Oddly enough, during the Corinthians Corps night teachings either Dr or W*lter C&mmings taught explicitly that it was WRONG for a man to touch a woman other than his wife in a sexual manner.
My first thought is that Walter must have taught this, because I find it really hard to believe that vee pee did. Nevertheless, it's a perfect example of how different sides and angles of a teaching can be taught by the same leadership in TWI and some, all or none could be documented, but some people won't believe it unless there is a direct written quote somewhere....but that's another story for another thread. ;)
I can tell you that T*dd Cenc1ch told my ex that he needed to "test drive the car" before he bought it referring to me and our impending engagement. It wasn't outside of the marriage bed, but it was before there was one.
And I agree with Hope that many leaders in TWI (The Moneyhands particularly) and many leaders in the off shoots knew and know about the abuse and adultery but never once did anything about it. That's just as guilty as doing it in my book.
"I really don't think that responding to being verbally assaulted for an extended period of time is outside of self defense. Remember Reagan telling that reporter to shut up? What do you think would've happened to him if he hadn't? I don't have secret service agents in my house to enforce my "mandates". Do you think I'd still be married after 17 yrs if I routinely looked for reasons to physically abuse those in my household?"
There are a number of ways to defend yourself from being verbally assaulted that do not require resorting to physically assaulting someone.
And yes, I think it is entirely possible for you to be married for 17 years while using physical violence to enforce your "mandates". Many women spend their entire lives in abusive relationships, especially those who have been "properly" beaten down by husbands enforcing their will.
Oddly enough, during the Corinthians Corps night teachings either Dr or W*lter C&mmings taught expli citly that it was WRONG for a man to touch a woman other than his wife in a sexual manner.
Oddly enough these things are documentable: Just for the record
Corinthians was taught by Walter and VPW From September 1982 through June 1983. Chapter 7 the part that was refered to was taught by Walter live and VPW as they ran the seg from CFS during the session. Teaching date 12/1/82 . Making this a perfect example of how you can document these things. There was no differance in teaching between the two,which means it was not a case of two differant teachings by people,but a case of practical error by the individual or individuals teaching.
Ex - I never said that the teaching meant that there was proof that these men didn't follow the "do as I say - not as I do" way of thinking.
I actually found it ironic that this doctrine was made public at a CORPS night - while many who had already been through the corps and were even ordained had violated this scripture.
So WD - it matters not that this teaching can be documented - I'm sure you realize that many bad things happen with no documentation at all. The documentation to the contrary is what many women have already said - tho not neccessarily here on this thread - I don't think you're going to find any evidnec of the worng doing on a teaching tape or in the University of Life.
So WD - it matters not that this teaching can be documented - I'm sure you realize that many bad things happen with no documentation at all. The documentation to the contrary is what many women have already said - tho not neccessarily here on this thread - I don't think you're going to find any evidnec of the worng doing on a teaching tape or in the University of Life.
I think you missed the point of my post Doojable. You are most correct that you will not find evidence of wrong in documentation, I never implied you would, that's why I separated the issues 1. What was said 2. What was done. Once again they are not one in the same as some would think.
It is however important that it can be documented when addressing the issue I was, which was this quote.
Nevertheless, it's a perfect example of how different sides and angles of a teaching can be taught by the same leadership in TWI and some, all or none could be documented,
It is not an example because it can and was documented( some, all or none was contrary to what was stated) and secondly the teaching did not reflect two angles it was in agreement. That corrected the misinformation presented.
Now the second issue sin, practical error. I had no response to make due to lack of full understanding in the matter. See I don't open my mouth and just say whatever about things I don't know about. Some do but that's not me. We all know what happens when you assume things and speak not knowing what you speak of. That's why I responded as such:
It was not a case of two different teachings by people, but a case of practical error by the individual or individuals teaching.
I/we know that there was sin/practical error by one of the teachers. I don't know about the other so until I do I will refrain from comment.
Once again keeping the issues separate and the truth straight benefits us all.
This was not a perfect example of how different sides and angles of a teaching can be taught by the same leadership in TWI and some, all or none could be documented. There were no different sides or angles taught the teaching was in agreement and it was documented. Both claims were false!
