The point of my question was that I'd hate to miss out on something just because of a prejudice, a prejudice that I probably wouldn't have if not for religion...
I ask you this: imagine that there are a lot of folks around that do things that there can be found "don't do this" in the Bible, are you as openly prejudiced against them?
Personally, I think I got a lot more out of the words to that song than you did... I guess it's how one looks at things...
What if your son came to you and told you he was sexually attracted to small children?
It's not that I don't like Trefor as a person. He's a well-spoken gentleman with a good deal of patience, probably moreso than I would have in the reverse situation. However, what I object to is his selective dismissal of the parts of the Bible that he doesn't particularly like. It's "situational theology", if you will, and the same thing Wierwille did to justify his adultery. No one's forcing Trefor to be a Christian, but if he's going to claim to be one, shouldn't he have to abide by the same restrictions others do? We all sin, but to practice sin as a lifestyle seems a bit hypocritical. That doesn't justify screaming "WITCH!" at him and trying to burn him at the stake or anything, but no man can serve two masters.
[shrug] I don't have an answer for it. I certainly don't have any authority at all to force him to choose how he lives his life.
The fool hath said in his heart, "PFAL is the word of God..."
"I accepted the "angel in the kitchen devil in the bedroom" maxim, partly because I like the sound of it.... "
That is so honest. I think a lot of what allured men was TWI was like being part of the Hefner mansion except it had God's approval!!!
:)-->
And Jerry you said:
"This is especially confusing because one of the things he taught from I Corinthians 7 was that it's wrong to touch a woman because women are aroused by touch. You can arouse a woman with a backrub. (I've done this by accident; it was kind of fun.) So the mixed messages in the class about touch may be due to the conflicting motives of presenting a class that would maintain relative decency at the twig level while preparing people for debauchery at the root level. "
That was VERY well stated!!! That was the CF&Sclass!
Zix
Wow. There are so many tribes in Africa maybe one had a woman do it and another a Dad. I have also heard of tribes where they ram sticks into the daughter to break her hymen.
Once VP covered the part in the Bible where those two daughters had sex with their father to carry on the Christ line. Saying it was ultimately God's will. Can't think of the reference right now, but they got Dad drunk and seduced him.
I never went over it by myself to see if the Christ line did come from it. By then I was so digusted!
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 Dopp. 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 proove it from the Bible. He was there to see if Jimmy could proove it was okay via scripture.
Dopp 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.
Praise God Weirwille got to MIKE before someone like Manson did.
I would like to take a moment to validate Ex's story that the Weirwille brothers were into the sex stuff. Both of them. I worked at Limb HQS. and a staffer went to HQS. We were all so excited to hear about this WONDERFUL place!!!
(I was still an "A" believer, to use my previous analogy.)
Well, the staffer came back and told us alright. She said she met Uncle Harry and she gave him a bless kiss. Uncle Harry grabbed her and gave her a french kiss and touched her breasts. Out in the open, too. They were not in a closed room environment. She was upset about it. Our 3rd corps limb leader's wife then said, "he only did it to make her feel like a woman. He was blessing her."
Later, I found out those leaders were also promoters of the "inner-circle" sex stuff.
I should have considered the reported french kiss and free feel more than I did. It BOTHERED me but again, PFAL delivered me so the ministry had to be of God!!!! I never considered the class to have been stolen!!!
Life is too short for bad coffee!
Dot Matrix
[This message was edited by Dot Matrix on September 24, 2003 at 13:54.]
Well, if you guys are going to keep throwing 'guilt bait' at me, I might as well keep responding to it. On page 2 of the sports section in the STL Post Dispatch there is an editorial section called SOUND OFF. The following letter by me was printed there on Aug. 24.
************************************************
Once again the self-appointed priests and Levites of political correctness have struck. Such turbulence over Jeremy Shockey calling Bill Parcells a "homo."
Twenty-five years ago the movie "Animal House" was showing in theaters. Very funny movie. Very popular, especially among college students since the movie took place on a college campus. One scene has a young man struggling with a moral dilemma over whether or not to pursue sexual relations with a certain female. This was illustrated by an angel on one shoulder pleading with him to do the "right" thing and a devil on the other shoulder with a different message. The devil won by saying, "You homo!" Sure got a lot of laughs in the theater where I was.
