And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
God formed man, a "man". God's intent was to produce a "man".
I don't see this verse describing two separate things - part one, form something out of the dust of the ground, don't know what it is, call it "blan". Then part two, breathe life into it, now it's a "man".
If we're going to strike a literal interpretation to the record, view the context. What's God doing? Forming a "man". There's a finished product in mind from the start. Intent. If God's actions continue through to what He intends, the result will be a living "man".
The finished product isn't said to be a "man" only after the "breath of life", man is a "man" in God's mind from the start.
Applied to the process of birth, the "man" would be viewed the same way, from the start of the process to the end result. The result that's being produced is a "man", a person, that's the intention.
We wouldn't say a person isn't a "man" while in the womb, prior to actual birth, if we take the verse and apply it to today, literally. The "man" is being produced in stages, by intent and by a process.
The process of birth post-Adam is entirely different than what's recorded in Genesis, anyway. So what God did in Genesis, if taken literally, can't be directly applied step-by-step to procreation that comes later.
If I apply the general description of the event though, I come to the conclusion that "man" was "man" right from the start, in God's mind. Literally, from the first scoop, what's God doing? Making "man". Intervening in that process at any point does what? Stops the making of the "man". Likewise with childbirth as we know it.
In Jesus's day He challenged the teaching of the day on the Old Testament Law when it produced a result that missed the intent, the "heart" of the original instruction from God. A person could observe every little detail, and apply additional requirements and rituals on top of the original instruction in an effort to be "right" but completely miss what was important, and any chance at realizing the "big" picture.
I see a contrast between His teachings and the interpretation of Genesis there being that man wasn't man until God breathed "life" into him. That seems to miss the bigger context of what God was doing and what His intentions were. "Man" became a "living soul", but man was man before that, when God breathed into his "nostrils". (snort :) )
.... I disagree with twi stance on the unborn. If it is alive, ie it is growing, it has a heartbeat, it is just plain nuts to say it isn't alive. ...
I find it remarkable people are still discussing a topic that was started back in April of 2004 and yet they still don't have their facts straight - even in 2007. I guess not having your facts straight gives someone the privelage to end up calling other people liars, question somebody else's integrity, etc. First of all, TWI never claimed the unborn fetus to not be alive, but that the unborn fetus has growth life. TWI simply made a distinction between breath-life and growth-life - that is all. TWI never claimed that the unborn fetus was never alive to begin with. They never claimed or taught that - not at all. But there is a poster here who likes to get people all emotionally riled up. It helps them muddy the facts and the truth regarding what TWI taught, and then they attack another poster over it.
The bible distinguishes between these different types of life (between breath-life and growth-life) in Genesis, but man's religion insists upon there only being one-type and only one form of life. That is what TWI taught us - that there are differences between and in these different forms of life recorded in the book of Genesis - not that the fetus is not or never was alive to begin with. That was never a TWI doctrine, so get your facts straight first about what TWI taught and then perhaps one can have an intelligent discussion that won't deteriorate into name-calling and bullying (i.e. I'm specifically referring to previous posts between Rascal and you-know-who). But that "only one form of life doctrine" is essentially the basis behind and the reasoning for Pres. Bush enacting that stupid "fetus protection" law back in 2004, which is what this thread was initially about. One should get their facts straight before they go bullying someone and end up attacking each other and calling each other names. But pushing someone else's hot button is apparently more important to some people here than getting their facts straight and having an intelligent discussion with somebody.
First of all, TWI never claimed the unborn fetus to not be alive, but that the unborn fetus has growth life. TWI simply made a distinction between breath-life and growth-life - that is all. TWI never claimed that the unborn fetus was never alive to begin with.
Dunno who "you-know-who" is. I have some differences of opinion with Rascal's posts on the subject, but one of them is not what TWI taught, even though maybe you are right. I'll explain.
Before being yanked out at the very end of 1979, I dont recall any teaching on the "breath of life" doctrine relating it to abortion. The only time I heard the subject brought up was at ROA 1978, when VPW called the corps who were going WOW into the woods for a burger and comments. Basically he said there had been some problems leading to abortions. Even though he said "you know I dont like abortion", he had had to pay for some (dunno how many) as a result of corps not "watching themselves". Then he said he wanted us to be sure we did just that.
