Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2010 17:26:48 GMT -5
I've never heard of "Satan's child" being used either but as gz points out, there's lots of other standard words or phrases to indicate a godless status......."lost out" or "deceived" are a couple of them. Same judgment regardless.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 14, 2010 17:33:07 GMT -5
I've never heard of "Satan's child" being used either but as gz points out, there's lots of other standard words or phrases to indicate a godless status......."lost out" or "deceived" are a couple of them. Same judgment regardless. Well to be more accurate it was "the devil's child".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2010 18:01:24 GMT -5
I've never heard of "Satan's child" being used either but as gz points out, there's lots of other standard words or phrases to indicate a godless status......."lost out" or "deceived" are a couple of them. Same judgment regardless. Well to be more accurate it was "the devil's child". And here you thought you were your daddy's child....what a blow! Seriously though, did that thought occur to you? Or was it just the association with the devil?
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jun 15, 2010 7:34:29 GMT -5
Well to be more accurate it was "the devil's child". And here you thought you were your daddy's child....what a blow! Seriously though, did that thought occur to you? Or was it just the association with the devil? If I'd been the parent in this instance and I had known what some worker would have said to an 11 y/o child like that, the invitation to NEVER come back would have been loud and clear and I and my family would have departed such a fellowship! The workers hold too much power and persuasion and I know that fear tactics are commonly used by the workers and that is abuse however it comes. But that is one common denominator OF the fellowship from day one of its' inception.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jun 15, 2010 8:28:44 GMT -5
And here you thought you were your daddy's child....what a blow! Seriously though, did that thought occur to you? Or was it just the association with the devil? If I'd been the parent in this instance and I had known what some worker would have said to an 11 y/o child like that, the invitation to NEVER come back would have been loud and clear and I and my family would have departed such a fellowship! The workers hold too much power and persuasion and I know that fear tactics are commonly used by the workers and that is abuse however it comes. But that is one common denominator OF the fellowship from day one of its' inception. I dunno. We ran into a bit of mentality like that and just blew it off. I'm not trying to diminish snow's experience, because her parents bought into the same mentality. But on the rare occasion that we had a worker in our home who was "out there", they simply didn't have much influence. When we first professed we ran into friends who were very sensitive to a few of the workers who were, you know, "out there". One time we were visiting some friends and a worker scolded us for our baby's behaviour in meeting. The friends we were with were all tied in knots at this worker's behaviour toward us. But basically the behaviour made her look like a nut, as far as we were concerned. And we didn't understand why the friends were so worked up about this worker, who had obvious problems with "nerves". I guess when you're raised "deep inside" the perspective is quite different, as I've come to understand. Most of the friends who mange to stay in the fellowship have a sense of balance and are well grounded in themselves. The vulnerable ones unfortunately are often the ones that invest the most emotionally and socially. They're setting themselves up for disillusionment because of unrealistic expectations.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2010 9:44:07 GMT -5
I think you have a good handle on it what. B&R's tend to take it all pretty seriously, and are never far away from the idea of worker inerrancy. So when a worker does something bizarre, it's very confusing and upsetting.....and they often don't know why they are upset so they swallow it and try to ignore it.
Since we are all built differently, for some reason or another some people are more resilient than others to such activities. Some can just shrug it off while others experience internal damage.
I'm not sure of the accuracy of this statement, but assuming it is true then one wonders what good is a church which spins off the members who are the most needy and retains only the most personally grounded?