That said what it was- is an example of how things were taught and not practiced as you correctly pointed out. My post addressed the two false assumptions.
Ok, sorry - Sometimes it is hard to really get what is being said. My hubby is an English major and he picks written pieces apart. I read and try to hear a voice behind the writing. Guess I "heard it wrong." Again, I apologize.
You wrote:
"I/we know that there was sin/practical error by one of the teachers. I don't know about the other so until I do I will refrain from comment"
I can tell you personally about at least 2 other teachers. One I have already shared about. The other I heard about in "excited utterance" by a corps sister who was accosted by a region leader.
For those of you who who are about to cry, "Hearsay!" let me enlighten you that "excited utterance" is an exception to the hearsay rule. (Hubby is also a lawyer.)
Thanks for your insistance on accuracy and not wanting to spread rumors.
No apology needed I should have posted the quotes in my first post. It appeared I was addressing your post but I was not.
You wrote:
"I/we know that there was sin/practical error by one of the teachers. I don't know about the other so until I do I will refrain from comment"
I was speaking about the two teachers mentioned Walter and VPW. We have established VPW record I don't know about Walter. But yes lots of others were involved but that's another story. I was limiting myself to the two mentioned in the quote I was responding to.
just thinking about the term doctrinal / practical error is enough to make me depressed for the rest of my life
quit thinking so much excie :)
....Are you saying that Dr. Wierwille taught the Corps that it was wrong for a man to touch a woman other than his wife?...
well let's see, I was in the office at Gunnison, we had bless patrol so it was like 2am ... sheley Iforgetherlastname (barederrier?) came in after a late visit with VP .. she glowingly discussed the sex subject .. I forget the details .. but it seemed she thought it was OK and had just received some sort of special input from the man of God ...
or something like that ... I think some of us just weren't spiritually advanced enough to handle that sort of carnal knowledge. :o (YOU can't HANDLE the truth ... Jack Nicholson lol)
Time to take a break
the problem with drinking drambuie is it makes you speak in high german ... no one can understand you till the buzz wears off
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
22
15
18
8
Popular Days
Dec 26
25
Dec 22
23
Dec 28
21
Dec 21
20
Top Posters In This Topic
rascal 22 posts
excathedra 15 posts
johniam 18 posts
doojable 8 posts
Popular Days
Dec 26 2005
25 posts
Dec 22 2005
23 posts
Dec 28 2005
21 posts
Dec 21 2005
20 posts
coolchef1248 @adelphia.net
and john
i gotta sy this:
a REAL MAN will never have an excuse to hit a woman {unless it's a life threatining case}
if she is giving you a hard time{in your opinion} just leave the situation for a few hours and calm down.
or hit a freaking wall but not the woman
there is NO excuse for it
i have had a few sore knuckles in my life from hitting the wall but never a woman
and then you have to fix the wall
so john the simple thing to do is leave the situation for a few hours
calm down
maybe by praying
NO HITTING
Edited by coolchef1248 @adelphia.netLink to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
My first thought is that Walter must have taught this, because I find it really hard to believe that vee pee did. Nevertheless, it's a perfect example of how different sides and angles of a teaching can be taught by the same leadership in TWI and some, all or none could be documented, but some people won't believe it unless there is a direct written quote somewhere....but that's another story for another thread. ;)
I can tell you that T*dd Cenc1ch told my ex that he needed to "test drive the car" before he bought it referring to me and our impending engagement. It wasn't outside of the marriage bed, but it was before there was one.
And I agree with Hope that many leaders in TWI (The Moneyhands particularly) and many leaders in the off shoots knew and know about the abuse and adultery but never once did anything about it. That's just as guilty as doing it in my book.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Morgan
"I really don't think that responding to being verbally assaulted for an extended period of time is outside of self defense. Remember Reagan telling that reporter to shut up? What do you think would've happened to him if he hadn't? I don't have secret service agents in my house to enforce my "mandates". Do you think I'd still be married after 17 yrs if I routinely looked for reasons to physically abuse those in my household?"
There are a number of ways to defend yourself from being verbally assaulted that do not require resorting to physically assaulting someone.
