Summary of problems with Peter's Indi...

Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post Emails from Mike Peters to wives graceisenough 12  1  7-08-07  3:47 pm   Start New Thread

Author Message   fellow2 New member Username: fellow2 Post Number: 24 Registered: 6-2006 Posted From: 64.228.102.5 Posted on Thursday, September 21, 2006 - 10:47 am:        I think we should start with a fresh thread, so I am reposting gottapost's summary below. Here's a summary of problems with Mike Peters teaching and the practices in TCCI (THE CHURCH IN INDIANAPOLIS). Explanation will be brief since much has already been stated. 1. Withholding affection: this doctrine and practice have torn families asunder and continues to do so. 2. Doctrine of Aloneness which was well described by ChrisO : people ought to be " SCARED TO BE ALONE". Members can't be alone except under rare circumstances. Especially harmful are those fathers who are prevented time alone with their children. 3. Selective application of Matt 18 discipline process. 4. "Daily Life" which REQUIRES members to be in another's life, house, family, marriage on a daily basis. If you're not, then you fall in the item#1 camp. 5. "House of Chloe" - This is MP's justification for encouraging, receiving, spreading, and acting upon gossip and lies. 6. "Borrowed" concept: Borrowed relationship, borrowed "teaching", borrowed "praise" et al is a mechanism used for controlling the CII environment. 7. "By invitation or revelation only:" once a sign on Mike's door, it spread. It appears to have mutated into something like the you're-not-welcome sign described by Tim Sz. All these doctrines are indefensible and result in a lording-over environment about which practices the bible condemns (Matthew 20:25,6; Revelation 2:6). "And not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbids them that would, and casts them out of the church." (1 John 3:10) -Gottapost- Theophilos theophilos.2@gmail.com   fellow2 New member Username: fellow2 Post Number: 25 Registered: 6-2006 Posted From: 64.228.102.5 Posted on Thursday, September 21, 2006 - 11:02 am:        We have come under some pretty heavy personal accusations here by those of you who are in favor of Mike Peters and the Indianpolis group. According to your assessment, most of us here are simply unacceptable in the sight of Mike Peters, which in his mind possibly equates to being unacceptable in God's eyes. So, I am honestly asking and wondering... what is the redeeming process I must take in order to be considered "acceptable", holy and made righteous in the blood of Jesus? 1. What is the gospel according to Mike Peters and Indianapolis? 2. How can I be reconciled? How does redeeming process work? 3. How does one become a offical member of the Mike Peter's brand of Church? Theophilos theophilos.2@gmail.com   cult_fighter Member Username: cult_fighter Post Number: 64 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 40.0.40.10 Posted on Thursday, September 21, 2006 - 11:37 am:        If we're going to start a new thread, let's make sure the BIG QUESTION is still here: Mike Peters HAS sent secret emails to the wives of other men. In those emails, he has "advised" those wives to withhold love, affection, respect, sex, submission, eye contact, dinner time, and even PRAYER from the God-given husband they made vows to. Does anyone else here think it sounds sick, twisted, and even perverted to be sending secret emails (behind the backs of the husbands) to women he's not married to? Just curious.   cult_fighter Member Username: cult_fighter Post Number: 66 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 40.0.40.10 Posted on Thursday, September 21, 2006 - 6:15 pm:        Back on September 13th, I made a "wise guy" posting where I implied that Mike has racial reasons for preventing his group from shopping at an Indianapolis store. After confrontation from a wise friend, I now see that was totally wrong and I repent of it and ask the forgiveness of Mike Peters and his group. There is NO reason to believe any of them are racists or anything like that.   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 159 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 199.103.143.97 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 7:47 am:        To those reading at home: Well, like the murderous Ringraths of the LOTR, this relentless evil just won't leave anyone alone or leave well enough alone. I thought I was "outta here" for a while, but considering the "7 Thesis" that was just posted on the rotting figless fig tree outside the camp for all to read and considering WHO posted it, I have to say something. This person apparently has come to the place, spiritually, where he "knows no bounds." I'll just take up a one of these accusations right now since I don't have time for a comprehensive expose on the lawlessness of "GottaPost." Believe me, it would take a lot of time... GottaPost vomits: 3. Selective application of [the] Matt 18 discipline process. Boy, that's a paradoxical and extremely ironic (and false) accusation coming from GottaPost. See, one of the reasons GottaPost was disfellowshiped (once) and then (later) asked to leave is because GottaPost had this propensity to "selectively apply" half the NT to his life. Can anyone see the strange irony in that? As I documented in my very, very first post, GottaPost, spiritually, was a nightmare to live with. In fact, with GottaPost it's actually impossible to try and apply Matthew 18, because he disputes anything and everything that anyone brings to him, so you actually cannot apply it with him. His prideful, arrogant, mocking, "I sit in the seat of Moses" elevation above everyone else, and his utter, complete, insistence on "having the final say" and "being the final and sole determiner of Truth" lead the church in Indianapolis to realize, this man would just not "stand down" on clear, simple teaching in the NT. We're talking about simple and obvious "acts of the sinful nature" as outlined in Galatians 5. Nothing "stretched" -- just simple stuff. Like... (You're the one in here pushing the envelope, GottaPost, and it's absolutely sickening. So I think some more details of your bent on lawless living and your own "selective application of scriptures" are necessary and called for since your insidiously evil post, again trying to paint the church in Indianapolis as "so evil" when YOU, YOU, YOU!!!! are the one with so many problems involving SPIRITUALLY LAWLESS BEHAVIOR!!! is an accusation that again, YOU are most guilty of. "Selective application" of most of the NT under the guise of "spiritual freedom" and "disputable matters," the former of which is also, ironically, outlined in Galatians, concerning those who use their "spiritual freedom" [so called] to DO EVIL as you have done and continue to do here... And we just didn't "give in to it," as it says there, is ALL that has happened. People simply not duped and manipulatiable by your own grossly "selective living and application of scripture.")   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 160 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 199.103.143.97 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 7:51 am:        Galatians 5:19: Discord - CONSTANT murmuring and setting yourself up as a prideful, all-knowing judge over everyone and creation of discord in yourself and those around you,attempting to love and labor with you. No one could nor still can "talk" to you about anything. There is always constant discord with you, as Paul says is an obvious (and boy was it ever) "flesh walker." Galatians 5:19: Jealousy and Selfish Ambition - You stated it yourself in one of your early posts, your "ambition" to "be a leader" while in Indianapolis. But no leader can be a leader without being subject to other leaders. Even Paul was subject to those around him and the church in Antioch. Even someone walking in Paul's stature isn't exempt from being yoked to and accountable and responsible to the other leaders around him. And as I stated in my first post: "You wanted to live how you wanted to live, be a leader but not be accountable to leaders..." Your jealousy and selfish ambition over certain people in Indianapolis was "obvious to all" as again Galatians 5 is clear and your actions most especially here bears that out, for in your continued jealousy and bitterness, you accused the church in Indianapolis, of the VERY things which EVERYONE WHO HAS EVER LIVED WITH YOU (not just in Indy, folks) has seen CLEARLY in your life. Galatioan 5:19: Fits of rage: This is a big one with GottaPost, I'm sorry to say. He's been known in many, many situations to "pop his cork" -- with unbelievers in stores, on public streets, with his children, and many, many times with his wife. Again, I've already detailed situations in previous posts where GottaPost stopped a car in the middle of the street and CURSED OUT the driver of the car IN FRONT OF HIS OWN CHILDREN and... the details I left out last time... was intent on provoking an all out fist fight with this person. Wow. Doesn't sound like "leadership material" to me. But again, any time someone wanted to apply scripture to GottaPost's life, it was "selectively applyable" or let's just say that somehow, it didn't apply. And this isn't just a "one time" deal, but GottaPost's propensity to "blow a gasket" was evidenced time and again in many situations. In stores, on basketball courts, you name it... It was semi-regular stuff. Galatians 5:19: Dissentions, factions, and envy: Similar stuff as above. With GottaPost's secret opinions and "selective application" of scripture to his life, dissentions and factions were caused. Doubts placed in people's minds about the genuineness of others, trust was broken down, etc.   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 161 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 199.103.143.97 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 7:54 am:        All those things were OBVIOUS (as Paul writes) and witnessed MANY TIMES by MANY OTHERS in at least two cities where people lived with GottaPost. And again, the haughty pride, arrogance, and mocking that GottaPost would do... finally lead to MULTIPLE INSTANCES of some kind of "break up." Either he was disfellowshipped (once -- and he couldn't even be told "why" then because the whole issue was his constant pride and seeing himself as "better and more knowledgeable" than simple saints around him and DISPUTING ANYTHING and EVERYTHING BROUGHT TO HIM and "selectively applying" scriptures on simple stuff), then it was mentioned that maybe Indy wan't the best situation for him (why have him stay when he was so "unhappy" and disputed everything even with all the obvious junk??) and he moved out of Indy, and then another time -- now get this -- everyone just left HIM. (So instead of asking him to "leave," others "took the hit" and left so he wouldn't be inconvenienced or feel "pressured" by everyone else. I personally left a couple thousand dollars on the table to back out of buying a house next to him, and another family had a rough, rough time selling their home. But neither of us said a word to GottaPost... We "took the hit" and left GottaPost to be the "bastion of truth and selective scripture application" on his own.) And none of this even touches on how he treats is wife -- like some Islamic head of household tyrant. (You wouldn't believe the number of times I found his wife shattered for a day or two due to some overlord, iron-fisted, angry (sometimes explosive) way of treating her.) Or his children at times, or the fact that his manner of living in Indy was enough to gain the attention of the police at least once, or... We don't have time to detail all of GottaPost's acts of lawlessness here and his "choosiness of what scriptures apply to him and don't." The POINT is that he's accusing a church of that which he himself is MOST guilty of -- more than anyone I know, in fact -- and indeed has been so difficult to work with over the years (on multiple occasions with multiple chances graciously extended to him, believing he would change, with nothing "held against him" each time) that he absolutely placed that church in a position a lot of times where they couldn't even APPLY "Matthew 18." It was impossible. GottaPost disputed everything. And still does I see...   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 162 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 199.103.143.97 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 7:59 am:        Now, before someone goes and accuses me that GottaPost says he "isn't who I think he is," remember that this board is CHALK FULL of lies and GottaPost has already already lied on multiple occasions on this board, this "7 Thesis" being only the latest. What's one more "little ol' lie" on his part?? And don't forget, you all choose this "fellowship of darkness," so you guys don't know whether he's lying or not. You don't know for a fact WHO this is to tell me "I don't know!!!" I KNOW WHO THIS IS. You guys can go getting all "bent out of shape" if you want, but even this cloak of darkness isn't enough to "hide" you all when there is plenty enough evidence to know who this is. Finally (and again, I know this will be "disputed" but that only goes to further cement and prove my point), "Matthew 18" is about a PROCESS and not a "recipe." There are no "recipes" in the NT anyway. Jesus didn't give us "recipes" -- He gave us a WAY. There is absolutely no indication anywhere in the NT outside of the gospels that the early church, when those times were exemplified in scriptures (Titus 3:10, 1Corinthians 5, 1Timothy 5, Acts 5, 3John, etc. etc.), "carried out Matthew 18" like some "judical procedure of the Sanhedrin" or something like that. Matthew 18 is about a PROCESS and is not some "Disfellowshiper's Bill of Rights." That's another "example" of JUST what we are talking about here -- someone being disciplined for obvious, multiple "acts of the sinful nature," pride, arrogance, entitlement, and then coming BACK to those discipling and "finding fault" with "how it's done." A rubber-stamping of exactly WHY they were doing it in the FIRST PLACE. Can anyone out there see that? (I'm not talking to the brood of vipers in here; of course they won't and can't.) That's all I have time for right now folks, but the other points in the "7 Thesis" are just as addressable and I'll get back to those later. I just felt that everyone out there needed to see the insidiousness and presumption with which GottaPost posts his vomit, when he is entirely guilty of the exact same thing over multiple passages of scripture, and placed that church in a position where they couldn't even carry out "Matthew 18." GottaPost was definitely, definitely NOT committed to nor open to that process in any way shape or form, and that's been at the core of his spiritual life for YEARS. So again, he was released to go and live however he wanted to live. As lawless as he wanted to.... :-( All of this is also very, very applicable to almost everyone else in here "dissenting" by the way, so the assertion and accusation is absolutely FALSE. Not to mention, as I stated about on the "process" versus "recipe" approach, that it doesn't "exist" that way ANYWAY. We can talk about the details of how some of these others "left" too if y'all want... Dennis "sneaking out of Dodge" (his choice entirely), etc.......... -ChrisO PS: You can see my very first posts of GottaPost, where a lot of this was already discussed, here: http://www.factnet.org/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=3&post=300548#POST300548   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 163 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 199.103.143.97 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 8:11 am:        Well, one more thing, since everyone in here loves trying to make absolutely, positively sure that "Mike Peters" has everything written apply to "him too"... On the thing with GottaPost wanting to "be a leader but not be accountable to other leaders" FACT... I can see right now where THAT is going to go. My personal observation when I lived there? And each time I lived there, I could throw a football and hit Mike's house, I was that close... Mike was and is accountable to all the other leaders there that I know about. I can name at least 6 men off the top of my head that he is accountable to and labors with, along side, as a brother. In fact, I don't know if I can remember the last time I saw Mike either alone or without one or more of these brothers in tow. To the readers at home, I can only give you my first hand accounting of what I saw when I was there. Of course, all that will be disputed, twisted and further slandered here, since the verdict is already made and the sentence already handed down, but hey... I'm just telling you want I've seen. -ChrisO   getagrip Intermediate Member Username: getagrip Post Number: 255 Registered: 6-2005 Posted From: 72.64.223.38 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 8:44 am:        "I personally left a couple thousand dollars on the table to back out of buying a house next to him, and another family had a rough, rough time selling their home." "In fact, I don't know if I can remember the last time I saw Mike either alone or without one or more of these brothers in tow." Only on Factnet in a cult discussion would comments like these and behaviors/incidents like these be presented as "normal", everyday life. Just out of curiousity Chris, how many children do you have and how many times have you moved... say in the last 15 years?   cult_fighter Member Username: cult_fighter Post Number: 67 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 40.0.40.10 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 9:14 am:        Chris, I hate to use that word "silly" again, but you are a silly boy -- ranting and raving about someone who's not even on this board! It's a good attempt on your part in changing subject from Mike's secret emails to other men's wives. Tell me, Chris, has this person (Gottapost, or whoever) ever sent secret emails to another man's wife? Has he ever sent secret emails to YOUR wife? Have YOU ever sent secret emails to another man's wife? You seem to think this is OK. I don't!   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 164 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 199.103.143.97 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 1:03 pm:        A pertinent quote from another brother somewhere well outside of Indy/Columbus and not in any relationship with them at all (as far as I know): Now I want to tell you the last and cruellest of our deceptions –- it is our concern to be understood and to be perceived in the way we would like men to acknowledge us spiritually. And until we are blind to men, even to the ‘spiritual man’ that we think ourselves to be or who we desire to be known as, we cannot serve God... We must come to such a selflessness, such a mindlessness about this last man, this last cruel deceiver, who, after we have given up every other form, yet retains this kind of power by which we are traduced and compromised; the necessity to be understood by men in the way that we would wish ourselves to be seen and to be approved! We need to come to place where we see no man, even our own man, even our own seeing! That is why Paul could say, "Follow me as I follow Christ," without an iota of arrogance or audacity. Is it not we who think that he is arrogant because we project upon him the ego in which we still live, not having fallen on our face upon the ground upon which he had fallen, and been blinded by the light of God, which blinded him? You project on him your own idea of "man" and assume that he must mean by that some kind of egotistic statement because you cannot understand a man who sees no man, and in which the element of self is therefore not a factor. He does not have to be recognised, he can be despised, he can be cast out, he can be the offscouring of the world, without so much as blinking at it, for he sees no man. ...The cruellest delusion is to find ourselves in a lie about the very thing that is correct....   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 60 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 85.25.141.60 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 1:38 pm:        Chris, There is irony in your posts.   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 165 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 199.103.143.97 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 2:32 pm:        Tim, There is irony in your lives. -ChrisO   cult_fighter Member Username: cult_fighter Post Number: 68 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 40.0.40.10 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 2:51 pm:        Chris, You know NOTHING about our lives! I think Denny's the only one you've ever met, and your memory of him is extremely flawed. You also know NOTHING about the ethics of sending secret emails to another man's wife.   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 244 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 6:01 pm:        This is Denny. Not the person ChrisO says is Denny. After much “personal” prayer and consideration in God’s Word. I have Peace. This is good. Honest soundness of mind only comes through soundness in God’s Word and faith-full fervency in prayer. My conscience is clear. And the only judge I trust in my life is God. Mercy triumphs over judgement! For judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy. Much judgement (including my own) has been on all sides in this forum. And the only way that mercy will win as promised is “though the Spirit”. ChrisO seems to have won “through the flesh” by successfully filling this thread will self-perceived extensively perverted write-ups of other’s "assumed" sins in attempt to nullify the testimonies of others regarding abuses of those in the titles of these threads. A Mike Peters trait, he could become “twice the son of Hell” over Mike with continued practice. God have mercy on his soul. God’s only True Son is my Advocate with the Father! And I am not Mike Peters judge except in the agreement of God’s Word. God’s Living Word will judge him now and in the end! God bearing witness with my soul, I have love for “everyone” that has been a part of this thread or relevant email/phone contacts. I refuse to hold the slightest grudge here or otherwise. I do not have any hatred for souls. That would be a terrible thing to have to live with inside. I will be praying and interceding for Mike Peters from my heart in Christ's Spirit. I will take this battle to a higher level where victory is sure!..... PRAYER If you don’t do the same you will fail. For unless the Lord is yielded to in this way “through the Spirit”, this battle is in vain and in the flesh of words only. If the Sword “of the Spirit” is the Word of God then we must be "of the Spirit" and not the letter only. These two combined will prevail over the darkness. What does God want from me? He has shown me what is good; And what does the Lord require of me But to do justly, To love mercy, And to walk humbly with my God? Lord willing, after 20-30 of ChrisO / Mike Peters / or the like posts, I may repost this for the sake of others wading through this deep mire being dumped. As the Psalmist prays: “Deliver me out of the mire, And let me not sink; Let me be delivered from those who hate me, And out of the deep waters.” And... “But the wicked are like the troubled sea, When it cannot rest, Whose waters cast up mire and dirt. “There is no peace,” Says my God, “for the wicked.” And for those who trust in riders of flesh, I will pray in this manner for those who battle “through the Spirit”... “They shall be like mighty men, Who tread down their enemies In the mire of the streets in the battle. They shall fight because the Lord is with them, And the riders on horses shall be put to shame.” (my next post)   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 245 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 6:16 pm:        If God’s Word and prayer does not take preeminence in this forum over this matter it is hopeless and of little good fruit. There is one thing that Mike Peters and each of his followers need... Sleep. Even hard hearts can have faint echoes of what is honestly right and wrong here. “Alone” time with God as you lay down for rest with all motives and thoughts naked before Him. Can you hear the whispers in your heart as you are quiet and no one is there to fill your mind with “are you sinning against the doctrine taught here?”