Goey

Refiner, Have you read this yet? The Cult That Snapped

JT, I agree. I also think that most people in TWI were/are in it for religious reasons - to improve their lives, help others, serve God, learn the truth, find nirvana, dwell in the household of the prevailing word or whatever -which is not to say that the religious reasons are necessarily noble or that the core of the ministry is not rotten. In all but the narowest of definitions TWI is a religious group. But whatever the definition, whether TWI is defined as religious or not seems insignificant to me. My question would be is TWI corrupt at the top. IMO TWI's "religion" runs much deeper than just a tax exemption. The "religion" is also a hook to attract new followers and to manipulate/control the current ones.

JT, You may be technically correct. However I seem to recall some folks here that knew of situations where folks were told to sell homes that they owned outright. Of course TWI got 15 percent of the sale price. And if you consider that the vast majority of Wayfers could never pay cash for a home anyway, for all practical purposes the debt/mortgage policy forbade home ownership except to the wealthy or priviliged.

Jason, Thanks, that was much better. That being said, believe there is suficient evidence to suggest that the BOD and Rivenbark in particualar willingly and knowingly bilk TWI's followers. No Pet Policy for the rank and file - Rosie has a pet. No home ownership policy - Rosie owns a home. BOT has the only voice in doctrinal and financial matters. Rosie lied about her knowledge of LCM "adultery". All ABS goes to HQ - little if any goes back to the local areas from which it came. Very large portion possibly a majority of ABS goes to maintain the lifestyles of BOD with immmaculate grounds/facilities and to provide them with assistants (servants?) Giving of more ABS is stressed in most all periodic literature and according to a current innie in 75 - 85 percent of all official gatherings. BOT give no accounting of ABS or how it is spent to its followers. TWI's books are closed to it's followers. TWI's only "charity" seems to be the comfort and wel-being of the BOD. TWI does not give to any charitable causes such as clothing and feeding the poor, hospitals, community programs, etc. I am sure that others could add to this list. Granted, the evidence is circumstantial but it seems highly suggestive of a snow job to me. Jason, unless you sat on the BOD yourself or you were very "in" with the BOD like as a country or regional coordinator and privy to the inner workings of the minds of the BOT then your "knowledge" is just as much speculation as anyone elses. Is it possibly you were one of the "top leaders" that we throw rocks at all the time? (Rhetorical) Offer some credible evidence (other than "I know") that Rosie and gang actually believe that what they are doing is of God and I will consider it. Use Private Topics if you wish. I am not concerned with who you are, but rather with what you actually "know".

Pat, Very Sneaky Pat. You throw in "does charitable works" knowing that TWI would not meet your definition of religion. You are begging the question by definition. Also Also, "love and true commitment" are not objectively measurable. Who decides ? So I agree that by YOUR definition, TWI is not a "religious group", but by many other more accepted definitions they most certainly would be considered a religious group - a very corrupt one IMO. Posted by Jason P. Oh really now .... Jason, that is probably one of the most arrogant posts I think I have seen at GS in a long time. Pure rhetoric. Jason "knows", so to disagree or to question Jason is "joustin windmills". This rhetoric and arrogance - and an attempt to stop debate or discussion with the all knowing Jason, cause HE "knows". And since Jason "knows" it is not open to debate. What Jason believs is not an opinion it is "the way it is." - Sorry Jason, got to chuckle a bit on that one ... LOL! Jason, just exactly how did you get to the point where you can see into the hearts of men and women and "know" their intentions? Just because you or I may have believed the swill doesn't mean that the BOD does. Unless you can into their heads what you "know" is just your opinion. Jason, everything is an opinion here even what YOU think you know. Declaring it to indisputable truth and not debatable does not make it so.

Posted by JasonP Jason, with all due respect, the tobbaco executives are fully aware of the dangers of smoking. If you are going to try to prove that TWI's leaders actually believe their own swill then you need a better analogy than this. I say that TWI's product is dangerous and that the BOT knows it.

Pat, Only two choices? Hmmm. IMO, TWI is both, and then some. I would characterize TWI as a corrupt religious organization. But the problem here Pat, is that you have offered no definition or explanation of what you mean by "religion". The meaning can be quite varied. Do you consider Christianity itself a religion? - How about Islam? - Buddhism? Or even environmentalism? Some definitions would include all of these others only one or two. Since there is no clear and agreed upon definition of "religion" your question is hard to answer. And another problem is that if the definition offered excludes TWI then your point could be construed as begging the question by definition.

I would not presume that becasue TWI repackaged the 'Four D's of Doulos Doings' that Martindale was still pulling the strings. That's a pretty big leap. It may be that TWI is simply using the old material they have on hand for lack of anything new. Even so, the 4 D's are an immutable spiritual law, right? And if it was an immutable law in '78 then it must still be an immutable law - right?

