The Biblical accuracy or inaccuracy of dispensationalism is not the issue here.
That is a subject for the doctrinal forum.
The simple fact is that dispensationalism is a theological system.
Wierwille used that system to excuse his sexual indiscretions.
Ergo, he used theology (accurate or not) to have sex with women other than his wife.
On one hand, twi taught us that Jesus Christ fulfilled the law to the uttermost and ushered in the Grace Administration...... and a higher level of love, agape love, a spiritual love that is unconditional. Also, the book of James refers to this as the *royal law of love* ...... to love your neighbor as yourself.
Yet, on the other hand, twi didn't approach *adultery* with the same logic......i.e. if one were to live at a higher level because of Jesus Christ's accomplishments, then regarding THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY there would not have even been a "grey issue." Grace was not a license to sin......quite the contrary. One could live at such a level that he/she was rarely tempted with sin/adultery........remember that?
On love........we were to live at a higher level
On adultery....we could bypass the OT law and live at a lower level
I wonder how Bathsheba, as Uriah's wife, reacted. no one said no to the king, so her cooperation was most certainly coerced because of his position of power, unless he took the time to seduce her. was she afraid? did she cry afterward? was what David did essentially RAPE? I think it probably was. Bathsheba didn't have a choice.
On the other hand, Bathsheba bathed where David could see her. I'm guessing that other options were available.
George
(No, this doesn't mean that every woman who is coerced was "asking for it." Bathsheba might have been, however.)
On the other hand, Bathsheba bathed where David could see her. I'm guessing that other options were available.
George
(No, this doesn't mean that every woman who is coerced was "asking for it." Bathsheba might have been, however.)
we don't know that she was naked. doesn't say she was in a tub. she might have been washing off dust and sweat in a basin once it cooled off. nothing suggests she was acting inappropriately. in fact, I'd venture a guess that she was acting with discretion, having waited for the evening. how was she to know that David stayed home from the war and slept all day, then stumbled upon an opportunity to indulge in some voyeurism?
And it came to pass in an eventide, that David arose from his bed, and walked upon the roof of the king's house: and from the roof he saw a woman washing (rachats) herself; and the woman was very beautiful to look upon.
verse 8
And David said unto Uriah, Go down to thy house and wash (rachats) thy feet.
II Samuel 25: 41
And she [Abigail] arose, and bowed herself on her face to the earth, and said, Behold, let thine handmaid be a servant to wash (rachats) the feet of the servants of my lord.
Psalm 26: 6
I will wash (rachats) mine hands in innocency:----------
I am with you oldiesman, one thing is one thing, and the other is the other.
Hello,
I hope you will enjoy this quote by Puritan John Owen. I believe it is topic related.
"Let no man pretend to fear sin that does not fear temptation also! These two are too closely united to be separated. He does not truly hate the fruit who delights in the root." John Owen
John Schoenheit in his paper proved from the church epistles that adultery and fornication is not permitted, so inferring that twi core teaching (seven administrations) is false because of bad behavior is folly.
umm, Oldies.. wasn't that why he was fired, labelled possessed, along with his "work" and anyone who happened to read it? And twi LEADERSHIP agreed.
seems your example supports Juedes claim to me..
and geer further claimed that this kind of "research" threatened the very fiber of "dr"'s "works"..
they ran him off before the ink was dry on his little paper..
they were so successful in burying j.s.'s little paper.. which though "accurate", could be described as a work that a high schooler could come up with..
that I didn't even know of its existence until twenty years later..
when I say high schooler.. it's "adultery 101".. even most grade schoolers would agree daddy shouldn't be sleeping with strange women..
no, the problem wasn't with the WHOLE ministry.. just those who ran it..
and I'm starting to think it was closer to the 97 percent level of those in "authority" being the very cause of all of this..
Yeah, not only was JS run off for writing the paper, to even READ the paper was to be considered to allow ones self to become possessed, and to be thrown out of the ministry.
umm, Oldies.. wasn't that why he was fired, labelled possessed, along with his "work" and anyone who happened to read it? And twi LEADERSHIP agreed.
seems your example supports Juedes claim to me..
and geer further claimed that this kind of "research" threatened the very fiber of "dr"'s "works"..
they ran him off before the ink was dry on his little paper..
