As most of yall know I post on many boards and I could be label a Big League poster but let me open upl to all reading
I try hard not to write the wrong thing but it still happens to me
but in truth what is wrong for me might not even shake you up
That is the big key we have to respect each other first but if we learn that, that does not mean we can always have peace but we can make things a lot easier for the people who help keep this place open
I some times think we need a area read only no replies for things that people want to share but are not ready to debate
This way a person who has views 99% of us do not agree with that person could still get to say it in the open and anyone that push things from the "do not reply area" or "read only" receive time to think about it as long as it not bad mouthing another poster maybe stories, doctrines, how they still love the way or what ever the subject that might be hard to post but they just want to share
There another thing I believe we need to do is trust the people who run the board and stop questioning them when something does not go our way and I am guilty of this too
it gets down to think before you write and hit the button
While I would like to see more sub topics there is more too it than making sub topics
I would tell two if they always battle and someone gets hurt stop fighting with each other
only takes one to begin but it only takes one to stop it
if there is no reply it soon dies out and us Big League posters have been around we should know when to post a reply to move thing back to the subject
because we been hurt before our-self
there was a time I almost walked away from here
one thing that helps me is that I take a week off here and there but what helps you might be different than what helps me
WD, is there anything that you feel the need to heal from or vent about concerning your time spent in twi? Most people have SOMETHING that motivates their participation in gs along those lines, a reason to come back, the draw that causes us to return and bond with like-souls or birds of a feather, if you will. I know I vented a lot my first few years. How about you? There must be some reason why you're drawn here so much.
The majority of us here, I believe, are soft-hearted, caring individuals, who would love to understand you. You seem to be a soft-hearted person too on the inside. I have so many faults it's not even funny, so there's no danger of me, for example, laughing at you or ridiculing you if you say there are things you still need or want to heal from originating from your time in twi. I mean, just knowing that others went through the same things that bothered me while I was associated with the group was a HUGE relief. Because I had no idea that others experienced the same things until I came here. That's why I say there HAS to be something that has bothered you about the way twi operates that causes you to stick so closely to this place. And, there's nothing wrong with making a connection to other people who have been through the same or similar hell that you've been through. We've all been there, had those feelings, and because of the support here and possibly other places, mostly gotten over it.
So, I don't think you're so different than the rest of us here except in that most of the rest of us admit what we've been through. And, yes, it was hard at first to talk about what bothered us, but it got easier and it will get easier for you, too, if you feel you could risk throwing it out there. I think you'd find that people here are more understanding than you might have imagined.
I've got a good example of what I think goes on here in this "proof" category. It's not a real heavy one, and I can offer it very generally without being specific, other than VPW and myself.
In the late 70's at the Way Nash, VPW made a joke publicly about me, in front of a large group of people, implying - but not directly stating - that I'd done something. I took offense at it, and a number of people asked me about it aftewards which made it even more offensive to me as now a large group of people all "knew" something, based on what he'd said. So the next day I went to see him to ask him about it and exactly where he got his information from and to tell him he had it wrong. Actually, fukkin' wrong is how I think I put it. I was angry but courteous, and intent on making my point clearly.
He kind of backpedalled a little, said, well, that's what he'd "been told" and he really didn't want to make a big deal out of it, he was joking and said he was sorry if he'd hurt my feelings and didn't see the need to take it further.
I did. Because what he'd been told was wrong, and whoever told him that was wrong, lying or both and it would be easy to prove. There had to be a reason why someone would fabricate a story about me or pass on a second/third hand story (if that was the case) without any proof of their own.
He restated, no. He wasn't going to "stew" about it or over it. I told him what about the comment he'd made then, others were misled by what he'd said, would he correct it? He got more agitated at that and said no, he wasn't about to do that and if I had a problem with it, it was mine, not his.
This didn't turn out very well, needless to say. A few days later he came up to me and asked me "if I was still mad at him", like a joke. I told him no, I agreed to let it be but I still stood by what I'd said and that's what I'd repeat. He shrugged and said okay and walked away.
My point is - people do lie. People do get things wrong when they're second hand. But when the principles are available and the trail's still fresh, it's not hard to reconstruct and gain a reasonable concensus on what happened.
Unfortunately VPW died leaving a lot of unfinished business behind for others to sweep up and deal with. He knew - I'm sure - that all of this stuff would come up later after he was gone but decided for his own reasons to not deal with it. So others will. It leaves it open for others now to refuse the story's told based on a "lack of evidence". Those who do are as much "victims" as anyone because they'll never know the truth, as others do. That means the end results will be inadequate, in some cases.
He was an adult. He was a minister of a Christian ministry. He was a leader to people who followed his teachings and embraced his vision of a worldwide ministry of "deliverance" based on an "accurate understanding" of the bible as God's Word. He knew he was dealing with young, immature people in their teens, 20's and 30's.
There's no "blame the victim" here, and no misdirected "blame the man" now, later. There are situations he contributed to and in great part created. If now it's not all to everyone's liking or preference, that shouldn't be any surprise to anyone.
In time everyone involved will be gone. Anyone who feels the need to clear their minds and hearts should. If you feel it's important still - don't leave it behind for others to have to sift through later.
Socks... for just a sec, my blood boiled at your relating of vic's "unwillingness" to man up and deal w/ the lie. "fib", stowry that HE, with his mouth, told about you. He REFUSED to accept responsibility and then, a couple days later, jokingly couched it and framed it as "your" "problem"
If there is any one in the room who cannot see the implications and reverberation of the habit he displayed of this type of activity and the immediate and ultimate repercussions to what we called the ministry<sic>, then God enlighten your sleepy brain!!
Makes me almost ill to think how much of his SH**TT hid under that krappie, self-serving attitude.... <_< :asdf: :(
The irony here is that if Socks had included a reference to witnessed sexual impropriety involving vpee  in this account, then the naysayers would be all over him to prove his vpw stowrie.