Insurgent, It's all about control -- Critical thinking not allowed. The more I think about it the more I realize that TWI was never a truly a " biblical research ministry". Not even in "the good old days" when I was involved. No legitimate biblical research was every done by TWI. VPW plagairized much of what became PFAL. Under VPW, any research done by others had to be framed by what was already established in PFAL or by VPW himself. Under Martindale and Rivenbark it seems to have only gotten worse. 'Biblical Research Ministy' is just a facade - a hook to give the appearance of academic respectability. They have none. The author of the article writes: The author has to twist the definiton of the word research to make his point -An old trick of Wierwille's. In the academic and scientific world c Research does not simply mean to "search again" or to repeat what has already been done. Here is what it really means: Research Re*search" (r?-s?rch"), n. [Pref. re- + search: cf OF. recerche, F. recherche.] Diligent inquiry or examination in seeking facts or principles; laborious or continued search after truth; as, researches of human wisdom. (Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary)

It is no more illegal to give someone their "copy" of the CF&S materials than it is to give them their copy of PFAL. I dont think Ana meant for anyone to print up a bunch of stuff and start selling it. On another note: The copyright for CF&S does not seem to have been renewed by TWI if it was ever copyrighted at all. If was copyrighted before 1978 and was not renewed then it would have expired 28 years after the initial copyright. I seem to recall taking CF&S in 1976 or 1977. A search of the US Copyright office shows no record of a copyright for CF&S.

Actually my experience has been quite positive as I remain sober and have had no "slips" since I began nearly 15 years ago. Your perception is wrong. But more to the point, I never bought in to the feel-good New Age kind of God that many A.A. folks seem to adopt, nor did I buy into the psycobabble that is heard in many AA meetings today. Neither is an actual part of the program of Alcoholics Anonymous.

Refiner, Thanks, Some of your posts seemed to imply that you were "involved" in dozens of cults as an actual believer. I am glad you cleared that up.

Refiner, You may want to consider what it is about yourself that caused you to be involved with literal dozens of cults. Seems like you sought out religious organizations that would abuse and control you. Dude, thats way beyond normal.

Imbus, I bet you are very wrong! On July 13th I will celebreate 15 years of "sobriety". I recall very vividly the day I quit drinking after having binged for several weeks that last time. I drank almost daily after leaving TWI in 1982 and I can probably tell you more than you want to know about abusive drinking. I like many folks who abused either alcohol or drugs ended up in AA. I have attended literaly thousands of AA meetings over the last 15 years. I served on the Board of Trustees of the Surbarban Alcoholic Foundation here in Austin Texas off and on over the course of the last 10 years. - My assessment of "Tomorrow's God" comes from personal experience of having been in involved in AA and associated with the recovery community at large. I partly agree with this. I am not sure about a majority, but certainly quite a few. I see a quite a few folks lorded over by zealous "sponsors" who are manipulative and controlling - sometimes to the point of trying for define God for others. Acceptance in AA is also sometimes dependant upon how many meetings you attend or how profound your "rap" appears to be in the meetings. Many times the "rap" is more pop-pycology that actual AA 12-step stuff, probably becasue of the high number of AA people exposed to therapy of some kind, and who try to bring the religion of pop-psycology in to the AA program. Acceptance in AA can also be dependant upon one's views of their "higher power". While AA itself does not promote any particular concept of God, (God as you understand him), many AA members seem to have adopted something like "Tomorrow's God" and seem to think that it is an AA standard that others should adopt also. Many of these folks cringe at the name of Jesus and are quite intollerant of those who espouse Christianity while they themsleves languish over the evil and intollerant Christians. They are missing the boat IMO. I was in one meeting in Bryan Texas where certain AA's objected to a person simply mentioning that he believed in Jesus while one of these members spoke of a door knob as being his higher power. Agreed, AA does have a better track record at helping folks sober up than anything out there. However, AA's purpose is to help folks get and stay sober and not to define God for them. Here is a quote from AA's "Big Book" Now how much were you considering betting? :)-->

Refiner, Where is the logic in rejecting the idea of God or Christianity altogether because of a bad experience in a cult that misrepresented them? The Way represents neither God nor Christianity. Why be angry at the notion of God because of the actions of people who don't even speak for him?

Roy, Not everyone believes that the musings of their mind are "prophecy". The answer is no.

It looks to me like the fallacious God in the first list was taken from a rather extreme outside view of orthodox religion. "Tomorrow's God" seem like a pop-psycology feel-good version of God constructed in imaginations of folks who have spent an awful lot of time in "group" or at AA meetings. I think neither view is correct.

Posted by MJ (Punctuation corrected by me for readabiliy) The fact that TWI or any institution or person believes something to be THE Word does not mean that it is The Word or that folks should blindly accept it and act on it without any considerations. This applies not only to abortion but anything else that a group teaches. But that still does not adresss the entire issue. Assume for a moment that abortion is not a sin. Then a married woman gets pregnant while participating in a Way Program like WOW or the Way Corps. It was not necessarily planned. Just one of those things that happens sometimes. Now comes the TWI leader with Bible in hand (never opened though) and tells this woman that if she does not abort the fetus inside her that she does not love God, is abandoning God, is unloyal to the ministry, will loose God's protection and fellowship, and will die a spiriutal death. He tells her that her commitment to the ministry program is greater than the potential life inside of her. Remember, we assumed that abortion is not a sin. The fact that abortion is not a sin does not make the counsel godly, acceptable, or correct. IT IS NOT ABOUT ABORTION BEING A SIN It is about the coercive nature of the counsel itself. It is about being given only 2 choices (false dilemma) when there are more. It is about shaming, scaring and manipulating a person with unfounded threats of spiritual death for doing something good - bringing forth a human life. It is about a lack of respect and lack of compassion for another human being. It is pure arrogance ...