So go ahead and kiss up to the priests like those goody-goody ESPN anchors who have to if they want to keep their jobs. But remember how you laughed just as hard as I did. Does your conscience bother you for that? Mine doesn't.
************************************************
Political correctness is a blatant attack on freedom of speech, especially if you're white, male, Christian, or conservative. So it was OK in 1978 to laugh at calling someone a homo as a putdown, but today, it's a mortal sin? Reggie White bashes gays in a prepared speech and he gets flamed a little. John Rocker does it in a spontaneous, off-the-top-of-his-head kind of way and he becomes the sports media's "pinata" for basically the next year?
I can't just honestly say how I feel about homosexuality without being called oh-so-righteous,*spiritual*, homophobic, etc. Bill Clinton hypocritically told a group of gays "I feel your pain" right after he got elected. Then before his first term was even up he signed into law a bill forbidding same sex marriages. He knew he didn't need their vote anymore. The truth is, most people really feel that homosexuality is on the Pluto side of reality, but they can't admit it without getting labeled and shredded.
Some of you guys should just call yourself political correctites. That's your real religion. I don't care. My conscience didn't bother me Aug. 24. It doesn't bother me now. There is no 'guilt bait' you can throw at me that will cause me to do so.
Dot: In Gen 19 Lot was raped by his two daughters who had gotten him drunk, but they weren't in the Christ line. Jacob's son Judah was seduced by his daughter in law, Tamar, and THAT subsequent pregnancy was part of the Christ line, but really Tamar did a gutsy thing plus her husband had died and Judah said she was more righteous than he. That's in Gen 38. Little out of the ordinary, maybe, but not twisted.
I think VP referred to these WEIRDO story lines in the Bible to lube us into accepting his sinister stuff.
There are some things in the Bible I do not get and frankly those examples are two for me.
He may have covered both accounts that day, for me stuff was running together into "this nut is all about getting girls to take their pants off." But I only recall the ONE account and that that act (the two daughters) was ultimately leading to the Christ line.
Thanks for the accounts. I am going to read them without his influence.
___________________
I am back, ya know I never heard the Tamar account. And that was NOT incest as it was a father-in-law. No, I would almost swear he used the drinking and incest account to validate "drinking" and "incest" being part of the Christ line. So, he was wrong.
Thanks for sharing the accounts with me, it makes things more clear.
Life is too short for bad coffee!
Dot Matrix
[This message was edited by Dot Matrix on September 24, 2003 at 13:51.]
quote:Hey, I posted what I THOUGHT was Trefor's position.
Sounded to me like he was saying it had no authority.
No translation has THE authority and neither what people say they think means has either. I cannot put it any more simply. The Bible we have is on the authority of the Catholic church, the decisions of men after all.
rascal
quote: I have seen a lot of spiritualy sound thoughts and ideas displayed by Trefor .... much more so than some of those who brandish the label *christian* on this board.....
Thanks for your kind remarks. My thoughts and ideas are do not only come from one source. I am no lopnger merely beholden to the Word as TWI would have us believe it to be.
johniam
You are confusing sex (ie gender) and sexuality. Let us hear a scholarly rebuttal of the site from you. One does not need to "throw out" things as you put it, one needs to understand context and also be aware that the guys who wrote the bible were still human and subject to the influences of their time. Dies Paul's attitude to slavery justify it now? Of course not. Is his attitude to women in church justified now? Of course not. Did he always obey what he was told? Nope. And yes I am no different but I am considered so by some.
wow76-78
quote: Also, can you imagine the HELL Trefor went through, being gay and in twi?
It is real easy to not like gays from an abstract point of view, Twi definitely re-inforced any anti gay sentiments that one may have had coming in to it.
Perhaps it is time to re-examine the knee-jerk reaction we exibit when presented with ideas contrary to our experiences.