Are they really asking for proof of sexual misconduct or is it just a veiled attempt of supression of any account that tarnishes the old man by picking on the most vulnerable of eye witnesses? Â
Trying to controll and shut up the tellers of these accounts is also what's at stake here. Â The actuall suppression and dislodgment of any thread that includes information that is anti vpw is what's going on, gee, I thought it was the purpose of this website to shed light on these very things...
I just stopped by to make another deposit under the counter and enjoy a cuppa joe with my good friends.
I see that the regulars in the peanut gallery are still attacking the victims and pouring salt into their wounds. My philosophy on this has always been that if they are ignored, they will have no fuel for the fires they try to start.
We pick our battles and trying to reason with folks like WD and OM who, after all these years, have not grown to understand nor empathize with the plight of our brothers and sisters, is futile. I would like to merely alert a new poster to the fact that there is no need to engage or defend one's self to them and carry on with the original intent and topic of the thread. Threads get completely derailed, off topic and people get hurt when we take turns engaging and arguing the same things over and over and over and over again - ad nauseam with them.
Those of us who have been here for any length of time already know what they are going to say and why we continue to even try to reason with them is beyond me. They have no decorum, no personal standards of decency and certainly no heart. Why do we continue to waste our time acknowledging any thing they have to say?
Nice to see you Belle........ I'd offer you some peanuts to go with the drink ,but you know there are so few left we may need to keep them in the gallery. Anyway glad to see you were not lost and found your way back.
I don't know if I'm considered a "Big Leaguer," since most of my posts are in the less battle-scarred game and prayer threads, but occasionally I like to add my three cents (adjusted for inflation) to these.
I find the give-and-take at Greasespot refreshing, although I must admit that seeing the same old battles resurfacing everywhere is a bit disheartening. And it works both ways. Someone in a "TWI Stinks" thread posts an experience, and a few "defend TWI at all costs" posters have to flame it, at BEST posting what they believe to be counterexamples, but usually just saying "I never saw that, and you can't prove it, so quit 'lying.'" Someone else starts a "remember this good thing from TWI" thread, and a bunch of others have to chime in with "VPW was a drunken, lying, serial rapist, so your experiences are invalid and how DARE you derive some benefit when others were hurt."
Is there a solution to this? I really doubt it. In an ideal world, we'd all gauge the intent of the previous posters and calibrate our responses appopriately. The evidence here indicates that that just isn't going to happen. (Not that some don't try, of course.) Some of the suggestions here are compassionate but have flaws. For instance, Roy's suggestion of a "no rebuttal" thread (or, rather, forum) has the problem that anyone could post ANYTHING, no matter how untrue, and it would have to be taken at face value. Whereas I think it's wrong to dismiss posts about personal experiences as unprovable, if someone posts something that I KNOW to be untrue (I was there, or whatever), I should have the opportunity to rebut it. The "Ban the Wierwille Apologists" idea is draconian and, IMHO, just plain wrong-headed. If the purpose of GS is to help those who have endured TWI, then I believe it's important to have all viewpoints expressed. Obviously, Paw and the moderators can ban whomever they want; but wasn't allowing only one point of view one of the big problems with TWI? I also think that the suggestion that "Big Leaguers" may intimidate newbies with logic is rather silly. Logic is probably the only thing that will help set the newbies straight. I would only suggest that those who have been at this game a while remember what it was like to BE a newbie and temper their logic with compassion. (Sounds like an old Star Trek episode, with Spock and McCoy reading Kirk's last instructions!)
Let us hear the conclusion of the matter: we are not all going to get along, but we can TRY to!
Aw, Alfakat. Hey, thanks be to the coast for a li'l cool fog, hey! FINAlly!
This all reminded me of something this morning - that old question, "If a tree falls in the woods and theres' no one there to hear/see it, did it really fall?"
Sort of a Philo 101 question, and really a classic example of misdirection although not necessarily deliberate. Maybe. Because the question "Did it fall in the woods?".....is posed by the word "If". And the answer's obvjous, although that would tank a 1,000 writs and screeds.
A preliminary discusson could go on forever about whether or not there are really trees, and what are woods, and who are we and how do we know if there are woods, and was it a big tree and did any innocent animals get hurt and what about that sky, what was it doing and blah blah blah.
But on the ground, the question is really "IF" the tree fell or not. And the question assumes the answer to that by the conditions - and no one's there to hear it.
We can't have an absence to an event if there's no event. So the question really assumes that there was an event. No details but the net result was something that could be seen or heard but for the sake of the question, may not have been seen or heard because there's no one "there" to recognize it.
Did it happen? Yes. Was there anyone there to know about it? Well, let's say No. Did it still happen? Yes. How do we know? Because the question couldn't be asked if it hadn't.
Which is all a little too Zen for Monday, but this being Sunday, hey. Worth a thought.
If (heh hehe) we get past the what are trees and who am I in the universe part of the discussion, which isn't essential information - the real answers reveal themselves as we examine and discuss the material. In much the same way that often goes on here at GS.
GS can never quite get past that level, methinks, because of it's "virtual" nature. None of us "exist" "in" or "on" GS. We pose information much the same as that question is posed, in a bit of a vacuum.
The move from thin air to grilled beef is a struggle that's inherent and will always exist unless it's treated like that question - the "if" assumes that (since) there's others saying they heard and saw something, an event occured that's substantial enough to discuss and examine. In that examination, which should happen in a manner consistent with the nature of the event ("a little courtesy here, with a side o' consideration, table 2! Easy on the hard stuff, they've had a rough trip in!"), the question and answer clarifies itself.
Unless I say it never happened and can't be proven, which brings me right back to where I started, token in hand, for another ride on the merry-go-round. I never get anywhere but I do get to ride again. :)
Well McCoy turned into a big time lawyer and was just fine until he got the mad cow disease . spock went the way of writing poetry and growing his hair long again( maybe with the secret agenda of hiding those ears in shame)
I also happen to believe mob mentality doesnt make a statement true or false it makes it insane.
