johniam

I've never been to Camp Gunnison. Born and raised in Michigan, though. Routinely played outside in ten below as a child. Still like the feeling of cold air hitting my face...in moderation. I work with a guy who regularly attends a TWI fellowship in Columbia, MO. St. Louis has been marked and avoided by TWI (so I've heard; how lucky can we be?) so the guy has to drive over 100 miles to be at this fellowship. He says he's blessed. But he recently spent a week at Gunnison. Took pictures. Said it was a good time. He let me listen to 2 SNS CDs. They've gotten much kinder and gentler compared to the mid 90s, when LCM would yell for an hour: 20 minutes of bible teaching and 40 minutes of whining about whoever po'd him that week. Found out that the guy who kicked me and my family out of TWI is now the limb cordo of CT. Closure!

Excathedra: Thank you very much. Good to see all your faces, too.

Wordwolf: 2 things 1) 2 Cor. 5:17a - Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature (creation)..Who says God can't create a mind/spirit bond which never existed before. Christ paved the way for this. 2) When VP said God can only talk to what He is, it was in the context of God telling Adam "thou shalt surely die" and how Adam lived for what? 930 years, but his spirit connection with God is what died. I really don't have a problem with the idea that VP got some things wrong. When God said that to Adam there were no other humans around and I DON'T think God talked directly to animals. I really don't see where the limit is. Someone could say why only Jesus? Why can't I get born again by being a Buddha follower? That isn't fair! Why is God so limited? Yet we read "No man cometh unto the Father but by me" (Jesus). Is that God being limited? I don't think that God can't put thoughts in the mind of one who isn't born again. Or speak in an audible voice, for that matter. OK, 3 things. 3) As for SIT, it still feels like honey on my tongue. The first time I did it was a life changing moment. Every session 12 I was ever at there was this powerful presence in the room when everybody SIT'd. Is it a guarantee that the person will thereafter always live virtuously? No. But it's good enough for me.

quote: The Bangor Daily News encourages comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service. In brief: 1.Keep it civil and stay on topic 2.No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks. 3.People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked. The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more): I personally don't see requirements like these in comments sections on line. Not on youtube, the Grateful Dead website, or any newspaper forum in the St.Louis area. Dare I say...GSC in culture? :)

quote: This is The Great Principle, as stated many times in the foundational, intermediate and advanced classes.: "God's spirit teaches His creation in you which is now your spirit and your spirit teaches your mind and is manifested in the senses realm as you act." Wierwille also stated that "God, being spirit, can only speak to that which he is, spirit." So, if God, being spirit, can not talk to your mind, how is it that YOUR spirit, being spirit, can? In essence, if The Great Principle is true, the only people that God has talked to down through the ages are either born-again Christians or people who have had the spirit placed on them conditionally on an ad hoc basis. Sounds rather limiting, in my opinion. I'll choose the limits of the great principle over the limits of an assoc. prof of radiology, psychiatry, and whatever any old time.

Very interesting. In my last post I said I could SIT and think in English at the same time because SIT doesn't require my "senses mind". Compare with..."the region of the brain involved in language is not activated when a person speaks in tongues." However..." Of course, if somebody is a deep believer in speaking in tongues, the source of the vocalizations is very clear. It’s coming from outside the person. It’s coming through the spirit of God." Not so fast. God's spirit teaches His creation in you, which is now your spirit. NOT from outside the person. Also...""It’s fascinating because these subjects truly believe that the spirit of God is moving through them and controlling them to speak." Nope. Maybe his subjects did, but I sure don't believe I'm being controlled.

quote: They could often site "look, I can SIT and shoot a basket", for example. Some people are better at multitasking than others. I can drink a beer and watch a game at the same time. Perhaps my focus is diverted for a second and I miss a play. During the late 90s I worked with several non TWI Christians. I deliberately avoided talking about abortion and the trinity, but I admitted I spoke in tongues. These guys weren't particularly shocked. One thing I told them was that I could speak in an unknown tongue and think in English at the same time, because SIT didn't require my senses mind other than deciding to do it. Another thing the above quote made me think of is: it says in scripture that one cannot serve 2 masters. Serving a master and having a thought are not the same thing. If I'm driving down the highway I can stay in my lane safely and listen to music/talk radio and even think about people, conversations, etc.....ALL at the same time. Serving a master, literal or figurative, requires enough focus that it can't be multitasked with anything else like that. If I'm driving on the highway and I get into the music a bit too much, or I think too hard about something, THEN I may notice that I'm too close to the car ahead of me, but multitasking? I'm for it.

I heard VP SIT and interpret during a Sunday AM fellowship which closed out a weekend in the word. Can't recall the exact calendar year.

