Yeah.. that "dirt road" term really made for a mind picture didn't it? I had never heard it before the class and haven't heard it since. VPW was warped. But law.. how he taught the Word.
That "original sin = masturbation" thing was the most ridiculous, convoluted piece of illogic that I ever heard....something about trees figuratively representing people in the bible and the "fruit of the tree" supposedly representing the genitalia... :blink:
C'mon now boys, dirt road, hershy highway, the fudge freeway...what difference does it make?...The cornfield predator was there for us! Explaining these lewd terms to young teenage girls...for their BENEFIT! Exposing young kids to the seamy side of life is bound to "broaden their horizens"...and I'll bet I can guess what ol' VP was using those sex surveys for.
...Another thought just crossed my mind...The late Jim Doop made it known to me personally as well as publicly, that when Wierwiile first went out to California to meet up with the "Jesus people" (Christian hippies), he asked Doop to take him to some orgies! Wierwille was a major league predator who was in to "extracurricular sexual activities" on a regular basis. He was really turned on by the "free love" of the young hippie girls...
To think that this dirty old man was teaching kids about sex!...it's like putting Jeffery Dahmer in charge of the kitchen!
That "original sin = masturbation" thing was the most ridiculous, convoluted piece of illogic that I ever heard....something about trees figuratively representing people in the bible and the "fruit of the tree" supposedly representing the genitalia... :blink:
Any more ridiculous than the Devil taking a female form to engage in a lesbian encounter with Eve? :blink: :blink:
I believe that someone is referring to The Principles of a Believer's Family audio class that lcm, with donna at his side, presented to the gunnison inresident corps in 1995 or 1996. This "class" was actually a series of topics that lcm taught the corps and were put together as a "class" by twi's a/v department.
If I remember correctly, there were nine or ten hours (sessions) of teaching......from a variety of topics dealing with life and living, courting, marriage and sex. It was really bland......skirting lots of issues and giving license to unmarried 25 year-old males to let their conscience guide them, or whatever. No teaching on the sanctity of marriage; no teaching on adultery; no teaching on alot of real issues.
It was a terrible "class" to run.......imo, it was the worst of all twi classes. The fee was $30 and generally run over a weekend, Saturday and Sunday and left most students with more questions than answers. A one-page handout was given to the students......but like I said, it was an AUDIO class. Uuuuugh.
Thankfully, this "class" dropped off the charts when WAP hit the field.....and a year or so later, I was gone. So, I don't know if twi continued to run these "believer's family classes" after that.
.......In hindsight, it's unbelievable to think that lcm had the audacity to even think he could teach aspects of *the believer's family* OR *christian marriage and sex* when he was SO UNQUALIFIED to address these topics being steep in rampant adultery and all.
amazing though, how people who's definition of proper arrangement and deliberate decision is "I'll let you do whatever you want if you let me do whatever I want.." were sought out for their "wise counsel".
I wonder what they thought when they looked in the mirror.
Maybe they covered them all with black paint or something..
When I took "Principles of a Believer's Family" in 1996 it was video. This is the one where LCM states it is the decision of the husband/father, as head of the household, when the children are old enough to become sexually active. This sent cold chills down my spine.
Also there was a whole session on DM teaching Proverbs 31. I still have notes in my Oxford Bible from that teaching. "She BLEEDS OUT HER LIFE for her husband for that home, for those children." Really makes you wanna be a virtuous woman, doesn't it?
It was, as mentioned before, pretty boring for the most part. I am delighted to say it was the last class I ever took in TWI.
It wasn't so much WHAT she taught, it was the WAY she taught it. I am taking a class from material by Elizabeth George that says much the same, that women should be the managers of their household, Love their husbands, keep the place clean, raise the children with love and discipline and nurture (but NOT beatings), etc. She teaches it as an expression of love and respect, DM taught it almost as a burden, a supreme self-sacrifice. I believe there are great benefits and rewards to be had by doing my best to be a good wife and mother, and now grandmother, that certainly outweigh the inconvenience I experience from time to time.
And then again, there's the example thing Mr. Ham and Skyrider mentioned. I'd rather hear this from someone who's been a successful missionary, whose husband is a professor, who has done her personal best to live what she's teaching (and is not ashamed to use her own failings as examples), than someone who obviously has fallen short of the mark, but is unwilling to present herself as anything less than perfect.