Heck TWI even instilled into me anti-gay sentiments! :)--> I had just a big a battle with it as anybody else does as a concept but being a personal thing also this was doubly difficult. I guess it depends on various influences how you view it. I am always reminded of the words of that song:
"You've got to be taught before it's too late
Before you are six or seven or eight
To hate all the people your relatives hate
You've got to be carefully taught."
zix
quote:It's not that I don't like Trefor as a person. He's a well-spoken gentleman with a good deal of patience, probably moreso than I would have in the reverse situation. However, what I object to is his selective dismissal of the parts of the Bible that he doesn't particularly like. It's "situational theology", if you will, and the same thing Wierwille did to justify his adultery. No one's forcing Trefor to be a Christian, but if he's going to claim to be one, shouldn't he have to abide by the same restrictions others do?
Firstly the child molester bit is a non-sequitur but so many just cannot resist using it.
Secondly I resent being likened to Wierwille. I do not use my power or position to take advantage of people. Neither do I selectively dismiss parts I don't like. I dismiss what people have selected from it to claim it says a certain thing. because I dispute and disagree the interpretation of those passages and the assumptions made from them does not put me into the realm of situational theology although I believe it can sometimes have a role where it is not a case of "good" and "best" but the lesser of the two evils.
And quickly back to johniam - it's nothing to do with political correctness which is often taken to extremes of ludicrousness but it is everything to do with recognising that people are different and have a right to be so and to be afforded equal respect and rights.
He was SO good looking he had women hit on him out in the world all the time - bars, bowling alley's etc. IT was a turn-off. He liked women who were not loose, who were confident and intelligent. After this happened, to him a couple times, it was weighing on him heavily and he was praying while sitting under a tree. Someone reported him for "not smiling".
These people who were sold out to the inner circle walked around with plastered smiles and ready genitals/taila. They were "leadership material".
My great-looking, smart, unwilling to screw around and use women friend, who was ONLY there because he LOVED GOD, was thrown out because he did not have the right attitude. I bet one of MOGGIE'S playthings reported him.
Geez what a travesty! What a disgraceful sham that program became. It reminds me of my wonderful WOW brother Jacques Kersaint. Jacques loved God and love to share the Bible with people whenever and wherever he could. He went into the 16th Corps. He told me he quickly developped a reputation as "the one who speaks the Word all the time". He found that the men, his Corps brothers didn't want to hear it, so he started dating a lot, just so he could get quality time with meeker hearts. Then he got a reputation for dating too much. He was saddened and surprised that he could stand out for talking about the Bible at what was supposed to be a Bible college.
Jbarrax, just wanted to say, i knew Jacques Kersaint, I met him at Emporia, I was 17th wc, and he was one of the first guys I met when i first set my foot on the grounds of Emporia, He left a great impression on me, real tender and easy going, very likeable guy!
"He was saddened and surprised that he could stand out for talking about the Bible at what was supposed to be a Bible college."
Reminds me of my sister on her second maybe third time WOW. She was at a meeting and a group of corps was smoking outside. I forget what she said in their conversation. Something positive. But they all laughed at her and said, "you still believe that crap? How long you been around? You'll see...."
tref, i would be inclined to join yours before the way's.... kindness and nonjudgmentalness always appeals to me
*
and zix, when you apologized for misreading my post, i was just as hurt at how you categorized people's "out-there-ness" that's why i did not know how to respond
My goodness...this topic may be the #1 topic ever as far as responses.
My question is: Has anyone ever known or heard of a homosexual that has TRULY been delivered?
I mean REALLY TRULY ULTIMATELY delivered?
We were taught in twi that it is a demon (devil spirit). Ok...say that it is. It TRAINS your mind and you have that orientation of preferring a man or a women (whatever you happen to be). Can this be changed? If it IS NOT a demon and is truly a SEXUAL ORIENTATION, is deliverance necessary? Mel White, author of STRANGER AT THE GATE, said that his homosexuality is a "gift from God." I cannot agree with that, but can we truly say that it is NOT something people are born with?
Also, if one CAN be delivered, why is is so damn hard for those who truly DO NOT WANT to be homosexual to change? I know people who love God and the things of God but HATE themselves for being gay; they so want to change but CANNOT.