We were taught in TWI that truth is what God does and facts are what man does, but... Fact is the opposite of fiction, which is usually written and truth is the opposite of lies, which are usually spoken. If God is the one speaking, then His truth has His characteristics, but if it's people who are speaking, then there are variables. In a court of law witnersses swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, but their "truth" is limited to what they have seen and heard; not the same as God's truth. In TWI we had to conform to different terminology than outside TWI. In fellowships and stuff I had to say household holiday or resurrection Sunday, but it's none of TWI's damn business if I want to see my family and say Christmas or Easter. In TWI only God can create, but if I want to call artistic people creative again, it's my business. And that's the truth :) .

quote: We shouldn`t HAVE to be afraid of fear or suppression or dispute if it involves our personal experiences in twi. We shouldn`t have our character, our veracity, or our morality called into question by people who don`t like hearing our side of the story. But it's OK for you to attack mine?

There's no "one size fits all" other than salvation by Jesus Christ. Remember David choosing to do battle with Goliath with a slingshot and stones rather than the 'state of the art' armor Saul offered him? You gotta go with what works for YOU many times. VP's analogy was comparing riding a bicycle with learning how to walk by the spirit of God rather than by the 5 senses that everybody is used to before salvation. There is a reason why bicycle handle bars are made straight in the factory. [edited to remove ad hominem argument]

quote: Well that would certainly get rid of the pesky women who persist in telling these stories....Seriously....to me it is too much like being banished to Siberia...and then who gets invited? Those abused? women? Everyone?? Not at all; the other forums are still available. If this was tried, I never heard of it. Why would I have? I'm certainly not a candidate for that type of forum. Rascal, you can't have your cake and eat it too. If you want to discuss something unmolested, then the best way to do this is privately. If you want to tell the world about something, then "the world" includes me, oldies, etc. If there was a forum like I suggested, then ideas could be aired out, tested in a private setting without fear of dispute, THEN if desired, those ideas that stuck could be brought to the other forums. No suppresion at all; quite the contrary. I thought about it some more and it is possible that when Tex said the lockbox should be unlocked in an environment of safety, that what she had in mind may be an environment controlled by professional people like herself, not something more casual, like this place.

WW: Not that you really need it, but you have my permission to cut and paste what I said. The discussion might get more response if you started it than if I did.

quote: dedicated to tex and the lockbox and the darkness darkness no more silence no more I have an idea. Tex said in her blog that the lockbox must be unlocked. But that some situations are sensitive enough that it has to be done in a safe environment. How about a 'support group' forum where only those in the support group have access? Once there was a politics and tacks forum, just one. Things got ugly and now there are 2 politics and tacks forums, one not for the squeamish, and one for those who don't want arguments to get out of hand. I don't often go to those forums, but the strategy must have worked, otherwise I would have heard something. The way corps site is another example. Here at GSC there are some with an axe to grind re: way corps. The word 'corpse' is frequently used interchangeably with way corps. This sends the message that if you were corps you must apologize for yourself all the time. I don't blame them a bit for wanting to go on a way corps only site where they don't have to feel like 2nd class posters just because they were corps. I don't blame posters who feel they were abused by way corps for trying to get that off their chests, either, but there is something to be said for a partisan fellowship. So, would it be possible to set up a forum for women who were sexually abused and those sympathetic to them, ie, a safe environment? Those with access could have their own passwords and no fear of "hard questions". Just a thought.

We bought our last 2 family vehicles on ebay...both under $1,000. Both vans; the 1st one went cross country 6 times and the second one twice so far with much better gas mileage. I've heard buying on ebay is dangerous, but so far so good for us.