Anyway, I dont know what was taught later. But Rascal (I accept her testimony) and evidently others were "advised" to have an abortion on the premise that it would not be destroying a life. That is, whatever TWIs teaching was, in practice they were telling her that the fetus was never alive.
Maybe I'm just dreaming this, but didn't VPW say somewhere in piffle that life begins when you take your first breath and ends when you take your last?
Hence the term, *breath-life*.
I'm not stating this as a form of agreement or disagreement with that line of thought.
I am stating this to establish that VPW did, indeed, "teach" that a fetus was not alive until it took its first breath.
(Though I don't recall him using the word "fetus".)
Bull SHEET they didn`t teach that the fetus was not alive. You lie WTH...
Perhaps one only heard the official teaching when a person got pregnant in the corpes....even app. corpes...
One was taken to where the scriptures differed in the penalties between murder and causing a woman to lose their fruit....*see see God doesn`t see that baby as alive*
The scriptures where then shown...adam took his first breath...*see he wasn`t alive* ...
One was then told that it was nothing more than a bunch of cells...paracites that could not survive without the host....like cancer...
You were then showed the passages of what happened to people who didn`t honor their vows to God and how they died...
You were then told that in signing up to go into the corpes or wow...that YOU had made a promise....a vow to God....
Then the reproof was ended with being scornfully asked if you were willing to allow a bunch of paracitical cells, that weren`t even alive.... to cause you to lie to God???
Were you ready for the consequences of breaking your vow?? If per chance the child were to be born, it would in all likelyhood be deformed...yadda yadda...
Bull CR@P they didn`t teach that the baby wasn`t alive before it took first breath...I have been there heard THAT and most unfortunately BOUGHT that..It was our limb leaders who later became bot `s...that insisted that abortion of the not yet living fetus must not allow me to break my vow.....ans YES had I not been able to pay for it....they would have ponied up the 500 bucks needed....your abs at work Kansas believers :( I will assume that they knew what twi`s *official* stance was on things.
Oh yeah and some ignoramous told me that the life was in the blood...they reckoned that was why we weren`t aliveuntill we took our first breath...the oxygen was introduced....dumb a$$ what do they think the umbillical chord for???
TWI simply made a distinction between breath-life and growth-life - that is all.
Is it?
I believe they made a different distinction, a distinction between abortion being morally reprehensible, or merely as harmless as clipping one's nails.
A fetus is hardly a newly sprouted corn stalk, or wheat.. or some kind of weed, that should be merely swept aside as some kind of inconvenience..
That is what the term "growth life" implies, does it not?
From many men's perspective, it can be such a "little" thing.. but from the woman's, it's the whole world.
I believe they made a different distinction, a distinction between abortion being morally reprehensible, or merely as harmless as clipping one's nails.
A fetus is hardly a newly sprouted corn stalk, or wheat.. or some kind of weed, that should be merely swept aside as some kind of inconvenience..
That is what the term "growth life" implies, does it not?
From many men's perspective, it can be such a "little" thing.. but from the woman's, it's the whole world.
I heard a fetus referred to as "a little parasite."
Yeah..I heard that it was soul life that entered with first breath....until then...they were just paracitical cells...
They steered very clear of the passages where mary`s cousin`s babe recognized Jesus and lept in the womb...Both of those womens *fruit* were called *babes*
I`d like to see twi people refer to the unborn Jesus as a *bunch of paracitical cells*
The ba$tards taught us that God almighty REQUIRED us to murder our unborn children :(
The pigs taught us that obediance to leadership was also required by God in order to be in his will.....
The low life scum insisted that there was no other alternative if one wanted to remain under God`s protection and in his will....
There was no *out*...you brokenly complied with their direction...why they knew where to go...could make the appointments....offered to pay...bless their hearts...this was a GOOD thing...and once you were carried there.....
This is one thing that can`t EVER be fixed...you can`t make this all better... no do overs and this time get it right.
They are unconscionable liars...this was wrong on so many levels.
The computer sure seems to embolden some of you to say THEmost AAAmazing things to one another.
Just one more example of how these women were treated horribly by twi...only to get the same treatment (or worse) here.
I cannot even imagine being faced with some of the things these women have been through.
Can you ?