Socks: your story struck a chord with me. Sorry you were wronged, and glad you had the sense to handle it so well. (It never seems to be enough, even if we "handle it well.")
perhaps "the other side of the story" is more mutlifaceted than it would be to use the word "the"
Unless I say it never happened and can't be proven, which brings me right back to where I started, token in hand, for another ride on the merry-go-round. I never get anywhere but I do get to ride again. :)
The only way to insure we get beyond this point and get to zen nirvana, is to actually ignore the posts that try to bring us back to the stone age and those who try to force the rest of us to ride the merry-go-round again. Â
Pretty tall order to do, especially when something in your particular post sets them off, because of which you are then ganged up on, but its not impossible if the whole Greasespot community decides to ignore the rant. Â Another thread could be started to address the naysayer's points with posted refusals to not dislodge the current thread.
WD, is there anything that you feel the need to heal from or vent about concerning your time spent in twi? Most people have SOMETHING that motivates their participation in gs along those lines, a reason to come back, the draw that causes us to return and bond with like-souls or birds of a feather, if you will. I know I vented a lot my first few years. How about you? There must be some reason why you're drawn here so much.
Really I have nothing to vent about I'm perfectly happy with my time spent in The Way, any problems I had I addressed with those involved, rather than years later blaming someone for my lack of action....... Well there is this one thing that really bugs me after all these years................. Why did they not put more garlic bread in the Lightbears Lasagna meals? Ok there I said it now I feel a whole lot better. Wow the load has lifted , I can see clearly now.
The majority of us here, I believe, are soft-hearted, caring individuals, who would love to understand you. You seem to be a soft-hearted person too on the inside. I have so many faults it's not even funny, so there's no danger of me, for example, laughing at you or ridiculing you if you say there are things you still need or want to heal from originating from your time in twi. I mean, just knowing that others went through the same things that bothered me while I was associated with the group was a HUGE relief. Because I had no idea that others experienced the same things until I came here. That's why I say there HAS to be something that has bothered you about the way twi operates that causes you to stick so closely to this place. And, there's nothing wrong with making a connection to other people who have been through the same or similar hell that you've been through. We've all been there, had those feelings, and because of the support here and possibly other places, mostly gotten over it.
So, I don't think you're so different than the rest of us here except in that most of the rest of us admit what we've been through. And, yes, it was hard at first to talk about what bothered us, but it got easier and it will get easier for you, too, if you feel you could risk throwing it out there. I think you'd find that people here are more understanding than you might have imagined.
All joking aside really , I appreciate your concern ,I do, but I don't consider myself a victim of anything I have no secret things to heal from while in the Way. I'm quite happy with what I learned , I'd do the same all over again. While I agree with your assessment that there are soft-hearted, caring individuals here . I have nothing to give them, I have no secret pain to share with them. Actually I sorta hoped it would be the other way around but I quickly saw that was not to be in most cases. I remain thankful that for whatever reason the scripture that I learned ,remains a benefit to my life. I have no answer for why it did not for everyone, but I wish it had.
Really I have nothing to vent about I'm perfectly happy with my time spent in The Way, any problems I had I addressed with those involved, rather than years later blaming someone for my lack of action....... Well there is this one thing that really bugs me after all these years................. Why did they not put more garlic bread in the Lightbears Lasagna meals? Ok there I said it now I feel a whole lot better. Wow the load has lifted , I can see clearly now.
So, your main purpose is to ridicule people who bought the whole ball of wax?
All joking aside really , I appreciate your concern ,I do, but I don't consider myself a victim of anything I have no secret things to heal from while in the Way. I'm quite happy with what I learned , I'd do the same all over again. While I agree with your assessment that there are soft-hearted, caring individuals here . I have nothing to give them, I have no secret pain to share with them. Actually I sorta hoped it would be the other way around but I quickly saw that was not to be in most cases. I remain thankful that for whatever reason the scripture that I learned ,remains a benefit to my life. I have no answer for why it did not for everyone, but I wish it had.
You are indeed very fortunate. I had similar experiences in my time with The Way. I did not witness the abuse first hand, and had a pretty good time and met some great people. My biggest complaint was that when I was an assistant twig coordinator, the coordinator lambasted me for everything I did until I felt like I could do nothing right. I think that the most pervasive evil in TWI was the wrong doctrines they taught.
Nevertheless, there were things that went on "behind closed doors" that most of us knew little or nothing about. But it is more than just hearsay now. Top leaders who were involved have admitted that it went on. They never tried to deny it. They used wrong TWI doctrines (like being above the law) to justify the actions of themselves and others, including VP. Why do you think John Shoenheit's Adultery paper caused such a stir?
I didn't believe any of it at first either. The first account I ever heard about VP's sexual abuse, I was told that the person who wrote about it was possessed, and I believed it. But as I read more and more first hand accounts, I had to start to wonder, could there be something to this after all? Obviously, there will never be a trial or a legal verdict, since he's dead. So we have to ask ourselves, what would be convincing testimony? To me, the NUMBER of first hand accounts, combined with the top leadership who were involved admitting it, makes it more than plausible. I'd say we can conclude "beyond a reasonable doubt" that VPW sexually abused women who trusted him as a man of God.
You say there is not enough evidence. How many of the accounts have you read? Do you know of any evidence that disproves those accounts? If you are genuinely interested in The Truth, then check out those testimonies. Some are at John Juedes' site: http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/tw_suits-sex.htm and some are here in various places. (This is why we need one section to put them together in.) If you genuinely care about truth and justice, rather than continue to say "there isn't enough evidence" you'll seek out the truth by listening to what those involved have to say. That's what I did, and that's what convinced me of what kind of man VPW was. I would not have seen it based on my limited experience with him in person.
The "I know what I saw" testimony, as real as it is to the witnesses, is still internet ether to those who saw something else. For me, the question of whether VPW was a philandering scoundrel is a matter that is to be settled between VPW and the Lord. But I myself am stuck with the nagging responsibility of what I shall do with my own life, and what my involvement with The Way Ministry led me towards: godliness or dishonesty. I have concluded that it is, for the most part, dishonesty, though it espoused and taught honesty.