Actually John Schoenheit's paper works to contradict Dr. Juedes' claim as he expressed it: "The fact that core Way teachings can so easily be used to promote immorality is a good indication that those Way teachings are false, too."
"is a good indication that those Way teachings are false, too" is the part of Dr. Juedes' statement that I am disagreeing with.
John Schoeneit uses the core twi teaching "seven administrations" to prove from scripture, namely, the church epistles, that adultery and fornication is not permitted in the grace administration.
So no, the fact that the seven administrations teaching was misused to promote immorality by some actually is NOT a good indication that that teaching is false, because the teaching also may be used to teach morality in the grace administration, as John Schoenheit did.
This is vital component of Wierwille's theology. According to Wierwille, all scripture is either addressed to Jew, Gentile or The Church of God. Understanding the "to whom" aspect is reliant upon a proper understanding of the seven administrations, as explained in PFAL. In light of this concept, we see that The Ten Commandments, specifically number 7, "You will not commit adultery.", are not written "to" The Church as it exists in The Age Of Grace. But where did this concept of administrations and "to whom" originate? It is largely accepted that the delineation of administrations (dispensations) was unknown much before the 19th century. Its origins are most closely tied and attributed to the works of John Nelson Darby (1800-1882). His theology promoted a "Right Dividing of The Word" and two "second comings".
The Dispensational Origins of Modern Premillennialism and John Nelson Darby
By Jack Van Deventer
John Neslon Darby
The twentieth century has seen a dramatic paradigm shift in prophetic perspectives, first away from and now back toward its historic roots. This shift away from historic Christianity stemmed from a novel approach to Bible interpretation called dispensationalism which was developed in the 1830s and popularized with the 1909 publication of the Scofield Reference Bible. Dispensationalism, with its unique brand of premillennialism, has been thoroughly pervasive, being prominent in many churches, in bookstores, and among radio Bible teachers.
The distinguishing features of dispensationalism are a rigidly applied literalism in the interpretation of Scripture, a compartmentalization of Scripture into "dispensations," and a dichotomy between Israel and the Church. Dispensationalists believe "this present world system . . . is now controlled by Satan" (not by God) and will end in failure and apostasy.
Dispensational premillennialists claim that their unique doctrines have been held since the early church, but these claims have been soundly refuted. Far from being the historic position of the church, premillennialism was described in 1813 by David Bogue as an oddity of Church history. Postmillennialism was the dominant eschatology from the Reformation until at least 1859.
The doctrine of a secret rapture was first conceived by John Nelson Darby of the Plymouth Brethren in 1827. Darby, known as the father of dispensationalism, invented the doctrine claiming there were not one, but two "second comings." This teaching was immediately challenged as unbiblical by other members of the Brethren. Samuel P. Tregelles, a noted biblical scholar, rejected Darby's new interpretation as the "height of speculative nonsense." So tenuous was Darby's rapture theory that he had lingering doubts about it as late as 1843, and possibly 1845. Another member of the Plymouth Brethren, B.W. Newton, disputed Darby's new doctrine claiming such a conclusion was only possible if one declared certain passages to be "renounced as not properly ours."
Following him on this theological path was C.I. Scofield (1843-1921). One of Scofield's influencial works that promoted this approach was Rightly Dividing The Word of Truth, published in 1896.
It should be quite clear that the theology of Darby and Scofield were large influences on the basic tenets of TWI and interwoven in the behavior of VPW, and some of the upper leadership, as it relates to sexual conduct. Hence, they used a unique brand of theology (TWI theology) to engage in sexual behavior (get sex).
Former TWI president Martindale resigned after female followers of TWI filed lawsuits against him, alleging he exploited them for sex. His first thought must have been- "but I haven't done anything wrong." According to TWI theology, he indeed had not done anything wrong. We have a new article on www.abouttheway.org called
The Way's Theology of Sex: How Way Leaders Used the Bible to Promote Promiscuity and Adultery
it describes in detail how leaders used Way theology to persuade women to have sex with them, and how the Way's sex class prepared students for promiscuous sex. It includes accounts of Kristen Skedgell's sexual experiences with TWI leaders from her book Losing the Way.