Yet, some of you feel nothing at all about lauding YOUR OPINION, of them, up to the sky in what seems like an attempt to glorify YOUR knowledge,YOUR feelings,YOUR *superiority*over them on these very personal matters.
They have obviously been deeply hurt.
But, of course, YOUR opinion, summation of events (you know nothing about)...
well...
THAT'S THE IMPORTANT THING. Isn't it ? Their pain means nothing. right? Go ahead ...add to it!!
As long as YOU get YOUR two cents in.
That's what really matters in here huh?
GOD FORBID WE GO THROUGH LIFE WITHOUT YOUR OPINION
If some of these things were said *face to face* I'm sure you'd have more to deal with than you'd care to.
Nobody would stand for that.
I think the loved ones in their life would take exception to it. (just a hunch)
Who among you would EVER DARE tell a rape victim that her rapist was a pretty cool guy ? or that she probably misunderstood him. Or "no way that really happened!!"
OR
telling a woman who believes she was FORCED into getting an abortion... that it's no big deal. "get over it!"
I really don't think you would. So...why is it ok in here??
Going with the flow...
Here's some thread ideas we can really sink our (very sharp) teeth into.
I mean, why not? These things are being said anyway. Right?
1 you're a lying wh_re
2 keep your legs together b_tch
3 101 ways to rip each other up
3 twi... who needs them? we have each other (to bring down)
4 How i'm better than you (and I can provide scripture)
5 wh_re "de jour"
6 liar,liar (pants on fire)
7 here's how wrong you really are (IMHO)
8 "neener,neener,neener!!"
9 here's how I think you should have handled (your own life)
10 I know that was harsh but...(let me make it even worse for you, ok?)
COME ON !!!!
A lil "over the top" but sheesh
Can we stop for a moment and think about how we're treating each other.
Granted . We get mad etc. but... we're talking about people's LIVES here.
Over the top??? I don`t think so...when people make their comments about being liars or perpetually whining victims or psychotic attention seekers... (yes I have been called all of those things) it reads...has the same impact ..the kick in the gut that the comments you wrote....
Thank you guys who understand. I mean it
What might be merely an intellectual exercise for some, or just another chance to slap down an irritating poster....for others on the recieving end is about deep hurt that just doesn`t go away.
These situations and discussions aren`t a pi$$ing contest and who is right and who is wrong......who ever yells the loudest or gets in the best digs wins....this is about peoples hearts....
I think I read where a person once said....next time I will take my boots off before I stomp across your heart.
One thing I can say.. there are times I feel like I'd rather not be a man..
no.. not what some may think.
These sycophants, standing behind a pulpit, who enabled this kind of practice.. and those who followed them, and bullied GOD'S women in this manner..
these guys are just so much bad company..
Now wait a minute...I'm not about to turn this into an "all men are pigs" discussion. It's no more fair than saying that all the rape victims "really wanted it anyway."
Each person has to own their own sh(t. I'm not laying blame at anyone's feet. But there are men and women that know exactly what they did and said and they will stand accountable for it.
Yes... I said "women..." There were women who were just as involved in the whole idea that and abortion was just getting rid of a problem.
In my opinion, a child is not a problem. A child is a precious responsibility and privilege - no matter how "inconvenient."
I also have a vague recollection of VPW teaching on Luke1.35( the section of scripture that refers to Jesus as a "thing") and rationalizing the usage of the word "thing" by saying he, Jesus, was technically a *thing* because he had not yet taken his first breath. I wish I could remember where VP taught this but it's been too long ago.
Part of the emphasis of that particular teaching was that The Word never contradicts itself.
It seems that there were people who had said this passage was an example of contradiction because it used the term*thing* rather than refer to Jesus as a child.
As always, there were subliminal implications to much of what Wierwille taught.
"Hey!, That's not what I taught. That's what you heard me say and give your own meaning to."
For the sake of clarification, I am not trying to proclaim a stance on the subject of abortion being right or being wrong.
My opinion is a moot point.
What I am trying to do is establish that Wierwille DID take a stance on how he regarded the subject.
We all know, I believe, that a stance taken by Wirwille on any subject carried a tremendous amount of weight.
(ie: "This is the stance that "DR" has taken so that's how I will stand also because he is obviously MUCH more in touch with what is spiritually correct,")
(I looked for a "smiley" hurling chunks but couldn't find one.)
