research is some serious stuff in the money department medical reasearch is done over years and only parts are done by several people so only a very select few know the actual outcome of the work or findings untill released. it is like a puzzle with each researcher having a piece of it to work on and only the one with the bank roll who has the large picture.
if you worked for a company and found an answer to anything and it happens everyday in many companies as far as saving much money and time it may be YOUR idea and effort applied but it often belongs to the company itself and laws are in place to protect who employs you to do the work. maybe if it a good company they will give you incentive or promotion if your idea succeeds and makes them a ton and then again maybe not. papers and contracts are signed in any business where money and ideas and research are generated.
I will give you one example a friend of mine owns a cleaning business when you become his employee you sign a paper that states you are in no way allowed to work for his customers while employed for him or for ten years after your employment with the company. he had a girl that worked for him recruit one of his customers for herself and he sucessfully sued her and won and now she has to give him alot of money for many many years and give up the customer for herself . happens every day tommy boy .
MJ is right. My best friend is a corporate counsel specializing in this type of issue. If you use a company's resources in any way to do something, invent, compose, etc, they can sue for a share or complete ownership. As to your AIDS cure example, the company owns it. Period. It will be in your employment agreement from day one. Ignoring the law even if you think you're more noble than the next guy still lands you in court.
Not that I think hiding a cure for AIDS is morally acceptable but just focusing on the legal stuff here. Did John S. ever sue for wrongful termination? He might have had a case.
I really have difficulty with this research papar on adultry. I really am wondering how far this nonchalant doctrine about adultry permeated not the brass but the other members throughout. Certainly members who remained sexually pure throughout could be somewhat grateful for someone taking a stand. That's fine. Still, wouldnt those same members have objected to the mere thought of it if it were introduced to them and run? Wasn'nt this issue kinda known and passified throughout? It sure as hell made me get out of there when i suspected it might be going on? Where's my accolades Raf? I dont see these same people standing around saying there sorry for permitting it all these years and how it affected me. From that standpoint this "researcher" didnt' doanything more than I already suffered there Raf. It's like saying , "Gee lets go do some reasearch to see if I have a nose on my face." Certainly someone had to stand up to them, but it wasnt like people werent bailing for this and other reasons anyway. Therefore in my mind to give some crony kudos for stating the insanely obvious, is like back slapping Nazi's who bailed when they thought they were going to lose the war or was it rather bailed because they couldnt take the pain they were inflicting on others? I aint judging them either Raf, because only God knows what there participation was, or the reason they tried to "make the stand." The point simply is wheres the apologies in proper for teaching doctrines of such a nature from the time they really did know about it?
From this standpoint, i really have to agree with MJ412. If what they did helped you and others, thats great. It's just it never made the food they served me proper, cause I got the hell out of there long before I had to hear these bone heads say it wasnt right. And heres the major point RAF, there in there years and years and it takes em that long to figure out adultry is wrong? Thats not just retarded RAF, thats demented. It's like , I bumped into a "Christian Group" who dehabilitated me. If there healthy now good for them. Personally i just couldnt ever trust some one like that.
quote:Not that I think hiding a cure for AIDS is morally acceptable but just focusing on the legal stuff here.
That's what I'm talking about. He11, I know the "legal stuff"... it would be morally unacceptable for me to keep that cure from the public. It might cost me my job and my future employment and probably some money... but it is something I would HAVE to do. Lives are at stake.
Do you see any similarity to what John S. did? It was morally the right thing to do, regardless of "policy" or "who owned the rights"... how many lives were destroyed up to that point? how many did publishing the paper save?
I disagree with your assessment of the JS research paper on adultery.
Most businesses are set up to do one thing: make money
However TWI, whatever its true reasons for existing, was presented to people as a ministry, not merely a business. Despite Wierwille's, and later Martindale's, autocratic ways, most people thought of it as God's ministry, and therefore answerable to God through his Word. Most wayfers further thought of it as their ministry, and therefore fully competant to express their opinions or try to affect change.