It is striking that they used core Way teachings to do this. This is much different from clergy scandals in the Christian world (like Jim Baker/ Swaggert) in which the men never try to use the Bible to defend and promote promiscuity.
Actually John Schoenheit's paper works to contradict Dr. Juedes' claim as he expressed it: "The fact that core Way teachings can so easily be used to promote immorality is a good indication that those Way teachings are false, too."
"is a good indication that those Way teachings are false, too" is the part of Dr. Juedes' statement that I am disagreeing with.
John Schoeneit uses the core twi teaching "seven administrations" to prove from scripture, namely, the church epistles, that adultery and fornication is not permitted in the grace administration.
So no, the fact that the seven administrations teaching was misused to promote immorality by some actually is NOT a good indication that that teaching is false, because the teaching also may be used to teach morality in the grace administration, as John Schoenheit did.
the claim I referred to was the above claim.
according to WAY THEOLOGY, neither vic, loy or others did no wrong. The proof?
and as a matter of CHURCH ADMINISTRATION no less.. they labelled a guy POSSESSED, sent him out in the night.. threatened others to not read his "research" on pains of harboring the same "spirits" and following him out the door.. all from a word study on ADULTERY and FORNICATION.
and for the most part.. twi "leadership" AGREED WITH him.
They ADMITTED the "research" undercut vic's theology..
with this kind of track record.. I wouldn't believe the sun appears in the morning in the eastern sky based on da ways assertion..
they BENT scripture every which way with "dispensationalism" and the like to soften warnings against adultery, fornication, etc..
loy and crowd bent it from avoiding fornication and the like.. to being as a matter of THEOLOGY.. a "righteous thing" for another man's wife to "relieve" the "spiritual pressure" da manogawd was undergoing..
is this a "good reason" to assume da way's teachings are false?
they were so successful in burying j.s.'s little paper.. which though "accurate", could be described as a work that a high schooler could come up with..
that I didn't even know of its existence until twenty years later..
Actually Ham, you're not entirely correct on this point...J.S. submitted his paper to Cummins (head of the research dept.) and Cummins, in turn, went to the top twi leadership with it...they decided that J.S. was possessed, and fired him and anybody else who read the paper...by doing this, a controversy started...which led to much unrest and division. I actually heard about this paper at the time of J.S.'s firing and the subsequent firings of many others...in fact, I even had my own copy at the time.
What Cummins SHOULD have done is thank J.S. for his submission and then bury it...throw it into a filing cabinet somewhere and forget about it...instead, twi decided to make an issue of it and there were many at the time (by your account, certainly not eveyone) who became aware of this issue.
...and there should be no doubt that when twi leadership condemned this letter, they were in effect, showing their cards, so to speak. Twi twisted scriptures to justify their hedonistic lifestyle...sex was certainly a big part of this.
well, I didn't even know what the paper was about, or that there even was a paper until I read it here, years later..
I didn't even know who j.s. even was.. or that he was "released" from employment.. or the extent of sexual indiscretions and worse..they were effective enough to keep a lot of this from rank and file, those who financially supported the "ministry".
they weren't running a ministry.. they were running a house of (often forced) prostitution under religious pretense..
" As we relaxed and had a second drink, he asked Judy and me to describe what is was like
to attend an orgy. We were taken back by the question and embarrassed by it, because even though it was part of our testimony in our deliverance from sin to God's righteousness, no one had ever asked us to describe what it was like to go to an orgy.
We found his curiosity shocking. But we gave him a brief description which is really all we could give him since our encounter with an orgy had been so brief. We had attended one orgy sponsored by the San Francisco Sexual Freedom League, but we were so overwhelmed by the spectacle that we had left after twenty minutes.
"You know that's all available," V.P. said. "God put it in I Corinthians 7:1 which He said 'It is good for a man not to touch a woman.' If it wasn't available to have sex outside the marriage God would have said 'best' instead of 'good.'"
I could not believe what I was hearing. I responded with, "I just thank God that He pulled our soul out of that pit of debauchery." When Judy and I went to bed, I said to her, "I don't believe what he said tonight, and I'm going to forget it. I must have misunderstood him."
vpw told Jim God said orgies were "available."