I heard a fetus referred to as "a little parasite."
First off, I don't care about the hearsay. TWI never taught the fetus was "a little parasite." I'm also sorry if somebody here took some idiot TWI leaders advice and had an abortion just so they could go into or remain in the Way Corps. If you were already in that situation then you honestly didn't belong in the Corps to begin with, and if some TWI leader told you that you had to have an abortion to go in or to stay in the Corps, then they really had no business handing out personal advice to anybody as a leader - ever - on any subject matter (whether that person was a Corp person or not) that does not implicate them in any way shape or form.
Were there some pretty screwed up leaders in TWI handing out bad advice to others? Definately. I don't doubt there were some pretty screwed up leaders in TWI because I ran into a few myself. I am not talking just about abortions but about finances and other life issues, etc. For the most part, I ignored them and their lousy advice. Apparently some people didn't do that and ended up paying a hefty price for the lousy advice they took from them.
I think it took too long for TWI to get rid of the worst of them, but unfortunately some of them are still in TWI today - IMO. Some of them are still in TWI because they still like to hand out advice to others but they don't want to assume the responsibility of someone taking their lousy advice. That is why nobody should take advice from someone who does not also want to also assume the responsibilities of making that decision for themselves. But there sure are a lot of people in this world (not just in TWI) who want to hand out advice to others - just so long as it does not implicate and involve "me" in any way.
If you're someone who has to take advice from somebody else because you're not "bright enough" to make a particular decision for yourself and on your own, then don't go around blaming the "advice giver" just because your own bulb is "burned out". I don't care who they say they are - a MOG, a therapist, a Dr. or a "whatever". All we have today is a lot of "advice takers" who love to go around yanking other people's chains - believing they are "turning on the light" for other people because things didn't turn out exactly the way they wanted in the end. I run into these types all the time as well as you do. Their stories are anything but "enlightening" but rather depressing, dull and dark. Who do they think they are kidding? They are not looking for enlightenment themselves. They are just looking to "yank someone's chain." You can pull on the chain all you want, but the light won't come on when the bulb is burned out.
A follower who hangs around a host (without benefit to the host) in hope of gain or advantage.
this is what a parasite is .. yes a fetus is a parasite, consider maybe we all have been parasitic in nature.
a flea is a parasite, yet it has a life. the breath life idea is sketchy at best , we put people on machines and stop breath of coming in and out during sugery or swimming etc. are they dead?
maybe... but does that mean God does not honor their life when it returns?
i think the bigger ideal is who is who once again , twi put much pressure on POWER and who had it and didnt it was all a game of competitiion in a BAD WAY!
you took the advance class and got forty people to take the class YOUR the ONE God loves more and honors more and respects more...
come on you seen it we all bought that ticket.
a pregnate woman is born again , they have holy spirit , so in the line of thining of the way, they are MORE IMPORTANT than a lowly unbeliever baby.
and it got that bad (that is why i think it was a cult ) the unbelievers their life their love anything was discounted as nothing at all. unless they wanted to take the pfal class.
and this thought ran deep.
it was like a undertow of God being the TRUE God so much and we having so much POWER within us and so important inflated beyond reason important to mankind that mankind just didnt matter anymore.
so many mini jesus christ's walking around in the way God will just KILL the whole world for us.
it was twisted and wrong .
so abortion became a natural discounted event just like treating people poorly or with abuse was ok because we wer so special to God.
Get that? and we are accountable to one another, and honor those who are set in place and of course the final testimony of the higher powers of romans 13!!
by the time that came out I believed it so much.
some here think we were thinking like normal people crap 20 years out and im still not thinking like normal people.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
62
61
55
20
Popular Days
Jun 10
71
Jun 7
52
Jun 9
41
Aug 15
32
Top Posters In This Topic
rascal 62 posts
oldiesman 61 posts
mj412 55 posts
Ham 20 posts
Popular Days
Jun 10 2004
71 posts
Jun 7 2004
52 posts
Jun 9 2004
41 posts
Aug 15 2007
32 posts
socks
God formed man, a "man". God's intent was to produce a "man".
I don't see this verse describing two separate things - part one, form something out of the dust of the ground, don't know what it is, call it "blan". Then part two, breathe life into it, now it's a "man".