While I do not know JAL's or JS's mindsets, comparing them to an insubordinate employee in a for-profit business misses the point. Even with TWI paying the bills, JS and other were TWI, just as much as the trustees were.
The research paper did more than "state the obvious". It put in black and white an issue that TWI leaders had been avoiding for years. It refuted the scripture twisting and rationalizations that had been passed around.
The research paper did more than "state the obvious". It put in black and white an issue that TWI leaders had been avoiding for years. It refuted the scripture twisting and rationalizations that had been passed around.
And not only that, "word" was spread around, that you would be inviting "devil spirits" into your life, if you even read it.
Wordwolf:[ Whether it was done with someone's approval or presumptuously is still under discussion. If there's no answer within 2 weeks, we'll know someone refuses to confirm or deny there was approval either way. Whether or not it is "current" is MY question.]
and others:
Thats a noteworthy point with one execption, somebody posted it here with someones presumed authority? :)--> Did it therefore bring us up to speed on current matters?
With respect to the stuff that occured in the 1980's: I can't believe someone did a "research paper" on wether Adultry was wrong or not. That really sounds retarded. Most of us that went to Sunday School heard it was wrong before we even new what sex was. Then the cue ball "not taught like since the first century thing shows up", and it dwarfs the writings of "Martin Luther". It just sounds so idiotic.
[ Amazingly, the practice at hq among the higher-ups did not reflect what's in the Bible. You'll want to review the opening of the paper. It's available for review on the GSC. ]
I also have a question. Was that "not taught since the first century thing" a quote in a book, in the Pfal class, or just simply a line floating around? I really dont remember.
[ The so-called "1942 Promise". It's not a direct quote from pfal. It's supposedly the reason vpw was in business. He claimed God Almighty told him He'd teach him His Word like it hadn't been known since the 1st century AD. We've discussed this one in detail before. Remind me next week and I'll find you some of the discussions. ]
Lets look at this life saving paper a little closer .
It was a paper telling christians adultary and fornication is considered sin in the bible.
You think it would have made a difference? oh please yes all the sex and abuse in TWI will now stop because this geek researcher few even heard of in the barn in ohio says the bible wrote a paper yeah that is right .
some heavy stuff there and WOW what revelation!
he has since written a book called SEX and the Scripture if you need to see all the details. un the proceeds go to CES now wonder how he found the time what with saving all the lost souls hero that he is hmmm.
come on that isnt my point. my point is he isnt a hero he was a degruntled employee with ideas and plans to join up with John and make CES while working for twi.
I think the paper had very little to do with what was going on word wolf and if vpw was still alive and LCM had not ....ed so many off it would have gone a different way,inside the rank and file of TWI at the time Word Wolf. BUT instead they used it to gain memebership on their hate trip across the nation and get followers.
I disclosed far worse and I mean far worse where innocent people got hurt badly in first person by a "leader" and I was marked and avoided where is my cult following now hmm?
fine paint him an golden idol all you want but the idea that he broke the rules because he is a "better" christian and changed the world does not fly with me in fact it leaves a bad taste in my mouth for the type of man he really is. plenty of clergy left in those days without the scene and tactics they used to gain membership on their gig plenty.
it was about money and power over people . it was war.
quote: the idea that he broke the rules because he is a "better" christian and changed the world does not fly with me in fact it leaves a bad taste in my mouth for the type of man he really is.
To be honest, the fact that he broke TWI's 'rules' to expose what they were doing like he did during the late 80's, is something I respect.
Tell me something Mj412. Does portraying John Schoenheit in a very positive light because of his adultery paper do anything to lessen this 'CES is a cult' mantra that you keep harping on? As tho' it takes away from what you are saying about how bad CES is?
That's what it looks like to me. ... And frankly, I find that a tad dishonest.