==============
""Weirwille sought things to validate his position. He did NOT research the word and change his opinion to IT. I becamed pretty good friends with Jim D*0p. He told me that he, Jim, had a ministry where they were sexually loose and an anything goes kinda group out in California. Weirwille flew out there, telling folks it was to talk with Jim about the Bible and witness or something to him. Jim told me Weirwille flew out there to LEARN from Jimmy about the free sex thinking. Weirwille said he always believed sex should be free and allowed with as many as you feel you want to be with -- but could NEVER prove it from the Bible. He was there to see if Jimmy could prove it was okay via scripture.
D0*p never really could and was more of a hippie minister than a sexual pervert looking for Biblical validation.
Weirwille had these concepts, notions, urges, illnesses and tried to find a way to SELL them to us. He was not about to CHANGE his thinking according to scripture. He was not a researcher. He was similar to a lot of cult leaders. He had an idea and looked for people who would buy into it. Like Charlie Manson."
=================
""He also told a small group at Emporia one night to teach their children about their bodies, "you can brush their nipple with your hand and show them how it hardens. You can show them not to be ashamed of their body reactions" Then he shared about the African Tribe where the Father broke the hymen of the daughters to get them experienced in sex to prepare them for marriage -- he thought it to be beautiful.
VPW had already let me see his dark side. Sitting there I thought OH MY GOD, this is subtle but
he is teaching this group that it is beautiful to teach your daughters how to have sex, it is just not accepted in our culture!
He was standing behind his sex problems and setting us up to have sex with our godly "family" as well as the earthly one."
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
11
7
13
16
Popular Days
Feb 24
31
Feb 23
12
Feb 25
12
Mar 3
11
Top Posters In This Topic
oldiesman 11 posts
Tzaia 7 posts
Ham 13 posts
waysider 16 posts
Popular Days
Feb 24 2009
31 posts
Feb 23 2009
12 posts
Feb 25 2009
12 posts
Mar 3 2009
11 posts
Popular Posts
waysider
Likewise with the in-clusion of the graphic photographs that were accompanied with comments like, "Aren't her breasts just bee-u-tee-ful!" and a lengthy list of street terms for genitalia and sex acts
potato
thank you, WG. I didn't remember that as being part of PFAL, but it certainly explains some things. it was a deeply engrained part of twi culture. I wonder how Bathsheba, as Uriah's wife, reacted. no
waysider
The Biblical accuracy or inaccuracy of dispensationalism is not the issue here. That is a subject for the doctrinal forum. The simple fact is that dispensationalism is a theological system. Wierwil
skyrider
On one hand, twi taught us that Jesus Christ fulfilled the law to the uttermost and ushered in the Grace Administration...... and a higher level of love, agape love, a spiritual love that is unconditional. Also, the book of James refers to this as the *royal law of love* ...... to love your neighbor as yourself.
Yet, on the other hand, twi didn't approach *adultery* with the same logic......i.e. if one were to live at a higher level because of Jesus Christ's accomplishments, then regarding THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY there would not have even been a "grey issue." Grace was not a license to sin......quite the contrary. One could live at such a level that he/she was rarely tempted with sin/adultery........remember that?
On love........we were to live at a higher level
On adultery....we could bypass the OT law and live at a lower level
Edited by skyriderLink to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
On the other hand, Bathsheba bathed where David could see her. I'm guessing that other options were available.
George
(No, this doesn't mean that every woman who is coerced was "asking for it." Bathsheba might have been, however.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
potato
we don't know that she was naked. doesn't say she was in a tub. she might have been washing off dust and sweat in a basin once it cooled off. nothing suggests she was acting inappropriately. in fact, I'd venture a guess that she was acting with discretion, having waited for the evening. how was she to know that David stayed home from the war and slept all day, then stumbled upon an opportunity to indulge in some voyeurism?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
II Samuel 11:2
And it came to pass in an eventide, that David arose from his bed, and walked upon the roof of the king's house: and from the roof he saw a woman washing (rachats) herself; and the woman was very beautiful to look upon.
verse 8
And David said unto Uriah, Go down to thy house and wash (rachats) thy feet.
II Samuel 25: 41
And she [Abigail] arose, and bowed herself on her face to the earth, and said, Behold, let thine handmaid be a servant to wash (rachats) the feet of the servants of my lord.
Psalm 26: 6
I will wash (rachats) mine hands in innocency:----------
*************************************************************
David spied on her from the roof!!