These people have great compassion for God's people, and many gifts that God has blessed them with.
It is tough. Is this like alcoholism, or any other difficult social sin? No one seems to have the answers. Can anyone here help?
All I can say is that it is easy to criticize someone for something that THEY THEMSELVES have no problem with or struggle with. Trefor is a brave man to be so open about what he believes. TWI was evil and cruel to gay people, especially in the mid 90's witch hunt that LCM started. All he needed to do is look in his own backyard and he would have found 2 witches.
"I accepted the "angel in the kitchen devil in the bedroom" maxim, partly because I like the sound of it.... "
That is so honest. I think a lot of what allured men was TWI was like being part of the Hefner mansion except it had God's approval!!!
Yeah, the Way was the perfect pitch to those of us who were raised in the permissiveness of the sexual revolution and wanted to love God without entirely leaving the world. The inclusion of little known and beneficial teachings like speaking in tongues and healing gave whatever VP taught a very real sense of authenticity. So it made it very easy for lecherous leaders to ride on God's coattails so to speak. Pretty weasely stuff dontcha think?
I?ve only scanned this thread, so forgive me if I missed anything. The gist of this roller-coaster seems to be about sexuallity, spirituality, and TWI. So I?m gonna butt in, make a quick observation, then butt out (if I can).
1) I think that most of the personal power VPW used to build his ministry came from stealing the dunamis from women who trusted him sexually. Yes, much like good ole' count Dracula.
2) I think the true deep sin of male homosexuality is when masculine spirituality gets together and virtually excommunicates feminine spirituality (regardless of personal gender or physical sexuallity). The endless wars and aggressions of humanity are the result of this spiritual man-to-man.
3) I think the true deep sin of female homosexuality is when spiritual femininity gets together in order to make up for what is lacking from male spirituality (regardless of personal gender or physical sexuallity). And so ?she? is also willing to trade the true power of her sexuallity for anything (which is way less than it is truly worth).
4) Just because the feminine has been second to man since the dawn of time does not mean that this is the natural state of things. The masculine has been in charge for a long time, but has really consistently messed it up, no? Do you think women would allow the world to be ravaged by war, hunger and slavery for all these millenia?
5) Like I may have mentioned on another thread, the healing of the "virgin" and ?bride? seems to be on the top of Christ?s list. So, why not the church?s, like Ephesians says? Maybe someday soon, Heaven and Earth will meet again.
While I don't really understand all that's homosexuality...I realize someday we will know more/better about it.
As far as women in power relating to aggression, I hope with 'enlightened' societies...the immediate perception of weakness due to this sex will change.
It could be responsible for women in power, in the past, having to be more defensive, therefore aggressive (a good offense is the best defense kind of thing)...when dealing with aggression/enemies.
There is much to be said for having strong allies, but that alone doesn't preserve your nation.
With trade alone, countries have been targets by enemies.
If a woman is perceived weak in her role as protecor of her nation by her enemies...her sons and her countrymen's lives at stake also considered...life-giving, nurturing, and protective all inclusive...she will still HAVE to protect her power.
I don't see women with an inherent ability to be more aggressive..but in the world-view, she may/will be able to because of the perception that she is weaker, or will/might be, which may contribute (through peer pressure, job design, and defensiveness)...to push that 'card' to go to war when the THREAT is perceived.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
32
39
66
34
Popular Days
Sep 20
84
Sep 19
78
Sep 22
63
Sep 21
53
Top Posters In This Topic
RottieGrrrl 32 posts
excathedra 39 posts
Dot Matrix 66 posts
WhiteDove 34 posts
Popular Days
Sep 20 2003
84 posts
Sep 19 2003
78 posts
Sep 22 2003
63 posts
Sep 21 2003
53 posts
Tom Strange
Johniam... thank you for your thoughts...
The point of my question was that I'd hate to miss out on something just because of a prejudice, a prejudice that I probably wouldn't have if not for religion...
I ask you this: imagine that there are a lot of folks around that do things that there can be found "don't do this" in the Bible, are you as openly prejudiced against them?
Personally, I think I got a lot more out of the words to that song than you did... I guess it's how one looks at things...