Think about the question for a bit before you respond please.
With all due respect to John S...it doesn't take a brainiac to figure out that the bible says adultery is wrong.
It doesn't take a bold person to come out with a paper about it, either. Sheesh, there are some state governments that still recognize adultery as a valid reason for divorce.
I'm not saying that I think it was a thing about being a disgruntled employee.
I think that it was a statement on the fact that John S tried to work within the system of twi by writing a "research paper" that he probably felt would measure up to twi's standards and get some attention and get things taken care of and cleaned up.
I'm with mj on this one thing, though...
Many, many of us tried to "bring things to light" in twi...like pedophilia being wrong...and where is our following? LOL ;)-->
quote:With all due respect to John S...it doesn't take a brainiac to figure out that the bible says adultery is wrong.
This is straw man: no one is saying John S is a brainiac for figuring out adultery is wrong. What's amazing isn't that he figured out something so dreadfully obvious. What's amazing is that he got threatened for it.
The example of John S is rarely brought up to prove what a wonderful guy John S is. The story proves nothing about John S, except maybe that he can read. The example of John S is more frequently brought up to prove how sick and twisted TWI was, that they would persecute someone just for saying "Adultery: bad."
quote:ine paint him an golden idol all you want but the idea that he broke the rules because he is a "better" christian...
MJ,
1. Who said he is a "better Christian?" And who's painting him as an idol? You accuse me of making quips to try to shut you up, but look at what you're doing. You want me to shut up because ... well, I can't figure out why you're trying to shut me up. But stop misrepresenting me: I don't idolize John Schoenheit. He wrote a research paper on adultery and got fired for it. That's the extent of my opinion on the man.
More replies in a coupla days: don't have time for it today...
I don't think he's a hero either. But TWI was certainly being a villain.
quote:it was company policy to not allow the release of any research unless approved. The paper he wrote was not approved of he worked for the company and gave it to those he knew would keep it for him that were outside of twi and they were wrong for firing him?
This wasn't supposed to be just a "company." This was supposed to be a research ministry and people were (belatedly) recognizing that adultery was a rampant problem. DUH!!
I'll bet good money in the next breath you're going to criticize those in the research department who refused to take a stand and say adultery was wrong. John S can't win with you. If he didn't write the paper, you'd condemn him for his silence. If he wrote the paper, he violated company policy (which, last I checked, was somewhat LESS important than taking a stand on God's Word: Even when it's obvious. You think seducing your neighbor's wife and then killing him so you can marry her would be obviously wrong? Well, then, nothing "heroic" about Nathan, is there?).
My point? You're ready to condemn John S no matter WHAT his past actions were.
Yeah, John S violated company policy. Somehow, I doubt he would have gotten fired for writing an unauthorized research paper legitimizing abortion, or quanitfying the properties of manna.
MJ is right. My best friend is a corporate counsel specializing in this type of issue. If you use a company's resources in any way to do something, invent, compose, etc, they can sue for a share or complete ownership. As to your AIDS cure example, the company owns it. Period. It will be in your employment agreement from day one. Ignoring the law even if you think you're more noble than the next guy still lands you in court.
JT,
You're right (and so is MJ) if you think of TWI as a "company." But TWI was supposed to be a "ministry." That's the standard to which we should hold them.
If JS should have been fired for anything, it would be for wasting time researching the fact that grass is green, the sky is blue, and a negative times a negative equals a multiplicity of negatives.
Tell me something Mj412. Does portraying John Schoenheit in a very positive light because of his adultery paper do anything to lessen this 'CES is a _cult_' mantra that you keep harping on? As tho' it takes away from what you are saying about how bad CES is?
That's what it looks like to me. ... And frankly, I find that a tad dishonest.
This is straw man: no one is saying John S is a brainiac for figuring out adultery is wrong. What's amazing isn't that he figured out something so dreadfully obvious. What's amazing is that he got threatened for it.