DM also mentioned that a wife should strive to not have very many opinions, but should ask her husband what HIS opinion was and then align her thinking with his. This is all very well and good if you aren't too bright. MY husband thinks I'm a pretty smart cookie and values my opinion. I in turn respect HIS intelligence and wisdom, and he is the CEO of our little company of two.
The thing about the father as head of the household deciding when his child is mature enough for sexual activity to my mind is really weird. I find it odd that it would be stated that a father should be that involved in his daughter's sexuality. The concept of a daddy saying to his little girl, aged 12, 13, 14, whatever, "Okay, honey, you seem mature enough to me. Here's a package of condoms, now go have fun!" sounds really perverted in a weird sort of way.
Well, actually, I remember this being in the class in the mid 1970s.
In fact, VP said that if you do this without your spouse, it is an indication you are having marital problems.
Where did he come up with this stuff? He thought it was bad for people to do themselves without their spouse - but it's totally fine to go out and have sex with anyone? Wow.
Why does the original sin always have something to do with sex?
Couldn't it just be about the knowledge of good and evil? My goodness.
WG - I find that creepy as well. My parents never told me when I should be ready for sex - thank goodness. They always told me to wait until I was married though. @_@
They really took that whole "dating around" thing to heart though. I couldn't freaking date anyone seriously without them jumping on me about "being serious." I was young! I needed to date other people even if I was in a happy relationship! I remember them bringing the class up.
It always bugged me a lot that people who spouted all kinds of junk to be commited to someone - said the exact opposite when they needed it to work for them.
Maybe that's why I've always been so confused about most things - everything always seemed to contradict itself.
DM also mentioned that a wife should strive to not have very many opinions, but should ask her husband what HIS opinion was and then align her thinking with his. This is all very well and good if you aren't too bright. MY husband thinks I'm a pretty smart cookie and values my opinion. I in turn respect HIS intelligence and wisdom, and he is the CEO of our little company of two.
Uhhhh.... Yea.... DM never had any opinions... <_< never had any ideas of her own...<_< Ri-i-i-i-ight.... OTOH I guess she had to learn to suppress some of her opinions...
This sounds suspiciously like a manager only training a person to the point that they can't replace him or her... I think they call it "rising to the highest level of incompetence."
Contrast this with:
I heard once that Billy Graham said that if both people in a relationship think exactly alike, then one of them isn't necessary. He encouraged men and women to celebrate the different ways they viewed things and to allow the each other's differences to strengthen the relationship.
DM taught it almost as a burden, a supreme self-sacrifice
Yeah. That's what I was alluding to. Imagine.. she's trying (I'll give her some benefit of the doubt here) to raise children with some "normality" in a house of insanity.. loy's, not to mention her own..
even if they had some kinda "agreement".. it had to hurt..
not to mention her own rumored proclivities..
had to cut the other way..
was she "happy"?
maybe looked like it, with enough Botox..
I really think if she found people that were happy in relationships, that there was something wrong with them..
can't say 100 percent for her, but the last branch guy's wife was like this. Couldn't figure out why anybody else could be "happy". If SHE couldn't be happy, by God, nobody else was going to be..
When we were dismissed from the FWC, the little woman in WA who decided to figure out what was wrong with us, with our relationship, decided that I was not submissive enough to my husband. She spewed forth some of the above, especially the "line up your thinking with that of your husband" crap. Several months later, at a meeting including the BC, he asked me how we were doing. "Just fine," was my polite reply; "nunya f-ing business" would've been more honest and accurate. "See!" he exclaimed triumphantly. "You do what the Word says and submit to your husband, and everything's just so much better!" It took me a long time to figure out what THAT was all about, but I finally put it together.
Yeah. That's what I was alluding to. Imagine.. she's trying (I'll give her some benefit of the doubt here) to raise children with some "normality" in a house of insanity.. loy's, not to mention her own..
even if they had some kinda "agreement".. it had to hurt..
not to mention her own rumored proclivities..
had to cut the other way..
was she "happy"?
maybe looked like it, with enough Botox..
I really think if she found people that were happy in relationships, that there was something wrong with them..
can't say 100 percent for her, but the last branch guy's wife was like this. Couldn't figure out why anybody else could be "happy". If SHE couldn't be happy, by God, nobody else was going to be..
I agree she went out of her way to make everyone miserable yech!!
I got her so peeved at me one time in a park,I told her cant you just for once be happy ya know be positive?She really went off on me,funny thing her hubby just smiled.
amazing though, how people who's definition of proper arrangement and deliberate decision is "I'll let you do whatever you want if you let me do whatever I want.." were sought out for their "wise counsel".