If we're going to strike a literal interpretation to the record, view the context. What's God doing? Forming a "man". There's a finished product in mind from the start. Intent. If God's actions continue through to what He intends, the result will be a living "man".
The finished product isn't said to be a "man" only after the "breath of life", man is a "man" in God's mind from the start.
Applied to the process of birth, the "man" would be viewed the same way, from the start of the process to the end result. The result that's being produced is a "man", a person, that's the intention.
We wouldn't say a person isn't a "man" while in the womb, prior to actual birth, if we take the verse and apply it to today, literally. The "man" is being produced in stages, by intent and by a process.
The process of birth post-Adam is entirely different than what's recorded in Genesis, anyway. So what God did in Genesis, if taken literally, can't be directly applied step-by-step to procreation that comes later.
If I apply the general description of the event though, I come to the conclusion that "man" was "man" right from the start, in God's mind. Literally, from the first scoop, what's God doing? Making "man". Intervening in that process at any point does what? Stops the making of the "man". Likewise with childbirth as we know it.
In Jesus's day He challenged the teaching of the day on the Old Testament Law when it produced a result that missed the intent, the "heart" of the original instruction from God. A person could observe every little detail, and apply additional requirements and rituals on top of the original instruction in an effort to be "right" but completely miss what was important, and any chance at realizing the "big" picture.
I see a contrast between His teachings and the interpretation of Genesis there being that man wasn't man until God breathed "life" into him. That seems to miss the bigger context of what God was doing and what His intentions were. "Man" became a "living soul", but man was man before that, when God breathed into his "nostrils". (snort :) )
Edited by socksLink to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
The thought of the Primal Man hatching from an egg kind of amuses me at the moment.
I'm aware of some myths to that effect.
Edited by TheInvisibleDanLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Would explain why he didn't have a navel. Of course he didn't have a navel, did he?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
What The Hey
I find it remarkable people are still discussing a topic that was started back in April of 2004 and yet they still don't have their facts straight - even in 2007. I guess not having your facts straight gives someone the privelage to end up calling other people liars, question somebody else's integrity, etc. First of all, TWI never claimed the unborn fetus to not be alive, but that the unborn fetus has growth life. TWI simply made a distinction between breath-life and growth-life - that is all. TWI never claimed that the unborn fetus was never alive to begin with. They never claimed or taught that - not at all. But there is a poster here who likes to get people all emotionally riled up. It helps them muddy the facts and the truth regarding what TWI taught, and then they attack another poster over it.
The bible distinguishes between these different types of life (between breath-life and growth-life) in Genesis, but man's religion insists upon there only being one-type and only one form of life. That is what TWI taught us - that there are differences between and in these different forms of life recorded in the book of Genesis - not that the fetus is not or never was alive to begin with. That was never a TWI doctrine, so get your facts straight first about what TWI taught and then perhaps one can have an intelligent discussion that won't deteriorate into name-calling and bullying (i.e. I'm specifically referring to previous posts between Rascal and you-know-who). But that "only one form of life doctrine" is essentially the basis behind and the reasoning for Pres. Bush enacting that stupid "fetus protection" law back in 2004, which is what this thread was initially about. One should get their facts straight before they go bullying someone and end up attacking each other and calling each other names. But pushing someone else's hot button is apparently more important to some people here than getting their facts straight and having an intelligent discussion with somebody.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lifted Up
Dunno who "you-know-who" is. I have some differences of opinion with Rascal's posts on the subject, but one of them is not what TWI taught, even though maybe you are right. I'll explain.
Before being yanked out at the very end of 1979, I dont recall any teaching on the "breath of life" doctrine relating it to abortion. The only time I heard the subject brought up was at ROA 1978, when VPW called the corps who were going WOW into the woods for a burger and comments. Basically he said there had been some problems leading to abortions. Even though he said "you know I dont like abortion", he had had to pay for some (dunno how many) as a result of corps not "watching themselves". Then he said he wanted us to be sure we did just that.
Anyway, I dont know what was taught later. But Rascal (I accept her testimony) and evidently others were "advised" to have an abortion on the premise that it would not be destroying a life. That is, whatever TWIs teaching was, in practice they were telling her that the fetus was never alive.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Maybe I'm just dreaming this, but didn't VPW say somewhere in piffle that life begins when you take your first breath and ends when you take your last?