The example of John S is rarely brought up to prove what a wonderful guy John S is. The story proves nothing about John S, except maybe that he can read. The example of John S is more frequently brought up to prove how sick and twisted TWI was, that they would persecute someone just for saying "Adultery: bad."
Raf,
I agree wholeheartedly. I'm sorry for not making that more clear. I'm not dissing John S in any way...or at least I'm not trying to.
Tell me something Mj412. Does portraying John Schoenheit in a very positive light because of his adultery paper do anything to lessen this 'CES is a _cult_' mantra that you keep harping on? As tho' it takes away from what you are saying about how bad CES is?
That's what it looks like to me. ... And frankly, I find that a tad dishonest.
What exactly is a "tad?"
A bit more than a smidgen, but that's only if your using the English Imperial Measurement system. I don't know how it figures out using Metric.
A few days ago, I sent the following email to John Lynn,
quote: Hi, John!
Jeff has been posting letters from you, and your e-mail address at the Greasespot Cafe, and he invited any of us who want to get in touch with you to do so. You and I haven't conversed in about seven years, so this is a sort of communication test.
First, I hope you are doing well!
The last time we communicated was by telephone in the evening after The Living Word Fellowship's congregational meeting. If you remember, that was the meeting where I publically repented of all the foolish promises and commitments I had made during my involvement with Momentus.
The last words you said to me were, "...you're being conned... uh... there's another call coming in... I'll get back to you."
Do you still think I was being conned? Why didn't you get back to me?
You should know, I am going to share this e-mail, along with any response or lack of response, with our mutual acquaintances at the Greasespot Cafe.
Your brother in Christ,
Steve Lortz
"Freedom is responsibility. Leadership is responsibility. A man who will not take responsibility is not free, nor can he lead." Thersites the Stoic
Today, I heard back from him,
quote: Hi Steve,
God bless you and Liz. I hope this finds you both well.
Seven years? I wouldn't have thought it was that long ago that we communicated. Let me say that I love you just as much as ever, and that I am grieved by the breach between us after we had been such good friends, worked together on the Dialogue staff, and you had me do your wedding.
To be honest, in reading your email, it does not come across to me as if you are seeking reconciliation with me. Rather, it seems that you still have the same agenda you did seven years ago, and you intend to get me into a dialogue that you plan to make public whether I like it or not.
I don't much know about the Greasespot forum, but I believe it was originally intended to help ex-Way folks get healed and serve the Lord again. I'm not sure how the dialogue you wish to pursue with me fits with that goal. By the testimonies of many ex-Way saints, I know that what we are doing in Spirit and Truth Fellowship International (CES) these past 17+ years does coincide with that goal, and now we are reaching many dear folks who have never heard of TWI. That is what I will continue to invest my energy in.
After seven years, I do not remember the exact words of the conversation you mentioned, but if I said I'd get back to you and didn't (which is uncharacteristic of me), please forgive me. I do recall some definite interaction after that, maybe via email, with you and the Barton's and Chuck T., but it seemed fruitless to me, and probably to you also.
At this point, I am not interested in taking time to dialogue with you about Momentus. I am not invested in defending it. It is simply one vehicle in the Body of Christ. All I know is that for me the Lord showed up in a life-changing way, and 95% of the approximately 1300 people I know who have done it had a positive experience.
As you know, I was there in the Momentus training with you and Liz. As I recall, she had to leave because of a physical ailment, but you expressed positive things to me about the training at its conclusion. Then for whatever reasons you changed your mind and have since been on an anti-Momentus campaign. I'm sorry you now feel that your experience was negative, and I would hope that you have moved on from that and let the Lord heal your heart as necessary.
I love you and miss you.
Your brother,
John
To which I replyed,
quote: Dear John,
Thanks for your prompt reply. Yes, it's been a little over seven years. Those were your last words to me. You may very well have communicated with Bill Barton and Chuck T. since, but not me.