I wonder what they thought when they looked in the mirror.
Maybe they covered them all with black paint or something..
Finally remembered what I was reminded of when you asked about the mirror.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
12
7
8
6
Popular Days
Jun 16
28
Nov 30
16
Nov 29
12
Dec 1
9
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 12 posts
Oakspear 7 posts
waysider 8 posts
Nero 6 posts
Popular Days
Jun 16 2004
28 posts
Nov 30 2007
16 posts
Nov 29 2007
12 posts
Dec 1 2007
9 posts
Posted Images
Sudo
Pirate,
Yeah.. that "dirt road" term really made for a mind picture didn't it? I had never heard it before the class and haven't heard it since. VPW was warped. But law.. how he taught the Word.
sudo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
That "original sin = masturbation" thing was the most ridiculous, convoluted piece of illogic that I ever heard....something about trees figuratively representing people in the bible and the "fruit of the tree" supposedly representing the genitalia... :blink:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
C'mon now boys, dirt road, hershy highway, the fudge freeway...what difference does it make?...The cornfield predator was there for us! Explaining these lewd terms to young teenage girls...for their BENEFIT! Exposing young kids to the seamy side of life is bound to "broaden their horizens"...and I'll bet I can guess what ol' VP was using those sex surveys for.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
...Another thought just crossed my mind...The late Jim Doop made it known to me personally as well as publicly, that when Wierwiile first went out to California to meet up with the "Jesus people" (Christian hippies), he asked Doop to take him to some orgies! Wierwille was a major league predator who was in to "extracurricular sexual activities" on a regular basis. He was really turned on by the "free love" of the young hippie girls...
To think that this dirty old man was teaching kids about sex!...it's like putting Jeffery Dahmer in charge of the kitchen!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolchef
what a sicko he was
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
Any more ridiculous than the Devil taking a female form to engage in a lesbian encounter with Eve? :blink: :blink:
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hooner
What was Believer's Family and Sex?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I've been out of TWI for quite a few years but I never heard of that one.
Is it perhaps another name for CF&S that was a local idiom?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
I believe that someone is referring to The Principles of a Believer's Family audio class that lcm, with donna at his side, presented to the gunnison inresident corps in 1995 or 1996. This "class" was actually a series of topics that lcm taught the corps and were put together as a "class" by twi's a/v department.
If I remember correctly, there were nine or ten hours (sessions) of teaching......from a variety of topics dealing with life and living, courting, marriage and sex. It was really bland......skirting lots of issues and giving license to unmarried 25 year-old males to let their conscience guide them, or whatever. No teaching on the sanctity of marriage; no teaching on adultery; no teaching on alot of real issues.
It was a terrible "class" to run.......imo, it was the worst of all twi classes. The fee was $30 and generally run over a weekend, Saturday and Sunday and left most students with more questions than answers. A one-page handout was given to the students......but like I said, it was an AUDIO class. Uuuuugh.
Thankfully, this "class" dropped off the charts when WAP hit the field.....and a year or so later, I was gone. So, I don't know if twi continued to run these "believer's family classes" after that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
IIRC it was to a family camp, not the Corps. There was a Way magazine article that they read extensively from.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I missed the loyster's version of the sex class..
amazing though, how people who's definition of proper arrangement and deliberate decision is "I'll let you do whatever you want if you let me do whatever I want.." were sought out for their "wise counsel".
I wonder what they thought when they looked in the mirror.
Maybe they covered them all with black paint or something..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
When I took "Principles of a Believer's Family" in 1996 it was video. This is the one where LCM states it is the decision of the husband/father, as head of the household, when the children are old enough to become sexually active. This sent cold chills down my spine.
Also there was a whole session on DM teaching Proverbs 31. I still have notes in my Oxford Bible from that teaching. "She BLEEDS OUT HER LIFE for her husband for that home, for those children." Really makes you wanna be a virtuous woman, doesn't it?
It was, as mentioned before, pretty boring for the most part. I am delighted to say it was the last class I ever took in TWI.
WG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I wonder how much she was speaking from personal experience.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
It wasn't so much WHAT she taught, it was the WAY she taught it. I am taking a class from material by Elizabeth George that says much the same, that women should be the managers of their household, Love their husbands, keep the place clean, raise the children with love and discipline and nurture (but NOT beatings), etc. She teaches it as an expression of love and respect, DM taught it almost as a burden, a supreme self-sacrifice. I believe there are great benefits and rewards to be had by doing my best to be a good wife and mother, and now grandmother, that certainly outweigh the inconvenience I experience from time to time.