If a church does not exist to help people get close to God and make it through this life into the next, then what does it exist for?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jun 15, 2010 10:03:37 GMT -5
I think you have a good handle on it what. B&R's tend to take it all pretty seriously, and are never far away from the idea of worker inerrancy. So when a worker does something bizarre, it's very confusing and upsetting.....and they often don't know why they are upset so they swallow it and try to ignore it. Since we are all built differently, for some reason or another some people are more resilient than others to such activities. Some can just shrug it off while others experience internal damage. I'm not sure of the accuracy of this statement, but assuming it is true then one wonders what good is a church which spins off the members who are the most needy and retains only the most personally grounded? If a church does not exist to help people get close to God and make it through this life into the next, then what does it exist for? I could have worded that last sentence a little better, since it sounds like if you leave you're not well grounded, which is not what I meant at all. Nor did I mean that if you are well grounded, you will likely stay. Some "well grounded" people will leave, and some "not well grounded" people will stay. I guess I'm a little jaded about the entire church experience no matter what it is, and believe that your trust has to be elsewhere. So I think if you "find your own centre" then the church fellowship can be supportive where it's supportive, and, hopefully, ignored where it's not. If it's not supportive at all, or more dysfunctional than useful, then it just becomes redundant in the spiritual journey. An example is that some people are rocked by the occurrence of CSA. But statistics show that a certain percentage of the population will be pedophiles. And those individuals will try to obtain a position of trust, and access to children. For example, I heard on the QT from an I/T guy quite a few years ago about a local pediatrician un-named who had been caught surfing child porn. (It never made the papers.) So why would it surprise me to learn that some workers are in prison for CSA? Some people have placed too much trust in workers, in the "way" (lower case w), in earthly things, not in things above. That's what I was thinking of when I wrote that sentence. I think the CSA could do irreversible damage to the fellowship. I'm just not sure.
|
|
|
Post by ronhall on Jun 15, 2010 12:34:20 GMT -5
Hmm. Being referred to as Satan's child must be a fairly common thing. I got called that by a sister worker when I was 11 years old. Shocked the heck out of me. I quit professing soon after. That's a strange comment. I presume that comment was meant to be a reflection on your father, since Satan is usually thought of in a masculine sense. An overseer once at the dinner table did ask my wife once if she ever "raised Cain". Since English is not her native language, she didn't understand and he found himself spending much of the rest of the meal dodging around trying to explain it to her. Heh! Heh! Heh! The younger worker and I had a hard time working at keeping our composure through the event! My wife, after about 20 years, still can't figured out why I start laughing when thinking about that incident! Hey! I've come to learn over the past few years that everyone finds themselves having opened their mouth to change feet, once in awhile! Even overseers!
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 15, 2010 12:59:34 GMT -5
Well to be more accurate it was "the devil's child". That doesn't sugar-coat it, either, does it? LOL no, I guess not. It must have effected me more than I realized at the time. After I quit professing and went through the withdrawal from the group stage, I used to call myself that in a joking way. But I think back now and I was half serious. I really did think I was going to hell because I wasn't in the fellowship any more. I didn't question at that age that is was the only way to heaven, I just questioned why it was the only way to heaven and I didn't like that. Which explains why I didn't like god either because I thought he was exclusive too and I couldn't love someone like that either. So she really did leave a lasting impression on me. More than I realized at the time.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 15, 2010 13:04:57 GMT -5
Well to be more accurate it was "the devil's child". And here you thought you were your daddy's child....what a blow! Seriously though, did that thought occur to you? Or was it just the association with the devil? No, not really. I was adopted and knew I had been given up by my biological parents. At that point in my life I felt it was because I wasn't wanted. I was an only child with much older parents in my adoptive family so I knew my 'dad' was not really my DAD, if you know what I mean. So maybe that's why it never occurred to be whose child I really was. Also, it really hurt and scared me because at that point I believed everything that came out of the mouths of the workers. I had professed at 8 years old and was very immersed in the 'way'. I truly asked questions in order to understand better. I look back now though and thank her for those words. It sent me off on a journey and an experience that I wouldn't have missed for anything. Was it an easy journey, no. But it got me learning and searching and today I am so happy and at peace with my understanding of god. I found what was completely right for me and I might not have done that if I hadn't been jolted awake when I was. There is a silver lining in every cloud imo.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 15, 2010 13:09:54 GMT -5