In addition, this word is not exclusively used in the sense of "taking a bath".
That's an extrapolation derived from our current usage of the word "bathe".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spoudazo
Hello,
I hope you will enjoy this quote by Puritan John Owen. I believe it is topic related.
"Let no man pretend to fear sin that does not fear temptation also! These two are too closely united to be separated. He does not truly hate the fruit who delights in the root." John Owen
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
umm, Oldies.. wasn't that why he was fired, labelled possessed, along with his "work" and anyone who happened to read it? And twi LEADERSHIP agreed.
seems your example supports Juedes claim to me..
and geer further claimed that this kind of "research" threatened the very fiber of "dr"'s "works"..
they ran him off before the ink was dry on his little paper..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
doesn't that strike you as at least a *little* UNUSUAL?
I mean.. as a matter of "church administration"..
labelling people who form the opinion from the bible that adultery is actually WRONG..
as POSSESSED?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
they were so successful in burying j.s.'s little paper.. which though "accurate", could be described as a work that a high schooler could come up with..
that I didn't even know of its existence until twenty years later..
when I say high schooler.. it's "adultery 101".. even most grade schoolers would agree daddy shouldn't be sleeping with strange women..
no, the problem wasn't with the WHOLE ministry.. just those who ran it..
and I'm starting to think it was closer to the 97 percent level of those in "authority" being the very cause of all of this..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Yeah, not only was JS run off for writing the paper, to even READ the paper was to be considered to allow ones self to become possessed, and to be thrown out of the ministry.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Actually John Schoenheit's paper works to contradict Dr. Juedes' claim as he expressed it: "The fact that core Way teachings can so easily be used to promote immorality is a good indication that those Way teachings are false, too."
"is a good indication that those Way teachings are false, too" is the part of Dr. Juedes' statement that I am disagreeing with.
John Schoeneit uses the core twi teaching "seven administrations" to prove from scripture, namely, the church epistles, that adultery and fornication is not permitted in the grace administration.
So no, the fact that the seven administrations teaching was misused to promote immorality by some actually is NOT a good indication that that teaching is false, because the teaching also may be used to teach morality in the grace administration, as John Schoenheit did.
Edited by oldiesmanLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
To whom is it written?
This is vital component of Wierwille's theology. According to Wierwille, all scripture is either addressed to Jew, Gentile or The Church of God. Understanding the "to whom" aspect is reliant upon a proper understanding of the seven administrations, as explained in PFAL. In light of this concept, we see that The Ten Commandments, specifically number 7, "You will not commit adultery.", are not written "to" The Church as it exists in The Age Of Grace. But where did this concept of administrations and "to whom" originate? It is largely accepted that the delineation of administrations (dispensations) was unknown much before the 19th century. Its origins are most closely tied and attributed to the works of John Nelson Darby (1800-1882). His theology promoted a "Right Dividing of The Word" and two "second comings".
http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/cathouse/darby.htm
The Dispensational Origins of Modern Premillennialism and John Nelson Darby
By Jack Van Deventer
John Neslon Darby
The twentieth century has seen a dramatic paradigm shift in prophetic perspectives, first away from and now back toward its historic roots. This shift away from historic Christianity stemmed from a novel approach to Bible interpretation called dispensationalism which was developed in the 1830s and popularized with the 1909 publication of the Scofield Reference Bible. Dispensationalism, with its unique brand of premillennialism, has been thoroughly pervasive, being prominent in many churches, in bookstores, and among radio Bible teachers.
The distinguishing features of dispensationalism are a rigidly applied literalism in the interpretation of Scripture, a compartmentalization of Scripture into "dispensations," and a dichotomy between Israel and the Church. Dispensationalists believe "this present world system . . . is now controlled by Satan" (not by God) and will end in failure and apostasy.
Dispensational premillennialists claim that their unique doctrines have been held since the early church, but these claims have been soundly refuted. Far from being the historic position of the church, premillennialism was described in 1813 by David Bogue as an oddity of Church history. Postmillennialism was the dominant eschatology from the Reformation until at least 1859.