. The whispers from God, breaking through the mind-controlling false doctrine, saying “You are letting the deception from Mike Peters keep you” or “You KNOW you are deceiving others with your false doctrine and practices”. We all must get alone with this conscience every night. That is if you need sleep. This is God’s Word: “In disquieting thoughts from the visions of the night, When deep sleep falls on men, Fear came upon me, and trembling, Which made all my bones shake. Then a spirit passed before my face; The hair on my body stood up. It stood still, But I could not discern its appearance. A form was before my eyes; There was silence; Then I heard a voice saying: ‘Can a mortal be more righteous than God? Can a man be more pure than his Maker? If He puts no trust in His servants, If He charges His angels with error, How much more those who dwell in houses of clay, Whose foundation is in the dust, Who are crushed before a moth?” If you rely upon or trust in Mike Peters or “any” man to know Truth and ignore knowing your God for yourself, you are trusting in “a house of clay”, whose foundation is in the dust! Foolish Galatians... By the grace of God, I will pray....Wake up! (to my next post)   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 247 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 6:32 pm:        One thing most any would say on this board is “Truth is Truth and you can’t change it with your words in the Eyes of the Almighty”. We all agree here! I will go to the Throne of Mercy to find grace that is needed here in this tiny affair of mankind. Mercy triumphs over judgement, Grace abounds, Truth sets free, Love conquers all. I will be praying for all of you while you sleep. I will continue to let God cleanse me of “present” sins and ask for God’s mercy for your sin, as the example of David, Daniel, Elijah and so many other mere mortal have been given to us by God’s Record. For if I say I am without sin, I would be a liar. I trust in Him and His Word’s “ONLY” to give the honest conviction needed to be purified by Him. This is the “Truth of the Gospel” as Paul so clearly states to the Galatians. If “anyone” wishes to communicate with me, feel free to email me any time. couthy68@yahoo.com Feel free, also, to test what I believe in Christ via my blog. I am a man open to answering questions the best I know how for I have nothing to hide. And my conscience is clear as I say that. The only thing I have hidden is my life with Christ in God. I am not sorry for this long post here and don’t believe I should be after serious prayer for God’s wisdom. Unless the Lord convicts me otherwise... Good night. It’s been quite an experience. Now, with far more seriousness, I take my experience before the Throne. Judge this to be religiosity if you will. But I refuse to deny the Power of my faith in Him! I will be praying that the Lord will open the eyes of everyone as they sleep. That the whisper will become amplified and the True Light will shine bright! That you will be compelled to the Scriptures and prayer for your own soul and it’s accountability to God. I expect perversions and aspersions to be cast at this. I expect my words to be turned on me. That’s ok I am quite used to it as are others here. You the one that has to sleep with your words as your flesh rears up here to poison others against our testimonies. With intense Love and tears and in the fear of God, Denny (Message edited by speakingtruth on September 22, 2006)   sigh New member Username: sigh Post Number: 13 Registered: 3-2006 Posted From: 24.192.78.89 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 9:41 pm:        From a Blood-purchased sister in Christ, neighbor of mike and 100 others who are in love with Jesus... According to Oliver Wendell Holmes, "once the mind has been stretched by a new idea, it will never again return to its original size." How might the human mind reasonably receive ideas previously not considered? Historically, an idea, previously unconsidered, has not been examined by its likeness to truth but rather according to the idea's affect upon any given person's agenda in this world. Did not Galileo offer visible proof with his telescope of Copernicus' idea that the planets revolve around the sun? Yet, in spite of the proof to support and validate a new idea, Galileo was attacked by the Roman Catholics of his day and forced to live out the last eight years of his life under house arrest. It was not until 1992 that the Catholics formally acknowledged their error in condemning Galileo. The "new" idea (the truth, previously unconsidered) for which Galileo offered proof was not judged by its accuracy, but by whether or not it was palatable to, deemed favorable and personally useful, by those in power to decide. Nevertheless, "once the mind is stretched by an idea, previously unconsidered and true, it will never again return to its original size." What if the Bible is meant to guide those who care enough to read it, and apply it into a way of life, here and now? What if God has very specific thoughts about how all who wear the name of His Son -- Jesus, the Christ -- by calling themselves christians, should live? What if God's thoughts about church are not at all like what we grew up attending and being taught? Isn't that possible? Didn't it already happen for centuries of "Roman Catholics" with but few who even dared to question over those many years. Could most of religious society be in that state today, as well? WHAT IF? What will you allow your mind to do with an idea -- one previously hidden from you by culture or those with a motive (pride? control? fear? greed? laziness?) to hide certain truths -- just as in previous generations? Why is your generation immune from such a possibility? Why "jump on the fear and hatred bandwagon" so quickly? Maybe the sun and all the planets don't really revolve around the earth as all the science books and experts say, after all? Will you examine a thought, a truth, a possibility based upon guidelines and examples and priorities expressed by God Himself in the Bible? Or will you, like so many others throughout history, reject a TRUTH simply because it is unfamiliar and fearful territory, not put into practice by your ancestors in this culture? What IF a truth has no convenient nor comfortable place in your life? Does that make it "wrong" automatically? And should not the "fruit" of this "wicked and perverted generation" not cause us to search "outside the camp" and "inside the Bible" for truths of God currently being ignored and disobeyed?   sigh New member Username: sigh Post Number: 14 Registered: 3-2006 Posted From: 24.192.78.89 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 9:43 pm:        Your life is the territory over which you have been granted the authority by God to decide such things as these "what ifs"? And in many countries, including the one from which this heart-felt note emanates, the government has constitutionally upheld each individual's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, without persecution, hate crimes and bigotry. The question again becomes, how will you respond to an idea or truth previously unknown or hidden from you by the "priests," though clearly in the Bible? You have been granted the right to choose. Will you measure truths and thoughts by their accuracy to the Scriptures, by their basis in substance and eternal reality -- or will you instead decide before ever getting that far, because of fear or prejudice or desire for power? Trying to keep the world "flat" and man at the "center of the universe" will not change the Truth. Don't be unwilling to make any changes to your current way of doing things as if Truth does not matter to you as much as "the old is better" and "safer." It isn't. Some acted as if truth did not matter and could be forever altered by wishing it so, in the days of the Roman Catholics and Galileo. How will you go down in history? Our actions and decisions and attitudes are all observed by Jesus and the great cloud of witnesses in the unseen realm, whether or not your individual decision is ever recorded in print in this present age. There's no way to hide from that. Will you let truth be your guide in considering things you have never previously considered as well as consider that perhaps many are dissatisfied with Laodicea, that your mind might be stretched and your life forevermore enlarged and enriched? Or will you push away, unwilling to even consider that what you are used to seeing and hearing and doing MAY not be what Jesus had in mind, or what those He taught face to face would ever accept or make peace with. Would not that attitude by ANY disciple of Jesus be tantamount to making yourself out to be your own god here and now, unwilling to consider Light or Truth, just as went on in the dark ages by the masses who bought into the lie perpetrated upon them by those with much to lose. Should we serve our own interests without regard for the truth, simply because Bible truths have been withheld from us by those with institutional power and money and pride at stake? Jesus only promised that the Truth would set us free -- not any human fabricated standard of teaching framework or common acceptance, without power, life, or much fruit. What say ye? My mind has been stretched by Bible Truths, truths that the religions of the world culture and "attendance" religions hate, vociferously. I cannot go back to the shape my mind held before, nor do i want to! All answers i do not offer you, but as even the pagans acknowledge freely in such places and anthologies intended to educate their readers, it is not more information that we need. Rather, it is grounding. It is context and perspective. It is help in discovering what matters, what lasts, what works, and the way in to such things! Thus, consider God's intent for His people on this planet in this generation before they reach heaven to be very specific and important and real. Most likely, it will be for you, as it was for me, intensely Biblical but a "new idea" as it is not being commonly taught nor universally accepted, thus, a "new idea" , as was the Copernican theory about the universe. But that didn't make that "new" (or ancient and Biblical) idea untrue or unimportant. Consider the implication.   sigh New member Username: sigh Post Number: 15 Registered: 3-2006 Posted From: 24.192.78.89 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 9:45 pm:        Most of what has been printed and thrust into public forum on the topic of a certain person in Indianapolis has been everything BUT the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth -- our government's sworn standard of what truth must be, to be truth. Most, if not all of what has been maliciously tossed about has lacked even the integrity of pursuing the facts before casually committing libel (a crime recognized by the government). It was only a matter of time before some who actually know the assaulted person would find it impossible to remain silent any longer. Few who have spoken as experts or prophets or heralds on the subject have ever met the man, let alone pursued the truth of any of their own statements. Others have motives of hatred or revenge, from having been disfellowshipped for heinous sins without repentance as the Bible insists must be done, and that hatred and deceit disqualify them from credibility. As with the erroneous but self-serving and power hungry Roman Catholics of history, TRUTH does not matter to these people who have falsely maligned the character and life of a man whose only crime is presenting to the world a telescope by which to observe God's plan for His people, NOW. Remember Galileo? These who have so carelessly misrepresented this man can be doing so only because they are unwilling to give an appropriate response to God Himself. Those who know him, day in and out for decades from close proximity, find these accusations and insults and this hatred without basis or honesty, not to mention the machiavellian vulgarity of a few that is past shocking by anyone who claims to be a Christian and can treat others this way. Some in every generation will refuse to consider truth -- and that is what has been at stake with the slanderers, since no one here in twenty years has ever been controlled or fleeced in any way, as happens regularly in the religions of our day. Some will lash out in fear or revenge, refusing to measure in Truth, but instead in personal, prejudiced, uneducated judgments based in fear and self-preservation. None have attacked these attackers here. None have maligned the maligners here. Example after example can be given of all that has been done in sacrifice and love and care and tender patience to those who eventually expired their "one more year" and were sent on to hopefully soften and turn from flesh. Many have. But for those who haven't, none have sought these people out to name them individually or wanted anything but the best for them. I know this as a daily witness. Yet, the hatred and scandal-mongering they have willingly participated in has been provoked by nothing more than their pride, their jealousy of what they cannot have apart from repentance, and a Biblical idea -- God's intent for His people, here and now, non-utopian -- but Light-walking, Jesus Quality of Life, "hundred mothers, brothers, sisters," "joined and knit together" before heaven -- for which some who do not love the Light have no patience, no respect, nor any willingness to measure or be measured by truth. Oh, how i bet those Roman Catholics have regretted their shameful, hateful, and disastrously dishonest and pride-filled decisions at that time. Personal preference and convenience and comfort zones allowed Truth no entrance nor respect! History reveals the folly of such a choice. How will you receive an idea from God, clearly in the Bible, and clearly disobeyed by Laodicean cultural and attendance religions, whether in house and edifice?   sigh New member Username: sigh Post Number: 16 Registered: 3-2006 Posted From: 24.192.78.89 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 9:47 pm:        i have no desire to name names, nor debate on any of these topics. i want simply to give those who DO value Truth and are willing to use truth alone to measure an unfamiliar idea the chance to be free to do so. The statements that have been presented here about Mike Peters, Dan, and others attacked here are not true. If that statement alone made by one who knows him and them personally is enough to motivate you to pursue GOD'S HEART FOR HIS PEOPLE AND HIS DEFINITION OF CHURCH -- to carefully weigh all information presented to you by considering the source and the motives therein, all the while determining to validate facts with truth and cast off all false statements against anyone who has attempted only to offer you a glimpse INTO what matters -- God's intent for His People, here and now -- then this effort will have been worthwhile. Perhaps, along the way, you will decide that some sources just simply aren't reliable nor are certain arenas a healthy place for lovers of truth to visit. However, if some set of information comes into your face and you have no basis in truth to decide its accuracy, pursue the truth on the matter before you decide. History demonstrates the importance of such a means to process information. How will you go down in history for your response to this "idea" about God's loving intentions and plans for you? Choose truth!   cult_fighter Member Username: cult_fighter Post Number: 69 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 4.224.108.152 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 10:31 pm:        OK, let me summarize those LONG break-free paragraphs by "Sigh": Essentially she says "What if God has given the ONLY truth to Mike Peters?" OK, what if? But why Mike? Why not Joseph Smith? Why not Mohammed? Frankly, I have serious doubts that IF God had a "new truth" to give to mankind that He would give it to a man who sends secret emails to other men's wives. And THAT, Ms.Sigh, IS the truth! He did it!   gottapost2 New member Username: gottapost2 Post Number: 3 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 88.198.7.68 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 10:33 pm:        chriso, If you know who I am, prove it! Post my name!   fellow2 Junior Member Username: fellow2 Post Number: 26 Registered: 6-2006 Posted From: 64.228.99.170 Posted on Friday, September 22, 2006 - 10:43 pm:        I would like to remind all, that the "stretching of the mind through the means of considering new ideas" is not at all in question here. I myself am in favor of a few "new" ideas which might traditionally be considered unacceptable. However, what is being challenged is the abusive "lording over" and sweeping "condemnation" heaped upon Jesus loving folks by Mike Peters and his top-tier "accountability" brothers. I still would like to have someone from the Indy camp explain the redemption process for such a one who has fallen out of grace with Mike Peters. Theophilos theophilos.2@gmail.com   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 61 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Saturday, September 23, 2006 - 8:15 am:        Does anyone from Indy/Columbus answer direct questions?   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 62 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Saturday, September 23, 2006 - 8:45 am:        David Norris is not a fan of factnet, but he knows Peters. This may give some answers. http://ministryofspirit.blogspot.com/2006/09/secret-origins-of-mike-peters-and.html   gottapost2 New member Username: gottapost2 Post Number: 4 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 199.77.130.14 Posted on Saturday, September 23, 2006 - 11:11 pm:        chriso said the seven points are lies. Let's look at that. 1 - Withholding affection - see cult_fighter's statement http://www.factnet.org/discus/messages/3/24476.html#POST340678 - IF THIS IS SUCH AN OUTRAGEOUS LIE, WHY HAS NO ONE DENIED IT? cult_fighter is a witness and there are other witnesses that Mike P communicates with other men's wives encouraging to use the "tool" of withholding affection. Besides that, just look at the teaching itself. 2 - Doctrine of Aloneness - It's wrong to "do things" alone in TCCI. I've experienced it, others have been excommunicated because of it. ChrisO is my *inside* source, he says: >> "Why are people there never alone?" but RATHER -- WHY AREN'T MORE PEOPLE SCARED TO BE ALONE???!!!!!! << So if this is a lie, who is the liar? 3 - Matt 19 "process" is *applied* on underlings but not the upper tier/inner circle oligarchy. I know of only one (maybe 2) exceptions. It is a "recipe" when someone criticizes Mike Peters, his teaching or church practices: "hey, you should go to him alone." If you don't mix the ingredients right, they cry foul. 4 - "Daily Life" - It's hard to deny that this is not core and essential to membership in Indianapolis. And it works for all who conform. Those who do not conform to *expectation* are pushed to the periphery of relational involvement, shunned, or pushed out of the church 5 - "house of Chloe" - Without a doubt, whenever gossip or hearsay is passed on to Mike Peters or other leaders, "house of Chloe" is MP's defense or others. 6 - Borrowed Concept (relationship, singing, praise) - This item is another unspoken rule: members do not engage with outside relationship with other people/Christians without involvement by those through whom they met these people. This stick has been pulled out to has been used to meddle into the lives of Christians and PREVENT them from fellowship. Mike's teaching references even seeking outside contemporary teaching, and even sing traditional hymns. Not always, but it happens. 7 - "Invitation or revelation only" - How can this be a lie? Mike Peters started this door sign "tradition" back around 1990/1 and others started to imitate it. That's a fact. Because of item 6 I posted 1 John 3:10. Mike casts out of the church (even by proxy) those who would fellowship outside of the church and outside of his control. Is it possible I'm wrong on some point that I've made in all my posting? I have to allow for that, I'm human and YES, I do sin, I do err. At some 2 or 3 postings I've already had make corrections. It seems that TCII representative ChrisO cannot fathom the possibility that he's wrong about Mike. I've known Mike Peters for more than a decade I've never heard Mike offer one apology for anything -- that's not to suggest he never has, just that I've never heard it. It's as if he's never wrong. Like the teacher, so goes the disciple.   