And here you thought you were your daddy's child....what a blow! Seriously though, did that thought occur to you? Or was it just the association with the devil? If I'd been the parent in this instance and I had known what some worker would have said to an 11 y/o child like that, the invitation to NEVER come back would have been loud and clear and I and my family would have departed such a fellowship! The workers hold too much power and persuasion and I know that fear tactics are commonly used by the workers and that is abuse however it comes. But that is one common denominator OF the fellowship from day one of its' inception. I never told them. It happened at convention one year and my parents always went home after the last meeting and I stayed. I was too ashamed at first to tell them, because I thought they would agree with her because workers were always right you know. Then I started to think about it and that was when I quit professing. My parents asked why of course, and all I said was I didn't believe god wouldn't let all good people into heaven. I've heard so many people try to explain to me why only the 'few' get in, that I think that's why I am so sure god is not exclusive.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 15, 2010 13:13:32 GMT -5
If I'd been the parent in this instance and I had known what some worker would have said to an 11 y/o child like that, the invitation to NEVER come back would have been loud and clear and I and my family would have departed such a fellowship! The workers hold too much power and persuasion and I know that fear tactics are commonly used by the workers and that is abuse however it comes. But that is one common denominator OF the fellowship from day one of its' inception. I dunno. We ran into a bit of mentality like that and just blew it off. I'm not trying to diminish snow's experience, because her parents bought into the same mentality. But on the rare occasion that we had a worker in our home who was "out there", they simply didn't have much influence. When we first professed we ran into friends who were very sensitive to a few of the workers who were, you know, "out there". One time we were visiting some friends and a worker scolded us for our baby's behaviour in meeting. The friends we were with were all tied in knots at this worker's behaviour toward us. But basically the behaviour made her look like a nut, as far as we were concerned. And we didn't understand why the friends were so worked up about this worker, who had obvious problems with "nerves". I guess when you're raised "deep inside" the perspective is quite different, as I've come to understand. Most of the friends who mange to stay in the fellowship have a sense of balance and are well grounded in themselves. The vulnerable ones unfortunately are often the ones that invest the most emotionally and socially. They're setting themselves up for disillusionment because of unrealistic expectations. Yes, I think age had something to do with it. Also, my parents were quite 'intense' in their beliefs. I was raised to respect the workers, that they were god's handmaidens etc., that there words came directly from god etc. So when she said that, I was already well programmed to internalize it.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 15, 2010 13:18:31 GMT -5
Hmm. Being referred to as Satan's child must be a fairly common thing. I got called that by a sister worker when I was 11 years old. Shocked the heck out of me. I quit professing soon after. That's a strange comment. I presume that comment was meant to be a reflection on your father, since Satan is usually thought of in a masculine sense. An overseer once at the dinner table did ask my wife once if she ever "raised Cain". Since English is not her native language, she didn't understand and he found himself spending much of the rest of the meal dodging around trying to explain it to her. Heh! Heh! Heh! The younger worker and I had a hard time working at keeping our composure through the event! My wife, after about 20 years, still can't figured out why I start laughing when thinking about that incident! Hey! I've come to learn over the past few years that everyone finds themselves having opened their mouth to change feet, once in awhile! Even overseers! I don't think so ronhall. My father was a very respected elder and had been professing for 40 years by then and we had a meeting in our home. She was very frustrated with my questioning the 'way'. It was in the evening after last meeting at convention and we sat down to talk with our hot chocolate because I had questions. My parents always went home after last meeting and I stayed, so I don't think she was referring to my father. And yes, I probably agree with you that she regretted saying it afterwards. I understand that better now that I am 50 + years old.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jun 15, 2010 13:23:32 GMT -5
B&R's tend to take it all pretty seriously, and are never far away from the idea of worker inerrancy. So when a worker does something bizarre, it's very confusing and upsetting.....and they often don't know why they are upset so they swallow it and try to ignore it. I don't think that's a universally true statement. I find it's not that hard to keep what's good and blow off what's not (if people don't keep poking).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2010 14:02:09 GMT -5
B&R's tend to take it all pretty seriously, and are never far away from the idea of worker inerrancy. So when a worker does something bizarre, it's very confusing and upsetting.....and they often don't know why they are upset so they swallow it and try to ignore it. I don't think that's a universally true statement. I find it's not that hard to keep what's good and blow off what's not (if people don't keep poking). Ah Jesse, you have a few sensitive spots too!
