fool me twice Wrote:

> I also had that same privilege to work for a
> different KB as a painter. I did painting on both
> the JRS home and the Blix house. One day while I
> was scraping paint on JRS's house, a job that is
> not only quite dirty but also causes a lot of
> paint chips to fall into your eyes since no
> productive gear was a thing with KB's. JRS stepped
> out of his house and scolded me because I had
> failed to somehow prevent the paint chips from
> falling into his flower beds. "That paint has lead
> in it and that will kill my plants" Not that lead
> paint could be harmful to you or your eyes.
> Actually that was the only time JRS said a single
> word to me outside of a service.

Yes--The Apostle of Love.
It wasn't unusual for him to boast about his love for the people in his sermons...and how he refused to enter into "resurrection life" without them. So many promises would have been fulfilled (apparently) if he hadn't been constrained by the immaturity of the rest of the body.

kbyrne- Talk about insecurity. I am fairly sure that most of us felt insecurity. I know I did and the culture in TLWF must have made that all too common. Indeed "A pastor that is not approachable -- a big red flag."
That could not be more true. I ask myself, almost daily, how many red flags did I refuse to see?

Onion wrote:
>I spoke with a friend of mine today who, like many of us, is a veteran of many years of being used as a tool, a pawn, a servant, etc., in the walk/cult for decades. When something goes wrong in any way, the conditioning comes hurtling back into your mind with the message "It's my fault. I don't deserve to be happy/successful/peaceful."
>How many people say that to yourselves? "I don't deserve...." It's a lie. Hell,
maybe it was the lying, cheating, stealing leadership that we were picking up on as they threw off all responsibility for their own harmful acts. I am still working on the tendency to punish myself when things go wrong because anything that I am not perfect in, makes me deserve to be punished. I do so much agree with you on this too:
"PUHLEAZE! Say it loud and with conviction: I Was/Am Not The Problem! I Deserve A Happy And Abundant Life!"

Reepicheep- What is "mind boggling" is the fact that it took me fifty years to comprehend this. However it could not be any more clear today. THWF is and was a cult, period! Please don't take my word for it. All anyone needs to do is research cults. It's clearly true on so many levels. Yes "Thank God that we are getting free of that thinking."

changedagain wrote:

>Yes--The Apostle of Love.
>It wasn't unusual for him to boast about his love for the people in his >sermons...and how he refused to enter into "resurrection life" without them. So >many promises would have been fulfilled (apparently) if he hadn't been >constrained by the immaturity of the rest of the body.

Yes just think what might have been if JRS "hadn't been constrained by the immaturity of the rest of the body."

is it not needful for all of us to come to terms that we were played, used and abused? is it not needful for all of us to come to terms of how that all came to pass? it came to pass because, in our varying roles, we were complicit. i contend that we were caught up in a mindset of a cult whether we knew it or not. yet, we are not exonerated by our ignorance. i much disagree with the notion that cult members are not responsible. if allowing that degree of not being responsible, then is it not afforded to our not being non complicit? we had voices and did not speak, we had a moral compass but failed to let it guide us, had insight but chose to be blind. to embrace the comfort of "we were in a cult" to explain away our actions/inactions and ignorance, i contend is a ruse not dissimilar to the hargrave ruse. we bought into it for the promise of a dream that exceeded personal dreams and we got took, and we got took by virtue of our own volition. and now, trying to right the ship, set the moral compass, not for those of us who have left the ship but for those who still remain, without a rudder.

Sounds like a “re-branding” like how they did with Bill Grier merging The Walk and The Move. They dissect, re-register themselves as new church entities. It helps them to make it harder to sue them. But, snail trails are easily followed.

that little red flag Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My apologies if someone has already posted this
> link.
>
> I am posting it for those TLWF people still
> holding out that may read this forum.
>
> Sex offenders grooming churches
>
> [www.christianitytoday.com]

VKocsis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sounds like a “re-branding” like how they did with
> Bill Grier merging The Walk and The Move. They
> dissect, re-register themselves as new church
> entities. It helps them to make it harder to sue
> them. But, snail trails are easily followed.

Here's my 'cynical' take shortly after TLWF imploded. I didn't buy into the concept that anything (other than legal structures) would change. At the time I hoped I was wrong, but nothing since has convinced me otherwise:

Date: November 04, 2018

Gary H--best to assume that whatever he does has his own interests first and foremost. We saw it with his phony, nebulous apology (for PR purposes) and now
in what appears to be the dissolution of TLWF...which still doesn't answer the question of who controls the remaining assets, obviously his primary concern (well, after escaping the long arm of the law).
Anyway, he's a skilled practitioner of deceit, so we can't assume what he has done, or is doing now, is motivated by any concern for the victims. People with legal inclinations, get to work.
BTW, someone on the FB thread has begun comparing him to Apostle Paul, prior to his Road to Damascus conversion. If that doesn't trigger your gag reflex, nothing will.

fool me twice Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> kbyrne- Talk about insecurity. I am fairly sure
> that most of us felt insecurity. I know I did and
> the culture in TLWF must have made that all too
> common. Indeed "A pastor that is not approachable
> -- a big red flag."


Hargrave used to rail in his sermons about the sin of insecurity within the fellowship. At one point he referred to insecurity as 'Satan' in the Kingdom (something like that). I recall him ministering to Bob Barton before the congregation about Bob's apparent struggle with insecurity. Interesting, because from my experience, there weren't too many 'ministries' within TLWF that could top Gary's harshness in the way he conducted himself. And, of course, when there was any indication someone was not feeling accepted, he would chastise them for not trusting they were loved. Did I mention the word 'sociopath' in one my previous posts?

suggested protocol: first beat them, then rebuke them for not feeling accepted...and then take an offering for the 'Word to the World' :)

Lilyrose said something once about how difficult it is to unlearn false and destructive teaching (so true). I would add, it's not always easy to recognize the false and destructive teaching. I don't call that being naive.

In more recent years, I became a CASA (court appointed special advocate) for foster kids. It was difficult when you worked with a child that desperately wanted to be returned to their abusive parent or parents. Why would they want to do that? It was less about love and more about dependency, conditioning, and fear. I would never look at that child and say, "What's wrong with you, why would you want to do that?"

Well, maybe we're not children, but I think many of us came into the walk with a child-like faith. We believed we found something real, something bigger than ourselves, and we wanted to serve. I don't think that was being naive. When it comes to abuse, in whatever form, blame lies in one place and one place only, at the doorstep of the abuser.

kbyrne Wrote:

> Well, maybe we're not children, but I think many
> of us came into the walk with a child-like faith.
> We believed we found something real, something
> bigger than ourselves, and we wanted to serve. I
> don't think that was being naive. When it comes
> to abuse, in whatever form, blame lies in one
> place and one place only, at the doorstep of the
> abuser.

That's true. On occasion, I've referred to myself and others as being naive, but the dependency created by exploiting those who are idealistic in nature (especially earlier in life) is a more apt depiction of what transpired. I think many of us that survived the cult are prone to being self-critical...and that, in itself, needs to be unlearned.

A bit off-subject, but I've been listening to quite a few podcasts on the future of artificial intelligence, and the possible nefarious ways it might be used. One theme that keeps coming up is the clear relationship between possessing droves of data on individuals' habits, practices, interests etc. and arriving at a place where AI eventually knows this person better than they know themselves. With this information advantage, the person can now be easily manipulated into making decisions...all the while believing the decisions emerged entirely from their own free will.