... confusion will be my epitath...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
What if your son came to you and told you he was sexually attracted to small children?
It's not that I don't like Trefor as a person. He's a well-spoken gentleman with a good deal of patience, probably moreso than I would have in the reverse situation. However, what I object to is his selective dismissal of the parts of the Bible that he doesn't particularly like. It's "situational theology", if you will, and the same thing Wierwille did to justify his adultery. No one's forcing Trefor to be a Christian, but if he's going to claim to be one, shouldn't he have to abide by the same restrictions others do? We all sin, but to practice sin as a lifestyle seems a bit hypocritical. That doesn't justify screaming "WITCH!" at him and trying to burn him at the stake or anything, but no man can serve two masters.
[shrug] I don't have an answer for it. I certainly don't have any authority at all to force him to choose how he lives his life.
The fool hath said in his heart, "PFAL is the word of God..."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
Jerry
Thanks for the compliment!
You said:
"I accepted the "angel in the kitchen devil in the bedroom" maxim, partly because I like the sound of it.... "
That is so honest. I think a lot of what allured men was TWI was like being part of the Hefner mansion except it had God's approval!!!
And Jerry you said:
"This is especially confusing because one of the things he taught from I Corinthians 7 was that it's wrong to touch a woman because women are aroused by touch. You can arouse a woman with a backrub. (I've done this by accident; it was kind of fun.) So the mixed messages in the class about touch may be due to the conflicting motives of presenting a class that would maintain relative decency at the twig level while preparing people for debauchery at the root level. "
That was VERY well stated!!! That was the CF&Sclass!
Zix
Wow. There are so many tribes in Africa maybe one had a woman do it and another a Dad. I have also heard of tribes where they ram sticks into the daughter to break her hymen.
Once VP covered the part in the Bible where those two daughters had sex with their father to carry on the Christ line. Saying it was ultimately God's will. Can't think of the reference right now, but they got Dad drunk and seduced him.
I never went over it by myself to see if the Christ line did come from it. By then I was so digusted!
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 Dopp. 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 proove it from the Bible. He was there to see if Jimmy could proove it was okay via scripture.
Dopp 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.
Praise God Weirwille got to MIKE before someone like Manson did.
I would like to take a moment to validate Ex's story that the Weirwille brothers were into the sex stuff. Both of them. I worked at Limb HQS. and a staffer went to HQS. We were all so excited to hear about this WONDERFUL place!!!
(I was still an "A" believer, to use my previous analogy.)
Well, the staffer came back and told us alright. She said she met Uncle Harry and she gave him a bless kiss. Uncle Harry grabbed her and gave her a french kiss and touched her breasts. Out in the open, too. They were not in a closed room environment. She was upset about it. Our 3rd corps limb leader's wife then said, "he only did it to make her feel like a woman. He was blessing her."
Later, I found out those leaders were also promoters of the "inner-circle" sex stuff.
I should have considered the reported french kiss and free feel more than I did. It BOTHERED me but again, PFAL delivered me so the ministry had to be of God!!!! I never considered the class to have been stolen!!!
Life is too short for bad coffee!
Dot Matrix
[This message was edited by Dot Matrix on September 24, 2003 at 13:54.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Well, if you guys are going to keep throwing 'guilt bait' at me, I might as well keep responding to it. On page 2 of the sports section in the STL Post Dispatch there is an editorial section called SOUND OFF. The following letter by me was printed there on Aug. 24.
************************************************
Once again the self-appointed priests and Levites of political correctness have struck. Such turbulence over Jeremy Shockey calling Bill Parcells a "homo."
Twenty-five years ago the movie "Animal House" was showing in theaters. Very funny movie. Very popular, especially among college students since the movie took place on a college campus. One scene has a young man struggling with a moral dilemma over whether or not to pursue sexual relations with a certain female. This was illustrated by an angel on one shoulder pleading with him to do the "right" thing and a devil on the other shoulder with a different message. The devil won by saying, "You homo!" Sure got a lot of laughs in the theater where I was.