Hence the term, *breath-life*.
I'm not stating this as a form of agreement or disagreement with that line of thought.
I am stating this to establish that VPW did, indeed, "teach" that a fetus was not alive until it took its first breath.
(Though I don't recall him using the word "fetus".)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
"he" paid? Paid? Hmm. I guess it's your abundant sharing at work..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Bull SHEET they didn`t teach that the fetus was not alive. You lie WTH...
Perhaps one only heard the official teaching when a person got pregnant in the corpes....even app. corpes...
One was taken to where the scriptures differed in the penalties between murder and causing a woman to lose their fruit....*see see God doesn`t see that baby as alive*
The scriptures where then shown...adam took his first breath...*see he wasn`t alive* ...
One was then told that it was nothing more than a bunch of cells...paracites that could not survive without the host....like cancer...
You were then showed the passages of what happened to people who didn`t honor their vows to God and how they died...
You were then told that in signing up to go into the corpes or wow...that YOU had made a promise....a vow to God....
Then the reproof was ended with being scornfully asked if you were willing to allow a bunch of paracitical cells, that weren`t even alive.... to cause you to lie to God???
Were you ready for the consequences of breaking your vow?? If per chance the child were to be born, it would in all likelyhood be deformed...yadda yadda...
Bull CR@P they didn`t teach that the baby wasn`t alive before it took first breath...I have been there heard THAT and most unfortunately BOUGHT that..It was our limb leaders who later became bot `s...that insisted that abortion of the not yet living fetus must not allow me to break my vow.....ans YES had I not been able to pay for it....they would have ponied up the 500 bucks needed....your abs at work Kansas believers :( I will assume that they knew what twi`s *official* stance was on things.
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Oh yeah and some ignoramous told me that the life was in the blood...they reckoned that was why we weren`t aliveuntill we took our first breath...the oxygen was introduced....dumb a$$ what do they think the umbillical chord for???
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Is it?
I believe they made a different distinction, a distinction between abortion being morally reprehensible, or merely as harmless as clipping one's nails.
A fetus is hardly a newly sprouted corn stalk, or wheat.. or some kind of weed, that should be merely swept aside as some kind of inconvenience..
That is what the term "growth life" implies, does it not?
From many men's perspective, it can be such a "little" thing.. but from the woman's, it's the whole world.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
I heard a fetus referred to as "a little parasite."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Yeah..I heard that it was soul life that entered with first breath....until then...they were just paracitical cells...
They steered very clear of the passages where mary`s cousin`s babe recognized Jesus and lept in the womb...Both of those womens *fruit* were called *babes*
I`d like to see twi people refer to the unborn Jesus as a *bunch of paracitical cells*
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
This is a real sore spot with me....
The ba$tards taught us that God almighty REQUIRED us to murder our unborn children :(
The pigs taught us that obediance to leadership was also required by God in order to be in his will.....
The low life scum insisted that there was no other alternative if one wanted to remain under God`s protection and in his will....
There was no *out*...you brokenly complied with their direction...why they knew where to go...could make the appointments....offered to pay...bless their hearts...this was a GOOD thing...and once you were carried there.....
This is one thing that can`t EVER be fixed...you can`t make this all better... no do overs and this time get it right.
They are unconscionable liars...this was wrong on so many levels.
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
One thing I can say.. there are times I feel like I'd rather not be a man..
no.. not what some may think.
These sycophants, standing behind a pulpit, who enabled this kind of practice.. and those who followed them, and bullied GOD'S women in this manner..
these guys are just so much bad company..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
exwaycorps
The computer sure seems to embolden some of you to say THE most AAAmazing things to one another.
Just one more example of how these women were treated horribly by twi...only to get the same treatment (or worse) here.
I cannot even imagine being faced with some of the things these women have been through.
Can you ?
Yet, some of you feel nothing at all about lauding YOUR OPINION, of them, up to the sky in what seems like an attempt to glorify YOUR knowledge,YOUR feelings,YOUR *superiority*over them on these very personal matters.
They have obviously been deeply hurt.
But, of course, YOUR opinion, summation of events (you know nothing about)...
well...
THAT'S THE IMPORTANT THING. Isn't it ? Their pain means nothing. right? Go ahead ...add to it!!
As long as YOU get YOUR two cents in.