You wrote, "To be honest, in reading your email, it does not come across to me as if you are seeking reconciliation with me. Rather it seems that you still have the same agenda you did seven years ago, and you intend to get me into a dialogue that you plan to make public whether I like it or not."
It seems to me that you still have the same agenda you had seven years ago, also.
Jeff has been posting CES promotional material and letters from you at the Greasespot Cafe. The purpose of this communication is not necessarily to affect reconciliation, though that would be nice, but to confirm whether or not Jeff is posting with your knowledge and consent. Some of the material he's posted seems very old and out of synch with the views many of the people who post at Greasespot hold regarding their former involvement with TWI.
You wrote, "I don't know much about the Greasespot forum, but I believe it was originally intended to help ex-Way folks get healed and serve the Lord again."
Sometimes the activity at Greasespot may help some people "serve the Lord" again, but that isn't its stated purpose. Its purpose is to help people come to grips with the experiences they had with the cult we formerly served. There are others there now besides ex-Way. THere are some former JWs as well. It's amazing how similar the experiences are from cult to cult.
"I'm not sure how the dialogue you wish to pursue with me fits that goal." I don't ordinarily consider CES that much these days, but Jeff's postings have stirred some conversation at Greasespot regarding CES, the ways it is different from TWI, and the ways it is still the same. Jeff intimated that you might start posting.
Momentus came up early on, and no, the issued wasn't raised by me. Some people asked for more information so I told them what I know. It's been interesting as you can imagine if you remember the Living Word Fellowship congregational meeting, where I repented of all the foolish promises and commitments I had made during my involvement with Momentus.
You wrote, "...I am not interested in taking time to dialogue with you about Momentus. I am not invested in defending it... All I know is for me the Lord showed up in a life-changing way, and 95% of the approximately 1300 people I know who have done it had a positive experience."
That would mean 65 people you know who took Momentus had negative experiences as a result of the training. Sixty-five people who had nervous breakdowns, attempted suicides, divorces. Do you still disassociate the quality of your leadership from ANY of their sufferings?
You wrote, "I'm sorry you now feel that your experience was negative, and I hope that you have moved on from that and let the Lord heal your heart as necessary."
The Lord healed my heart of its involvement with Momentus seven years ago, John. He gave me to understand that I had to repent of my foolish involvement before He could work that healing. The Lord was healing my heart, even as you stood nose-to-nose with me, shouting about how much you loved me.
This communication has served its purpose. I'm glad you seem to be doing all right in your private life. I'm sorry you're still investing so much of your energy in building a religious empire, replicating TWI.
At this point it matters very little to me what ulterior motives (if any) John S and JL and others had for making their break from the Way.
I'm extremely glad that they did, because I believe their outspoken defiance certainly helped to inspire the same resolve in others at the time to do the same - to get out of the Way. Whatever their reasons might have been, they raised the red flags, at a time in the 80s when there was no Waydale or Greasespot or Path-of-Christ-Ministry or Living-Epistle Society or Center for Marcionite Research ;)--> etc.
Even CG's self-deluded ramblings with the whole POP episode helped to underscore that the Way household had quite a few holes in their roof.
I've had little issue in the past (at least prior to the advent of "Momentus") recommending people toward the direction of CES (or Bullinger or Concordant Concern publishers), if they were shopping for Way-like doctrines and ideas. CES at the very least may have served as a decent "half-Way house" for folks leaving the old gigantic cult, though I'm not particularly impressed by them nowadays. It strikes my palette as a "tad" stale and moldy.
For anyone reading this who is still in the Way and thinking of leaving, here's my personal piece of advice: save some time and dump all the old Way teachings, skip the offshoots altogether, and get thee to a public library!
Discover all the cool things you've been missing out on.
quote:It is simply one vehicle in the Body of Christ. All I know is that for me the Lord showed up in a life-changing way, and 95% of the approximately 1300 people I know who have done it had a positive experience.
i was thinking the same thing, steve, what would jesus think about the 5% ?
who cares ? the numbers show the success rate.
