Yes, thanks LaRhonda.

<Later I found out that he argued with my Dad and said " you gave me those kids! They're mine" my dad threatened to call the police and come with the sherif to get us. I guess John backed down after that and then called me to let me know I would have to go home.>

Good for your Dad. That's a line I also never allowed TLWF leaders to cross, letting them feel as though they had the ultimate say over my kid's lives. No amount of cult conditioning swayed me from that stance.

There was a person named Dan in the Salt Lake City church who told me, “If a stranger was to break into my house and start raping my wife, I’m not going to do anything about it because we’re under the commandment to love our enemies.” I was stumped. Then out of the blue came this: “Sure as hell not much of a shepherd, letting wolves devour those under your protection.”

Thank you ---- New day/LaRhonda Cronquist, changedagain --- Have a nice day.


kBOY: I love your posts. They remind me of some things touched upon in the Upanishads.

Psalm 46:10 --- Be still, and know that I am God.

Many mystics have gone into the God Journey to the point of ‘non-duality’. It’s valid and very much a life changing and supportive place.

Wanting to learn more. FCSLC

My family was formed because women in “The Walk” needed a “covering” in order to avoid the “battle” going on in the spiritual world. “Coverings” were always male, since they were the only “authority” over “demons” who attempted to distract and subvert the faithful on a continual basis.
Above the male “covering” there were “The Elders” of the church. These were a council of “brothers” who interpreted “God’s Will” for “The Body.” (Back then WE were the body of Christ, not an individual, in a Gnostic vein.) Above The Elders was the local church “Priest.” He supposedly reported to his “Shepherds” at Shiloh, who reported directly to JRS and then G&M, who, of course, received their direction (“leadings”) directly from God.
There has been debate here over whether arranged marriages really happened. They did. Single women in a local “body” were given very little time and few choices among the single “brothers.” To be without a male “covering” meant satanic forces could manipulate and derail a woman’s “Walk,” turning her into a “Jezebel Spirit, ” which, of course, meant disaster, if not damnation for all. Once a “Word came down” a relationship was “suggested, and then “tested” and then “submitted” to the Elders for approval, if it hadn’t been a part of a “word” over the life of the participants in the first place.
My parents, ill suited, I mean “unequally yoked,” from the beginning, were one such couple. They were not alone by any means.
They stayed married for far too long. I watched, gradually, as they sunk into depression, gave up many of the joys in their former lives and became hollow shells of the people they were. Activities they enjoyed “of the world” faded away. Their sole focus was on Living Word literature, tapes and services. Nothing held them together except JRS and his “vision” for God’s “Kingdom” on earth.
It was not “in the lord” for them to divorce until, coincidentally, of course, they came into a large sum of money and “tithed it.”

(And thank you for the kind and warm welcome!)

FCSLC


Thank you for appreciating the contributions.

Your example of a loved one being assaulted is worthy of discussion so as to avoid any confusion. I am certainly not advocating the same response given the situation.

Jesus’ decision to ‘resist not’ in his execution was part of the path he chose to walk out and was not necessarily imposing it on anyone else. At the same time, he intervened in the Garden of Gethsemane for the Roman soldier who temporarily lost his ear, in the stoning of the woman caught in adultery, and on behalf of the unsuspecting folks that the disciples were considering barbecuing.

Once again it is important to make the distinction between ‘enemy’ and someone who ‘knows not what they do’. We are assisted out of ‘temporary insanity’ by correction, not punishment.

Given a scenario where harm could come to myself and I could do something about it, I would evade and escape where possible in order to LOVE another day.

My old friend was at the Valley Walk from 1977-1983. He also became an elder, check-writing responsibilities and all.

What I have just now understood is how little he knew of Stevens personally. He didn't "know the man personally". Didn't know of his extensive book collection on the Occult, etc. Then I understood that the church had its own pastors so I'm assuming Stevens was the Apostle, and spoke at individual churches only now and then? Though conducting his leadership this way via/through pastors and elders?

Is this a fair assessment ?

Discussion about this little cult we were all a part of has now had 144,798 page views.

changedagain Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Discussion about this little cult we were all a
> part of has now had 144,798 page views.


I confess, six of those were me.

Kboy,

I don't understand what you mean when you offer the idea that the answer is, " the prodigal son." returned home. I don't know what home means to you. If you would - say what your saying in every day words, clearly and plainly that would help me to understand what you are really trying to say.

When I pointed out what Jesus said to His disciples regarding how we are to go about forgiving some one who has wronged us. I am not talking about enemies - I am talking about those we have related to as our brethren. I think Jesus words are the perfect way of relating - if you are going to be relating so closely as to relate to one another as spiritual brother's and sister's. I also think that this is impossible with men but that it is possible with God.

In story of the prodigal son returning home. The story of the prodigal son to me is not a match to what I am talking about or from where I am speaking from. The young man ( the prodigal son ) who left his home - the story does not report that he was being robbed, beaten or defrauded by his dad or by his brother. The story of the prodigal son for me is like comparing apples with oranges.

To look at an aspect of being a victim. Job did not do to himself what was done to Job. God did not do to Job , what took place against Job. God took the hedges down that protected Job and all that God had given to job.There was no man's hand ( no human being ) who took job's wife away or children away from Job. No man's hand was involved in striking down and killing Job's flock, no man destroyed Job's livelihood and no man was involved in destroying Job's house.

What responsibility was Job to take for what took place against him ?

Job as a victim of these things did not blame God for what happened to him. And God spoke of Job that Job spoke rightly of HIM.

Not all victims blame God for what happened to them.

I may just be having a little brain "glych" here, but I can't remember if there is any scripture, twisted or otherwise that speaks of anybody "bringing forth the kingdom of God." I think it actually goes like this, I think Christ brings forth the church, rather than the church bringing forth the Kingdom of God. I am trying to remember, off hand, I googled it, and nothing there.

I remember another guy, Earl Paulk, a mega church guy with about as many followers as JRS had at one time, he said that "God can do NOTHING, unless a prophet speaks it into existence." Now that was believed by his followers for a while, even though just thinking for a few seconds, one will realize that God did PLENTY before there were any prophets alive on the face of the earth, which by the way was not there either, the earth I mean, and it did not take a prophet to create it.

I would like to know what scriptural reference could show me there is any validity of anybody bringing forth the kingdom. Just curious about that.