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 64 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Sunday, September 24, 2006 - 8:14 pm:        I made some errors on factnet. I apologize to the folks in Indy and Columbus. I have requested following posts to be removed due to some degree of false information, first and last names posted (members didn’t like this), and word use that could imply something different than what I intended. Please disregard these posts for reasons above: http://www.factnet.org/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=3&post=327572#POST327572 http://www.factnet.org/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=3&post=327573#POST327573 http://www.factnet.org/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=3&post=336480#POST336480 To offset this, I interviewed my friend[s] Elizabeth and former member of the Columbus Church. Her comments are better than anything I could have offered anyway. -Elizabeth Nelson- “Hey Tim ! Vince and talked about it and we think that [quote from factnet] "being lifted to the heights in sensual-spiritual pleasure by you and [Dan ]" is strong language in the same way that they make everything sensational. I never felt that there was sensual pleasure. I felt that a woman in an emotional state, who is displeased with her husband can be manipulated very easily by a man that comes along as the spiritual hero. I totally believe they are self elevated and self proclaimed leaders and they handle this power very dangerously with a woman who confesses she has no interest in any way in her husband. I also agree strongly with what you are saying, they take a part in how the wife treats her husband (or how the husband who is "in" treats an outcasted wife). They enforce and encourage a woman cutting her husband off in various ways. I don't know if there is anything I'd change except that sentence. If you can in any way change it to say that they don't sleep with their husbands, they look to male leadership instead of their husbands. They are very displeased with their husbands and then these male leaders are set on pedestals as heroes who have the answers to their problems at home. This group actually boasts in the fact that outsiders and newcomers can't tell who is married to whom and whose children are whose. This is one of the many exposing aspects that they are blind to. Many of the leaders (male or female) frequently travel in town and out of town, paired up with others who are not their spouses. As far as the issue with the women, mainly Linda and Shelly, they are in control! I am not sure if they ever had a title while I was around, but it goes without saying they rule the roost. I've been on the phone and heard Dan bow down to Shelly. I have several times seen the women tell Dan what was going on in their opinion and he would carry out the action they thought necessary with or without them being present. He is more under Linda's authority than anything. Cherie holds more power with her longer connection to Indy. “   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 65 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 70.229.159.198 Posted on Monday, September 25, 2006 - 1:29 pm:        -Posted for Elizabeth Nelson- To the Group: I do not have any unforgiveness, I am only standing up for what God showed me that was wrong with what this group believes and does to people. No one is off the hook for their involvement in a mind control group - but I do believe they are decieved. When I walked away from the whole thing I did not go to people and point out what they were doing to wrong others. All I could do was repent for my part in the hurt, abuse, and control that I took part in when I was involved with this group. I call it "lording over" and Pharisaic control. I was as guilty in this as anyone else that I was with. They know what I am talking about. How many times did a certain person and I discuss cringing when someone came groveling to us. But this is encouraged in people due the constant double speak of the group. Example: We would tell people they needed to talk to God about things but then they were always required to confess it to others specifically and then the leaders would in turn decide when to allow someone to be included again if at all. I also recall a conversation with a female leader who told me about how God had taught her not to smile at people if she didn't now "where they were at with God." This is control! Again, I do not want to hurt anyone. I am so sorry if this hurts. I believe that they are very deceived. I love and miss some of them very much. I do not want to do what they do. I do not like the mudslinging. However, I believe this dialog is very important and I believe God will not tolerate false teachers. They are fishers in God's sea of forgetfulness. They constantly pull up the sins of peoples past and list it publicly then scream "libel and slander!" This is so unbelieveable how blind thay are. Notice they are never wrong. They defend a human's teaching with their life. May God have mercy on us all, may we walk in the love and freedom that He has called us all to. My desire is for blind eyes to be opened and for outsiders to be warned of the many legalistic and controling groups that have erred. In my thoughts, Laodicea were the ones who thought they had it all and were in need of nothing. They had the attitude of those who had arrived, those who weren't wrong and had an answer for everything. I am praying for good things to come from this and for people to be set free. Elizabeth Nelson any questions or comments enelson8735@yahoo.com   onetimeposter Junior Member Username: onetimeposter Post Number: 37 Registered: 3-2006 Posted From: 24.192.78.89 Posted on Monday, September 25, 2006 - 4:04 pm:        Hi, All! I'd like to post the following public-domain article. I don't know the author personally, but I found his discussion insightful. My hope is that there would be *no* knee-jerk reaction about how someone else is guilty of slander. Instead, I ask you to do what the Bereans did and search the scriptures to see if what the article says is true. If so, let's begin by EACH APPLYING IT TO OUR OWN LIVES. As mentioned before,I do not read factnet, so if you have a response to this one--pro or con--please write me at: Saved_by_Grace@wowway.com   onetimeposter Junior Member Username: onetimeposter Post Number: 38 Registered: 3-2006 Posted From: 24.192.78.89 Posted on Monday, September 25, 2006 - 4:13 pm:        Word Study: Slander by Artemio Allan Martin II, Doctoral Candidate, Fuller Theological Seminary In perusing the various sin catalogs offered for this word study, I was attracted to the studying of the word "slander" in Romans 1:30 (NRSV-NIV, 1990) because of some issues that I am having to deal with in a local ministry I am involved with. What in Romans 1:30, the NRSV and the NIV identify as "slanders," is also identified as "railers (NRSV-NIV, 1990)," "detractor," and "calumniator (Perschbacher, 1990)." Bromiley (1988) includes a variety of synonyms for slanderer from both testament sources. These would include: talebearer, mischiefmaker, informer, evil speaker, backbiter, scandal-monger, and false accuser. He goes further to list action verbs that identify the deeds of the slanderer: spread tales, accuse, disparage, tear, jeer, stab in the back, eat the flesh, devour, blasphemy, cursing, defame, backbiting, recrimination, talk scandal. A general definition given is "one who utters such malicious accusations, lies that damage another's reputation (Bromiley, 1988)." Usage of the word "slander" in the New Testament, which is akin to the Roman 1:30 usage, has a rather narrow range of application, emphasizing its meaning as "speaking evil against one's neighbor" (Kittel, 1967). This New Testament reference to "speaking evil" is not so much making a false report on another, as slander is typically used in the Old Testament, rather it appears to be an admonition to the early Church to refrain from hostile and malicious speech directly against a neighbor (Bromiley, 1988; Kittel, 1967). Although "slanderer" is almost exclusively used in Romans 1:30 as a naming noun of the evil speaker, the closest action verb usage in the New Testament is found in 1Peter 2:1, 2Corinthians 12:20, James 4:11, and 1Peter 3:16 (Kittel, 1967; Perschbacher, 1990). Bromiley (1988) includes Pauline sin catalog listings of evil-doers in addition to those above (2Timothy 3:3, Ephesians 4:31, Colossians 3:8, 1Timothy 6:4), noting slander as a primary concern for Paul. Kittel (1967) notes that "slanderer" is found in ancient writings P. Oxy., XV, 1828 r 3 (3rd cent. A.D.) and the word does not occur in LXX or related literature. Bromiley (1988) notes the strong condemnation of slander as a sin worthy of "severe punishment." The Mosaic law and Decalogue had strong direct statements prohibiting slander or false witness, in efforts to avert the vicious destructive nature of this sin. The direct force of the term "slanderer" as used in Romans 1:30 appears to identify in the initial portions of this sin catalog, people who were ungodly and wicked, subject to God's wrath for suppressing the truth (NRSV-NIV, 1990). Clearly, a slanderer was not a true Christian, because of the "uncharitableness" of their action (Kittel, 1967). Kittel goes further to note the Paul's intention for including slanderers in his vice lists was to emphasize the difference in ethical life between the Christian and the non-believer. Slander must be avoided not just for "moral grounds, but for the sake of the new life in God (Kittel, 1967)." Slanderers have no claim to connectedness with God as the sin catalogs suggest, rather they are more directly akin to Satan whose role as a liar and slanderer is especially emphasized in the Johannine writings (Bromiley, 1988). Like Satan, a slanderer's actions reflect the ultimate evil speaking, which is to deny Jesus Christ.   onetimeposter Junior Member Username: onetimeposter Post Number: 39 Registered: 3-2006 Posted From: 24.192.78.89 Posted on Monday, September 25, 2006 - 4:17 pm:        Reflecting on slanderers and spirituality, I find Bromiley's (1988) analysis of this sin as ultimately denying Jesus Christ, hits on the crux of insidious nature slander for both personal and communal spirituality. Like an awful virus or malignant cancerous growth, a slanderer can wreak havoc from within the spiritual body, sometimes even under the guise of "giving admonition" or "character discernment." Spirituality cannot be personified by the slanderer who is tearing into people with malicious speech. As the evil speaking is perpetuated, people can literally be destroyed, reputations tarnished, character tainted, by the slanderer's actions. Although this type of behavior may be acceptable in the pagan world (Kittel, 1967) during Paul's day, and fine for today's secular society, it is clearly contrary to the ethos of Christianity. Therefore alignment of the slanderer is unquestionably in Satan's camp, whose primary campaign is to slander God. As in the case of cancer or HIV, where the cells of the body attack the body, the slanderer compromises the spiritual health of the body of Christ through evil speaking. Relationships within the spiritual community no longer serve to "build up the body," instead they tear down and "eat the flesh" of the body. Relationships no longer serve spiritual purposes, they are debased toward selfish intentions, vengeful purposes, and ultimately the disparaging of Jesus Christ Himself. The absence of slander in the spiritual community and the transformation of the slanderer into a new creature in Christ are among the distinctions that separate the kingdoms of God and Satan. The presence of the slanderer makes a spiritual community no different than that of the "every person for themselves" world. Mudslinging campaigns, wrongful allegations, harmful lies intent to hurt another--all these are part of the world. What an amazing distinction Paul was trying to create and develop as the life ethic for Christians in the early church and today! Evidently Paul felt it important enough an issue to almost without fail, include the slanderer at the forefront of his sin catalogs. No doubt the early church was being sabotaged spiritually by slanderers who needed to either be transformed or "surgically removed." It appears the intention of Paul, in mention of the slanderer in Romans 1:30, was to do the needed "operations" to refine the early Church, spiritually reflecting Christ's body as opposed to the world. The slanderer clearly has no place in Christ's spiritual kingdom, which leaves him/her only one domain in which to reside. References: Bromiley, G. W. (Ed.). (1988). The international standard Bible encyclopedia (Vol. 4 Q-Z, p. 537). Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans. Kittel, G. (Ed.). (1967). The theological dictionary of the new testament (Vol. IV, pp. 3-5). Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans. The NRSV-NIV: Parallel new testament in Greek and English (A. Marshall, Trans., pp. 443, 542, 668). (1990.). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. Perschbacher, W. J. (Ed.). (1990). The new analytical Greek lexicon (p. 224). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.   onetimeposter Junior Member Username: onetimeposter Post Number: 40 Registered: 3-2006 Posted From: 24.192.78.89 Posted on Monday, September 25, 2006 - 4:24 pm:        (For the record, I added the bolding in the previous article to bring out points that I thought were especially insightful.) Dan (who makes a habit of repenting daily!) Zeigler SavedByGrace@wowway.com   fellow2 Junior Member Username: fellow2 Post Number: 29 Registered: 6-2006 Posted From: 64.228.37.39 Posted on Monday, September 25, 2006 - 7:13 pm:        Sigh posted on September 22, 2006: Your life is the territory over which you have been granted the authority by God to decide such things as these "what ifs"? The question again becomes, how will you respond to an idea or truth previously unknown or hidden from you by the "priests," though clearly in the Bible? You have been granted the right to choose. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The above is actually a wonderful statement with a two-fold purpose - 1) to open your mind to new ways of applying biblical passages, and in particular to draw your interest toward the teachings and practices of the religious community headed by Mike Peters - 2) but it may also be applied to those who have had their eyes opened and are now considering the "what ifs" about some of the questionable practices in the Indy camp. Therefore, never forget the authority and responsibility granted to you by God to decide about these matters even now. What if Indianapolis isn't quite what they claim to be? Do you have the courage to move on with any further revelation God is trying to show you? I would like to summarize my thoughts about this whole matter concerning Indianapolis, and some of the other cults I have had a taste of during the course of the last 25 years. As one who loves Jesus with the whole heart, that inner yearning for His life, way and truth will always cause one to seek for closer and deeper ways to experience Him - and I believe (even by God's providence) He has allowed for fragments of His truth to appear in various places - much like road signs pointing to the Celestial City. It very much reminds me of the Bunyan story of Pilgrims Progress, and how true that allegory is to our own walk. Lets not forget that the Celestial City is not going to be found on this earth, no matter how spiritual it's clever imitation may appear! No, not even in Indianapolis. Being familiar with the story of Pilgrims Progress, I cannot go so far as to tell you, dear reader, what path you should or shouldn't take - for doing so is not within my jurisdiction as a fellow pilgrim in the Way. It is entirely between you and your Lord, where He would lead you to learn - and I would never want to rob you of the opportunities for that priceless personal experience. As long as our feet touch this earthly ground, we will time and again meet various potholes and puddles along the way to muddy our feet in - so even if you leave from here (the Indianapolis group) today, soon other doors will open and invite you into new trappings! Thus is the way with man. I can only offer you this, that wherever your feet may lead you to go - may God go with you... and may you come to know His GRACE deeply. And always remain personally connected to the "inner voice" of God, and never allow that to be replaced or blocked by any so-called "spokesman" for God - for NO MAN can speak for you on behalf of God, NO MAN can replace your personal walk and responsibility with God - not a 100 fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters - and no not Mike Peters either. In the end it is going to be YOU who has to answer for the choices you have made for yourself in this life. So, allow yourself to tune out those other 100 voices and be still... that you may hear your Father's voice within your own spirit. And Follow Him! A blessed journey to all who will. Theophilos theophilos.2@gmail.com   scannyd New member Username: scannyd Post Number: 9 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Monday, September 25, 2006 - 9:08 pm:        I just thought I would point out that the whole point of slander is that it is false. That is what the above passage posted by Dan says. However since most of us are speaking the truth from our own experiences I do not think that we are in danger of the other domain mentality. If we testify to the truth it is not slander. Slander is what happend to Denny on factnet. http://www.factnet.org/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=3&post=301106#POST301106 I know we (the Dennis') have been accused repeatedly as not knowing anything because we were not "apart" of anything there. We will be posting soon our testimony of what happened in our own family very soon. This will bring these critics to a halt. We have experienced the pain and family tearing too. Danielle   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 66 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Monday, September 25, 2006 - 9:45 pm:        I find it hard to understand why Dan says, “I don’t read factnet”. But he posts two pages for the rest of us to read. I don’t trust a man when he says, “I won’t be back”. And then he comes back. His screen name is “one time poster”, but for some reason he has posted 40 times. Does this person seem like a walking contradiction? Dan, when you said you don’t read facnet, does that mean from this point on? I know you all read it. How did you know when Chris posted his testimony on the website? I suspect most of the leaders are engrossed with it, waiting for the next ex-member to post their testimony. And somebody tell me why they always show up when someone new testifies against them? That must mean they are reading every post. PS - I would not contact Dan through email. I think he is just trying to draw the comments off of factnet and control the situation. If you post on factnet you should be able to take responsibility for it on factnet. Now let’s get back to the questions that gottapost posted. Is anyone in Indianapolis or Columbus going to answer these questions? Do you all understand that people think you are a cult even in more so now, because you will not answer these questions?   onetimeposter Junior Member Username: onetimeposter Post Number: 41 Registered: 3-2006 Posted From: 140.254.233.240 Posted on Wednesday, September 27, 2006 - 1:51 pm:        Since some of the discussion on this thread has concerned the topic of sexual intimacy in marriage, I thought that the following document might shed provide an inside look at what “Indy” really teaches on the subject. First, some historical context: The time stamp on my copy says “Thursday, June 29, 1995 at 9:51am,” which I assume would be the approximate date it was written. We received a copy here quite some time ago, back before anyone here had ever heard of this forum. It was not, in other words, a product of the current persecution, but in fact predated it by over a decade. The document presented unedited and in its entirety. It was not originally distributed as an e-mail. A brother in Indianapolis wrote the document and passed it onto a couple of more mature wives and mothers, who over a period of time wound up reading it, usually one-on-one, with most of the younger married women in the church. Male leaders equipping the older women so that they can in turn train the younger women is certainly a biblical model (Titus 2:3-5). It seemed the best way to handle the sensitive subject of sex in marriage. Second, a few brief comments from me: I think it will be obvious that the teaching is not coming from a legalistic mindset at all, but from a spirit of love and freedom. There are no rules, or even guidelines; there is only a heart-level attitude presented. Clearly no one is controlling the private life of another here. It should be equally obvious that a very positive view of sex in marriage is presented, one that I would not hesitate to recommend to any married believer. The application of these teachings in your own situation is of course something left to your own conscience. Finally, I can state with a clear conscience that this teaching, not distortions that some have slanderously alleged, gives the genuine flavor of our views on the subject, both in the church I belong to and in Indiana. I have lived in the Columbus area for twenty-seven years. I have known Mike P. for the last seventeen of them. I have been a part of our church here since its birth over a decade ago. Folks, I believe that makes me an “insider.” I tell you, the reader—and if you were in front of me, I would look you straight in the eye and tell you out loud—that I have never heard any other view of Christian sexuality taught within our church or by our friends in Indiana. We often quote Jesus’ promise that He would give His disciples a hundred-fold increase in brothers, sisters, fathers, and mothers (Matthew 19:29), but we have also often noted that Jesus did not say a hundred husbands or wives! We hold that relationship to be unique, in part for the reasons described in the following paper. And I also testify that I have never heard it even suggested that withholding sex is an acceptable “tool” for a wife to control a husband’s behavior (or vice versa, for that matter). That, folks, is my experience. Now for the paper. As always, I welcome any comments, questions, discussion, or constructive criticism at saved_by_grace@wowway.com. Responses made directly to this forum likely won’t reach me. Dan “Repent—and be refreshed! Acts 3:19” Zeigler   onetimeposter Junior Member Username: onetimeposter Post Number: 42 Registered: 3-2006 Posted From: 140.254.233.240 Posted on Wednesday, September 27, 2006 - 1:54 pm:        Dearest Sisters in Christ, I feel the need to offer a thought or two about a subject that we seldom discuss. Though Paul seldom discussed money or sex, and we have followed his lead, there were times when he unashamedly offered guidance in these two areas. This discussion is NOT about money. The odds are fairly high that, if you are married and female, you have a particular battle of one magnitude or another on your home front. You, more than likely, are not as desirous of sex with your husband as he is, and his wishes about the frequency of physical expressions of love are very different than yours. This is not always the case -- sometimes the roles are very reversed, or on rare occasions, God fools us by allowing the desires of the two to actually match! That spoils some of the fun, however, of learning to be like Jesus, so it is rare. I would like to offer you a challenge in Christ. Understand that while