So go ahead and kiss up to the priests like those goody-goody ESPN anchors who have to if they want to keep their jobs. But remember how you laughed just as hard as I did. Does your conscience bother you for that? Mine doesn't.
************************************************
Political correctness is a blatant attack on freedom of speech, especially if you're white, male, Christian, or conservative. So it was OK in 1978 to laugh at calling someone a homo as a putdown, but today, it's a mortal sin? Reggie White bashes gays in a prepared speech and he gets flamed a little. John Rocker does it in a spontaneous, off-the-top-of-his-head kind of way and he becomes the sports media's "pinata" for basically the next year?
I can't just honestly say how I feel about homosexuality without being called oh-so-righteous,*spiritual*, homophobic, etc. Bill Clinton hypocritically told a group of gays "I feel your pain" right after he got elected. Then before his first term was even up he signed into law a bill forbidding same sex marriages. He knew he didn't need their vote anymore. The truth is, most people really feel that homosexuality is on the Pluto side of reality, but they can't admit it without getting labeled and shredded.
Some of you guys should just call yourself political correctites. That's your real religion. I don't care. My conscience didn't bother me Aug. 24. It doesn't bother me now. There is no 'guilt bait' you can throw at me that will cause me to do so.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Dot: In Gen 19 Lot was raped by his two daughters who had gotten him drunk, but they weren't in the Christ line. Jacob's son Judah was seduced by his daughter in law, Tamar, and THAT subsequent pregnancy was part of the Christ line, but really Tamar did a gutsy thing plus her husband had died and Judah said she was more righteous than he. That's in Gen 38. Little out of the ordinary, maybe, but not twisted.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
I think VP referred to these WEIRDO story lines in the Bible to lube us into accepting his sinister stuff.
There are some things in the Bible I do not get and frankly those examples are two for me.
He may have covered both accounts that day, for me stuff was running together into "this nut is all about getting girls to take their pants off." But I only recall the ONE account and that that act (the two daughters) was ultimately leading to the Christ line.
Thanks for the accounts. I am going to read them without his influence.
___________________
I am back, ya know I never heard the Tamar account. And that was NOT incest as it was a father-in-law. No, I would almost swear he used the drinking and incest account to validate "drinking" and "incest" being part of the Christ line. So, he was wrong.
Thanks for sharing the accounts with me, it makes things more clear.
Life is too short for bad coffee!
Dot Matrix
[This message was edited by Dot Matrix on September 24, 2003 at 13:51.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trefor Heywood
wordwolf
No translation has THE authority and neither what people say they think means has either. I cannot put it any more simply. The Bible we have is on the authority of the Catholic church, the decisions of men after all.
rascal
Thanks for your kind remarks. My thoughts and ideas are do not only come from one source. I am no lopnger merely beholden to the Word as TWI would have us believe it to be.
johniam
You are confusing sex (ie gender) and sexuality. Let us hear a scholarly rebuttal of the site from you. One does not need to "throw out" things as you put it, one needs to understand context and also be aware that the guys who wrote the bible were still human and subject to the influences of their time. Dies Paul's attitude to slavery justify it now? Of course not. Is his attitude to women in church justified now? Of course not. Did he always obey what he was told? Nope. And yes I am no different but I am considered so by some.
wow76-78
Heck TWI even instilled into me anti-gay sentiments!
:)--> I had just a big a battle with it as anybody else does as a concept but being a personal thing also this was doubly difficult. I guess it depends on various influences how you view it. I am always reminded of the words of that song:
"You've got to be taught before it's too late
Before you are six or seven or eight
To hate all the people your relatives hate
You've got to be carefully taught."
zix
Firstly the child molester bit is a non-sequitur but so many just cannot resist using it.
Secondly I resent being likened to Wierwille. I do not use my power or position to take advantage of people. Neither do I selectively dismiss parts I don't like. I dismiss what people have selected from it to claim it says a certain thing. because I dispute and disagree the interpretation of those passages and the assumptions made from them does not put me into the realm of situational theology although I believe it can sometimes have a role where it is not a case of "good" and "best" but the lesser of the two evils.