**
wow, 7 years .... i thought i talked on the phone for a long time ....
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
18
32
35
26
Popular Days
Jul 22
45
Jul 23
43
Jul 24
34
Jul 12
24
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 18 posts
Raf 32 posts
mj412 35 posts
Steve Lortz 26 posts
Popular Days
Jul 22 2004
45 posts
Jul 23 2004
43 posts
Jul 24 2004
34 posts
Jul 12 2004
24 posts
mj412
look tom
research is some serious stuff in the money department medical reasearch is done over years and only parts are done by several people so only a very select few know the actual outcome of the work or findings untill released. it is like a puzzle with each researcher having a piece of it to work on and only the one with the bank roll who has the large picture.
if you worked for a company and found an answer to anything and it happens everyday in many companies as far as saving much money and time it may be YOUR idea and effort applied but it often belongs to the company itself and laws are in place to protect who employs you to do the work. maybe if it a good company they will give you incentive or promotion if your idea succeeds and makes them a ton and then again maybe not. papers and contracts are signed in any business where money and ideas and research are generated.
I will give you one example a friend of mine owns a cleaning business when you become his employee you sign a paper that states you are in no way allowed to work for his customers while employed for him or for ten years after your employment with the company. he had a girl that worked for him recruit one of his customers for herself and he sucessfully sued her and won and now she has to give him alot of money for many many years and give up the customer for herself . happens every day tommy boy .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
Tom,
MJ is right. My best friend is a corporate counsel specializing in this type of issue. If you use a company's resources in any way to do something, invent, compose, etc, they can sue for a share or complete ownership. As to your AIDS cure example, the company owns it. Period. It will be in your employment agreement from day one. Ignoring the law even if you think you're more noble than the next guy still lands you in court.
Not that I think hiding a cure for AIDS is morally acceptable but just focusing on the legal stuff here. Did John S. ever sue for wrongful termination? He might have had a case.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
Raf:
I really have difficulty with this research papar on adultry. I really am wondering how far this nonchalant doctrine about adultry permeated not the brass but the other members throughout. Certainly members who remained sexually pure throughout could be somewhat grateful for someone taking a stand. That's fine. Still, wouldnt those same members have objected to the mere thought of it if it were introduced to them and run? Wasn'nt this issue kinda known and passified throughout? It sure as hell made me get out of there when i suspected it might be going on? Where's my accolades Raf? I dont see these same people standing around saying there sorry for permitting it all these years and how it affected me. From that standpoint this "researcher" didnt' doanything more than I already suffered there Raf. It's like saying , "Gee lets go do some reasearch to see if I have a nose on my face." Certainly someone had to stand up to them, but it wasnt like people werent bailing for this and other reasons anyway. Therefore in my mind to give some crony kudos for stating the insanely obvious, is like back slapping Nazi's who bailed when they thought they were going to lose the war or was it rather bailed because they couldnt take the pain they were inflicting on others? I aint judging them either Raf, because only God knows what there participation was, or the reason they tried to "make the stand." The point simply is wheres the apologies in proper for teaching doctrines of such a nature from the time they really did know about it?
From this standpoint, i really have to agree with MJ412. If what they did helped you and others, thats great. It's just it never made the food they served me proper, cause I got the hell out of there long before I had to hear these bone heads say it wasnt right. And heres the major point RAF, there in there years and years and it takes em that long to figure out adultry is wrong? Thats not just retarded RAF, thats demented. It's like , I bumped into a "Christian Group" who dehabilitated me. If there healthy now good for them. Personally i just couldnt ever trust some one like that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Do you see any similarity to what John S. did? It was morally the right thing to do, regardless of "policy" or "who owned the rights"... how many lives were destroyed up to that point? how many did publishing the paper save?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
MJ:
I disagree with your assessment of the JS research paper on adultery.