That's what really matters in here huh?
GOD FORBID WE GO THROUGH LIFE WITHOUT YOUR OPINION
If some of these things were said *face to face* I'm sure you'd have more to deal with than you'd care to.
Nobody would stand for that.
I think the loved ones in their life would take exception to it. (just a hunch)
Who among you would EVER DARE tell a rape victim that her rapist was a pretty cool guy ? or that she probably misunderstood him. Or "no way that really happened!!"
OR
telling a woman who believes she was FORCED into getting an abortion... that it's no big deal. "get over it!"
I really don't think you would. So...why is it ok in here??
Going with the flow...
Here's some thread ideas we can really sink our (very sharp) teeth into.
I mean, why not? These things are being said anyway. Right?
1 you're a lying wh_re
2 keep your legs together b_tch
3 101 ways to rip each other up
3 twi... who needs them? we have each other (to bring down)
4 How i'm better than you (and I can provide scripture)
5 wh_re "de jour"
6 liar,liar (pants on fire)
7 here's how wrong you really are (IMHO)
8 "neener,neener,neener!!"
9 here's how I think you should have handled (your own life)
10 I know that was harsh but...(let me make it even worse for you, ok?)
COME ON !!!!
A lil "over the top" but sheesh
Can we stop for a moment and think about how we're treating each other.
Granted . We get mad etc. but... we're talking about people's LIVES here.
Thank you in advance
(risky,I know)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Waysider you NAILED it :(
Over the top??? I don`t think so...when people make their comments about being liars or perpetually whining victims or psychotic attention seekers... (yes I have been called all of those things) it reads...has the same impact ..the kick in the gut that the comments you wrote....
Thank you guys who understand. I mean it
What might be merely an intellectual exercise for some, or just another chance to slap down an irritating poster....for others on the recieving end is about deep hurt that just doesn`t go away.
These situations and discussions aren`t a pi$$ing contest and who is right and who is wrong......who ever yells the loudest or gets in the best digs wins....this is about peoples hearts....
I think I read where a person once said....next time I will take my boots off before I stomp across your heart.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Now wait a minute...I'm not about to turn this into an "all men are pigs" discussion. It's no more fair than saying that all the rape victims "really wanted it anyway."
Each person has to own their own sh(t. I'm not laying blame at anyone's feet. But there are men and women that know exactly what they did and said and they will stand accountable for it.
Yes... I said "women..." There were women who were just as involved in the whole idea that and abortion was just getting rid of a problem.
In my opinion, a child is not a problem. A child is a precious responsibility and privilege - no matter how "inconvenient."
Rant over...for now...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I wasn't making that insinuation.
:)
It's just.. sheesh.. I think these guys give men a bad name..
As bad as some people think he was, even Hemingway had more sensitivity..
I think he nailed the attitudes pretty well with "Hills like White Elephants".
The woman was saying.. "we could have had the world... once 'they' take it, you'll never get it back.."
The man was saying.. "naw, no big deal. It's not even an operation.."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I also have a vague recollection of VPW teaching on Luke1.35( the section of scripture that refers to Jesus as a "thing") and rationalizing the usage of the word "thing" by saying he, Jesus, was technically a *thing* because he had not yet taken his first breath. I wish I could remember where VP taught this but it's been too long ago.
Part of the emphasis of that particular teaching was that The Word never contradicts itself.
It seems that there were people who had said this passage was an example of contradiction because it used the term*thing* rather than refer to Jesus as a child.
As always, there were subliminal implications to much of what Wierwille taught.
"Hey!, That's not what I taught. That's what you heard me say and give your own meaning to."
(Sounds like a cop-out/loophole to me.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
For the sake of clarification, I am not trying to proclaim a stance on the subject of abortion being right or being wrong.
My opinion is a moot point.
What I am trying to do is establish that Wierwille DID take a stance on how he regarded the subject.
We all know, I believe, that a stance taken by Wirwille on any subject carried a tremendous amount of weight.