And quickly back to johniam - it's nothing to do with political correctness which is often taken to extremes of ludicrousness but it is everything to do with recognising that people are different and have a right to be so and to be afforded equal respect and rights.
Trefor Heywood
"Cymru Am Byth!"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
Zix
Private Topic
Life is too short for bad coffee!
Dot Matrix
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
from tref:
no kidding. UGH!tref.... oh man i don't even know what to say. welcome to a new cult
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jbarrax
Geez what a travesty! What a disgraceful sham that program became. It reminds me of my wonderful WOW brother Jacques Kersaint. Jacques loved God and love to share the Bible with people whenever and wherever he could. He went into the 16th Corps. He told me he quickly developped a reputation as "the one who speaks the Word all the time". He found that the men, his Corps brothers didn't want to hear it, so he started dating a lot, just so he could get quality time with meeker hearts. Then he got a reputation for dating too much. He was saddened and surprised that he could stand out for talking about the Bible at what was supposed to be a Bible college.
Peace
JerryB
Link to comment
Share on other sites
up on high
Jbarrax, just wanted to say, i knew Jacques Kersaint, I met him at Emporia, I was 17th wc, and he was one of the first guys I met when i first set my foot on the grounds of Emporia, He left a great impression on me, real tender and easy going, very likeable guy!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
Shaz:
The list that describes a narcissist you posted:
N RED FLAGS
1.) He talks a lot about his pedigree, his possessions, his education, his awards, his associations, or who he knows, as if THEY are who HE is.
2.) He lies or exaggerates any of the above.
3.) He puts you on a pedestal when he hardly knows you, or exaggerates who you are to others.
4.) He pushes for a commitment from you early in the relationship, and seems to be constantly raising the level of commitment required.
5.) He tries to change your behavior or appearance, often under the guise of caring about you.
6.) He tries to commandeer your time and attention. He is jealous of your friends or other interests. He isolates you.
7.) He uses "everyone is out to get me" statements.
8.) He requires you to live by different rules than he lives by himself.
9.) He doesn't listen to you, or pretends not to understand clear statements from you.
10.) He does not accept responsibility for his actions. It is never his fault.
11.) He overreacts in anger to minor irritations.
12.) He has trouble playing by the rules. He is always the exception.
13.) He thinks he is always right; he has the truth.
Yes, I can see inserting Mike's name as well as VP's on many of them. I agree.
Life is too short for bad coffee!
Dot Matrix
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
Jerry you shared:
"He was saddened and surprised that he could stand out for talking about the Bible at what was supposed to be a Bible college."
Reminds me of my sister on her second maybe third time WOW. She was at a meeting and a group of corps was smoking outside. I forget what she said in their conversation. Something positive. But they all laughed at her and said, "you still believe that crap? How long you been around? You'll see...."
So very sad to break some very GOOD people.
Life is too short for bad coffee!
Dot Matrix
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trefor Heywood
ex
What would you call the cult?
Maybe I should start my own - TGI - The Gay International!
:D-->
Trefor Heywood
"Cymru Am Byth!"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
Dot: Private topic received and replied.
:)-->
The fool hath said in his heart, "PFAL is the word of God..."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
tref, i would be inclined to join yours before the way's.... kindness and nonjudgmentalness always appeals to me
*
and zix, when you apologized for misreading my post, i was just as hurt at how you categorized people's "out-there-ness" that's why i did not know how to respond
anyway no bitchfest honestly
Link to comment
Share on other sites
exousia
My goodness...this topic may be the #1 topic ever as far as responses.
My question is: Has anyone ever known or heard of a homosexual that has TRULY been delivered?
I mean REALLY TRULY ULTIMATELY delivered?
We were taught in twi that it is a demon (devil spirit). Ok...say that it is. It TRAINS your mind and you have that orientation of preferring a man or a women (whatever you happen to be). Can this be changed? If it IS NOT a demon and is truly a SEXUAL ORIENTATION, is deliverance necessary? Mel White, author of STRANGER AT THE GATE, said that his homosexuality is a "gift from God." I cannot agree with that, but can we truly say that it is NOT something people are born with?