You know, man does not want to be ruled. I do not want to be ruled. I want to rule. I want my desires, my will, to rule. But guess what? I am the pot, and Another is the Potter. In my own journey, The Way defined God, put him in A Box that allowed me to make demands of Him because I "understood" Him and thereby had power over Him, "compelling" Him to "honor" "His Word." Not so any more. Now, I want to be ruled. Damn or bless VPW or anyone else, as the Lord sees fit. Let them answer to the Lord, as will I. I know for certain that without mercy I will not prevail. How 'bout you?
You are indeed very fortunate. I had similar experiences in my time with The Way. I did not witness the abuse first hand, and had a pretty good time and met some great people. My biggest complaint was that when I was an assistant twig coordinator, the coordinator lambasted me for everything I did until I felt like I could do nothing right. I think that the most pervasive evil in TWI was the wrong doctrines they taught.
Nevertheless, there were things that went on "behind closed doors" that most of us knew little or nothing about. But it is more than just hearsay now. Top leaders who were involved have admitted that it went on. They never tried to deny it. They used wrong TWI doctrines (like being above the law) to justify the actions of themselves and others, including VP. Why do you think John Shoenheit's Adultery paper caused such a stir?
I didn't believe any of it at first either. The first account I ever heard about VP's sexual abuse, I was told that the person who wrote about it was possessed, and I believed it. But as I read more and more first hand accounts, I had to start to wonder, could there be something to this after all? Obviously, there will never be a trial or a legal verdict, since he's dead. So we have to ask ourselves, what would be convincing testimony? To me, the NUMBER of first hand accounts, combined with the top leadership who were involved admitting it, makes it more than plausible. I'd say we can conclude "beyond a reasonable doubt" that VPW sexually abused women who trusted him as a man of God.
You say there is not enough evidence. How many of the accounts have you read? Do you know of any evidence that disproves those accounts? If you are genuinely interested in The Truth, then check out those testimonies. Some are at John Juedes' site: http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/tw_suits-sex.htm and some are here in various places. (This is why we need one section to put them together in.) If you genuinely care about truth and justice, rather than continue to say "there isn't enough evidence" you'll seek out the truth by listening to what those involved have to say. That's what I did, and that's what convinced me of what kind of man VPW was. I would not have seen it based on my limited experience with him in person.
Mark I'll try this again ,honestly I don't know why . I've said it a zillion times over several threads............ Perhaps you will read slowly and get what I said right this time
First you seem to imply by your statement "I didn't believe any of it at first either" that you think I am in the group that does not. I have never stated such. I did say that aside from testimony from one side of the story that there is not documentable evidence to prove the case one way or another. That is a true fact there are no reports filed, DNA , excreta...... That does not prove or disprove anything but it is the hard facts. There are obvious reasons for why that is which I won't go into but some have been brought up in the threads.
Second what I did say is that I, ME, Myself , will not charge someone as guilty of a crime without such evidence, it flies against our rights as Americans. You and or anyone else is free to do as you please before God, but I choose not to go down that road of being the judge without a fair hearing. The second part to this I also believe that it is wrong to refer to someone as having committed a crime based upon someone's story, they have a right to be innocent until proven guilty and until such time as they are they should be referred to as alleged , some disagree but if one looks at the public presentation of such cases you will see that is the rule of thumb.
You say there is not enough evidence. How many of the accounts have you read? Do you know of any evidence that disproves those accounts? If you are genuinely interested in The Truth, then check out those testimonies. Some are at John Juedes' site: http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/tw_suits-sex.htm and some are here in various places. (This is why we need one section to put them together in.) If you genuinely care about truth and justice, rather than continue to say "there isn't enough evidence" you'll seek out the truth by listening to what those involved have to say. That's what I did, and that's what convinced me of what kind of man VPW was. I would not have seen it based on my limited experience with him in person.
Mark I have read them all I heard about them long before Waydale or GreaseSpot were a thought in anyone's mind, (clear from my little geographical area where I know nothing even) and others as well that have not been accounted for like Dee Ann Voth Contrary to what Rascal thinks I know What I speak of.
Mark what you did was listen to one side of a testimony and you made a decision , whether I agree with that testimony or not is not/ nor ever was the point. The point is /was always once one starts down the road of accepting one persons word without due process and rendering someone and referring to someone as guilty we have destroyed the rights we enjoy in this country. You may be right in this case what will the next one be? It's a road I won't travel on , but as I said you are free to do as you see fit , and I am free to point out the facts which are that there is zero evidence for these claims to make a judgment either way unless you just pick one from an emotional response.
Was it earlier on this thread where someone asked if it was acceptible for a person to have multiple screen names for this site, even if it was not for the purpose of getting around a suspension? I believe Pawtucket responded with a simple, direct, "NO."
It might have been on the Where's Bumpy thread... anyway, I just saw that there are several people with birthdays today (July 14). Three of them might be the same person.
Hills Bro is Hills Bro. But he has said before that his business is as a carpet cleaning contractor. That could be the same as a "ProRug Sucker"... and if his first name (or nickname) is "Jimbo" then it's possible all three of them are the same person.
I don't know if that's the case, but it sure looks like it could be...
Mark I'll try this again ,honestly I don't know why . I've said it a zillion times over several threads............ Perhaps you will read slowly and get what I said right this time
Unnecessarily condescending, but I'll let it go.
First you seem to imply by your statement "I didn't believe any of it at first either" that you think I am in the group that does not.
I'm not implying anything, I just stated a fact. I didn't believe the allegations at first. But I was convinced.
Mark what you did was listen to one side of a testimony and you made a decision
No, I listened to both sides of the story. One side said VP was a scumbag because he had sex with all of those women. The other side said it wasn't a big deal because in the Bible adultery is really referring to idolatry, not literal sex. Furthermore, that side said that he had needs that had to be met, because of various physical conditions that Mrs. W had, even though in his own Christian Family and Sex class he said that in such cases a man "ought to learn how to masturbate."