And yes, I think it is entirely possible for you to be married for 17 years while using physical violence to enforce your "mandates". Many women spend their entire lives in abusive relationships, especially those who have been "properly" beaten down by husbands enforcing their will.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Oddly enough these things are documentable: Just for the record
Corinthians was taught by Walter and VPW From September 1982 through June 1983. Chapter 7 the part that was refered to was taught by Walter live and VPW as they ran the seg from CFS during the session. Teaching date 12/1/82 . Making this a perfect example of how you can document these things. There was no differance in teaching between the two,which means it was not a case of two differant teachings by people,but a case of practical error by the individual or individuals teaching.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
oddly enough people say one thing and live another
all this "teaching" doesn't mean a thing to me because i saw the behavior
i should add that this is how i see it now, not back then
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Ex - I never said that the teaching meant that there was proof that these men didn't follow the "do as I say - not as I do" way of thinking.
I actually found it ironic that this doctrine was made public at a CORPS night - while many who had already been through the corps and were even ordained had violated this scripture.
So WD - it matters not that this teaching can be documented - I'm sure you realize that many bad things happen with no documentation at all. The documentation to the contrary is what many women have already said - tho not neccessarily here on this thread - I don't think you're going to find any evidnec of the worng doing on a teaching tape or in the University of Life.
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
It is however important that it can be documented when addressing the issue I was, which was this quote.
It is not an example because it can and was documented( some, all or none was contrary to what was stated) and secondly the teaching did not reflect two angles it was in agreement. That corrected the misinformation presented.
Now the second issue sin, practical error. I had no response to make due to lack of full understanding in the matter. See I don't open my mouth and just say whatever about things I don't know about. Some do but that's not me. We all know what happens when you assume things and speak not knowing what you speak of. That's why I responded as such:
I/we know that there was sin/practical error by one of the teachers. I don't know about the other so until I do I will refrain from comment.
Once again keeping the issues separate and the truth straight benefits us all.
This was not a perfect example of how different sides and angles of a teaching can be taught by the same leadership in TWI and some, all or none could be documented. There were no different sides or angles taught the teaching was in agreement and it was documented. Both claims were false!
That said what it was- is an example of how things were taught and not practiced as you correctly pointed out. My post addressed the two false assumptions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
just thinking about the term doctrinal / practical error is enough to make me depressed for the rest of my life
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Ok, sorry - Sometimes it is hard to really get what is being said. My hubby is an English major and he picks written pieces apart. I read and try to hear a voice behind the writing. Guess I "heard it wrong." Again, I apologize.
You wrote:
"I/we know that there was sin/practical error by one of the teachers. I don't know about the other so until I do I will refrain from comment"
I can tell you personally about at least 2 other teachers. One I have already shared about. The other I heard about in "excited utterance" by a corps sister who was accosted by a region leader.
For those of you who who are about to cry, "Hearsay!" let me enlighten you that "excited utterance" is an exception to the hearsay rule. (Hubby is also a lawyer.)
Thanks for your insistance on accuracy and not wanting to spread rumors.
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
No apology needed I should have posted the quotes in my first post. It appeared I was addressing your post but I was not.
I was speaking about the two teachers mentioned Walter and VPW. We have established VPW record I don't know about Walter. But yes lots of others were involved but that's another story. I was limiting myself to the two mentioned in the quote I was responding to.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
So then lemme get this straight.
Are you saying that Dr. Wierwille taught the Corps that it was wrong for a man to touch a woman other than his wife?
Geeze what hypocrisy, ya think?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Ahhhhhhhh - now I get it. I have never heard anyone disparage Walter for that or any other reason.
See I can be a little dense - I'll just go and so another painting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
quit thinking so much excie :)
well let's see, I was in the office at Gunnison, we had bless patrol so it was like 2am ... sheley Iforgetherlastname (barederrier?) came in after a late visit with VP .. she glowingly discussed the sex subject .. I forget the details .. but it seemed she thought it was OK and had just received some sort of special input from the man of God ...
or something like that ... I think some of us just weren't spiritually advanced enough to handle that sort of carnal knowledge. :o (YOU can't HANDLE the truth ... Jack Nicholson lol)
the problem with drinking drambuie is it makes you speak in high german ... no one can understand you till the buzz wears off
Edited by rhinoLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
:blink:
:blink:
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.