Most businesses are set up to do one thing: make money
However TWI, whatever its true reasons for existing, was presented to people as a ministry, not merely a business. Despite Wierwille's, and later Martindale's, autocratic ways, most people thought of it as God's ministry, and therefore answerable to God through his Word. Most wayfers further thought of it as their ministry, and therefore fully competant to express their opinions or try to affect change.
While I do not know JAL's or JS's mindsets, comparing them to an insubordinate employee in a for-profit business misses the point. Even with TWI paying the bills, JS and other were TWI, just as much as the trustees were.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Sky4it:
The research paper did more than "state the obvious". It put in black and white an issue that TWI leaders had been avoiding for years. It refuted the scripture twisting and rationalizations that had been passed around.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
And not only that, "word" was spread around, that you would be inviting "devil spirits" into your life, if you even read it.
How's that for "covering your tracks??"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Sooooooo....
MJ......
Yes, or no, then.......
Was it "wrong", in your opinion..
For John to research his paper?
For John to write his paper?
For John to share the results of his paper?
==============
Should he instead have buried the thing and trusted that
"God will cover?"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
[WordWolf responds in boldface as usual.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mj412
.
Lets look at this life saving paper a little closer .
It was a paper telling christians adultary and fornication is considered sin in the bible.
You think it would have made a difference? oh please yes all the sex and abuse in TWI will now stop because this geek researcher few even heard of in the barn in ohio says the bible wrote a paper yeah that is right .
some heavy stuff there and WOW what revelation!
he has since written a book called SEX and the Scripture if you need to see all the details. un the proceeds go to CES now wonder how he found the time what with saving all the lost souls hero that he is hmmm.
come on that isnt my point. my point is he isnt a hero he was a degruntled employee with ideas and plans to join up with John and make CES while working for twi.
I think the paper had very little to do with what was going on word wolf and if vpw was still alive and LCM had not ....ed so many off it would have gone a different way,inside the rank and file of TWI at the time Word Wolf. BUT instead they used it to gain memebership on their hate trip across the nation and get followers.
I disclosed far worse and I mean far worse where innocent people got hurt badly in first person by a "leader" and I was marked and avoided where is my cult following now hmm?
fine paint him an golden idol all you want but the idea that he broke the rules because he is a "better" christian and changed the world does not fly with me in fact it leaves a bad taste in my mouth for the type of man he really is. plenty of clergy left in those days without the scene and tactics they used to gain membership on their gig plenty.
it was about money and power over people . it was war.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
To be honest, the fact that he broke TWI's 'rules' to expose what they were doing like he did during the late 80's, is something I respect.
Tell me something Mj412. Does portraying John Schoenheit in a very positive light because of his adultery paper do anything to lessen this 'CES is a cult' mantra that you keep harping on? As tho' it takes away from what you are saying about how bad CES is?
That's what it looks like to me. ... And frankly, I find that a tad dishonest.
Think about the question for a bit before you respond please.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
With all due respect to John S...it doesn't take a brainiac to figure out that the bible says adultery is wrong.
It doesn't take a bold person to come out with a paper about it, either. Sheesh, there are some state governments that still recognize adultery as a valid reason for divorce.
I'm not saying that I think it was a thing about being a disgruntled employee.
I think that it was a statement on the fact that John S tried to work within the system of twi by writing a "research paper" that he probably felt would measure up to twi's standards and get some attention and get things taken care of and cleaned up.
I'm with mj on this one thing, though...
Many, many of us tried to "bring things to light" in twi...like pedophilia being wrong...and where is our following? LOL
;)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
This is straw man: no one is saying John S is a brainiac for figuring out adultery is wrong. What's amazing isn't that he figured out something so dreadfully obvious. What's amazing is that he got threatened for it.