Not once did I ever hear any of the top leadership who were involved deny that it happened. Only that it wasn't a big deal because we are "above the law" and "doctor" taught us what was acceptable among people who were spiritually mature enough to handle it.
...whether I agree with that testimony or not is not/ nor ever was the point. The point is /was always once one starts down the road of accepting one persons word without due process and rendering someone and referring to someone as guilty we have destroyed the rights we enjoy in this country. You may be right in this case what will the next one be? It's a road I won't travel on , but as I said you are free to do as you see fit , and I am free to point out the facts which are that there is zero evidence for these claims to make a judgment either way unless you just pick one from an emotional response.
Sorry, but if you reread the posts (slowly, if you like ;) ) you'll see that many posters have pointed out to you that this is not a court, and this is not about legality or due process, yet you keep repeating these and other related phrases. There will never be due process since VPW is dead. The whole reason for discussing this at all has nothing to do with due process or VP's rights. It has to do with acknowledging some evil things that happened in the name of God, so that anyone who would otherwise be deceived by the lies that were propounded would know the truth. To continue to cast doubts on those who were hurt merely continues to propagate the lies, even if your intention is to speak up for "truth and justice."
You keep saying there is "zero evidence" but how do you account for the fact that there are eyewitnesses who saw it happen in many cases, others who knew it was happening and excused it, many of whom offer their testimonies, and "zero evidence" to disprove or discredit their testimony? We're not talking about just "one person's word," we're talking about MANY testimonies that all corroborate the claims. Even in a court, the goal is to prove "beyond reasonable doubt." Maybe there is not sufficient "hard evidence" to convict in court, but how much evidence do you require before you'll admit that harm was done in the name of God, and anyone following him has the right to know the truth.
As you know, the justice system is not perfect, and there are many instances where the innocent have been punished, and the guilty have gotten away with their crimes. That's why we keep saying we're not talking about courts or due process. We're talking about speaking forth the truth about a man who too many continue to lie about, in the hopes that some people will avoid getting hurt by people who follow his practices - and there are those who do that.
You keep harping on VP's rights. What about the rights of those who were taken advantage of? What about the rights of those who know what happened to them or what they saw or heard, but were made out to be crazy, or possessed, or liars? What about the rights of those who were/are seeking answers and being fed the lies that so many of us were? Do they not have the "right" to know the truth about this man? Why do their rights mean less to you than those of a dead man who will not be affected one way or the other by any of these discussions?
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
17
16
12
16
Popular Days
Jul 11
68
Jul 12
40
Jul 10
26
Jul 15
13
Top Posters In This Topic
Rocky 17 posts
JustSayNO 16 posts
WhiteDove 12 posts
doojable 16 posts
Popular Days
Jul 11 2008
68 posts
Jul 12 2008
40 posts
Jul 10 2008
26 posts
Jul 15 2008
13 posts
excathedra
but thank you for your insight
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
Beloved pawtucket and others reading
God loves you my dear friends
first I have not read the whole tread
As most of yall know I post on many boards and I could be label a Big League poster but let me open upl to all reading
I try hard not to write the wrong thing but it still happens to me
but in truth what is wrong for me might not even shake you up
That is the big key we have to respect each other first but if we learn that, that does not mean we can always have peace but we can make things a lot easier for the people who help keep this place open
I some times think we need a area read only no replies for things that people want to share but are not ready to debate
This way a person who has views 99% of us do not agree with that person could still get to say it in the open and anyone that push things from the "do not reply area" or "read only" receive time to think about it as long as it not bad mouthing another poster maybe stories, doctrines, how they still love the way or what ever the subject that might be hard to post but they just want to share
There another thing I believe we need to do is trust the people who run the board and stop questioning them when something does not go our way and I am guilty of this too
it gets down to think before you write and hit the button
While I would like to see more sub topics there is more too it than making sub topics
I would tell two if they always battle and someone gets hurt stop fighting with each other
only takes one to begin but it only takes one to stop it
if there is no reply it soon dies out and us Big League posters have been around we should know when to post a reply to move thing back to the subject
because we been hurt before our-self
there was a time I almost walked away from here
one thing that helps me is that I take a week off here and there but what helps you might be different than what helps me
thank you
with love and a holy kiss blowing your way Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
you are an awesome person, roy
thank you
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waterbuffalo
WD, is there anything that you feel the need to heal from or vent about concerning your time spent in twi? Most people have SOMETHING that motivates their participation in gs along those lines, a reason to come back, the draw that causes us to return and bond with like-souls or birds of a feather, if you will. I know I vented a lot my first few years. How about you? There must be some reason why you're drawn here so much.
The majority of us here, I believe, are soft-hearted, caring individuals, who would love to understand you. You seem to be a soft-hearted person too on the inside. I have so many faults it's not even funny, so there's no danger of me, for example, laughing at you or ridiculing you if you say there are things you still need or want to heal from originating from your time in twi. I mean, just knowing that others went through the same things that bothered me while I was associated with the group was a HUGE relief. Because I had no idea that others experienced the same things until I came here. That's why I say there HAS to be something that has bothered you about the way twi operates that causes you to stick so closely to this place. And, there's nothing wrong with making a connection to other people who have been through the same or similar hell that you've been through. We've all been there, had those feelings, and because of the support here and possibly other places, mostly gotten over it.
So, I don't think you're so different than the rest of us here except in that most of the rest of us admit what we've been through. And, yes, it was hard at first to talk about what bothered us, but it got easier and it will get easier for you, too, if you feel you could risk throwing it out there. I think you'd find that people here are more understanding than you might have imagined.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
I would love to hear from WD regarding his experience when someone went to jail for a crime they didn't commit or something along those lines
thank you
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
Beloved excathedra
God loves you my dear friend
your welcome and your a awesome person too
thank you
with love and a holy kiss blowing your way Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
I've got a good example of what I think goes on here in this "proof" category. It's not a real heavy one, and I can offer it very generally without being specific, other than VPW and myself.