physical expressions of love in the realm of sex are NOT the basis of a relationship (of course), it is designed by God Himself to be a powerful OIL to lubricate the marriage and relationship. Just as oil in an engine keeps the imperfections of the parts from tearing each other up, and keeps the constant contact of the parts from wearing each other down and overheating at a critical time, so also God created sex to do the same to your relationship with your mate. Do NOT resent it, but celebrate that God has given this strange thing to allow you to lubricate your imperfections in other areas and keep your constant contact with your husband from being destructive rather than constructive. A scenario that I feel as if I should ask you to soberly consider, from another time and place, is this. A wife had little interest in sex, and considered her husband to have a selfish lack of control and an insensitive, inconsiderate desire for sex. She could "easily live with two or three times per month" (in her mind, because she was so spiritually minded, and didn't need this vice to help her to communicate). He, on the other hand, would have been content with physical fulfillment of one sort or another if it had been, perhaps, five times per week. A huge gap in preferences. She initiated little or nothing, because she felt like he was pressing too hard anyway. It didn't need her to add to it. And, it would just "feed" his foolish desire anyway. And then, who knows where it would stop! So, she very seldom initiated. And, "stuck to her guns" that this was his problem and her view of proper frequency was fine. There was often tension. If not vocalized, there was a war going on within him of knowing how much trouble it would stir up if he expressed himself. So, he tried as hard as he could to only mention his desires and needs on the rare occasions that he felt like she could receive it without it causing a fight. Of course, there were many times where he got frustrated and lashed out "for his rights" and drove her further away from wanting to serve him in this way.   onetimeposter Junior Member Username: onetimeposter Post Number: 43 Registered: 3-2006 Posted From: 140.254.233.240 Posted on Wednesday, September 27, 2006 - 1:56 pm:        It wasn't until she realized the Purpose for which God, in His imponderable Wisdom, created sex that she was able to restore the life and love to her relationship with her man. She had never viewed it as "oil" for lubricating OTHER areas of the marriage, but only as a thing in itself (that she didn't have a great interest in, as her "selfish" husband did). She hadn't truly appreciated what she had, and had taken him for granted. The "price" of fulfilling him, beyond what he could ask for or imagine, was unnecessary, in her mind. Until he gave up and she lost his heart for her. Whatever else could be said to him about his attitudes along the way, she would be quick to tell you now how this unusual invention of God called sex is a wonderful gift to heal many other areas of life. And while her personal desires weren't there (initially), she blessed her husband with creative, loving attention (absolutely nothing "kinky" or evil) with freshness and frequency. She would tell you now, years later, that it was perhaps the best decision she ever made (and is still making) as an investment in their love and relationship. It was, in contrast to the terrible thought of losing her husband's heart, an easy decision. She only regretted that she came so dangerously close to breaking his spirit and tempting him beyond what he could bear. Certainly, he needed to learn to love and exercise restraint at times, and not to act impulsively to feed his flesh whenever it cried out. But she learned that she could ask him to be careful of that, and that he would pray. God would help him keep that in check, along with her gentle reminders at times. But they didn't need to war any longer. And she didn't have to be the one to "fix" him and "safeguard" him from selfishness. He really would take loving reminders and pray. And she could initiate and love on him to the extent that he was so secure that she could say anything to him and he would hear her. That's all of the story that I have time for at the moment, but I'm hopeful and prayerful that this will encourage each of you to greatness in your marriages, in God's Sight and by His Spirit. For His Glory and Liberty, Love, a brother   amazed_one New member Username: amazed_one Post Number: 18 Registered: 3-2006 Posted From: 69.47.8.77 Posted on Wednesday, September 27, 2006 - 2:44 pm:        I have not returned here to continue our previous discussion. In a paper by F. W. Grant from over a century ago a point that is relevant to this antaginization is made. Grant says, “For instance, if you take the gospel of God, where does it derive its authority and power from? From any sanction of men? Any human credentials of any kind? Or from its own inherent power? I dare maintain that the common attempt to authenticate the messenger takes away from, instead of adding to, the power of the Word. God’s Word must be received as such, as God’s own Word. He that receives it testifies that God is true. Its power to redeem the heart and conscience is derived from the fact that it is "God’s good news." He knows perfectly what man needs, and He has provided for it perfectly. Whoever has known its power to change lives also knows good and well from whom it comes. The work and witness of the Spirit of God in the soul need no witness of man to supplement them.” I share this to offer to anyone who may come across this string that desires truth, an option beyond allowing the word of humans they do not know, authority they do not have (my postings here fall into the same category). As quoted from Grant above; “I dare maintain that the common attempt to authenticate the messenger takes away from, instead of adding to, the power of the Word.” It only follows that the also common (purpose here) to de-authenticate the messenger serves only the same purpose. The reality is that the Word of God is its own authority. We can experience that as free men as we freely choose to put into practice the teachings of Jesus where we are as we discover them. We will learn whether some teaching is from God as we apply it to our very own lives (John 8:31-32). I have found the teachings that are generated out of a physical place on planet earth through physical men alive today being slandered here (specifically Mike and Dan) to carry the authority of the Word of God as I faithfully apply them to my life. Neither Mike nor Dan would desire that I attempt to vindicate them here. That is not what I am attempting. I am attempting to appeal to those of you reading this string (and any other published attacks against specific humans) to humbly go before God with the things you here that appear to be true and ask His mercy as you attempt to put those teachings into practice. As you do that I encourage you to be particularly sensitive to that clarification of the one from whom it comes. In these last days there will be “many who gather around themselves a great number of teachers who say what their itching ears want to hear.” “But the people who know their God will firmly resist (them).” Test the Spirit by LIFE. Enjoy the ride&#61514;   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 67 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Wednesday, September 27, 2006 - 8:39 pm:        The thought just occurred to me last week that any neutral person who is looking on factnet about indy teaching, is probably already suspicious to some degree. So for those who are trying to use buckets to save the titanic, your point of failure in not factnet. It is the FACT that people are already suspicious of the teaching and the group being a cult. And another thing, when I was a Peterite, I did not use logic. We “died to self”. Which in cult language means, when something doesn’t make sense and there are red flags, IGNORE THEM. Does anyone know of a logical Peterite?   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 248 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Wednesday, September 27, 2006 - 9:42 pm:        I believe this is the appropriate time to post some vital information. If I didn’t know from whence some of the words in the above posts came, I might think this “sounds” very Christian. Considering the fact that I and many others here (who have testified to the inner workings of the Indy group and affiliates) have been slandered by being labeled slanderers and about every other type of evil, I wish to submit for the public 3 peoples (the author/editors of "The Kingdom of the Cults") perspectives that most likely have never been affiliated with Mike Peters in any way. Unless Mike thinks he can successfully project slander on these people, they are considered by many to have respected and proven insight regarding the working of today’s American cults. One of the chapters is called "The Language Barrier" showing us that cults have "their own definitions" for Christian words. For the sake of searching Christians, please consider the wisdom, insight, and decades of experience these people have had regarding cult activity and discerning it subtleties and traps. As you can observe through their studies and research, “all cults claiming” to be of the Christian faith will speak a language that “sounds” Christian to catch the searching Christians thoughts unaware. But, as the truth is uncovered you find they know what this language means to you and they know its redefined definitions as learned in their inner workings and how it is “really” played out in their practices. Of which “of course” the adherents in a cult will “always” deny. If you haven’t read through this material presented here yet, I wish to offer to the Christian public a great book revealing common traits and practices of this past centuries American cults. They are not all the same but all fall into some key similarities. There are some excerpts from the book called “The Kingdom of the Cults” by Walter Martin posted at: http://noahlot.blogspot.com/2006/09/kingdom-of-cults.html Consider the following link as well, if you will: http://www.waltermartin.org/ Also, as touching another pertinent issue, you may wish to consider Steve Camps insight regarding Christians suing Christians: http://stevenjcamp.blogspot.com/2006/09/boy-named-suechristians-suing.html As we have heard numerous times that Mike has threatened Christians with law suits. Submitted to the Bereans of “The Truth of the Gospel”, Denny couthy68@yahoo.com   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 166 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Thursday, September 28, 2006 - 11:13 pm:        To Readers At Home: A quick excerpt from the AllAtHisFeet web site, very relevant to this forum and with a few words and phrases I took the liberty of adding or bolding to apply it a little "closer to home" here...: We've somehow created this "wax museum Jesus" out there somewhere, where you wind Him up or you pull His string and He says things, but it doesn't mean anything. If anybody said any of those words today (eg. "hate your family members"), there would be people all over the world screaming, "Legalism, legalism!" But this IS Jesus. This is the only Jesus there is. And He's not being legalistic. And He is not a hard master. To that man, at that moment, there was no other Hope. Everyone's "one thing you lack" may be different. The "rich young ruler" had a problem with money addictions, apparently, rather than biological family addictions that Jesus said others would have to deal with. God is neither "anti-money," nor "anti-family relationships" -- if those issues are totally under His Lordship in all areas of obedience and affection and decision. Jesus is ANTI anything and everything that would cause a person to not instantly obey Him because their heart-strings and prejudices and comforts and pride are tied up in anything less than HIM, in this present fallen age. He is saying that if you don't live this way, then satan will get his hook in you and you will be uprooted. This isn't legalism. This is grace. "I'm giving you an opportunity. I'm extending My hand to you. I'm bringing Truth into your life that can set you free from the bondage of fear, self-indulgence, the fear of death, the fear of storms, the fear of poverty, the fear of sickness, the fear of loss of loved ones." And if you won't live this way, you will be uprooted. Because satan will find a way to destroy you. If you give him any targets that are uncovered by the grace and the knowledge of God, and a total commitment to Him, and death to self-life ("take up YOUR cross and come after Me" and "deny your very self" and "even unto death") -- if you give him any targets, satan will find you out and he will rip you off.   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 167 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Thursday, September 28, 2006 - 11:16 pm:        This is not legalism! Jesus is not legalistic as some would quickly call Him if He was physically saying these things to them about areas of their lives they had held back from Him. Jesus is NOT legalistic when He says you must forsake your heart's affections and priorities other than HIM. He just knows how this "wicked and perverted generation" can deceive any man or woman or teen who thinks they can "have their cake, and eat it to" (as has been our experience, first-hand, with the dissenters here in this forum on more than one occasion -- why do think THEY "scream" as mentioned above?) It will, instead, eat THEM. Notice the language of Jesus -- not "legalism" but, "I am telling you that I know how this whole thing works! Hear Me! You can't grab for the world and your self life and desires and crutches and comforts, and not be eventually taken to My enemy's home. This is JESUS saying, "Don't build this tower without counting the cost. Don't go into this thing without knowing that it is going to cost you everything in order to make it all the way through." That's the nature of Christianity. "You can't follow me. You won't be able to continue to follow me without this." That's not legalism. He's saying you won't make it unless this is who you are and want to be. Anyone can sit in a pew, or living room (or on your oh-so-fine-sounding "blog"), and deceive themselves (and try and deceive everyone else) with pretty prayers and speeches and ideas (and blog entries full of "scriptures") and potluck dinners. But, a LIFE that isn't fully given to Him (which is fairly easy to spot, and some here haven't LIKED that!!!), with all of its affections and priorities, all of its time and resources and loves, consumed in HIS Purposes, rather than its own -- this person has or will fail. Thus saith the Lord. "This must be the quality of your decision to follow me--that you'll leave it all." (Posted without reading another single word here since I don't have the time for it right now.) -ChrisO   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 168 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Thursday, September 28, 2006 - 11:23 pm:        To Readers At Home On the silly little (but very wicked) accusation by GottaPost and Cult_Fighter (and Tim Szaz at one point) regarding the "Do Not Solicit" stickers that is being discussed in here in such a way as to make people in Indy look "weird"... The city I moved into last -- a city of about 50,000 residents, and a suburb of a major metropolitan area, considered an "alluential part of town" by some -- gives every single person who moves into this city the same kind of stickers which say pretty much the same thing to be affixed in our doors, if we choose. And I know of thousands of middle-class and affluent home owners associations all over this country that do the same thing. So... Not a "weird" thing by any stretch when city and urban planners all over the country think it's a good idea and that their residents just might want to exercise their legal right to do such a thing. Just one more example of how the evil people in here will go to any lengths to phrase and frame things in such a way as to get (demand? yep...) you to see things their way (or else they will pull their little ol' "we'll call you a cult!" guns out and try and terrorize you into seeing it their way -- notice how anyone is treated here who even dares to side with the accused in this forum.) Alrighty... That's all for now. -ChrisO   cult_fighter Member Username: cult_fighter Post Number: 70 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 4.225.16.161 Posted on Thursday, September 28, 2006 - 11:46 pm:        Dan (Onetimeposter), I love and respect you, but I have to make a few comments about your "sex is beautiful in the Peters community" articles. Perhaps there ARE wonderful marriages inside the Indy group -- that is IF both husband and wife are submitting to Mike Peters and his teachings. Maybe Dan doesn't know this, but IF the husband falls out of favor with Mike, by the testimony of now 7 different husbands, their wives ARE withholding -- not only marital sex, but also love, affection, respect, submission, eye contact, and even prayer. It is bad enough when a wife (who says she loves Jesus) disregards all Biblical teaching and withholds from her God-given husband. But it is especially HORRID when another man is sending her secret emails -- openly advising her to withhold all love (including sex) from HER husband! THIS is what Mike Peters does to the marriages under his control! In one such email, for example, Mike told a wife to NOT hold hands with her husband. I'm sorry, Dan, but THAT doesn't sound like a healthy sex life to me!   gottapost2 New member Username: gottapost2 Post Number: 5 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 193.226.6.137 Posted on Friday, September 29, 2006 - 5:20 am:        I've posted 7 points which no one denies, they only yell "foul." Cult_fighter has brought up two very legit points or questions in the course of this dialog. 1) Mike Peters can't name 3 churches in Indianapolis that would stand with them in supporting his teaching. 2) What about these "secret emails" and encouraging women to withhold affection from their husbands? So far, there have been no denials... only ad hominem attacks.   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 68 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Friday, September 29, 2006 - 8:21 am:        In westerville, if you ask the neighbors of the Peterites,they will tell you that they never see families walking together. It is always males with males and females with females. As Elizabeth stated, they take pride in the fact that visitors don't know who is married to who. I know when I met them I couldn't tell this. There is a leader there that spends way more time with the ladies than his own wife.   first_truth New member Username: first_truth Post Number: 21 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 80.237.173.67 Posted on Friday, September 29, 2006 - 8:36 am:        Gottapost & Cultfighter have excelent points. 1 Tim 3:2,3 "Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money." 1) Is Mike Peters above reproach? After reading all the cries here in this forum from people who have had there lives and families turned inside out, can anyone say that Mike Peters is above reproach? I think not. Simply put, "The Emperor (Mike Peters) has no clothes." 2) "husband of but one wife" Mike IS legally married to ONE wife, however if a husband falls out of grace with the "group" NOT because of gross SPECIFIC unrepented sin, but because he maintains his own identify or is not 100% pro-PETERS then Mike and others will speak evil of this person and even state that "He is not a Christian" thus destroying the respect and honor his wife once held for her husband. Once this is done then Mike will have secret communications with his wife as "issues" arise in the marriage. This will include text pages, emails, phone, and long person to person conversations. For the husband it is as though there is another man living in his household taking his role as husband, her heart is now given to another. In this regard Mike Peters is on the heals of violating this particular qualification and command by emotionally flirting with other men’s wives and taking away the husbands roles by slandering the women's husband such that she does not trust him anymore. How do I know these things? Because this happened to me and I know other men where the same exact thing happened!!! 3) "temperate, self-controlled, respectable" Regarding these... I have witnessed Mike's "loose cannon" way of dealing with people. He is far from the temperate and self-controlled. As for respectable, whoa, do I need to say anything about Mike's respectability? 4) "hospitable" Regarding the sign, not sure of the exact text but IF it states something like this "If your not invited your not welcome" this flies in the face of the command to be hospitable and against Jesus' words Matt25:35 ..."I was a stranger and you invited me in..." Seven points from Gottapost: http://www.factnet.org/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=3&post=341319#POST341319   scannyd New member Username: scannyd Post Number: 10 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Friday, September 29, 2006 - 9:03 am:        If Dan and others are so sure that this withholding of affection does not occur why don't they ask the people that are in this process right now. I know Dan knows of at least one family this is happening to right now. He could even ask Elizabeth about this subject. So why is he posting emails that have nothing to do with our point? I mean I really do "know" why but it is a rhetorical question. Hey Dan let's stay on topic.   getagrip Intermediate Member Username: getagrip Post Number: 258 Registered: 6-2005 Posted From: 72.64.223.38 Posted on Friday, September 29, 2006 - 12:34 pm:        "What about these "secret emails" and encouraging women to withhold affection from their husbands?" Let's see one of the alleged emails... JD   cult_fighter Member Username: cult_fighter Post Number: 71 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 40.0.40.10 Posted on Friday, September 29, 2006 - 12:43 pm:        I'm in the process of asking the victimized husbands for permission to post some of these emails (with names removed). But look above and you'll see that First_Truth was such a victim. Secondly, the Peterites do NOT deny that Mike has done this. They can't deny it because they know it's true! Mike Peters, "the man who sends secret emails to other men's wives", can't deny it because he knows he'd be caught in a lie.   