It seems this place is becoming read by more people everyday. We truly can not believe the response and are shocked by how many people continue to visit this place. It is not only frequented by us, the former members, but by those who are still there. We hope those who remain see the true motives here and take this at face value. However, it seems that in typical LFF fashion, the arguments are forming and lines are being drawn. As usual, those on the inside, are making more indelible, this line that separates them from us. And behind that line, the rebuttals are taking shape.
Now, it is not our desire to be hostile or create any animosity towards the truth by those who remain. Yet we feel it our duty to address the most common arguments making their rounds in the inner circles of LFF. Unfortunately, these are the same tactics LFF has always employed and these methods truly attest to the lack of change there. We have been fortunate enough to maintain many relationships with those who still attend. They have been informative and have been forthcoming with their own questions as well as that which is being said to discredit the truths of these pages.
It is not our desire to tell anyone how to think; instead we hope, in presenting the facts logically, people will be enabled to make their own logical decisions. It is so hard when you are surrounded by an environment that exerts so much control to see anything else. And that, among other things has been the reason for this place. We do not, now, consider ourselves enlightened or above those who remain. We instead, wish only to show the words here as fact and realize that unless you have experienced the things being discussed here, our words may seem esoteric. As this post unfolds we will attempt to address the arguments coming from current members.
The first argument is a classic. Not in the sense of timelessly good; instead it is so inadequate an argument it has a name. It is a fallacy, a mistake so huge it is taught to every entry level philosophy student as simply deplorable. Again the leadership is employing ad hominem arguments. Unfortunately, these arguments are at best, foolish. They are a personal attack that is irrelevant to the arguments on the table. Though this has been addressed in several places on this blog, LFF is again reverting to that which they have always known. So please, we beg of those listening to these arguments, disregard them.
First of all, the LFF leadership does not know who is maintaining this blog. Sure there are guesses, but they are just that; guesses. Besides not knowing who the administrators are, almost all of the comments and e-mails are posted anonymously. Sure the pastors are familiar with the more detailed e-mails, one author even intended that. But to throw out every hurt, every pain, and every tear because someone questions the authors’ character would be a mistake. Don’t let personal attacks on a writer blind you from the truth.
The next argument they present is in part, the reason why many of us have left. The fact that this rebuttal would be used to render the words of this site meaningless is reprehensible. Yet this is indeed the case. The statement goes as follows, “Most of the things discussed on this blog happened in the past, under the former senior pastors. LFF has changed and the new pastors are running things differently.” This is, to put it mildly, a lie. A majority of the administrators, and I would venture to say, at least half of the readers, left long after “the baton was passed.” Why? Because it is still the same abusive environment it has always been. There is one person in particular who was and is more duplicitous, abusive, and manipulative than the former pastors ever were.
The current senior pastors would like you to believe that there have been changes, and to a certain extent, there have. Yet, no change has come to the underlying problem and therefore, the manipulation, abuse, and lies continue. I am the most recently departed on this team here and I left four years after the “mantle” was passed on. By the current senior pastors, I have been lied to, put out, and degraded by numerous bouts of “righteous” anger. This is in no way unique to my situation. If one takes a moment to reflect on the people who have left since the transition, it is more than clear that the problems still exist.
Pastors, PCL’s, CCL’s, HCL’s (I know there are cell groups now) and church employees have all left under the new leadership’s watch. Why? Because of past hurts? In some cases; yes. But in many cases it was due to the fact that the current senior pastors are just as oblivious to the pain they inflict as their predecessors. They are unable to admit they have done wrong and when confronted, in love, with their failures, they incredulously deny the obvious truth.
Yet another argument is evidenced in the questions of a current member to a WSU psychology professor. People seem to feel the accounts and details on this site are exaggerated and tainted by emotional wounds. (It is interesting how LFF generally discredits the teachings of the psychology department. Yet, when the thoughts of a professor, unfamiliar with the details, seem agreeable, they form the basis of yet another shoddy rebuttal….)
**********************QUESTION********************************
I am not a student, just a Pullmanite with a thought that's been bugging me, and I am curious to know if there have been any studies on it, or if it's common knowledge and I just don't know it. =) I wasn't sure how to find out, it's a bit too complex for a Google search, so I thought I'd just ask one of the professors in town, and your description seemed most like the question I have. I understand professors are very busy, so if you are not able to answer for awhile (or at all), I will understand completely. Since I am not a student or a colleague of yours, I expect you to treat my question as a low priority. =)
Okay, my question concerns the reliability of a person's memory as concerns traumatic events in their life. Meaning: say a person goes through an event that either seemed or was indeed offensive, abusive, or traumatic for them. It seems from what I've seen, that if the person does not "come to terms" with the event, or is not "reconciled" with the people or institution who caused the pain, then their re-telling of the event is often exaggerated, and made to sound worse than it actually was. In other words, can a person be trusted to relate the story with objective accuracy, if they still feel the pain of the wound? A second part to my question is this: when people do exaggerate a negative event, do they do so knowingly, to garner more sympathy, or have their memories really been corrupted, to believe the exaggeration?
**************************RESPONSE************************************
Thanks for your email. I'd be happy to try and answer your question. Reliability of memory is a funny thing. If 10 people witness a car accident and report it to police, the police tend to 10 related but differing reports. What this means is that each of us experiences the world differently. As a result we all have different interpretations and memories of an event. Hence, what psychologist have found is that the "accuracy" of a memory is less important than a person's "perception" of the event.