In the late 70's at the Way Nash, VPW made a joke publicly about me, in front of a large group of people, implying - but not directly stating - that I'd done something. I took offense at it, and a number of people asked me about it aftewards which made it even more offensive to me as now a large group of people all "knew" something, based on what he'd said. So the next day I went to see him to ask him about it and exactly where he got his information from and to tell him he had it wrong. Actually, fukkin' wrong is how I think I put it. I was angry but courteous, and intent on making my point clearly.
He kind of backpedalled a little, said, well, that's what he'd "been told" and he really didn't want to make a big deal out of it, he was joking and said he was sorry if he'd hurt my feelings and didn't see the need to take it further.
I did. Because what he'd been told was wrong, and whoever told him that was wrong, lying or both and it would be easy to prove. There had to be a reason why someone would fabricate a story about me or pass on a second/third hand story (if that was the case) without any proof of their own.
He restated, no. He wasn't going to "stew" about it or over it. I told him what about the comment he'd made then, others were misled by what he'd said, would he correct it? He got more agitated at that and said no, he wasn't about to do that and if I had a problem with it, it was mine, not his.
This didn't turn out very well, needless to say. A few days later he came up to me and asked me "if I was still mad at him", like a joke. I told him no, I agreed to let it be but I still stood by what I'd said and that's what I'd repeat. He shrugged and said okay and walked away.
My point is - people do lie. People do get things wrong when they're second hand. But when the principles are available and the trail's still fresh, it's not hard to reconstruct and gain a reasonable concensus on what happened.
Unfortunately VPW died leaving a lot of unfinished business behind for others to sweep up and deal with. He knew - I'm sure - that all of this stuff would come up later after he was gone but decided for his own reasons to not deal with it. So others will. It leaves it open for others now to refuse the story's told based on a "lack of evidence". Those who do are as much "victims" as anyone because they'll never know the truth, as others do. That means the end results will be inadequate, in some cases.
He was an adult. He was a minister of a Christian ministry. He was a leader to people who followed his teachings and embraced his vision of a worldwide ministry of "deliverance" based on an "accurate understanding" of the bible as God's Word. He knew he was dealing with young, immature people in their teens, 20's and 30's.
There's no "blame the victim" here, and no misdirected "blame the man" now, later. There are situations he contributed to and in great part created. If now it's not all to everyone's liking or preference, that shouldn't be any surprise to anyone.
In time everyone involved will be gone. Anyone who feels the need to clear their minds and hearts should. If you feel it's important still - don't leave it behind for others to have to sift through later.
Edited by socksLink to comment
Share on other sites
alfakat
Socks... for just a sec, my blood boiled at your relating of vic's "unwillingness" to man up and deal w/ the lie. "fib", stowry that HE, with his mouth, told about you. He REFUSED to accept responsibility and then, a couple days later, jokingly couched it and framed it as "your" "problem"
If there is any one in the room who cannot see the implications and reverberation of the habit he displayed of this type of activity and the immediate and ultimate repercussions to what we called the ministry<sic>, then God enlighten your sleepy brain!!
Makes me almost ill to think how much of his SH**TT hid under that krappie, self-serving attitude.... <_<
:asdf: 
:(
Link to comment
Share on other sites
now I see
The irony here is that if Socks had included a reference to witnessed sexual impropriety involving vpee  in this account, then the naysayers would be all over him to prove his vpw stowrie.
Are they really asking for proof of sexual misconduct or is it just a veiled attempt of supression of any account that tarnishes the old man by picking on the most vulnerable of eye witnesses? Â
Trying to controll and shut up the tellers of these accounts is also what's at stake here. Â The actuall suppression and dislodgment of any thread that includes information that is anti vpw is what's going on, gee, I thought it was the purpose of this website to shed light on these very things...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Hi
I just stopped by to make another deposit under the counter and enjoy a cuppa joe with my good friends.
I see that the regulars in the peanut gallery are still attacking the victims and pouring salt into their wounds. My philosophy on this has always been that if they are ignored, they will have no fuel for the fires they try to start.
We pick our battles and trying to reason with folks like WD and OM who, after all these years, have not grown to understand nor empathize with the plight of our brothers and sisters, is futile. I would like to merely alert a new poster to the fact that there is no need to engage or defend one's self to them and carry on with the original intent and topic of the thread. Threads get completely derailed, off topic and people get hurt when we take turns engaging and arguing the same things over and over and over and over again - ad nauseam with them.
Those of us who have been here for any length of time already know what they are going to say and why we continue to even try to reason with them is beyond me. They have no decorum, no personal standards of decency and certainly no heart. Why do we continue to waste our time acknowledging any thing they have to say?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Nice to see you Belle........ I'd offer you some peanuts to go with the drink ,but you know there are so few left we may need to keep them in the gallery.
Anyway glad to see you were not lost and found your way back.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
I don't know if I'm considered a "Big Leaguer," since most of my posts are in the less battle-scarred game and prayer threads, but occasionally I like to add my three cents (adjusted for inflation) to these.
I find the give-and-take at Greasespot refreshing, although I must admit that seeing the same old battles resurfacing everywhere is a bit disheartening. And it works both ways. Someone in a "TWI Stinks" thread posts an experience, and a few "defend TWI at all costs" posters have to flame it, at BEST posting what they believe to be counterexamples, but usually just saying "I never saw that, and you can't prove it, so quit 'lying.'" Someone else starts a "remember this good thing from TWI" thread, and a bunch of others have to chime in with "VPW was a drunken, lying, serial rapist, so your experiences are invalid and how DARE you derive some benefit when others were hurt."