The doctrine of a secret rapture was first conceived by John Nelson Darby of the Plymouth Brethren in 1827. Darby, known as the father of dispensationalism, invented the doctrine claiming there were not one, but two "second comings." This teaching was immediately challenged as unbiblical by other members of the Brethren. Samuel P. Tregelles, a noted biblical scholar, rejected Darby's new interpretation as the "height of speculative nonsense." So tenuous was Darby's rapture theory that he had lingering doubts about it as late as 1843, and possibly 1845. Another member of the Plymouth Brethren, B.W. Newton, disputed Darby's new doctrine claiming such a conclusion was only possible if one declared certain passages to be "renounced as not properly ours."
********************************************************************************
***********************************
Following him on this theological path was C.I. Scofield (1843-1921). One of Scofield's influencial works that promoted this approach was Rightly Dividing The Word of Truth, published in 1896.
http://www.biblebelievers.com/scofield/index.html
Here is the table of contents. Note the resemblance of the contents to subjects that were explored in TWI.
Introduction
CHAPTER 1 The Jew, the Gentile, and the Church of God
CHAPTER 2 The Seven Dispensations
CHAPTER 3 The Two Advents
CHAPTER 4 The Two Resurrections
CHAPTER 5 The Five Judgments
CHAPTER 6 Law and Grace
CHAPTER 7 The Believer's Two Natures
CHAPTER 8 The Believer's Standing and State
CHAPTER 9 Salvation and Rewards
CHAPTER 10 Believers and Professors
**************************************************************************
It should be quite clear that the theology of Darby and Scofield were large influences on the basic tenets of TWI and interwoven in the behavior of VPW, and some of the upper leadership, as it relates to sexual conduct. Hence, they used a unique brand of theology (TWI theology) to engage in sexual behavior (get sex).
edit: spelling
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
the claim I referred to was the above claim.
according to WAY THEOLOGY, neither vic, loy or others did no wrong. The proof?
and as a matter of CHURCH ADMINISTRATION no less.. they labelled a guy POSSESSED, sent him out in the night.. threatened others to not read his "research" on pains of harboring the same "spirits" and following him out the door.. all from a word study on ADULTERY and FORNICATION.
and for the most part.. twi "leadership" AGREED WITH him.
They ADMITTED the "research" undercut vic's theology..
with this kind of track record.. I wouldn't believe the sun appears in the morning in the eastern sky based on da ways assertion..
they BENT scripture every which way with "dispensationalism" and the like to soften warnings against adultery, fornication, etc..
loy and crowd bent it from avoiding fornication and the like.. to being as a matter of THEOLOGY.. a "righteous thing" for another man's wife to "relieve" the "spiritual pressure" da manogawd was undergoing..
is this a "good reason" to assume da way's teachings are false?
I think he makes a pretty good case..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
the MESSAGE was..
"it's OK to boink herr manogawd, in his hour of *need*.."
"all things (without exception) are purified with believing"
"it's OK to lie, cheat and steal.."
like a friend of mine in the old days.. his dad was smart.. he told him "sounds like you are using the bible to go to hell.."
Edited by HamLink to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Actually Ham, you're not entirely correct on this point...J.S. submitted his paper to Cummins (head of the research dept.) and Cummins, in turn, went to the top twi leadership with it...they decided that J.S. was possessed, and fired him and anybody else who read the paper...by doing this, a controversy started...which led to much unrest and division. I actually heard about this paper at the time of J.S.'s firing and the subsequent firings of many others...in fact, I even had my own copy at the time.
What Cummins SHOULD have done is thank J.S. for his submission and then bury it...throw it into a filing cabinet somewhere and forget about it...instead, twi decided to make an issue of it and there were many at the time (by your account, certainly not eveyone) who became aware of this issue.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
...and there should be no doubt that when twi leadership condemned this letter, they were in effect, showing their cards, so to speak. Twi twisted scriptures to justify their hedonistic lifestyle...sex was certainly a big part of this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Yep. Most definitely showed their hand.
well, I didn't even know what the paper was about, or that there even was a paper until I read it here, years later..
I didn't even know who j.s. even was.. or that he was "released" from employment.. or the extent of sexual indiscretions and worse..they were effective enough to keep a lot of this from rank and file, those who financially supported the "ministry".
they weren't running a ministry.. they were running a house of (often forced) prostitution under religious pretense..
I wonder if I can get my money back..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Â
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.