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 253 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Friday, September 29, 2006 - 3:04 pm:        It seems so very odd that NONE of all of those who have been defending Mike Peters have cared enough to defend him against the allegations of Mike sending secret emails to OTHER men's wives. (Except for Chris who isn't even a part of Indy...) This is very weird in our opinion and we think a simple response to this from them may help. They have proven, by saying so many OTHER things, that they are out to defend Mike and themselves. How about this matter of "wives influenced by Mike to withhold emotional and physical affection from THEIR husbands while he flatters them with his affection for OTHERS wives?" HOW HARD IS THIS QUESTION FOR "THE Church in Indianapolis"? It seems so very simple to defend if there is nothing to hide. Denny and Jen   getagrip Intermediate Member Username: getagrip Post Number: 259 Registered: 6-2005 Posted From: 72.64.223.38 Posted on Friday, September 29, 2006 - 3:35 pm:        Fine, I've read what you've stated. Now, let's take a look at one of the alleged emails. PS Who cares if they do or don't defend something? Why be so insistent on communicating with them, they've made it clear that they won't dialogue on Factnet. Let's see the emails   fellow2 Junior Member Username: fellow2 Post Number: 31 Registered: 6-2006 Posted From: 64.228.102.68 Posted on Friday, September 29, 2006 - 4:29 pm:        It would be nice to hear from Mike Peters himself on this, and perhaps he could answer in a simple 'yes or no' statement. Mike Peters, is it indeed your practice to send out these "secret emails" to these married wives in your commune and encourage them to withhold affection from their husbands? And do you consider this your God-given right as some kind of "apostle" or "over-seer" over other sovereign individuals? As far as I know, God does not delegate authority to destroy marriages like you have done. There is only one who comes to steal, kill and destroy - and that would be Satan. Theophilos   getagrip Intermediate Member Username: getagrip Post Number: 260 Registered: 6-2005 Posted From: 72.64.223.38 Posted on Saturday, September 30, 2006 - 5:40 am:        Wouldn't it be a lot easier to simple post the emails? I don't think this "And do you consider this your God-given right as some kind of "apostle" or "over-seer" over other sovereign individuals?" is a fair question, unless you know for sure that this "Mike Peters, "the man who sends secret emails to other men's wives", can't deny it because he knows he'd be caught in a lie" is true.   gottapost2 New member Username: gottapost2 Post Number: 6 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 83.171.172.114 Posted on Saturday, September 30, 2006 - 8:39 am:        Mr Grip, yes it would, if it were that simple. I imagine some people will refrain posting these emails to prevent bigger riffs in their families. Mike and the other 3 CII apologists' silence on his secret emails to other men's wives is deafening. Instead they call names and superimpose mythical characters onto -->certain people<--- Mike Peters teaches (yourkingdomcome.com/allaffection.html): "I want to encourage you to understand that withholding your affection is actually a tool in God's toolbox" and Mike continues to say "If this brother continued to sin, whether in slander, gossip, immorality, or something else, he was not to be associated with" and " everyone who won't listen to Jesus will be completely cut off." Substitute *Mike* or *The Church* with "Jesus" and there you have it. VERY IMPORTANT: Notice the word "slander" and the phrase "something else?" Dan illustrates the tCII mindset's definition of "persecution" as criticism of their church. If dialogue from this website is persecution, IMAGINE HOW LITTLE it takes to be viewed as slanderous. "Something else" is ANY molehill they (tCII leaders or wannabe's) wish to make into a mountain. This happened to me and to my shame I did it to others with Mike's approval and directive. I've heard Mike justify his council by comparing the offender to a pervert, kidnapper, pedophile, or murderer. It is a straw man comparison. Now that I'm "out", I see his straw man arguments all throughout his writings. - gottapost@dodgeit.com   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 254 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Sunday, October 01, 2006 - 12:46 am:        Well, I'm glad to say that I have received my copy of the 2003 version of "The Kingdom of the Cults" by Walter Martin, edited by Ravi Zacharias. I will be posting more excerpts on this book on my blog over time. The following is a quote from Ravi in the General Editor's Introduction: "Of one thing we can be sure: Where we find truth, often in close proximity we also find a way of thinking that distorts and faults. In fact, the philosophical method of the central figures in cults is to take a partial truth--such as a verse used as a proof-text--and blend it with an untruth so that the mix has the appearance of interpretation but in reality is systematically false. Hence we encounter cults that stray from the teachings of Christ by adding other requirements to the Gospel of grace, or by claiming a new revelation or "more accurate word from God," or by exercising inordinate control over its followers." Considering the fruit of Mike Peters teachings, may we ponder the above quote as we look at some particular Scriptures references: Mt 10:29-30 So Jesus answered and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My sake and the gospel’s, “who shall not receive a hundredfold now in this time—houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions—and in the age to come, eternal life. James 5:16a “Confess your trespasses to one another...” Just to name a couple that have been severely twisted to fit the gospel according to Mike Peters and the meetings in Mike’s kingdom. I would encourage those who have not read “The Kingdom of the Cults” to consider it. If you believe yourself to be potentially vulnerable to a cult (and we all can be) this is a must read for today. May God bless your understanding of “The Truth of the Gospel” to have victory over the Kingdom of the Cults. Here is their link: http://www.waltermartin.com/whatsnew.html Denny (Message edited by speakingtruth on October 01, 2006)   cult_fighter Member Username: cult_fighter Post Number: 72 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 4.225.111.246 Posted on Sunday, October 01, 2006 - 1:00 am:        Denny, Does "Kingdom of the Cults" mention any cults where the leader meddles in other men's marriages? Any mention of secret correspondence between the leader and other men's wives? Just wondering.   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 169 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Monday, October 02, 2006 - 2:46 pm:        To Readers At Home: Only back for a bit since I'm working two jobs and just don't have the time right now to spin my wheels with the spiritual brood of vipers in here that just will not be deterred from the lynching in here, no matter what. (Someone mentioned how "we" are always right, and it's never dawned on them yet that the attitude on the part of the accusers in here represents exactly that, but I'm used to the "rules of engagement" in here and have been for a while. Nothing "sticks" the other way... But oh well. Real life goes on.) I dropped back in to point this out and see if it makes any sense to anyone out there (since it will not to anyone in here.) GottaPost pukes out: I've known Mike Peters for more than a decade I've never heard Mike offer one apology for anything -- that's not to suggest he never has, just that I've never heard it. (emphasis mine) And that my friends, is a prime example of the utter arrogance, pride, and pompous entitlement that is going on in here and has been going on in here for a long time. Can you imagine someone with the coothe to say something like that? That because he has never heard it, then it's never happened? That's arrogance to the max and the exact kind of arrogance I've been talking about and why most of the people in here were asked to leave. You can't live with or work with that kind of arrogance. That above all things defines slander -- when someone makes accusations about someone in the middle of admitted absence of proof. That's pride to the max, GottaPost, to assume that ANYONE needs to confess to YOU in order to prove that they do!!! That's what I mean when I say you accuse Mike of the very things you yourself are guilty of, even if he were as well. More later if and when I can get around to it. (As GetAGrip so aptly points out again, assuming I or anyone else is following this thread or investing alot in it at this point, is again ludicrious and arrogance to the max, as I've point out before. Just because there is "no answer" doesn't mean that there isn't AN answer. And as if anyone in here deserved to hear it??? Or even could really "hear" it??? Some of you mockers in here have been mocking God and the people in Indianapolis for YEARS... which is why you were left alone to go believe whatever you want to believe and live. Do you actually think you have the right to come back later and demand answers like this??? You were left to believe whatever you want to believe and will continue to be left to do so, just as Jesus did to those who didn't believe Him. Those that want to handle things God's way -- without the accusations and white KKK masks over your faces in here -- can write Indy and find out. Those with humble hearts are generally answered...) -ChrisO   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 69 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 88.191.12.12 Posted on Monday, October 02, 2006 - 4:25 pm:        ChrisO, Obviously, you are not a part of a local peterite cult. Maybe the brainwashing has made you think you are doing the right thing in this forum. I love you Chris, please don't come back on factnet and change the subject again. We were discussing Mike's secret emails to wives concerning the husbands or vice versa. (Message edited by danrepent on October 02, 2006)   cult_fighter Member Username: cult_fighter Post Number: 73 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 40.0.40.10 Posted on Monday, October 02, 2006 - 5:59 pm:        Chris says: Just because there is "no answer" doesn't mean that there isn't AN answer. Chris, put up or shut up!! Do you HAVE an answer to why Mike sends secret emails to other men's wives?? Another question, Mr. Chris Olive: What if someday Mr.Peters starts sending secret emails to Mrs.Olive? Will THAT be OK with you? What if Mr.Peters is telling Mrs.Olive to withhold love from Mr.Olive? Still OK with you? Your silence on this is DEAFENING, Chris!!!   gottapost2 New member Username: gottapost2 Post Number: 7 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 128.252.87.92 Posted on Monday, October 02, 2006 - 11:50 pm:        Despite that ChrisO's "inveighs are both immoral and perhaps illegal" (quoting Mike), I recall chrisO to be a nice, talented, guy and so with his family too. I wasn't aware of any "issues" with him. Though I was never a neighbor of his and never lived in his city in OH, my thoughts of him remain that he's a smart, witty guy. When I was told of his "disfellowship" I was somewhat dismayed. I was never told why, just that "Chris isn't doing well these days." That's what they say. I hope Mike Peters never sends secret messages to Chris's wife, or your wife (or husband), or counseling you that your spouse is worse than an infidel, thief, or murder. It seems obvious from which direction the rifts and destruction are coming. They have a saying in Indy among, especially among the leaders, "when you've seen me, you've seen Mike." I hope that's not Chris's aspirations.   getagrip Intermediate Member Username: getagrip Post Number: 262 Registered: 6-2005 Posted From: 67.78.1.226 Posted on Tuesday, October 03, 2006 - 10:41 am:        "when you've seen me, you've seen Mike."... No way, people actually say this?   gottapost2 New member Username: gottapost2 Post Number: 10 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 81.169.155.246 Posted on Tuesday, October 03, 2006 - 3:01 pm:        Getagrip, Here's their logic: Jesus said, "when you've seen Me you've seen the Father." So Mike taught (and Nick, Kevin, and leading women championed the teaching), "When you've seen them, you've seen me." "We being many are ONE Body... THIS is how all men will know you are MY disciples!" and "If you've seen me, you've seen Dave, or Jeff, or John?" Surely our cohesiveness as One Body is directly dependent". These are quotes from references below. The mingling of scripture with Mikespeak happens so often that one begins not to know the difference. In various contexts (challenges, confrontations or teaching reinforcements) members would say "well, when you've seen me you've seen Mike." IMO, this ushered in anti-identity/anti-individualism culture among the church. Underlings drop this phrase as gentle as a spiked gauntlet; it seemed an effective lording-over technique. Since members (and supporters) perceive other's testimonies (such as on FACTnet) as slander against Mike, it is slander against them too. This shared personalization is why it's so hard for [even former] members to objectively digest any criticism of Mike or his teaching. I would bet there are families of tCII members reading this factnet who've heard this same "when-you've-seen-me-you've-seen-me" line. While I hate to plug Mike's websites, here are the references for the quotes above (ctrl-f for 'seen me'): "The City Church" - http://yourkingdomcome.com/28.html "Unity in the Faith" - http://yourkingdomcome.com/apostolicfoundations2.html Holiness - What's that - http://yourkingdomcome.com/holiness.html "Trivial Life example" - http://yourkingdomcome.com/triviallifeexample.html (Message edited by gottapost2 on October 03, 2006)   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 170 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Tuesday, October 03, 2006 - 11:31 pm:        "Cult_Fighter": Let me just say this for now and make this as clear as I can: YOU are the one in here DEMANDING and TELLING people "what to do." (Whereas Mike is accused of this, and to be honest with you all, Mike works so hard to make sure he's not telling ANYONE "what to do" that he's actually aggrevating sometimes. Here's a leader that should be "leading" and he won't "do it" the way people sometimes want him to -- THAT'S how hard he works to not TELL and DEMAND and I've never, ever seen him act the way people in here do EVER. Not even CLOSE.) I would sooner zip my mouth and allow the entire world to believe the accusations and out and out lies in here than to be goaded by your SATANIC DEMANDS into "answering" anything for you or anyone else in here. Again, let's make this one thing clear, clear, CLEAR: You, nor anyone else in here, represents any real AUTHORITY -- neither civil nor spiritual -- to be DEMANDING answers from ANYONE. You all have chosen your own ways, you were allowed to go the way you wanted in peace and you are in no position to demand ANYTHING. IS THAT CLEAR??? This is a public forum, and as long as I am not breaking the rules of this forum, I am free to post here when I want, how I want, and when I decide it's appropriate or not. The way you and others act in here -- coming in here DEMANDING answers is so decided unChristlike -- it defies description. And let me make this clear as well, so everyone understands (at least reading -- the spiritual snakes like yourself and others in here aren't likely to "get this", but...) that this has absolutely NOTHING to do with "Indy": I wouldn't care if this was the Mormon church you were accusing and slandering and DEMANDING your childish and evil, manipulative, arm-twisting "put up or shut up" answers from. This is America, people are free to choose and worship and believe whatever they WANT to believe. And to allow others to do so as well -- go their own way and believe whatever they WANT to believe without fear of reprisals, slander, bitter retribution, revenge (over not getting your way or nt understanding things), malcontent, abuse, and other forms of religious persecution as you ALL were allowed and encouraged to do. That's GOD'S view -- that's how Jesus operated, and that's our country's view. Clear?? Now: CAN IT with your insidiously evil and lying, insinuative demands.   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 171 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Tuesday, October 03, 2006 - 11:36 pm:        I've already investigated these ridiculous, outrageous claims which I already knew to be false, and I know what you snakes are up to and what you've "blow out of proportion" again. In the interest of other people's lives, which you guys "pretend" to care about, but actually DO NOT (as I said, nothing is too diabolical in here, as long as it fits the predetermined end), there may or may not be an explanation given. But... To Those Reading At Home: Let's just say that for now, it's absolutely sickening considering the details I know about -- which doesn't surprise me in the least since I already know a lot about the spiritual thugs in here ANYWAY -- that someone would dare to twist things as they have. Mike has never, EVER done what he is accused of here. (And GetAGrip, there is very, very, very good reason why they haven't posted the "proof" yet...) Maybe more later, as I spend some time actually caring about these situations and seeing whether something is worth posting or not. Meanwhile, Cult_Fighter... Have a seat. You'll be waited on if and when others are ready. If you don't like the "service" in here, you are of course free to leave. But you, my friend, are in absolutely NO position to "demand" nor will anyone "cower" to you or "bow down to" your "demands" (which is ironically very germane to your spiritual condition both in the past and presently and just why you are where you are right now and why your life has turned out the way that it has...) -ChrisO   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 172 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Tuesday, October 03, 2006 - 11:46 pm:        PS. And notice how I will most certainly be attacked and called "arm-twisting" for my last post whereas those on the "prosecution" side can say, and phrase, and DEMAND whatever they want with "put up or shutup" phrases and absolutely NOTHING was said then. The POINT (aside from the fact GottaPost, DanRepent, Cult_Fighter and others in here are lying through their teeth) is that this is a free and open forum, and a Godly church is being put ON TRIAL IN HERE without "due process of law" -- which is again a right we are supposed to have as citizens (and these snakes KNOW that that isn't going to happen), and the strong-arming is entirely inappropriate. But these "rabid animals" (Jude, 2 Peter 2) in here are dying to sink their teeth into the kill... Nobody has to put up with this and it will not be put up with... One day the KKK white masks in here are going to come off you will stand completely bared... -co   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 255 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 2:43 am:        >>>Meanwhile, Cult_Fighter... Have a seat. You'll be waited on if and when others are ready. If you don't like the "service" in here, you are of course free to leave. But you, my friend, are in absolutely NO position to "demand" nor will anyone "cower" to you or "bow down to" your "demands" (which is ironically very germane to your spiritual condition both in the past and presently and just why you are where you are right now and why your life has turned out the way that it has...)<<< Chris, you say this as if you know cultfighter. Do you? Or is this another gottapost or Denny thing where you THINK you know them, but really you don't? >>>(And GetAGrip, there is very, very, very good reason why they haven't posted the "proof" yet...)<<< I guess there must be a very good reason you didn't respond to gottapost's request to say his name?   getagrip Intermediate Member Username: getagrip Post Number: 263 Registered: 6-2005 Posted From: 72.64.223.38 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 5:13 am:        Well, that's simple. Chris/Wirk says you are lying about Mike Peters, cult fighter says he has seen proof. Until such time that I see these emails, Mike is "innocent" in the court of law that Wirk refers to from time to time. However, if Cultfighter produces the "smoking gun", then we will have a verdict in two areas, MP as well Wirk who has stated that these accusations are lies. Someone please email me when these emails hit Factnet, until then I think Ghandi said something quite appropriate here... It is said that Ghandi studied all of the world religions in depth and decided that Christianity was the one true religion... "I was about to become a Christian, and then I met one".   gottapost2 New member Username: gottapost2 Post Number: 11 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 149.9.0.56 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 9:17 am:        Here is an OFFICIAL public email to some man's wife from "Love, Mike" and it has another reference to that "not without my daughter" movie: http://yourkingdomcome.com/authority.htm Don't forget first_truth's testimony (above) along these lines: http://www.factnet.org/discus/messages/3/24476.html#POST342991 -gottapost@dodgeit.com   scannyd New member Username: scannyd Post Number: 11 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 9:33 am:        Thanks gottapost for researching this. Some here do not understand that it is hard for some of the people to bring out these letters because their families are still attached to the Peters mindset. They are trying to get them out and do not want to compromise it in any way. So maybe we should be praying for these families to be healed and then the letters can easily come out. Also in reading the above letter to this lady I wonder why isn't scripture used that directly applies to women? Why is it a non marriage scripture that is used here. See 1 Peter 3 1-6. 1Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, 2when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. 3Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. 4Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight. 5For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands, 6like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear. So where are all the conditions in God's word? I don't see it Mike. It sounds like you are condoning the exact opposite. That movie "Not Without My Daughter" keeps coming up too. I have heard from several women that they used this movie that has no bearing on a christian family. In fact the man is a muslim and he is very abusive. I would wager that most of these men are not abusive but are simply trying their hardest to get their wives to see the truth. The men that I have seen in this situation are doing that very thing. Danielle   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 70 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 85.25.141.60 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 3:04 pm:        I honestly wish things could be different. I wish Mike Peters would just admit his mistakes and move on with life. A simple, "I AM SORRY…" would be sufficient. But no, cults do not apologize and now we have to post the secret emails to wives... From Elizabeth who can not post on factnet (account issues)…. _______________________________________________________ Hello. This is Elizabeth Nelson. I am sorry that I cannot post this letter from Mike myself, so I've asked that it be posted for me. I decided to post it because I am so sad about all the marriages and families that have been torn to shreds by this group. I realize that Vince and I are not the best example of what happens with this group and how it destroys marriages because we had our own issues and don't blame them for everything. I know of others whose husbands weren't doing anything that could be brought against them besides disagreeing. I did not receive a lot of personal emails from Mike either, maybe five. I did not save them all. I was so full of irrational fears that were due to the false teachings of this group. I was also given the "Not Without My Daughter" movie w/ Sally Fields to watch. This really heightened my fears. Mike and others definitely exaggerated what was going on with my husband. He never even knew him, like Mike himself said he spent only moments with me and yet he can tell me that I should find a lawyer. My husband is not proud of the addiction he was battling, but he didn't deserve to be treated the way I treated him. I would follow him around the house making sure he wasn't alone with the children way before he fell into sin with p-rnography. I wouldn't let him be with his children for the simple fact he disagreed with the teachings and said I was in a cult. This is not all about what my husband did wrong. When we think about it now we know that we both were in sin. God did heal our marriage completely! Jesus taught me how to love and encourage my husband. God also helped Vince to forgive me too for all the hurt I caused him. I turned his children against him. This group teaches children to fear all outsiders. My children talk openly about this. Our children are doing wonderful now! They love and respect their father. Thanks to the Grace of God! We are so thankful to be together. If you have questions or comments... Enelson8735@yahoo.com (continued)   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 71 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 85.25.141.60 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 3:08 pm:        From Elizabeth who can not post on factnet (account issues)…. -----Original Message----- From: Elizabeth Nelson [mailto:enelson8735@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 3:07 AM To: mike@hisfeet.org Subject: about "spousal authority"... Hi, I don't know where to start (like usual). I found that "spousal authority" letter you wrote last year under my bed tonight. Then not two minutes later I opened up the "women's role" book and there it was again! Anyway, I needed to read it tonight. Vince got caught in the p**nography again a few weeks ago and since then it has been an all out war. He is afraid of losing the family/marriage so he has totally bullied me in a corner-- even almost taking them out of state w/out me to prove that he has the right to be with "his children" w/out my approval. I have been so full of fear (in many areas) but specifically that he will try to take the children and accuse me of being in a cult. He has used my mother in this (who already has her problems with me because she wants a relationship that i can't give to her) and she has stood with him. I talked to some ladies tonight and that was hard too. I will forward "notes" that Shelly typed out afterward. I am tired of being a wimp. I agree with what was said. I really don't know how to walk through this. Vince keeps accusing me of controlling when I protect the children and even just in directing them. There is something in his accusation that has shaken me. It's true I have not wanted him to be in control and he hasn't been until he got caught in sin and started blaming me. He says I've taken control over the house. What choice did i have? He has been gone and he's no leader. I know I need to protect the children, but I can't stop him from taking them again without a fight. I want to see why it shakes me. I feel sooo powerless. I feel like his tactics on saying he was taking them to Pennsylvania worked. I am BEGGING for a miracle!!!!!! I am asking God to forgive me and deliver me from the fear of man. I have to let go of what every person i know might think! I want to hear and obey! I have been afraid because I have nowhere to go. I want to tell you this and not fear the risk. I have been asking God since I found the computer stuff if i should stay or go. And i still don't know but i am asking God to make me completely willing. While no one has told me what to do i feel like in the conversation tonight it was encouraged to protect the children no matter what. On the same token it was said by someone that I haven't proven myself with Jesus so i couldn't stay with anyone of them. I am probably wrong to be offended but I am. I don't deny that so many selfish motives have been exposed for which i am so grateful to Him. But something about thinking I have to prove something to people is what i am trying to stay away from. I believe His timing is perfect in all of this. PLEEAASE rebuke, correct, shine light, etc. love, elizabeth (continued)   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 72 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 85.25.141.60 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 3:10 pm:        From Elizabeth who can not post on factnet (account issues)…. -----Original Message----- From: "mike" <mike@hisfeet.org> To: "'Elizabeth Nelson'" <enelson8735@yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 09:15:31 -0500 Subject: RE: about "spousal abuse and covenant-breaking betrayal"... Hi Liz........ I do understand the difficulties here, no doubt. The pain and confusion and unknowns can be quite anguishing, beyond question. You must TRUST Him that if you do your best for HIM, it will work out in the end. If someone told you "You must not murder" they would not be "telling you what to do" - but only reporting what God has said. In your many opportunities to murder someone, then, you should remember God's Command, and SPECIFICALLY CHOOSE those decisions, on your own, of how to apply that Truth. The same is true for "YOU MUST PROTECT THE CHILDREN." There are many specifics you must apply on your own to obey this Command from God. The Command to "not be worse than an infidel" by not protecting them, and the many other Scriptures are not "telling you what to do" -- but giving you GOD'S MANDATE for you. You'll have to figure out what that means, day to day. As for the "living situation" I'm sure they didn't mean to "insult" you, but just to point out that "the double minded woman is unstable in all her ways" and that unless you are "without wavering, fully persuaded" and not a "weak-willed woman" -- then you will vacillate and waver and be unstable, NO MATTER WHERE YOU LIVE. Perhaps you can find a "christian attorney" or someone who can tell you what you can legally do to protect yourself from a fornicating, abusive, child-napper, should you choose to do that? But, that's all up to you. I do know that even pagan women don't put up with the abusive situation, the covenant breaking betrayals, and "locking children in rooms away from their mother" and things you have tolerated. But, that's all up to you...... Regardless, PRAYING WITH YOU........ Love, mike   ultimatetruthseeker Member Username: ultimatetruthseeker Post Number: 74 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 82.166.49.237 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 7:02 pm:          wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 173 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 8:50 pm:        Wow. I can't believe you guys posted that letter, and that GottaPost posted that link on Mike's reply to another marriage situation. You guys are actually so drunk on your "witch hunt" that you think this actally proves your point, when in fact most pagans wouldn't even disagree with the advice Mike provided. For someone that was acting like Vince, the children did need to be protected. The only thing is that unfortunately, Liz is bold-faced lying about some of this. She was concerned that Vince would MOLEST the children -- it had absolutely nothing to do with "a cult" thing. And my understanding is that Vince did sit down with Mike once. I've found that for whatever reason, Liz, has chosen to "rewrite history" here a little bit when all that happened was others were reacting to her concern and alarm and not someone [Mike] "telling her what to do" and so-called "interfering." It's sad to see Liz lying here (again as she is on Tim Dennis' so-called "cult" site), but... that's her choice and her life. If she's "fine" now, great. Now for ALL YOU GUYS and for those reading at home. Those letters that were just posted is EXACTLY what we have been talkng about and NOT ONLY THAT, BUT... All the venomous SNAKES in here, accusing and persecuting this church for CARING about situations like that, have been GUILTY of the same kinds, level, and types of things, and DIDN'T WANT TO REPENT, but wanted to KEEP ON LIVING THAT WAY, and they simply weren't allowed to do those kinds of vile, perverted, dangerous, lawless (both according to the laws of the land and God's law) things and still call themselves "Christians." So they GOT MAD and here they are in here venting, fuming, accusing, slandering, lying, persecuting, and seeking revenge!!! I mean if this is what everyone is so worked up about, then I would be nearer to God to become a PAGAN than to following "teachings," sentiments, attitudes and actions of the pack of wolves in this forum. In every single case where these kinds of things have come to the attention of the authorities, THEY have expressed alarm, and in some cases, investigations took place, so seriously did even pagans take it (when they were even involved -- most of the time, everyone in here was protected from civil and media exposure and it was only considered, as in the case of Liz, when there was very, very high danger.) Now if the STATE takes this kind of stuff seriously WHAT IN THE WORLD IS THIS CHURCH BEING VILLIFIED FOR?????????   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 174 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 8:55 pm:        And two of the biggest "dissenters" in here -- Cult_Fighter and GottaPost -- are only upset with Indianapolis and Columbus because their wives at least have enough sense to see this kind of stuff for what it is too according to the Word of God (and not what "Mike said"), and their husbands -- who are absolute TYRANTS at home and SO unChristlike, uncaring, revolting, and unloving -- that pagan women would not put up with them. THIS HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH "FEMENISM" SINCE THEIR WIVES -- AND I KNOW THEM -- TRY HARD, HARD, HARD TO PLEASE AND BE SUBMISSIVE TO THESE UNCARING BEASTS whereas a pagan woman wouldn't put up with their shananegans and Mike has done nothing but push, push, PUSH these women back towards their husbands (as little as they deserve it, so PERVERTED is their idea of "submission" as well as other things "spiritual" in their minds, re-writing the scriptures to suit themselves -- it runs closer to all out totalitarian, Islamic rule). Now... Everyone reading at home, understand that the handful of "dissenters" in here are just upset because someone is willing to stand up to them and not take this garbage and also to try and help guide their wives in their situations around men who are so perverted with admitted porno addictions, prostitution, potential for child molestation (of their OWN CHILDREN), emotional battering and abuse, and the list goes on.... Now why Liz has chosen the path she's on now -- including her bold-faced lying (read her original letter and you can even read between the lines and see she definitely did have some "change of heart") -- is entirely her business. No one is "making" her do anything, and you can see from the letter Mike sent her that he didn't TELL her what to do, but only suggested something that anyone else like James Dobson or Billy Graham, any one of hundreds or perhaps thousands of other "christian counselers" would suggest: PROTECT THE CHILDREN if you suspect evil, filthy, perverted actions to be taken against them. Wow, wow, wow, I am just AMAZED that anyone would have a problem with ANYTHING that has recently been posted as "proof" of Mike's "withholding affection doctrine." If THAT'S what "being a cult is" then, so be it. (And let the reader consider, this has absolutely nothing to do with those so-called "10 Signs of a Cult" thing on Tim Dennis' so-called "cult" board.) Again, this is nothing but a forum full of a pack of wolves who protect and harbor these kinds of civil and spiritual perverts who didn't and apparently don't want to change and are even openly advocating their right to "children and family and 'legalized s-x'" while still living like pagan preverted animals, or why are they here beating up on Indy and Columbus??? Yes, "Cult_Fighter", by all means and a thousand times YES!!!!!! to answer your question: If I were immersed in pornography, an emotional tyrant at home, who was suspected of having potential and by my actions causing my own wife to suspect that I could molest my own children, then yes, yes, YES!!! I would want Mike or anyone else -- a pagan would be fine too!!! -- to write them instructing them to get away from me and stay away from me until I came out of the pig pen and came back to my senses!!! You are so evil and have been for YEARS!!!!!! Insinuating that the church there is advocating some evil "withholding affection" when it's a twisted and vengeful LIE on your part!!! You have been so VENGEFUL and SPITEFUL throughout the years.   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 175 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 9:00 pm:        Does the reader at home really need any more proof than what has been posted as "proof"???? Understand the pack of wolves and deceivers in here, okay? Dennis Elslager (SpeakingTruth) and his wife, Jen, who is guilty mainly of defending him, but also poking her unknowing and worldly wise nose into situations she can't understand and has no ackground on othe than what her angry and selfishly prideful and sinful husband has told her): Angry because he couldn't have his way in Indy and "be a leader" while in close proximity to selfish, evil and multiple sexual sins, not to mention his major and obvious pride, ambition, and self-exhaltation. He was essentially only asked to lay back for a while and let's see how things went with his then addiction, and he didn't like it. Period. That's all that is going on with him (and has been ever since -- he can't stand being confronted, nor can his wife see Dennis, herself, nor the other evil vipers in here properly). Tim Dennis (DanRepent): Never was in the church in Columbus. His 100% lying and evil scheming was completely revealed (follow the link below) and is a fraud, a liar, and a persecution ring-leader whose wife, Danielle, is simply in cahoots with him (for whatever reason): http://www.factnet.org/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=3&post=339683#POST339683 Cult_Fighter and GottaPost: You already read what I wrote above. These men are abosolute TYRANTS at home and are angry, mad, upset, and bitter that their wives cdon't agree with them but rather have the nerve and the where-withall to view sin properly while STILL tending to these creatures of instinct and trying to be loving submissive wives (who have been asked to please, please, please keep loving these men instead of the other way around as it's painted time and time and time again in here.) Scannyd and others: These people are along for the ride or are in behind-the-scenes cahoots with the others here for who knows what reason. "SOME will love the Truth and so be saved." And some, simply will not. Why? We don't always know "why" but JESUS said it would be that way and that people will get mad, form a vendetta, and ultimately MURDER those who DO love and obey the Truth. Scannyd is from Columbus and in cahoots with TIm Dennis and Danielle. "Fellow2" and others are scattered about in various places and upset about "visits denied" or whatever else -- their own pride (in being denied -- when the people in Indy have a right to deny visits to homes with families and children since that's all that is there is just "homes"), or their "thrill of the chase," power mongering, control, or what have you... Also see my original post where I told everyone here what these animals were made of a long, long time ago. We know because we've tried (hard!) to live with them: http://www.factnet.org/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=3&post=300538#POST300538   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 176 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 9:03 pm:        Let me finally say this: The innocent reader here should know that this thread and the biggotry of FactNet is here because of the jealous rage of a handful of people acting like many, most of which were disfellowship for heinous, unrepented of crimes against God that are repulsive even to most unBelievers, and some are criminally prosecutable for federal crimes of abuse against women and even children. This site is filled with bold faced lies and rewriting of history by those with unmentionable immoralities, carelessly and maliciously accusing the Blood of Jesus by accusing and lying against some who love Jesus with all their hearts and make no claims for themselves except faith in Jesus' Blood as atonement and the Scriptures as much abused, neglected, and disobeyed by modern attendance-based religion. For this "crime" of not desiring the FactNet crowd's unBiblical religion of family destruction -- 50% divorce rate and 75% loss of children and 80% involved in internet pornography -- for opposing these factnet guys' lives of such sin and defense of divorce and living lives of pornography and Lawlessness, we are villified. So be it. We wouldn't want what you "have" for any amount of persecution and biggotry and hate crimes you threaten. For the innocent reader, spend as much time as you want reading thousands of documents and listening to hundreds of available hours of audio and video of Life -- and you will find that there is no "control" or "legalism" of any kind there or in daily life amongst the Saints -- no matter what the liars here, out of jealousy and revenge motives, say here. "Test the spirits" YOURSELF. -ChrisO More materials to read, listen to and inspect here: http://www.AllAtHisFeet.com Their email: AllAtHisFeet@cs.com My email: WirklichMir144@yahoo.com   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 178 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 9:11 pm:        "In this world one must be like everybody else if he doesn't want to provoke scorn or envy or jealousy." --Mark Twain   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 179 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 9:53 pm:        A couple of followups: (1) Here's another email someone else sent me who was on copy for an email Mike sent to Liz concerning the tragedy in her house. So you all can SEE "how" and "what" Mike writes "other women" (while very evily and despicably TWISTING it -- Cult_Fighter and GottaPost -- and leaving out the dark, evil, wicked stuff going on inside those homes.) Hi Elizabeth... Much prayer and love for you in Jesus. Unfortunately, out of 7 billion people on the planet and Jesus' Oath that "few will be those who find Eternal Life" -- the odds are high that we will have many on the "broad road that leads to Destruction" in our surroundings, or even in our homes. It is sad, but meant to refine us for Him, regardless of the pain. He wants to Teach us Wisdom and Patience and Courage in the midst of the "Lessons" He places in front of us in the very temporary "vapor" life in this era and realm. It's never any fun, but do take heart that His love for you and plans for you are intact, and you need just respond to HIM in Peace, regardless. No one can truly "take" anything from you, if you’re His. Just stay protected and perfected in His Peace, and do your best with the "external" circumstances. Keep the Place INSIDE of you a beautiful Place, always. He'll make it worth your while. And, frankly, if the "worst" things happen (your husband's additional abuse to you and addiction to perversions, physical violence or any such thing), he will only be further exposing himself as a fraud to HIMSELF, to the courts, to his "friends" and whomever. You can see, then, that even the "worst" - can "work together for the Good." His further sin and rebellion and hatred of Righteousness and Love may shame him and be the very thing that allows your husband to bow his knee before the Living God, while there is still time. The "avoidance" of the "bad" things in YOUR life can actually prevent the Good things, the Eternal things. So, stay close to Jesus and at Peace... and Trust. This wil! l work out, in time. It is a fallen planet, with much sorrow, chaos, and evil. Keep your heart a Beautiful Place, and Trust. In His Love, mike   wirklichmir Intermediate Member Username: wirklichmir Post Number: 180 Registered: 5-2006 Posted From: 24.118.71.69 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 9:54 pm:        (2) And concerning Mike's time with Vince, that I told you Liz is lying about, my understanding is that Mike has spent over an hour one on one with her husband, and Vince was very happy to talk and they discussed his desire to be free in Christ from his sins. Why Tim Dennis and Elizabeth felt the need to bring up lies that only exposes the sinful deeds of darkness and fear of molestation that caused Elizabeth to come to others for help. I understand that probably a dozen emails have been saved with this issue of Elizabeth's cry for help about illegal and immoral concerns in her home, as well as a lengthy detailed account of exactly when and how Elizabeth sought out others for help with her tragic home life. Again, why she's suddenly come to a change of heart on representing these things, is a mystery in some ways, but again... That's her choice. It doesn't change the facts of what went on and there are plenty of others other than Mike that can bear witness to this tragedy. Again, is the picture being better painted of the lies, schemeing, vengefulness, pride, slandering, malcontent, and other things going on here? And that people here, namely Tim Dennis, but also Cult_Fighter and GottaPost would use people like Liz for their diabolical ends -- which I've been saying here all along??? -ChrisO   gottapost2 New member Username: gottapost2 Post Number: 12 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 193.138.90.182 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 10:30 pm:        If factnet wasn't so difficult with creating accounts, I would change my name handle gottalaugh.   