And then again, there's the example thing Mr. Ham and Skyrider mentioned. I'd rather hear this from someone who's been a successful missionary, whose husband is a professor, who has done her personal best to live what she's teaching (and is not ashamed to use her own failings as examples), than someone who obviously has fallen short of the mark, but is unwilling to present herself as anything less than perfect.
DM also mentioned that a wife should strive to not have very many opinions, but should ask her husband what HIS opinion was and then align her thinking with his. This is all very well and good if you aren't too bright. MY husband thinks I'm a pretty smart cookie and values my opinion. I in turn respect HIS intelligence and wisdom, and he is the CEO of our little company of two.
The thing about the father as head of the household deciding when his child is mature enough for sexual activity to my mind is really weird. I find it odd that it would be stated that a father should be that involved in his daughter's sexuality. The concept of a daddy saying to his little girl, aged 12, 13, 14, whatever, "Okay, honey, you seem mature enough to me. Here's a package of condoms, now go have fun!" sounds really perverted in a weird sort of way.
WG
Edited by Watered GardenLink to comment
Share on other sites
Nero
Where did he come up with this stuff? He thought it was bad for people to do themselves without their spouse - but it's totally fine to go out and have sex with anyone? Wow.
Why does the original sin always have something to do with sex?
Couldn't it just be about the knowledge of good and evil? My goodness.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nero
WG - I find that creepy as well. My parents never told me when I should be ready for sex - thank goodness. They always told me to wait until I was married though. @_@
They really took that whole "dating around" thing to heart though. I couldn't freaking date anyone seriously without them jumping on me about "being serious." I was young! I needed to date other people even if I was in a happy relationship! I remember them bringing the class up.
It always bugged me a lot that people who spouted all kinds of junk to be commited to someone - said the exact opposite when they needed it to work for them.
Maybe that's why I've always been so confused about most things - everything always seemed to contradict itself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Uhhhh.... Yea.... DM never had any opinions... <_< never had any ideas of her own...<_< Ri-i-i-i-ight.... OTOH I guess she had to learn to suppress some of her opinions...
This sounds suspiciously like a manager only training a person to the point that they can't replace him or her... I think they call it "rising to the highest level of incompetence."
Contrast this with:
I heard once that Billy Graham said that if both people in a relationship think exactly alike, then one of them isn't necessary. He encouraged men and women to celebrate the different ways they viewed things and to allow the each other's differences to strengthen the relationship.
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Yeah. That's what I was alluding to. Imagine.. she's trying (I'll give her some benefit of the doubt here) to raise children with some "normality" in a house of insanity.. loy's, not to mention her own..
even if they had some kinda "agreement".. it had to hurt..
not to mention her own rumored proclivities..
had to cut the other way..
was she "happy"?
maybe looked like it, with enough Botox..
I really think if she found people that were happy in relationships, that there was something wrong with them..
can't say 100 percent for her, but the last branch guy's wife was like this. Couldn't figure out why anybody else could be "happy". If SHE couldn't be happy, by God, nobody else was going to be..
Edited by Mr. HammeroniLink to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
When we were dismissed from the FWC, the little woman in WA who decided to figure out what was wrong with us, with our relationship, decided that I was not submissive enough to my husband. She spewed forth some of the above, especially the "line up your thinking with that of your husband" crap. Several months later, at a meeting including the BC, he asked me how we were doing. "Just fine," was my polite reply; "nunya f-ing business" would've been more honest and accurate. "See!" he exclaimed triumphantly. "You do what the Word says and submit to your husband, and everything's just so much better!" It took me a long time to figure out what THAT was all about, but I finally put it together.
WG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
frank123lol
I agree she went out of her way to make everyone miserable yech!!I got her so peeved at me one time in a park,I told her cant you just for once be happy ya know be positive?She really went off on me,funny thing her hubby just smiled.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Finally remembered what I was reminded of when you asked about the mirror.
The lyrics to a Rush song called "War Paint."
The chorus goes
"All puffed up with vanity
We see what we want to see.
For the beautiful and the wise
The mirror always lies."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
The story I heard was that all the mirrors cracked one day when Rosie came over for a visit.
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.