Is there a solution to this? I really doubt it. In an ideal world, we'd all gauge the intent of the previous posters and calibrate our responses appopriately. The evidence here indicates that that just isn't going to happen. (Not that some don't try, of course.) Some of the suggestions here are compassionate but have flaws. For instance, Roy's suggestion of a "no rebuttal" thread (or, rather, forum) has the problem that anyone could post ANYTHING, no matter how untrue, and it would have to be taken at face value. Whereas I think it's wrong to dismiss posts about personal experiences as unprovable, if someone posts something that I KNOW to be untrue (I was there, or whatever), I should have the opportunity to rebut it. The "Ban the Wierwille Apologists" idea is draconian and, IMHO, just plain wrong-headed. If the purpose of GS is to help those who have endured TWI, then I believe it's important to have all viewpoints expressed. Obviously, Paw and the moderators can ban whomever they want; but wasn't allowing only one point of view one of the big problems with TWI? I also think that the suggestion that "Big Leaguers" may intimidate newbies with logic is rather silly. Logic is probably the only thing that will help set the newbies straight. I would only suggest that those who have been at this game a while remember what it was like to BE a newbie and temper their logic with compassion. (Sounds like an old Star Trek episode, with Spock and McCoy reading Kirk's last instructions!)
Let us hear the conclusion of the matter: we are not all going to get along, but we can TRY to!
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Aw, Alfakat. Hey, thanks be to the coast for a li'l cool fog, hey! FINAlly!
This all reminded me of something this morning - that old question, "If a tree falls in the woods and theres' no one there to hear/see it, did it really fall?"
Sort of a Philo 101 question, and really a classic example of misdirection although not necessarily deliberate. Maybe. Because the question "Did it fall in the woods?".....is posed by the word "If". And the answer's obvjous, although that would tank a 1,000 writs and screeds.
A preliminary discusson could go on forever about whether or not there are really trees, and what are woods, and who are we and how do we know if there are woods, and was it a big tree and did any innocent animals get hurt and what about that sky, what was it doing and blah blah blah.
But on the ground, the question is really "IF" the tree fell or not. And the question assumes the answer to that by the conditions - and no one's there to hear it.
We can't have an absence to an event if there's no event. So the question really assumes that there was an event. No details but the net result was something that could be seen or heard but for the sake of the question, may not have been seen or heard because there's no one "there" to recognize it.
Did it happen? Yes. Was there anyone there to know about it? Well, let's say No. Did it still happen? Yes. How do we know? Because the question couldn't be asked if it hadn't.
Which is all a little too Zen for Monday, but this being Sunday, hey. Worth a thought.
If (heh hehe) we get past the what are trees and who am I in the universe part of the discussion, which isn't essential information - the real answers reveal themselves as we examine and discuss the material. In much the same way that often goes on here at GS.
GS can never quite get past that level, methinks, because of it's "virtual" nature. None of us "exist" "in" or "on" GS. We pose information much the same as that question is posed, in a bit of a vacuum.
The move from thin air to grilled beef is a struggle that's inherent and will always exist unless it's treated like that question - the "if" assumes that (since) there's others saying they heard and saw something, an event occured that's substantial enough to discuss and examine. In that examination, which should happen in a manner consistent with the nature of the event ("a little courtesy here, with a side o' consideration, table 2! Easy on the hard stuff, they've had a rough trip in!"), the question and answer clarifies itself.
Unless I say it never happened and can't be proven, which brings me right back to where I started, token in hand, for another ride on the merry-go-round. I never get anywhere but I do get to ride again. :)
Edited by socksLink to comment
Share on other sites
pond
Well McCoy turned into a big time lawyer and was just fine until he got the mad cow disease . spock went the way of writing poetry and growing his hair long again( maybe with the secret agenda of hiding those ears in shame)
I also happen to believe mob mentality doesnt make a statement true or false it makes it insane.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
anotherDan
belle
good to see you
GeorgeStG: thanks for chiming in
Socks: your story struck a chord with me. Sorry you were wronged, and glad you had the sense to handle it so well. (It never seems to be enough, even if we "handle it well.")
perhaps "the other side of the story" is more mutlifaceted than it would be to use the word "the"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
now I see
The only way to insure we get beyond this point and get to zen nirvana, is to actually ignore the posts that try to bring us back to the stone age and those who try to force the rest of us to ride the merry-go-round again. Â
Pretty tall order to do, especially when something in your particular post sets them off, because of which you are then ganged up on, but its not impossible if the whole Greasespot community decides to ignore the rant. Â Another thread could be started to address the naysayer's points with posted refusals to not dislodge the current thread.
Edited by now I seeLink to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waterbuffalo
Whitedove said:
So, your main purpose is to ridicule people who bought the whole ball of wax?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
You are indeed very fortunate. I had similar experiences in my time with The Way. I did not witness the abuse first hand, and had a pretty good time and met some great people. My biggest complaint was that when I was an assistant twig coordinator, the coordinator lambasted me for everything I did until I felt like I could do nothing right. I think that the most pervasive evil in TWI was the wrong doctrines they taught.
Nevertheless, there were things that went on "behind closed doors" that most of us knew little or nothing about. But it is more than just hearsay now. Top leaders who were involved have admitted that it went on. They never tried to deny it. They used wrong TWI doctrines (like being above the law) to justify the actions of themselves and others, including VP. Why do you think John Shoenheit's Adultery paper caused such a stir?
I didn't believe any of it at first either. The first account I ever heard about VP's sexual abuse, I was told that the person who wrote about it was possessed, and I believed it. But as I read more and more first hand accounts, I had to start to wonder, could there be something to this after all? Obviously, there will never be a trial or a legal verdict, since he's dead. So we have to ask ourselves, what would be convincing testimony? To me, the NUMBER of first hand accounts, combined with the top leadership who were involved admitting it, makes it more than plausible. I'd say we can conclude "beyond a reasonable doubt" that VPW sexually abused women who trusted him as a man of God.