gottapost2 New member Username: gottapost2 Post Number: 14 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 80.237.146.62 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 10:54 pm:        So if Mike knows someone who is a "child napper" why doesn't he call the police? If he knows someone is a child molester, why not call the police? I know of a situation where Jim Dobson (Focus on the Family) was contacted by a woman concerned about her husband having inappropriate sexual contact with their children. Dobson did right and called the police; the man was investigated and indicted; now the children visit their father in jail and he is ordered by the court NEVER again to be alone with children after he is released.   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 73 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 11:54 pm:        [PART 2] Elizabeth can not post on factnet. She wanted this posted. (Follow up conversation with Mike Peters) -----Original Message----- From: Elizabeth Nelson [mailto:enelson8735@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 9:48 AM To: mike@Hisfeet.org Subject: Fwd: RE: about "spousal abuse and covenant-breaking betrayal"... Thanks for telling the truth... I know something has to change. I wasn't insulted by anything that's been said except about "proving myself"-- I'm sure that i took that the wrong way and i want to clear that up. i stayed up last night looking up child custody laws and divorce laws. Anyway---thank you for praying and listening and writing back. Love, elizabeth (continued)   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 74 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 11:57 pm:        [Part 2] Elizabeth can not post on factnet. She wanted this posted. ---------- Original message ---------- From: "mike" <mike@hisfeet.org> To: "'Elizabeth Nelson'" <enelson8735@yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 11:02:57 -0500 Subject: RE: RE: about "spousal abuse and covenant-breaking betrayal"... I have always thought of you as "very special"....... Stay close to Him..... xoxoox   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 257 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Thursday, October 05, 2006 - 12:03 am:        Chris, you had us rolling on the floor laughing! You expect people to believe you, but you absolutely never have the facts straight! 1) More lies about Denny, whom you never knew. 2) My "worldly wise nose"? You're the one always referring to the courts and the pagans! 3) Gottapost is not who you say he is, and has said so repeatedly. 4) I know who cultfighter is, and you don't! hahaha Wrong again!! 5) Scannyd is not in cahoots with Tim D and Danielle. SHE IS DANIELLE!! Where are we supposed to read Jesus in anything you write, so full of venom and vicious anger, and speaking about people and things you know nothing about? Buzz off, Chris. You're simply wrong. And many are praying that when the day comes that you see how wrong, you will repent before it's too late. You're like a rabid dog or something with these false accusations. Jen BTW, Chris, what you are doing in this forum is absolute libel. That's a fact. (Message edited by speakingtruth on October 05, 2006)   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 75 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Thursday, October 05, 2006 - 12:04 am:        PS - For those of you who are talking about Vince, he specifically asked ChrisO, Dan, Mike or anyone who wants to talk about him to call him: 1-863-529-7306   fellow2 Junior Member Username: fellow2 Post Number: 32 Registered: 6-2006 Posted From: 64.228.37.126 Posted on Thursday, October 05, 2006 - 12:48 am:        Dear ChrisO, I really think you need to calm down a bit and get a grip on yourself. Your posts are very out of control and becoming very difficult to read. I actually want to revisit the issue of graceless-ness and the sense of "you're never good enough" one gets from Mike's loving, suggestive, mind-wrenching emails. Reading Elizabeth's letter and Mike's response, I immediately detected the same tactic all cults use to control their members, namely through FEAR and subtle "condemnation" . As a current Indy member you will probably not see it in the same light, which I can completely understand - because I have been there, done that myself. To you dear Indy member, I would only like to say - PLEASE STOP LIVING IN THIS CONSTANT FEAR and CONDEMNATION, for Christ does NOT condemn you! You CAN'T be "good enough", BUT you CAN be HOLY, in fact...if you have asked the Living Christ to indwell you...you ARE Holy and Acceptable in HIS sight! For it is no longer YOU living, but Christ IN you. I want to post just a couple examples from Mike's replies, for you to see what I mean. Here is one example of a subtle wrong teaching, instilling a totally WRONG idea which is bound to keep you FAILING for the rest of your life - quoting Mike Peters: "You must TRUST Him that if you do your best for HIM, it will work out in the end." There is NO "best" you can do for Jesus, if you are still "doing" instead of "being", you are caught up in graceless legalism. Either Christ IS your righteousness and you ARE holy, or you are relying on your own "best" which will never do for God. - If you are currently living according to this ideology, you will find yourself living in a perpetual state of "missing the mark". And perhaps it is because of this erroneous suggestion, that some of you find it so cumbersome to measure up to Mike Peter's standards of being "proven with Jesus". quoting Mike Peters: "but just to point out that "the double minded woman is unstable in all her ways" and that unless you are "without wavering, fully persuaded" and not a "weak-willed woman" -- then you will vacillate and waver and be unstable, NO MATTER WHERE YOU LIVE." The above is one example of those subtle sweeping "condemnations" I mentioned earlier. First of all, that passage is directly relating to "asking God for wisdom" and that with "total confidence" or faith that He will grant it. It signifies that when we ask anything of God, we must not waver in doubt. The passage has absolutely nothing to do with making general choices in our life, which Mike Peters might view as "off" and declare as being unstable. Once again that is an example of mis-applied scripture use. And if those words of Mike have made you feel like a hopeless, helpless, weak-willed, wavering, mark-missing failure... you need to reject those thoughts and feelings, because Christ IN you is none of those things! Embrace His Grace for IF we sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Christ our Lord! Let Him cover you. quoting Mike Peters: "But, that's all up to you......" - This is an example of influencing a confused mind, but taking no responsibility for your counsel. It looks like there is a lot of freedom there, but the mind has already been captured by the suggestions. A confused and fearful mind does not know what freedom or choice is. They always need the "guiding hands" of others to lead them by the way. (continued)   fellow2 Junior Member Username: fellow2 Post Number: 33 Registered: 6-2006 Posted From: 64.228.37.126 Posted on Thursday, October 05, 2006 - 12:58 am:        quoting Mike Peters: "Keep the Place INSIDE of you a beautiful Place, always." Again, another example promoting a legalistic, graceless "works" mentality. Tell me, how do YOU keep anything in you beautiful? Again, if the focus of your life remains on what you do for Jesus, you have missed the mark - missed GRACE, and missed the Gospel. The acceptable Life in God is ALL about what He, Jesus IS in and through us - apart from this truth, there is no righteousness. Nothing beautiful to keep beautiful. It must be all HIM and of Him. And lastly, the constant "massaging of the mind" vacillating between the bitter vinegar (those subtle condemning suggestions) and the honey sweet approvals (I've always thought of you as "very special") is a sure recipe to keep you broken, needy and unstable...lacking soundness of the mind. This is MIND-CONTROL in simple terms. May your eyes be opened... Theophilos   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 258 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Thursday, October 05, 2006 - 1:41 am:        Mike's words: "If someone told you "You must not murder" they would not be "telling you what to do" - but only reporting what God has said. In your many opportunities to murder someone, then, you should remember God's Command, and SPECIFICALLY CHOOSE those decisions, on your own, of how to apply that Truth." I find this very strange as well. In these words we see Mike's subtle way of implying that one would be constantly thinking of murdering. I believe this is to keep minds on fearing and dwelling on potential sin, which I see as another form of mind manipulation or at least strong influence possibly intended to keep one weak in their faith. As for this lost soul ChrisO, We should pray for him often and sincerely that he will come to see and admit his constant direct contradictions as placed on this FACTNet. Chris, you are digging a large hole for yourself and we are concerned how hard you will hit bottom soon. "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, And bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.” Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. (1 Cor 1:18-21) As Theophilos said so well, the message is God's Grace to us as helpless sinners gives us COMPLETE VICTORY through Jesus Christ! “Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you seems to be wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, “He catches the wise in their own craftiness”; and again, “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile.” (1 Cor 3:18-20) Chris, you speak SO MUCH of the wisdom of this world OVER AND OVER AGAIN. I believe that God has caught you in your own craftiness. I have to be very honest with you. If I am discerning correctly, you may need to examine yourself to see whether you are really in the faith for your words are emptied of grace and filled with presumptuous worldly wise lies. I promise, I am and will hold you before the Lord in my prayers for your soul. In Amazing Grace, Denny   gottapost2 New member Username: gottapost2 Post Number: 15 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 193.201.52.133 Posted on Thursday, October 05, 2006 - 4:48 am:        Speaking of Amazing Grace. I think there are two views of God's Forgiveness: 1) PARDONED; or 2) Paroled. The latter is the model in tCII. The PARDONED person is free with no strings attached to past transgressions -- he cannot be prosecuted for his transgressions. This person's transgressions are forgiven. The Paroled person has conditionally limits and must meet ongoing requirements to remain "free". Psalms 25:11 - "For Your name's sake, O Lord, forgive my iniquity, for it is great" - God answers: Jeremiah 50:20 "For I will pardon those whom I preserve" Mike's use of the law in his email is UNLAWFUL. He uses it as a standard of achievement by saying "you should remember God's Command" not to murder. His rememdy is bondage and he holds the bonds through his approval process. 1 Tim 1:8 Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully… that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient. The Paroled person lives in fear and bondage to SIN *through the law*. The PARDONED is free. Are you pardoned or paroled? BTW, the emails posted above are not the secret emails sent by Mike Peters to other men's wives to which have been decribed to me by the recipients.   gottapost2 New member Username: gottapost2 Post Number: 16 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 85.31.187.84 Posted on Thursday, October 05, 2006 - 12:28 pm:        >>BTW, the emails posted above are not the secret emails sent by Mike Peters to other men's wives to which have been described to me by the recipients.<< Let me clarify: The emails above are not the secret emails told to me by the recipient(s). If they were I would have said so. The new emails posted from Elizabeth are news to me. The other email from hiskingdomcome.com's website is an over-the-top *public* *example* -- how much more the private? Again, why doesn't Mike call the police if he believes someone is living with a child molester or murderer? Licensed counselors are required by law to do this in various states, but common sense would say CALL THE POLICE if there is any reasonable suspicion of such threats.   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 76 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 83.226.130.33 Posted on Thursday, October 05, 2006 - 1:24 pm:        Indy Threats... ---------- Original message ---------- From: Dan Z@*&%^$ <z@*&%^$*@o**.edu> To: Tim Dennis <ti@*^***@@gmail.com> Date: Oct 4, 2006 9:03 PM Subject: You are hurting people, Tim. Tim— I haven't read factnet for quite some time. But I was shocked to learn from Chris O this evening that you posted an excerpt from a letter Mike wrote Liz, putting a spin on it that it demonstrated "secret letters to wives" and claiming that she was nervous about Vince being with the children because he said she was in a cult. This is a bald-faced lie. As I have tried to tell you, there is much you don't know, apparently, about the Nelsons' situation. There's no reason for you to know. You are a very young man, young in faith, and young in marriage experience. A registered clergy card is something you can buy on the internet, but genuine wisdom doesn't come so cheaply. Your arrogance and presumption are hurting people, Tim. Including Vince and Liz. Here's the situation: we have turned the other cheek, and turned it again, and again, and again, after you recruited Liz to your hate-group. Now, though, you are completely misrepresenting a child of God publicly. We have the letter that Liz wrote Mike that prompted his reply, that you have excerpted. Liz's letter describes what she was REALLY feeling at the time, and what she was telling Mike, and us. Either she lied to us then, or your recent post is a lie. They cannot both be true. It is only fair that we post Liz's letter. We don't want to; we've been trying to protect them. Yet it's only a small fraction of the TRUE story regarding the time with Liz and Vince. We do not want to post it, but YOU, TIM DENNIS, are putting us in a position where we have little choice. We are coming to the conclusion that we will have to post Liz's entire letter to Mike, unchanged, and his entire reply to her, also unchanged. So talk it over with Liz. You can delete the dishonest post, or we can post a truthful one. Either way, this lie WILL be corrected. Your call. I expect to hear back from you by 8:00 a.m. tomorrow with your intentions. I realize that's only 11 hours notice, but it's 11 hours more notice than you've ever given anyone else. Please make a decision to mind your own business and leave other people alone. It's SCRIPTURAL. Dan   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 77 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 66.199.184.254 Posted on Thursday, October 05, 2006 - 1:33 pm:        More nonsense... ---------- Original message ---------- From: Tim Dennis <t@@#$#@@gmail.com> To: Dan Z@#@@@^ <z@#@@@^@o$#.edu> Date: Oct 4, 2006 9:20 PM Subject: Re: You are hurting people, Tim. Talk to Liz & Vince about your concerns. They posted on their own accord. If she could post herself she would. The original emails are there and unadulterated. Here is her email which is on factnet... Enelson8735@yahoo.com PS - Did you make things right with T*&#? ---------- Original message ---------- From: Tim Dennis <t@@#$#@@gmail.com> To: Dan Z@#@@@^ <z@#@@@^@o$#.edu> Date: Oct 4, 2006 10:19 PM Subject: RE: You are hurting people, Tim I'm talking to you about my concerns for you. You have been divisive, going after close Christian relationships, trying to sow seeds of discord between brothers and between parents and children. You have been a gossip and a tale-bearer, spreading around the world whatever tales someone told you, without seeing to it that the person attempted to work things out with the individuals they had an alleged grievance against. You apparently believe that you are too spiritual for Matthew 18 to apply, that you are above it all due to your superior wisdom. You have made no attempt to verify others' charges before repeating them in public. In fact, you have taken what others have told you and exaggerated them to an even greater degree. You have pretended to speak for others in making accusations on their behalf that they themselves never in fact made. You have lied about "being a part of" something you never were a part of. "We are the Dennis family, called to testify about this group since we were in it in Columbus Ohio." That's a lie. You discredit a brother by claiming to have been "a peterite" for five years, when he only met you once, and you never once even visited the church he's a part of. Neither he, nor anyone of us, is responsible for the gross distortions and caricatures that you are presenting as if they were truth. And by the way, the term "peterite" is a bigoted slur, no different in heart or intent to a cheap ethnic slur. How repulsive. You, Tim Dennis, are personally responsible for ungodly lies. A bitter root has grown up to defile many, as the scriptures say. And it's your fault. I am shaking the dust off my feet, Tim. You'll have to answer to God on your own for your disobedience to His clear teachings and commands. It's on your head now. Dan P.S. What will you do to us next? Physical violence? Property destruction? Murder? None of that would surprise me, considering what you've already done. If it happens, at least everyone will know who's behind it.   fellow2 Junior Member Username: fellow2 Post Number: 34 Registered: 6-2006 Posted From: 64.228.99.87 Posted on Thursday, October 05, 2006 - 4:04 pm:        Dan Zeigler wrote: What will you do to us next? Physical violence? Property destruction? Murder? None of that would surprise me, considering what you've already done. If it happens, at least everyone will know who's behind it. ================================================= Does this look like an extreme case of Paranoia and FEAR to anyone, or is it just me? There appears to be a real problem with false perceptions and false projections in the Indy folks. The latest posts from ChrisO and now Dan really bear out some very irrational thinking. ChrisO and Dan, please consider what I wrote in my previous post about subtle mind control, through FEAR - because your minds seem filled with so many negative things ... consider your own words... look at them again. Can you hear yourself? You seem bound up in a mental knot. Recently I read a profound statement an author made about the scripture "the truth shall set you free" - he reasoned that if truth sets you free, it is error that keeps you bound. So, it would seem appropriate to backtrack and unravel the possible ERRORS that keep the mind bound up. Let me say it again...it is OK to be wrong, and to admit to error...your world will not fall apart if you admit to the possibility - a new world of freedom and forgiveness will open up to you instead. Please do not be afraid to consider the "what if" which <sigh> tried to make us aware of earlier in one of her posts. What if the things shared here are 10% true, will you consider at least the 10% or throw it all out as 100% false? I am wondering what percentage of truth would be required to get you to stop and be willing to look into these things? As far as I can tell, we are looking at at least 90% truth here (I am allowing for 10% of human error, because lets face it, sometimes we all ERR), if we have to judge it by a scale. Theophilos theophilos.2@gmail.com   first_truth New member Username: first_truth Post Number: 22 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 83.125.32.57 Posted on Friday, October 06, 2006 - 1:01 am:        Here are some examples of some emails that you all may be interested in. Plus if I may add I witnessed first hand Mike counseling a wife to take her children and run if her husband tried to take the children with him to a local church gathering (non-Peterite or should I say anti-Peterite). This was right on the heels of a "movement" in the group for everyone to make sure everyone has a passport and that it is up to date. Some emails (note the commentary at the bottom): -----Original Message----- From: mike [mailto:mike@Hisfeet.org] To: '<husband> & <wife> <lastname>' Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 6:42 PM Subject: RE: slander/willls Hi <wife>... Well, we COULD start with <husband>'s slander and namecalling this way: it puts him in direct judgment and into the "fires of hell" according to Jesus. No matter how he "feels" about it........ (Mat. 5:23) -----Original Message----- From: mike [mailto:mike@Hisfeet.org] Sent: Friday, January 15, 2003 4:13 PM To: '<husband> & <wife> <lastname>' >> they probably think I'm terrible for not going to church every Sonday with my husband what kind of unBiblical vocabulary ("go to church") is THAT??! Yucko! As for <friend> and the rest - don't get into a discusion trying to justify yourself. NOWHERE does the Bible command you to hold hands and give away affection to a hypocrite. Jesus SURELY didn't! (Mat.23!) Try to be kind as much as possible, don't argue, but DON'T YOKE WITH HYPOCRISY. -----Original Message----- From: mike [mailto:mike@Hisfeet.org] Sent: Friday, January 20, 2003 1:02 PM To: '<husband> & <wife> <lastname>' <wife> you should say, "<husband> what do you want from me? tell me how you want me- to be except don't expect me to believe you're a christian when i see your temper and your life. i can be a great wife in every other respect i know how, but the Scriptures define a christian in luke 9:57-63 and 1jn.3 and many other places, and the Spirit of Jeus inside of you? i see no way base on the lack of "fruit of the spirit" and the obvious continuation in "the acts of the sinful nature" in Gal.5. So tell me how you want me to be in matters NOT related to 'church' and 'prayer' and the like, and I'll do my best to change. But, until i see you have a conversion experience and the marks of conversion in luke9, 1jn.3, gal.5 etc, DON'T demand that i accept you "christianity" until it meets BIBLICAL measurements! Everything else i want to improve in, but don't ask me to deny the BIBLE and Teachings of JESUS and accept yours and <friend>'s definitions instead of the exact quotes from JESUS." -----Original Message----- From: mike [mailto:mike@Hisfeet.org] Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 11:19 PM To: '<husband> & <wife> <lastname>' Subject: RE: <friend> put us on the radio 2-nite! <wife>, perhaps you can highlight that legal advertisement that I sent you when answering your question about slander and libel -- and smile and hand it to <friend> and ask him if he really likes living in a house, instead of an apartment? -------------------------------------- Continued to next message...   