Also, if one CAN be delivered, why is is so damn hard for those who truly DO NOT WANT to be homosexual to change? I know people who love God and the things of God but HATE themselves for being gay; they so want to change but CANNOT.
These people have great compassion for God's people, and many gifts that God has blessed them with.
It is tough. Is this like alcoholism, or any other difficult social sin? No one seems to have the answers. Can anyone here help?
All I can say is that it is easy to criticize someone for something that THEY THEMSELVES have no problem with or struggle with. Trefor is a brave man to be so open about what he believes. TWI was evil and cruel to gay people, especially in the mid 90's witch hunt that LCM started. All he needed to do is look in his own backyard and he would have found 2 witches.
exousia
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jbarrax
You're Welcome Dot!
Yeah, the Way was the perfect pitch to those of us who were raised in the permissiveness of the sexual revolution and wanted to love God without entirely leaving the world. The inclusion of little known and beneficial teachings like speaking in tongues and healing gave whatever VP taught a very real sense of authenticity. So it made it very easy for lecherous leaders to ride on God's coattails so to speak. Pretty weasely stuff dontcha think?
Peace
JerryB
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
I?ve only scanned this thread, so forgive me if I missed anything. The gist of this roller-coaster seems to be about sexuallity, spirituality, and TWI. So I?m gonna butt in, make a quick observation, then butt out (if I can).
1) I think that most of the personal power VPW used to build his ministry came from stealing the dunamis from women who trusted him sexually. Yes, much like good ole' count Dracula.
2) I think the true deep sin of male homosexuality is when masculine spirituality gets together and virtually excommunicates feminine spirituality (regardless of personal gender or physical sexuallity). The endless wars and aggressions of humanity are the result of this spiritual man-to-man.
3) I think the true deep sin of female homosexuality is when spiritual femininity gets together in order to make up for what is lacking from male spirituality (regardless of personal gender or physical sexuallity). And so ?she? is also willing to trade the true power of her sexuallity for anything (which is way less than it is truly worth).
4) Just because the feminine has been second to man since the dawn of time does not mean that this is the natural state of things. The masculine has been in charge for a long time, but has really consistently messed it up, no? Do you think women would allow the world to be ravaged by war, hunger and slavery for all these millenia?
5) Like I may have mentioned on another thread, the healing of the "virgin" and ?bride? seems to be on the top of Christ?s list. So, why not the church?s, like Ephesians says? Maybe someday soon, Heaven and Earth will meet again.
Peace
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
SGL:
1) That's an odd metaphor.
2) Wars and aggression stem from homosexuality? WHAT?
3) This makes even less sense.
4)
Absolutely. It would only be in different form. Matriarchal animal societies are every bit as vicious, if not moreso, than the patriarchal ones.5) The sooner the better, as far as I'm concerned...
The fool hath said in his heart, "PFAL is the word of God..."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
Sorry, Zix. I'm not sure what to say to you.
peace
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ginger Tea
Interesting SGA
While I don't really understand all that's homosexuality...I realize someday we will know more/better about it.
As far as women in power relating to aggression, I hope with 'enlightened' societies...the immediate perception of weakness due to this sex will change.
It could be responsible for women in power, in the past, having to be more defensive, therefore aggressive (a good offense is the best defense kind of thing)...when dealing with aggression/enemies.
There is much to be said for having strong allies, but that alone doesn't preserve your nation.
With trade alone, countries have been targets by enemies.
If a woman is perceived weak in her role as protecor of her nation by her enemies...her sons and her countrymen's lives at stake also considered...life-giving, nurturing, and protective all inclusive...she will still HAVE to protect her power.
I don't see women with an inherent ability to be more aggressive..but in the world-view, she may/will be able to because of the perception that she is weaker, or will/might be, which may contribute (through peer pressure, job design, and defensiveness)...to push that 'card' to go to war when the THREAT is perceived.
Just my thought...
Ginger
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
I hear ya, Ginger.
Everyone knows that ya really shouldn't mess with a mama bear's cubs.
I'm a bit worried that my above points will be misunderstood.
I guess I'll have to wait and see.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ginger Tea
...and some think I'm a ditz
Heaven help them if I perceive a threat..lol
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.