The example of John S is rarely brought up to prove what a wonderful guy John S is. The story proves nothing about John S, except maybe that he can read. The example of John S is more frequently brought up to prove how sick and twisted TWI was, that they would persecute someone just for saying "Adultery: bad."
MJ,
1. Who said he is a "better Christian?" And who's painting him as an idol? You accuse me of making quips to try to shut you up, but look at what you're doing. You want me to shut up because ... well, I can't figure out why you're trying to shut me up. But stop misrepresenting me: I don't idolize John Schoenheit. He wrote a research paper on adultery and got fired for it. That's the extent of my opinion on the man.
More replies in a coupla days: don't have time for it today...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I don't think he's a hero either. But TWI was certainly being a villain.
This wasn't supposed to be just a "company." This was supposed to be a research ministry and people were (belatedly) recognizing that adultery was a rampant problem. DUH!!
I'll bet good money in the next breath you're going to criticize those in the research department who refused to take a stand and say adultery was wrong. John S can't win with you. If he didn't write the paper, you'd condemn him for his silence. If he wrote the paper, he violated company policy (which, last I checked, was somewhat LESS important than taking a stand on God's Word: Even when it's obvious. You think seducing your neighbor's wife and then killing him so you can marry her would be obviously wrong? Well, then, nothing "heroic" about Nathan, is there?).
My point? You're ready to condemn John S no matter WHAT his past actions were.
Yeah, John S violated company policy. Somehow, I doubt he would have gotten fired for writing an unauthorized research paper legitimizing abortion, or quanitfying the properties of manna.
Company policy? F! the company.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
JT,
You're right (and so is MJ) if you think of TWI as a "company." But TWI was supposed to be a "ministry." That's the standard to which we should hold them.
If JS should have been fired for anything, it would be for wasting time researching the fact that grass is green, the sky is blue, and a negative times a negative equals a multiplicity of negatives.
That's a joke, people.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
What exactly is a "tad?"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
Raf,
I agree wholeheartedly. I'm sorry for not making that more clear. I'm not dissing John S in any way...or at least I'm not trying to.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
A bit more than a smidgen, but that's only if your using the English Imperial Measurement system. I don't know how it figures out using Metric.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
raf
what were the threats (and who made them) and what was that thing about giving the paper to a few for fear of his life or something ?(sorry about the memory thing here.... ever since i stopped renewing my mind.... i just haven't been the same)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
A few days ago, I sent the following email to John Lynn,
Today, I heard back from him,
To which I replyed,
There you have it.
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
At this point it matters very little to me what ulterior motives (if any) John S and JL and others had for making their break from the Way.
I'm extremely glad that they did, because I believe their outspoken defiance certainly helped to inspire the same resolve in others at the time to do the same - to get out of the Way. Whatever their reasons might have been, they raised the red flags, at a time in the 80s when there was no Waydale or Greasespot or Path-of-Christ-Ministry or Living-Epistle Society or Center for Marcionite Research
;)--> etc.
Even CG's self-deluded ramblings with the whole POP episode helped to underscore that the Way household had quite a few holes in their roof.
I've had little issue in the past (at least prior to the advent of "Momentus") recommending people toward the direction of CES (or Bullinger or Concordant Concern publishers), if they were shopping for Way-like doctrines and ideas. CES at the very least may have served as a decent "half-Way house" for folks leaving the old gigantic cult, though I'm not particularly impressed by them nowadays. It strikes my palette as a "tad" stale and moldy.
For anyone reading this who is still in the Way and thinking of leaving, here's my personal piece of advice: save some time and dump all the old Way teachings, skip the offshoots altogether, and get thee to a public library!
Discover all the cool things you've been missing out on.
Danny
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
who cares ? the numbers show the success rate.
**
wow, 7 years .... i thought i talked on the phone for a long time ....
(((((steve)))))
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
i dislike geer beyond words and wouldn't trust ANYTHING he did or does....
if god used him, he had to go thru the adversary ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
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.