quote: For some reason, I read the first post by Tex. Then I read her blog entries. Then I read what you had to say. OK Satori, if this is the progression detailing how you decided to post to me I believe you. The post with the link to her blog wasn't done until I think new year's eve. My first post on this thread was before that, and, as I said, the blog entries answered my question. The question was about the format of her book, not about her credibility. I have a confession to make. I know who Tex is. I don't recall ever being formally introduced to her (it may have happened), but I was at a few meetings she was at. I once saw her teach the word at a fellowship with well over 100 people in attendance. I lived with 2 guys immediately after they'd been wows under her direct leadership. Those guys had a lot of respect for her; they said she was nobody's fool and nobody to mess with. One of the guys said that during the year she was in STL she coordinated a pfal class in a rough neighborhood. On the night of session 1, as she arrived at the class location, several teenage boys were making loud noise right outside the house the class was held in. She walks right up to them and says sweetly, "Would you boys mind playing down the street for the next 3 weeks; we're going to be running a bible class and the noise is distracting." Something to that effect. The teens not only cooperated with her, but by the time the class was over they would open the car door for her when she'd arrive for class like they were her limo driver. She had more guts than most of the guys. She was tough. She was the kind of way corps you really did NOT want to screw up around. I don't think that was a bad thing. Some way corps let it go to their heads; they acted like their corps status entitled them to vomit their egos on people, but nobody in STL ever said anything like that about Tex. She was motivated; she believed in what she was doing (moving the word). I wonder how many interim corps, male OR female, were given the assignment of branch coordinator of 7 wow families at the age of 22. Impressive. If the way corps was college football, she'd have been a first round draft pick easy, if not top 5. I'm even guessing she may have been denied the chance to excel (ordination, limb/region coordinator, etc.) just because she's a woman. Whatever her ethical concerns were about VP, she believed in him as MOG. Another believer in STL said that once during the same year a group of them were out witnessing and she went into a Christian bookstore and saw a small box with copies of that booklet called "the way of Victor Paul Wierwille". She didn't hesitate; she picked up the box, left the Christian bookstore, and deposited the box in the nearest trash can. Most of what I've said is second hand, but having seen her in the flesh and having heard all the stories, I believe it. A lot of these stories about sexual abuse seem to me as..."from a galaxy far away" because it's so different from the TWI I saw first hand. Sure, I knew men and women who screwed around, but most of the leaders who did that got in trouble for it, lost their leadership position. No evidence of a "secret society" of adulterers; just something in those anti way pamphlets. Tex is someone I have actually seen, so, by comparison, her testimony is...from a galaxy...down the block. I saw a link on Dr. John Jeudes' site about Tex. She said that TWI was guilty of 'black and white thinking' and she didn't want her kids raised that way. Then on her blog she said she now believes she was brainwashed. But she blessed a lot of people in STL and probably elsewhere. Is all that just meaningless now? I guess what I find most disturbing about all this is...here you have this young, motivated, confident leader of God's people on the rise, and then, a few short years later she is at the point of having to depend on a women's shelter and the other things she said. That's more than sad, it's heartbreaking. I do not agree with all her stated conclusions, but at this point, I am definitely interested in what she has to say.

quote: You can't "defoliate" that which has already been rendered bare. Then why are they trying so hard to do just that? I mean, if it's so obvious that my transparency is whatever stupid thing you said it was..IF this is so obvious, then why not ignore me? I'm not just talking about this thread. You can't declare me possessed or M&A, that's already been done, but you could just put me on ignore. The reason you can't is because enough of what I post must be so threatening that you feel you HAVE to address it. But on THIS thread I've said nothing. Just asked a question. And you're all over me. WHY? What are you afraid I'm going to say? Why the desperate, uncharacteristic attacks? This is not your usual MO.

This is getting funnier and funnier. First, Pawtucket shows uncharacteristic emotional attachment to Tex regarding my post. Then Jack Torrance, who hasn't given me the time of day for at least 2 years, pulls out his axe and says, "Here's Johnny!" Why are you guys behaving so desperately? Why is it so imperative for you to napalm my credibility...NOW??? Bizarre.

quote: johniam, if you're going to be so evasive that it requires all this parsing to get what you're actually trying to say, why bother to say anything at all? So you finally admit that it's you who are trying to shut ME up? You act like any accusation against TWI is absolute truth. Christians frequently comment on the writing style of the bible writers. Both TWI and non TWI. quote: 1. "using" implies that the author employs a literary device, which implies artificiality Hello? WORDS are literary devices. So is puntuation. Perhaps you are projecting your own dishonesty onto me.

quote: Of course you have, johniam, by the insinuation implicit in the word "villain." You as much as say so yourself by your description of the word, by which you mean "fictional." She'll be surprised to find someone like you here, but Tex is far more than a match for you. If she doesn't find you a complete waste of time, I look forward to seeing her deal with you. Have you read In cold blood by Truman Capote? It's nonfiction. But you don't think there's a villain in it? What could she possibly say to me that others haven't?

The but it's not necessary part was MY statement, not VP's.

quote: ugh, who cares what VP felt? Um...I thought that was the reason for GSC's existence. Context, waysider, context! It's not necessary to SIT when you pray with the understanding.

What? I made no "statement"; I asked a question. The word "villain" is a literary/theatrical term. If the literature is about recovery, then this assumes there is something to recover from, hence, a villain. I haven't given any opinions about Tex yet. Besides, I got the answer to my question from the entrys on the blog she posted a link to.

This has been a hot topic of discussion in the fellowship I attend. Yes, prayer with understanding works fine. All VP said was that he personally felt the burden lifted more completely when he SITd, but it's not necessary.

You can't do what he did. Not everything. He let himself be crucified which caused the windows of heaven to open and holy spirit to rain down. And there was not room enough to receive it, since they were filled to overflowing. If you let yourself be crucified it would accomplish nothing. But you can SIT.