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jun 15, 2010 20:00:48 GMT -5
I guess we now know that, God isn't involved in the mire that is knee deep and stinks! Did anyone know the scenario of a female friend that had an overseer, JF, that was a worker, that got deeply imbedded in the Mich. case. She is or will be the wife of a ex-worker from Ky. which is JF's baby. It has been said that he is an ex because of the pressure that he experienced. Did JF apply any pressure I wonder?? And, the new wife , or to be, would not appreciate those incidents. This lady ex worker has been able to bring about the necessary attention to many workers that have abuse under their belt. It has put JF in the hot seat and rightfully deserved. A worker that has any type of deceit in his life, does not need to be a worker. And lying to cover up a misconduct, is not virtues of a worker. Well I guess Jerome's lucky this Sunday is Father's Day. If I read the post correctly JF could be a grand-pappy by this time next year. Wow, what pressure growing up illegitimate inside the faith your father is a Worker! But it sounds like his son is an ex today. Would this be any surprise to me? NOPE. He was PH's (KY Overseer) right-hand man in KY before JF became overseer in FL, then JF returned to KY as that state's overseer at Peter's death. But back in the 60's PH (who was Overseer in WI) found himself in the identical situation. That situation has been mentioned a few times on TMB and is briefly mentioned in a letter by ex-Worker Charles Mattison on VOT. Well, it is easy to see why some overseers get the repsonsibility of the sexual congressed workers at least even if it is a crime! Kind of answers the overrun of such in MI, doesn't it? I think it is simply horrible that a worker could sire a baby and NOT be made to marry the mother of that child and help raise the child....the natural family unit is of God and to NOT make this a result of sexual congress whether consensual or not is certainly laying the whole workership open to those who'd dare do the same and think to get by with it...perhaps that's what has happened in this case...one worker got by with it and so one or more of his underling workers thought that "hey, he got by with it...so can I." It really comes down to the fact it makes the workers that are not willing to marry the mother of their child not any better then freeloading dads all over the world. Maybe the states will start going after these freeloading dadworkers to pay back 21 yrs. of child support the state has had to hand out for 21 yrs. while the child goes through school and college....that's what is happening to a lot of other freeloading dads in America.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Jun 15, 2010 20:41:20 GMT -5
She is or will be the wife of a ex-worker from Ky. which is JF's babyIs everyone thinking that the ex-worker is Jerome's 'baby', or are they like me and thinking that what was meant was that Kentucky was Jerome's 'baby'? I believe that is where he was before becoming the overseer of Michigan. Although I do know of another overseer who has a son..... Scott
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Jun 15, 2010 23:07:49 GMT -5
She is or will be the wife of a ex-worker from Ky. which is JF's babyIs everyone thinking that the ex-worker is Jerome's 'baby', or are they like me and thinking that what was meant was that Kentucky was Jerome's 'baby'? I believe that is where he was before becoming the overseer of Michigan. Although I do know of another overseer who has a son..... Scott Excellent point Scott. It is a poorly written account. It has been noted on the thread listed below that Ben M (whose father is Ron a KY convention owner), and ex-Worker, is marrying Kelli H. who is an ex-Worker from MI. Not sure if she is one of two in the calamity that unfolded two years ago with the Russian twins or not. professing.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=15936Yes, she is one of those two. I think it is great that Ben and Kelli are getting married. Good for them!! I wish them all the best that life has to offer. Scott
|
|
|
Post by emy on Jun 15, 2010 23:44:36 GMT -5
It was quite clear to me that the writer meant that KENTUCKY was JF's baby!! Now there will be a rumor spread far and wide that Ben and Kelli's kids are JF's grandkids. (IF Ben and Kelli are in fact getting married, which is a rumor in itself.)