For Rosie, Who does your laundry? Who cooks your meals? Who cuts the grass at your house? Do you claim this as income on your personal tax return? What about the others on the BOD ? Did you bring both sets of books or just the one the IRS gets to see? What's the going interest rate for numbered accounts in the Cayman's ? Provide a list of all corporations foreign or domestic that you sit on as a director or trustee. Who does the 9 million belong to that is in the Way Credit Union? Can I have the names of the 10 largest depositors and share holders? Has Loy C. Martindale received any compensation from TWI in the last 2 years? What is Gunnison Inc actually used for? Who has access and use privileges there? Exactly who are the "members" of TWI Inc? How is the board of directors determined? What would be the process of removing or replacing a board member?

Trefor, Never said they did. This Doctrinal Forum is not necessarily about TWI's doctrine. We discuss/debate all kinds here. Look at Def's initial post. It is about "tithing" outside of TWI where the term is freqently used.

How in the heck did you get that? Wrong! Read what I wrote no more no less. Stop guessing. Wasn't I plain enough? Missing the above makes this a strawman. What most groups do is irrelevant. I don't think that. Your bias seems to be getting in the way of hearing what folks are saying. Remove your blinders for just a moment and read what I actually said. YES ! Finally! Dang you are thick ! Irrelevant! The fact that it was common does not justify it. Society can also be evil. The only place in the Bible that I have seen where God's people were corerced and misled and threatened in the name of God by their "leaders" was with the Phariaees. Jesus called them "vipers" and warned folks beware of their doctrine (counsel). He called them "whited sepulchers" and "hypocrites". He said their father was the devil. Sounds like their counsel was pretty evil to me ...

MJ, Your last post above is no more than a distraction of irrelevance and fallaciousness. Please address my points or just shut up will ya?

When have I ever said that I think abortion is evil? You don't understand that at all. You are presuming to know something that you do not. It's so typical of you. It is not the same choice no matter how you try to make it so. Outside of TWI people are not generally given a choice between spiritual death in giving a life or having God's blessings in taking or preventing one that has already been conceived. People on the outside are not usually told that it is God's will for them to abort a pregnancy and if you don't God is gonna get you. Apples and oranges. Again you don't understand squat. I have NEVER said that abortion is murder. Never. Why do you insist on making things up about people? My point has nothing at all to do with abortion being murder. To paint is so is very disingenous on your part. Again typical of you. Take abortion out of the equation completely. Any counsel for any purpose that attempts to motivate a person to do a particualar thing by the threat of the loss God's protection, spiritual death, or other such false consequences is evil. It is evil because it is coersive and motivates by fear and not genuine concern for the individual. Even if this person giving the counsel believes the counsel to be correct - it is still evil. The evil does not magically dissappear because the person giving it is sincere. You don't get $hit MJ. You have to disingenuously misrespresent folks to make your feeble points. Repeat your lies and presumptive misrepresentations all you want. And please will you at least for once address what I actually write and not what your seemingly seared conscience is telling you? Best I can tell you have not actually addressed one single thing that I have written.

MJ Posted: I say it does make the counsel "evil". What in your mind make the counsel "evil"? Anything at all? Do you even believe in such a thing as evil? Do you even know what evil means? It seems not. Evil E"vil ([=e]"v'l) n. 1. Anything which impairs the happiness of a being or deprives a being of any good; anything which causes suffering of any kind to sentient beings; injury; mischief; harm; 2. Having or exhibiting bad moral qualities; morally corrupt; wicked; wrong; vicious; as, evil conduct, thoughts, heart, words, and the like. 3. Producing or threatening sorrow, distress, injury, or calamity; (Webster's) TWI's counsel clearly caused sorrow and grief, and it clearly was threatening of sorrow, grief and calmity - EVEN IF THE COUNSEL WAS UNHEEDED. The persons choice in the matter is irrelevant. Sheesh! How thick can you be ?

The IRS/Scientology deal set a precendent of sorts. It's not that TWI has any clout with the IRS. But if the IRS let's Scientology off the hook and then goes after others cults/religions for the same stuff then it is playing religious favorites. It got itslef in a jam and tied its own hands so to speak. Here is a link on that - IRS/Scientology I agree that TWI getting more follwers will be a problem, however this does not mean they won't try. This poll shows that quite a few folks would return to TWI under the right circumstances. If things get financally bad enough for TWI, I would be looking for some changes in that area anyway, even if they don't really work that well. Certain changes could at least keep a few folks from leaving - maybe.