first_truth New member Username: first_truth Post Number: 23 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 128.2.141.33 Posted on Friday, October 06, 2006 - 1:07 am:        Names edited out (except Mike) for covering over the effected family. Commentary on the above emails: 1) Jan.14, 2003: Mike telling another man's wife how to judge the salvation of her husband. 2) Jan.15, 2003: Mike telling another man's wife to NOT hold hands with her husband or give affection to him. Mike again tells her how to judge him (a "Hypocrite"). He also says not to "YOKE" with her husband (which may mean NOT to have sex with him). 3) Jan.20, 2003: Mike telling another man's wife how to interact with her husband, and again telling her how to judge his Christian testimony. Mike directly tells her to NOT go to church or to PRAY with her husband. Ironically, Mike is telling her how to be a "biblical wife" while telling her to withhold most things a wife should be giving her husband. If you wish to contact me my address is: then_freedom@yahoo.com In Christ's freedom, First_Truth   scannyd New member Username: scannyd Post Number: 12 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Friday, October 06, 2006 - 6:30 pm:        Here is a very interesting point about these emails. Out of all the scriptures Mike uses not one of them are among the marriage or wife scriptures. I think it is very odd that he uses examples that really have no bearing on the home life. These guys are twisting scripture to make it fit their ideas when they should be using scripture to form their ideas. Thanks first truth for posting these I will be praying for whoever this affected family is. Danielle   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 78 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Saturday, October 07, 2006 - 9:48 am:        False Marriage Doctrine: http://indianapoliscult.com/AllatMikesfeet/WomenAndMike.aspx and http://indianapoliscult.com/AllatMikesfeet/Marriage.aspx   scannyd New member Username: scannyd Post Number: 13 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Monday, October 09, 2006 - 2:34 pm:        Hello. I know we are moving on from this on factnet and there are somne more letters that prove how controlling Mike is but I just wanted to say a few things about their response to posting the letters from Mike. These are the original letters in their entirety. At the time that this was happening in my life, I was ruled by irrational fears. I did tell two ladies about my husband's childhood which I was bringing up completely out of blown up fear, including fears from my own childhood. God has forgiven me for being fearful and hurting my husband by bringing his past into the situation and sharing it with two other people, who in turn told who knows how many others. My husband Vince never hurt our children and he never would. We have no idea who Chris O is. We never met him or spoke to him. He was never directly involved with us in any way. It's funny (or not) how Dan can cry slander and gossip, and say others are hurtful while they tell Chris O all sorts of exaggerated garbage and he writes it up in his own way without ever knowing who we are. This response was very predictable. It's a classic smear to discredit anyone who opposes them. I cannot believe that Christians would keep records on other believers. Sounds like the Jehovah's Witnesses way of shunning and shaming ex-members. It's sad and I am concerned for them all. Thank God that our past is under the blood no matter who tries to drag it out! Thanks to all of you for showing us the love of Jesus and supporting us through a painful situation. It was worth it to expose the lies of their doctrine. I am hoping some will see how they operate in fear. One friend of ours who got out calls what they do "evil surmising". We will keep praying. Elizabeth Nelson enelson8735@yahoo.com   danrepent Member Username: danrepent Post Number: 79 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 24.95.71.20 Posted on Tuesday, October 10, 2006 - 7:59 am:        For clarity sake, The post above was posted for Elizabeth Nelson by scannyd. Since Elizabeth is having trouble (account issues) getting on factnet.   cult_fighter Member Username: cult_fighter Post Number: 74 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 40.0.40.10 Posted on Tuesday, October 10, 2006 - 4:17 pm:        ChrisO, While you are spewing your GIANT LETTER fits of rage at us, calling us "snakes", "KKK", "Nazis", and other silly stuff, do you ever check your blood pressure? Wow, dude, you need some anger management counseling! Do you ever realize that you are getting SO ANGRY simply because Mike Peters, a man who sends secret emails to other men's wives, is being exposed for what he REALLY DOES? With Elizabeth's and First_Truth's posted "secret emails" above -- sent by Mike to other men's wives, the proof is out there now for the whole world to see! By the way, it matters NOT what the circumstances were for Mike's secret correspondence with these wives. If they first contacted him (as Dan says Elizabeth did), then a real Man of God would've let another WOMAN counsel the wife of another man. Sorry folks, but there is NO twisting being done here! These were truly SECRET emails -- meaning that the husbands were NOT informed that another man was counseling their wives, and in fact, he was counseling harm and hatred against them! While it is bad enough that Mike would think he has a right to secretly counsel other men's wives, the real awful thing is what Mike was actually counseling. If you look at the secret emails he sent to Elizabeth, to the wife in First_Truth's posting, or even on the Peters' group's website (http://yourkingdomcome.com/authority.htm), does anyone see Mike telling these poor women to pray with (or for) their husbands? Is there any indication that Mike cares about these marriages, and wants to see some reconciliation? Nope! All I see is Mike (an outside meddling man) telling these wives HOW to judge their husbands' failings and sins, how to create even more distance and tension in their marriages, and even how to judge the genuineness of their husbands' Christian testimony. Look at First_Truth's secret emails (from Mike to another wife): Mike actually has the gall to tell this other woman to NOT pray with and NOT go to church with her own God-given, vows-made-to husband. But I imagine, Chris, since you seem to think Mike is some angel or prophet, this is all OK with you. Is it also OK with you when Mike ended his emails (to Elizabeth, another men's wife) with "xoxoox"?? (see above, 04Oct06 at 11:57pm) In case you are dense, Chris, this means "Hugs and Kisses". Can anyone here, including you Peters' defenders, imagine any Godly man ending a correspondence with another man's wife with "Hugs and Kisses"? I wonder if Mike's wife would appreciate this. MY wife (whom you do NOT know, Chris) would be furious with me for months if I ended an email to another man's wife with "Hugs and kisses".   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 259 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Tuesday, October 10, 2006 - 9:03 pm:        If I ever RECEIVED an email from another man with "xoxoxo", my husband would be the one responding to it!!! Jen   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 260 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Tuesday, October 10, 2006 - 10:56 pm:        I meant what I said in that last post, but I wanted to clarify something. That statement is coming from a woman who is very happy and fulfilled in her marriage. I realize that many of the email exchanges that are being discussed here revolve around marriages that are (or were) in trouble for one reason or another. (Though I truly believe that most of the troubles are largely due to the couples' involvement in this group.) I agree wholeheartedly with cultfighter that if a woman is seeking counsel, she should be directed to a mature Christian woman, and not receive private counsel from a man. So I in no way wanted it to sound like I was coming down on the wives if they didn't respond properly to the "xoxoxo" stuff. And maybe some of them did. I don't know. All I do know is that this is a complicated and ugly issue. Jen   gottapost2 New member Username: gottapost2 Post Number: 17 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 199.77.130.14 Posted on Wednesday, October 11, 2006 - 12:31 am:        We testify about the things we've heard and seen, not like chrisO who's heard second/third hand. Mike says in his first post, "no doubt this who website thingy above is all my fault. I have much to learn, and much to change" . Mike, please seek help from outside your group of boot-licking, approval seeking, yes-men like ChrisO. I hope ChrisO seriously considers how Mike let him do the dirty writing and consider the legal and eternal danger he's placed himself. Is there anyone who leaves Indy without getting smeared? But doubt not that Mike (who says 'that I never ever "tell anyone what to do"' then tells wives in his secret email not to pray with their husbands) will go on letting ChrisO be trigger man then fall guy. ChrisO, my (email) door is open if you need a friend. I mean that sincerely. Lucky for you that you have NOT named names, because you , you, you, (and possibly Dan, Dan, Dan) would be wrong, wrong, wrong (oops, sorry for the Mikespeak). Though my new username gottalaugh isn't working, we're not laughing about these secret *hugs and kisses* emails Mike sent to these men's wives. It's outrageous! My hope is that these marriages can turn (or has turned) around. gottapost@dodgeit.com   cult_fighter Member Username: cult_fighter Post Number: 76 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 40.0.40.10 Posted on Thursday, October 12, 2006 - 11:40 am:        OK, ChrisO, this is NOT a "put up or shut up", just a REQUEST for a thoughtful answer: Since you say that YES ("a thousand times YES") you would welcome Mike Peters meddling in your marriage (if you were "immersed in porn" and "a tyrant at home"), let me ask you to clarify: Would you, Chris Olive, under ANY circumstances, be OK if Mike was sending secret emails to your wife and signing off of those emails with "HUGS AND KISSES"???? Could you EVER justify that?? By the way, I am NOT a perfect husband, but I've NEVER been called or even thought of as "a tyrant at home" (as you called me), and my wife totally AGREES with me about Mike Peters (you said she disagrees with me). Just like Gottapost, you have no idea who I am!!   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 262 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Friday, October 13, 2006 - 7:33 pm:        The following series of post from "speaking truth" is an email communication involving Dan Z and Greg W. I have Greg's permision (as the receiver of the following email communication) to post this. He has had trouble connecting to FACTNet for posting himself. After reseaching the matter of revealing emails on a public forum I found it is permisable by law under the circumstances. As far as ethics go, It is my opinion that we are dealing with a spiritually, mentally, and emotionally harmful cult and therefore ethics say I must do this. Denny   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 263 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Friday, October 13, 2006 - 7:43 pm:        Post 1: (email addresses removed) This email generated by the Indy machine prompted my question. I sent my question to Mike and Dan and the email exchanges from Dan followed. -----Original Message----- Subject: a lil Melbourne story, regarding a visitor from Japan at their dinner table Just a neat snapshot from the other night around our table. We saw Michaela, who's 6, "winking" at Alex sitting next to her at dinner. We inquired about what she was doing..."Is Alex your friend Michaela? Is that why you're winking at him?" "No, not really", she replied. "Hasn't he been nice to you since he's been here?", we asked. "Yea, but I JUST CAN'T GIVE HIM MY STUFF YET" she said with a calm boldness. All affection belongs to Jesus; test and lay hands on no man quickly; etc... it's in there even in our little 6 year old ;) Awesome stuff. xxxoooo -mv -----Original Message----- From: Greg White [mailto:greg@********] Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 11:32 AM To: ; 'dzeigler******** Subject: Something to consider. greg. a lil Melbourne story, regarding a visitor from Japan at their dinner table Definitely "some" truth here. But what about the way it was said??? Is it more important and Jesus way, that little Michaela withhold her love "stuff" from Alex or that little Michaela show him Jesus love??? What test does Alex have to pass? Are scriptures being interpreted, or manipulated? Did Jesus or the apostles use these same tests or principles??? Should Alex feel lesser than Michaela? How would this make you, us feel? Did Jesus withhold a smile or a wink or affection from anyone? What is being taught to the children? Walls are more important? All affection does belong to Jesus and we must walk as He walked. i cannot see Jesus doing this, acting this way. It is not His Way? We should watch that we are not teaching a doctrine of man to lessen our troubles or trials. Are we willing to risk all for Jesus? Let us come back to our First Love. Maybe this email might need a second look? What would Jesus say? Please let me know what you believe. Please call me if you would like. Maybe we could get together again, it has been awhile. In Jesus, greg white Rev 2:1 "To the angel of the church in Ephesus write: 'The words of him who holds the seven stars in his right hand, who walks among the seven golden lampstands. Rev 2:2 "'I know your works, your toil and your patient endurance, and how you cannot bear with those who are evil, but have tested those who call themselves apostles and are not, and found them to be false. Rev 2:3 I know you are enduring patiently and bearing up for my name's sake, and you have not grown weary. Rev 2:4 But I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first. Rev 2:5 Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent, and do the works you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent. Rev 2:6 Yet this you have: you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. Rev 2:7 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who conquers I will grant to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.'   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 264 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Friday, October 13, 2006 - 7:48 pm:        -----Original Message----- From: DANIEL ZEIGLER [mailto:******@osu.edu] Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 9:14 AM To: Greg White Subject: Re: FW: Something to consider. greg. a lil Melbourne story, regarding a visitor from Japan at their dinner table Hi, Greg-- Well, I'm going to answer your questions by sending you a couple of more things to read, and then asking you a few questions back. Here's the first thing--a note from Alex's perspective that Mike P. forwarded to a few folks last week. This should answer your questions, "Should Alex feel lesser than Michaela? How would this make you, us feel?" Rather than speculating about how Alex felt, we'll just let him speak for himself: -----Original Message----- From: Alex Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 3:07 AM To: mike Mike, Thank you for suggesting spending some time here with Mike V. I have been truly blessed to see what I could never have imagined taking place in this world. Thank you Jesus! With much appreciation, Alex Secondly, I'm sending you a copy of a paper that lists everything that Jesus ever had to say about physical family. The point is that He gave some clear teaching in there about what our affections must be based on. Now for the questions: Would you also say there is "definitely 'some' truth " in Jesus' teachings? Would you also say that Jesus was "teaching a doctrine of men to lessen His troubles and trials"? Are you nicer, wiser, kinder, and more fruitful than Him? And what motives of your heart would so distort your perspective that you would "project" onto Alex a load of emotions and reactions that he obviously never had? I truly hope that you'll ponder these questions as a lover of truth and that some reflection and prayer and repentance will help clear the fog for you. In Jesus, dan   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 265 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Friday, October 13, 2006 - 7:54 pm:        Post 3: Original Message ----- From: "Greg White" <greg**********> To: Cc: "Greg White" Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 4:01 PM Subject: letter to Dan > Dan, > > I know how emails can easily be misinterpreted. I do not believe that I misinterpreted the email sent out from Melbourne. I know that you misinterpreted my email sent to you. The focus of my letter had nothing to do with physical family. The focus of my letter was the 6 year old little girls statement, "I just can't give him my stuff, yet." The one shining moment of the visit decided to be worthy of sending to other brothers and sister in Christ Jesus and described as, "awesome stuff" was this response, "I just can't give him my stuff, yet." Due to the age of the child I must assume that she is not born again or had a revelation of Jesus Christ. The only conclusion is that this child has learned this from others or has watched it worked out. This teaching is not the Spirit of Jesus. If it is not Jesus Way then it must be a doctrine of man? Right? It it is not of Jesus than is must be darkness and needs to be brought into the Light? We can find many examples in scripture of how Jesus gives "His stuff" to brothers and sisters and to people outside of the family of God. I will mention a few, the Samaritan woman at the well, many Samaritans, the woman full of sin washing His feet with her tears, the Centurion, Zacchaeus the tax collector, the Canaanite woman... I am pretty confident that this is a teaching that the family in Indy, Columbus, and Melbourne embrace. Please take a second look and pray to our Lord for guidance. After my last meeting with you and Greg and Joe, I sent you an email with questions concerning our time together at dinner. I asked why Joe and Greg did not talk and just listened and watched. I didn't understand what was happening. I felt yucky and dirty afterwards. This last meeting was completely the opposite experience from the first two times we were able to spend together, which was wonderful and loving. Needless to say you never answered my email. I don't know what Greg and Joe were there for (they were not sharing in the fellowship of believers), but I have two assumptions. Either they were instructed to watch and listen only or they were there to protect you from me? Neither teaching is found in the New Testament without some serious misinterpretation of scripture. Now, may I address your response to my email and the spirit in which you words were written. Is this something that Jesus would write? I am more troubled with the email you sent to me than with the earlier email from Melbourne. The sarcastic tone was terrible. It was not the fruit of the Spirit of Jesus. "Now for the questions: Would you also say there is "definitely some truth " in Jesus' teachings? Would you also say that Jesus was "teaching a doctrine of men to lessen His troubles and trials"? Are you nicer, wiser, kinder, and more fruitful than Him? And what motives of your heart would so distort your perspective that you would "project" onto Alex a load of emotions and reactions that he obviously never had? I truly hope that you'll ponder these questions as a lover of truth and that some reflection and prayer and repentance will help clear the fog for you." (continued)   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 266 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Friday, October 13, 2006 - 7:57 pm:        Post 4: Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience,kindness, goodness, faithfulness, Gal 5:23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. Please, please, please consider some of the things I have said. I love all of you brothers and sisters in Columbus and Indy and everywhere. I truly hope that what I see is wrong. Never the less, it is not wrong to question. It is commanded to test all teaching. Yours in Christ Jesus, greg white   speakingtruth Intermediate Member Username: speakingtruth Post Number: 267 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 209.9.208.7 Posted on Friday, October 13, 2006 - 8:14 pm:        Final post: -----Original Message----- From: DANIEL ZEIGLER [***********@osu.edu] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 6:13 PM To: Greg White Subject: Re: something to consider, Melbourne story Greg, I think I did and do understand exactly what you were trying to say. My answer in the last e-mail is what I have every reason to believe is very nearly what Jesus Himself would have said to you, since it seems very likely you have chosen to live in compromise in your personal life and decisions and do not have the blessings and promises of Heb. 3:12-14 working in your life. If we disobey Him in personal areas and compromise, we become hard and blind, and then He sends a powerful deception. At that point, you will even kill a Saint, Prophet, or Jesus Himself, 'thinking you are doing God a favor.' Greg , I honestly think that your heart is VERY different than when we first met you, and you have progressively turned your face away from Him and His Truths. THAT is why it was uncomfortable at dinner, and the other guys had little to say to you, when they have been quite free in countless other settings. That is why your inner man wants to accuse and find fault with that which confronts your fleshly instincts. As I said before, the man from Japan was quite obviously THRILLED with the Life and Love that he participated in when he was in Melbourne. Clearly, then, your critical and distrustful reaction is your problem, not the Australian saints’ problem (or ours, or Indy’s, or anyone else’s). Evidently, from what you said in your letter, you would be uncomfortable with Jesus' decision about the ‘rich young ruler’ and many other things as well. But do what you want with all of that. You've got a course you're happy with, so carry on. We won't stop praying for you and your marriage, and your life and fruit, for sure.--dan -end of emails- As you can see, this reveals more of the Mike Peters indoctrination as we see more of their perversion of Hebrews 3:12-14 as well as their twisted views of family. Not to mention their utter "spiritual" arrogance and thinking they are above being questioned. They have willingly tied the blinders on their own heads b