Some people are able to cope with traumatic things quite easily, others have a more difficult time. Moreover, some may be affected by events for years or even a lifetime. For example, many WWII veterans have remained affected by their war experiences for 60+ years. For people who are strongly affected by an event or a part of their life, there are several approaches to helping them overcome those traumas. The goal is not to forget the events but to reduce how much anxiety, anger, frustration, or sadness they feel when they think of the event. The key to treatment is that the person want to deal with their feelings. Interestingly, though we might expect that no-one in their right mind would want to continue feeling upset by things long past, many people are not willing to accept treatment - either because they don't think it will work, they don't want to put in the effort, or they don't want to have to deal directly with the thing that upsets them. Those who care about them can help by finding treatment, giving them emotional support such as letting them know that it will be tough but that they will be there for them, and - in tougher cases - by carefully asking the person about why they want to continue living with these feelings and how it fits in with their life (this is a leverage technique since most people will acknowledge that they don't want to live with such feelings).
In answer to your second question, there is attention that comes with feeling bad. For example, if you have a friend who has a cold but hides it, you tend to give them less sympathy. But, if that friend "appears" very sick, you are more likely to give them more attention. The same is true for these negative feelings. However, traumatic memories - based on real or exaggerated events - are common and hence, there are a lot of treatment options. There are many local psychologists right here in Pullman who can help with such things. Hope this helps and thanks for the question.
Assistant Professor
Department of Psychology
Washington State University
Interesting point. There is definite validity to the statement above, but without the supporting details this rationale truly has no grounds here. It is both short-sighted and cold to call the events here “exaggerated.” It would be easy to believe this if you have not experienced the abuse at the hands of the senior pastors. For, the events that have transpired between sheep and shepherd are so outrageous, they seem completely false. Nevertheless, that is not the case. I know not how many more accounts, comments, e-mails and heartaches need posting before some will see the validity of these things. Being that I, and all of the team members here have experienced first hand, the travesties posted here, I can assure you these accounts are fact.
As administrators, we have opted to keep most specifics under wraps. The details posted by others and from e-mails are graphic enough and should serve as ample evidence. Sadly, if any single administrator were to post a list of specifics, it would be even harder for those who doubt these events to see their truth. In many of our cases, the specifics are beyond comprehension. Though they happened to us and unfolded before our own eyes, it is still difficult to believe these things could have ever taken place. Again, ambiguity, but the truth can at times be too shocking. Thus, exaggeration is the furthest thing from the truth. Instead, we have taken the opposite approach and done our best candy coat events, lending diplomacy to our writing for fear of being labeled liars. As was said by an e-mailer, if we could walk you through this entire blog with a highlighter, we could show you specifics that we have witnessed first hand. And in these specifics are no exaggerations. So, please, don’t ascribe these accounts to misinterpretations and exaggerations. That only deepens the wounds of the hurting.
We are not seeking anyone’s sympathy. We don’t write these facts or recount our pains for the condolences of the public. Instead, this is our humble attempt at lending a voice to that which has been ignored for far too long. We seek not the sympathy of strangers or the reassurances of some digital world, we only desire the truth be known. To exaggerate the events related here would be pointless, a true waste of all of our time. It is sickening that any reader would assume embellishment on the part of the authors. This becomes even more disturbing when people are searching for the ability to forgive and trust again. There is a genuine desire for healing expressed on these pages and for someone to come along and label the wounds of the recovering as bigger than life is detrimental to this process.
Then there are the most vexing statements from the pastors. “Vengeance is mine saith the Lord. The people writing here obviously have grievances and they need to go talk to the person who has offended them.” Really? You read your Bible and felt lead to apply that wisdom here? How sad. It is obvious this site is not vengeful. That is not the point here. People are only relating truths; they are naming pains and hoping to help others. Yet, some pastor, someone who thinks they have a deeper understanding of human motive, labels this as vengeful. Since when is healing vengeful; have you even read anything written here? This site contains pages and pages of truth; there are no malicious intents here. To label this as vengeful or hateful is childish. It is nothing but a meager attempt to derail the truth with inapplicable Scripture. It is not our desire to “dethrone” the pastors; it is our desire to state the truth. We hope to help the hurting and save others from the same. To sit by and watch these things continue to happen would be shirking our duty before God.
As for talking about grievances with the offenders, this has been done. There have been hundreds of people who have tried to talk to the senior pastors and to no avail. Their observations fall on deaf ears; they are labeled as divisive. The truth is silenced by the senior pastors through unfounded accusations. There has been no lack of effort on the part of the departed; we have gone out of our way to resolve the travesties that continue at LFF. We are not harboring bitterness we are merely stating the facts. The onus lies not on the hurt but on those who caused this pain. The fact that many have forgiven those who admit no wrong is commendable. Yet, those they have forgiven still refuse to admit any wrong and that is atrocious. And though this was expected, it truly grieves us all. With a simple click, the pastors come, they read, they judge, and they leave. No apology, no remorse, no admission of guilt. What more can be said? The facts are here but they write them off with a host of mediocre excuses. To ignore the facts is one thing; but to say the truth is exaggerated, vengeful, or simply false only asseverates the gravity of the problems being addressed here.
Perhaps, in this site’s infancy, these words could be written off as false. Yet, to attempt to discredit the truth now shows serious mental deficiency. This project now contains the thoughts and accounts of hundreds. Who in their right mind would accuse everyone here of overstating the truth or of lying? This is absurd; it is like a defense lawyer standing before the jury calling hundreds of witnesses liars. Is this place a sham, is it truly a smattering of facts embellished by the writers for sympathy? No!!!! If there are those who still feel otherwise, we invite your thoughts.
