, I have mixed reactions to your posting on Greasespot Cafe. Other posters there responded similarly. It was nice that you attempted to make a connection, but sad that you felt you could not just talk and answer questions. You invited us to contact you, so here I am. I doubt this will go much further than a letter or two, because I have no desire to "come back to the Word." In the most essential ways, I never left. But I did leave an organization back in 1984, because I saw at its core that it was not designed to really care about people. And by the way, people write with pseudonyms online for many different reasons. I, for one, still have a child at home, and the Internet world is not always a safe place. I have no trouble responding to questions and comments from anonymous posters, as for every poster, there are several "lurkers" who never post who want to know. But you know me. My name is...{and here I gave him enough info that he now knows who I am.} Here is what I wrote you on Greasespot: What did we learn from PFAL that hadn't been taught for centuries? The Word of God is the Will of God -- hmm, basic fundamentalist doctrine. The Law of Believing -- ruined many lives, and almost wrecked mine How the Bible Interprets Itself -- a basic course in how to read ANY book Four Crucified -- Bullinger For This Purpose Was I Spared -- your group throws that one out How to be Born Again -- see any born-again church Renew the Mind -- ditto Speaking in Tongues -- Oral Roberts had that one packaged as neatly as Wierwille. T.I.P. -- Your group completely revamps much of what was taught in the Intermediate Class. JC Not God -- probably the most significant doctrine you brought with you from TWI (Now, as far as The Way being a one-stop, package deal, I would also like to mention that B.G.Leonard had his class first and taught it to Wierwille, who re-labelled that package PFAL.) So if we throw out the parts of PFAL that you do not adhere to, there is not much left that can't be found in any evangelical church with a charismatic renewal element, the type of church that was coming of age at the same time TWI gained its biggest following. And the ministries of Oral Roberts and B.G.Leonard, et al, certainly surfaced before Wierwille, as well as Bullinger, who published in the late 1800's. So why is it that you think "tens of thousands of people ... learned the Word like they could not have anywhere else... VPW/TWI did have a package of biblical truth unlike anything for centuries?" Was it so important that this doctrine be packaged that people's lives could be destroyed over it? Frankly, I think God cares more for people than He does for a book, even His own. If you reply, I hope you will not feel the need to cite a verse for backup. Just talk as a person, with an opinion. May I post your reply on Greasespot? You can always review my post to check that I did not take any remairks out of context. I think I have a reputation there of being fair. Regards, {Shaz}