You say there is not enough evidence. How many of the accounts have you read? Do you know of any evidence that disproves those accounts? If you are genuinely interested in The Truth, then check out those testimonies. Some are at John Juedes' site: http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/tw_suits-sex.htm and some are here in various places. (This is why we need one section to put them together in.) If you genuinely care about truth and justice, rather than continue to say "there isn't enough evidence" you'll seek out the truth by listening to what those involved have to say. That's what I did, and that's what convinced me of what kind of man VPW was. I would not have seen it based on my limited experience with him in person.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
anotherDan
The "I know what I saw" testimony, as real as it is to the witnesses, is still internet ether to those who saw something else. For me, the question of whether VPW was a philandering scoundrel is a matter that is to be settled between VPW and the Lord. But I myself am stuck with the nagging responsibility of what I shall do with my own life, and what my involvement with The Way Ministry led me towards: godliness or dishonesty. I have concluded that it is, for the most part, dishonesty, though it espoused and taught honesty.
You know, man does not want to be ruled. I do not want to be ruled. I want to rule. I want my desires, my will, to rule. But guess what? I am the pot, and Another is the Potter. In my own journey, The Way defined God, put him in A Box that allowed me to make demands of Him because I "understood" Him and thereby had power over Him, "compelling" Him to "honor" "His Word." Not so any more. Now, I want to be ruled. Damn or bless VPW or anyone else, as the Lord sees fit. Let them answer to the Lord, as will I. I know for certain that without mercy I will not prevail. How 'bout you?
Edited by anotherDanLink to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
I missed where I said that........ Or was that a question? If so the answer is NO
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Mark I'll try this again ,honestly I don't know why . I've said it a zillion times over several threads............ Perhaps you will read slowly and get what I said right this time
First you seem to imply by your statement "I didn't believe any of it at first either" that you think I am in the group that does not. I have never stated such. I did say that aside from testimony from one side of the story that there is not documentable evidence to prove the case one way or another. That is a true fact there are no reports filed, DNA , excreta...... That does not prove or disprove anything but it is the hard facts. There are obvious reasons for why that is which I won't go into but some have been brought up in the threads.
Second what I did say is that I, ME, Myself , will not charge someone as guilty of a crime without such evidence, it flies against our rights as Americans. You and or anyone else is free to do as you please before God, but I choose not to go down that road of being the judge without a fair hearing. The second part to this I also believe that it is wrong to refer to someone as having committed a crime based upon someone's story, they have a right to be innocent until proven guilty and until such time as they are they should be referred to as alleged , some disagree but if one looks at the public presentation of such cases you will see that is the rule of thumb.
Mark I have read them all I heard about them long before Waydale or GreaseSpot were a thought in anyone's mind, (clear from my little geographical area where I know nothing even) and others as well that have not been accounted for like Dee Ann Voth Contrary to what Rascal thinks I know What I speak of.
Mark what you did was listen to one side of a testimony and you made a decision , whether I agree with that testimony or not is not/ nor ever was the point. The point is /was always once one starts down the road of accepting one persons word without due process and rendering someone and referring to someone as guilty we have destroyed the rights we enjoy in this country. You may be right in this case what will the next one be? It's a road I won't travel on , but as I said you are free to do as you see fit , and I am free to point out the facts which are that there is zero evidence for these claims to make a judgment either way unless you just pick one from an emotional response.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Was it earlier on this thread where someone asked if it was acceptible for a person to have multiple screen names for this site, even if it was not for the purpose of getting around a suspension? I believe Pawtucket responded with a simple, direct, "NO."
It might have been on the Where's Bumpy thread... anyway, I just saw that there are several people with birthdays today (July 14). Three of them might be the same person.
Hills Bro is Hills Bro. But he has said before that his business is as a carpet cleaning contractor. That could be the same as a "ProRug Sucker"... and if his first name (or nickname) is "Jimbo" then it's possible all three of them are the same person.
I don't know if that's the case, but it sure looks like it could be...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
Unnecessarily condescending, but I'll let it go.
I'm not implying anything, I just stated a fact. I didn't believe the allegations at first. But I was convinced.
No, I listened to both sides of the story. One side said VP was a scumbag because he had sex with all of those women. The other side said it wasn't a big deal because in the Bible adultery is really referring to idolatry, not literal sex. Furthermore, that side said that he had needs that had to be met, because of various physical conditions that Mrs. W had, even though in his own Christian Family and Sex class he said that in such cases a man "ought to learn how to masturbate."
Not once did I ever hear any of the top leadership who were involved deny that it happened. Only that it wasn't a big deal because we are "above the law" and "doctor" taught us what was acceptable among people who were spiritually mature enough to handle it.
Sorry, but if you reread the posts (slowly, if you like ;) ) you'll see that many posters have pointed out to you that this is not a court, and this is not about legality or due process, yet you keep repeating these and other related phrases. There will never be due process since VPW is dead. The whole reason for discussing this at all has nothing to do with due process or VP's rights. It has to do with acknowledging some evil things that happened in the name of God, so that anyone who would otherwise be deceived by the lies that were propounded would know the truth. To continue to cast doubts on those who were hurt merely continues to propagate the lies, even if your intention is to speak up for "truth and justice."
You keep saying there is "zero evidence" but how do you account for the fact that there are eyewitnesses who saw it happen in many cases, others who knew it was happening and excused it, many of whom offer their testimonies, and "zero evidence" to disprove or discredit their testimony? We're not talking about just "one person's word," we're talking about MANY testimonies that all corroborate the claims. Even in a court, the goal is to prove "beyond reasonable doubt." Maybe there is not sufficient "hard evidence" to convict in court, but how much evidence do you require before you'll admit that harm was done in the name of God, and anyone following him has the right to know the truth.
As you know, the justice system is not perfect, and there are many instances where the innocent have been punished, and the guilty have gotten away with their crimes. That's why we keep saying we're not talking about courts or due process. We're talking about speaking forth the truth about a man who too many continue to lie about, in the hopes that some people will avoid getting hurt by people who follow his practices - and there are those who do that.
You keep harping on VP's rights. What about the rights of those who were taken advantage of? What about the rights of those who know what happened to them or what they saw or heard, but were made out to be crazy, or possessed, or liars? What about the rights of those who were/are seeking answers and being fed the lies that so many of us were? Do they not have the "right" to know the truth about this man? Why do their rights mean less to you than those of a dead man who will not be affected one way or the other by any of these discussions?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.