(ie: "This is the stance that "DR" has taken so that's how I will stand also because he is obviously MUCH more in touch with what is spiritually correct,")
(I looked for a "smiley" hurling chunks but couldn't find one.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
What The Hey
First off, I don't care about the hearsay. TWI never taught the fetus was "a little parasite." I'm also sorry if somebody here took some idiot TWI leaders advice and had an abortion just so they could go into or remain in the Way Corps. If you were already in that situation then you honestly didn't belong in the Corps to begin with, and if some TWI leader told you that you had to have an abortion to go in or to stay in the Corps, then they really had no business handing out personal advice to anybody as a leader - ever - on any subject matter (whether that person was a Corp person or not) that does not implicate them in any way shape or form.
Were there some pretty screwed up leaders in TWI handing out bad advice to others? Definately. I don't doubt there were some pretty screwed up leaders in TWI because I ran into a few myself. I am not talking just about abortions but about finances and other life issues, etc. For the most part, I ignored them and their lousy advice. Apparently some people didn't do that and ended up paying a hefty price for the lousy advice they took from them.
I think it took too long for TWI to get rid of the worst of them, but unfortunately some of them are still in TWI today - IMO. Some of them are still in TWI because they still like to hand out advice to others but they don't want to assume the responsibility of someone taking their lousy advice. That is why nobody should take advice from someone who does not also want to also assume the responsibilities of making that decision for themselves. But there sure are a lot of people in this world (not just in TWI) who want to hand out advice to others - just so long as it does not implicate and involve "me" in any way.
If you're someone who has to take advice from somebody else because you're not "bright enough" to make a particular decision for yourself and on your own, then don't go around blaming the "advice giver" just because your own bulb is "burned out". I don't care who they say they are - a MOG, a therapist, a Dr. or a "whatever". All we have today is a lot of "advice takers" who love to go around yanking other people's chains - believing they are "turning on the light" for other people because things didn't turn out exactly the way they wanted in the end. I run into these types all the time as well as you do. Their stories are anything but "enlightening" but rather depressing, dull and dark. Who do they think they are kidding? They are not looking for enlightenment themselves. They are just looking to "yank someone's chain." You can pull on the chain all you want, but the light won't come on when the bulb is burned out.
Edited by What The HeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
pond
A follower who hangs around a host (without benefit to the host) in hope of gain or advantage.
this is what a parasite is .. yes a fetus is a parasite, consider maybe we all have been parasitic in nature.
a flea is a parasite, yet it has a life. the breath life idea is sketchy at best , we put people on machines and stop breath of coming in and out during sugery or swimming etc. are they dead?
maybe... but does that mean God does not honor their life when it returns?
i think the bigger ideal is who is who once again , twi put much pressure on POWER and who had it and didnt it was all a game of competitiion in a BAD WAY!
you took the advance class and got forty people to take the class YOUR the ONE God loves more and honors more and respects more...
come on you seen it we all bought that ticket.
a pregnate woman is born again , they have holy spirit , so in the line of thining of the way, they are MORE IMPORTANT than a lowly unbeliever baby.
and it got that bad (that is why i think it was a cult ) the unbelievers their life their love anything was discounted as nothing at all. unless they wanted to take the pfal class.
and this thought ran deep.
it was like a undertow of God being the TRUE God so much and we having so much POWER within us and so important inflated beyond reason important to mankind that mankind just didnt matter anymore.
so many mini jesus christ's walking around in the way God will just KILL the whole world for us.
it was twisted and wrong .
so abortion became a natural discounted event just like treating people poorly or with abuse was ok because we wer so special to God.
dangerous stuff .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
WTH
COLD!---VERY COLD!
Did I mention that our freedom to pick and choose which advise we would accept and which we would reject was tempered by mind control?-----My bad.
We trusted them(TWI leadership) because they convinced us they had an inside track on what was pleasing to God.
They lied. They did not have an inside track.
Why is it our fault that they chose to lie?
SNIP--"They really had no business handing out personal advice to anybody- as a leader- ever- on any subject matter". SNIP
Agreed!
SNIP--"That does not implicate them in any shape or form."--SNIP
As my twig leader* told *me in 1972, "We are not affiliated WITH The Way, We ARE The Way".
That implies they spoke as representatives of the group as a whole and thereby implicates them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pond
The body of christ concept.
Get that? and we are accountable to one another, and honor those who are set in place and of course the final testimony of the higher powers of romans 13!!
by the time that came out I believed it so much.
some here think we were thinking like normal people crap 20 years out and im still not thinking like normal people.
were you ever in the way or
did you just go and snicker at the cult heads?
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.