|
|
|
Post by emy on Jun 15, 2010 23:45:33 GMT -5
Yes, she is one of those two. I think it is great that Ben and Kelli are getting married. Good for them!! I wish them all the best that life has to offer. Scott Yes it's great. Apparently she has reprofessed and getting hitched, so it's good the MI calamity hasn't destroyed her, because she could have just became a closet-case from the tumultuous events that had occurred. Re-professed? Closet case? You don't know Kelli, do you?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jun 16, 2010 21:25:32 GMT -5
Maybe the states will start going after these freeloading dadworkers to pay back 21 yrs. of child support the state has had to hand out for 21 yrs. while the child goes through school and college....that's what is happening to a lot of other freeloading dads in America. The state has been paying child support? What states pay child support? Is it a known fact the state has been paying anything or is this just conjecture? Child support is set by the courts and is between the parents of the child, not the state.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jun 17, 2010 8:56:44 GMT -5
The state has been paying child support? What states pay child support? Is it a known fact the state has been paying anything or is this just conjecture? Child support is set by the courts and is between the parents of the child, not the state. The state (MI) only pays child support if it's petitioned by lets say the mother who has the child. If she doesn't file, the father pays nothing, but she is eligible for many other financial benefits like food stamp allotments now on ATM-like cards, babysitters fees, housing financial assistance, payments for special education classes, ... all programs paid by state and federal dollars from the taxpayers. And this individual has been getting child support since birth?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2010 12:58:47 GMT -5
I'm confused. Am I reading it right that a worker fathered a child, stayed in the work, and that the mother has been collecting some sort of support from the state?
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jun 17, 2010 13:23:34 GMT -5
I'm confused. Am I reading it right that a worker fathered a child, stayed in the work, and that the mother has been collecting some sort of support from the state? I don't think any "particular" child or parents were of the discussion other then deadbeat dads who don't support their offspring and when the states give monetary assistance in the raising of the child...there's been cases known that ever after a child reaches their majority and the states find out who and were the father is will go after reimbursement of all the monies that the state(s) have spent in the raising of that particular child...I know one couple who's wages were garnished by a state that they were not resident of and the female of the couple had nothing to do with getting the child into the world and the father apparently had had no notifications that the fetus had even been conceived UNTIL after the child had turned 21. It is done and it will be done more and more as the government is determined to stop deadbeat dads.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2010 13:40:04 GMT -5
That clears it up. Thx
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Jun 18, 2010 8:58:08 GMT -5
Isn't it fun to wallow in other people's puke?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jun 19, 2010 6:26:36 GMT -5
Could I sit in a Gospel meeting and listen to them proclaim their sacrifices to spread the Gospel and not wonder who they've been in bed with or what child they've been cozying up to over the last week? ABSOLUTELY NOT. So you are prejudging all based on the actions of a few? All workers are not pedophiles any more than all priests are pedophiles. Do you wonder if the person sitting next to you at the office is a pedophile? Or your father? Brother? Or is it just the workers?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jun 19, 2010 8:46:39 GMT -5
Isn't it fun to wallow in other people's puke? The Workers have perpetuated there own scourging sexual dilemmas that have went on clandestinely unhindered for years --- in all likelihoods back to Irvine himself in 1897. Only by the widespread availability of the INTERNET are these promiscuous and, in many instances, criminal disclosures now not lost in hiding or swept into other states or countries, ... into silent obscurity -- all under the guise of a homeless & celibate ministry. The Workers 'rule the roost' and that will never change, the fear and intimidation of their power is all that's needed in one word 'excommunication.' I knew many Workers personally in over 20 years, those I respected and admired, along with nearly thirty personal friends that went into the Work, but would I have any confidence, trust, ... in them today? Absolutely not. Could I sit in a Gospel meeting and listen to them proclaim their sacrifices to spread the Gospel and not wonder who they've been in bed with or what child they've been cozying up to over the last week? ABSOLUTELY NOT. The wolves sleep in their own vomit. That seems like an over-reaction.
|
|