Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

fairfarmhand

ATI questions

Recommended Posts

How does one know what is going on in the privacy of the home?

 

Look at all the things the Duggars removed from their websites when they started to become a household name.

 

I remember people discussing them many years ago and I do remember seeing the Pearls content on their website and I do remember quite clearly seeing the tomato staking and blanket training things on their website.

 

I don't believe there is any such thing as a non-crazy ATI believer. If they weren't crazy they wouldn't give ATI their support. 

I am not one of them, but we do know some families who, back in the day, had adopted ATI for their families.  You may not believe it is possible, but they were not crazy, not whackadoodles, not lacking in good judgement and common sense.  Some of them drew narrower boundaries than we did (TV and music come to mind), but it really would be inappropriate to paint with a broad brush and say that these families were crazy. 

 

I do think that many ATI families were deceived and had no idea that Gothard would go off the deep end in his beliefs.  He triggered my legalism bells from the beginning, but his early teachings, from Scripture, were very helpful to my husband's healing and wholeness after years of struggling with dyslexia.   ETA: Just to clarify, hubby is still dyslexic, but the healing was in his self-image and his understanding of God's purpose for him, and it came from teaching of Scripture, through early Gothard materials.

 

That said, I've seen several teachers who start out relatively sound and go off on a tangent that irreparably damages people who are not discerning or who have no frame of reference.  It grieves me that this is part of human nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the connection of ATI and A.C.E. Paces?

There isn't one specifically. It's that they are recommended for those ATI families that want a more structured approach specifically to math and English. The reason they are recommended is because they are very conservative...pictures of girls in longer sleeves, never in pants, long skirts, much discussion of modesty and purity, etc. That's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There isn't one specifically. It's that they are recommended for those ATI families that want a more structured approach specifically to math and English. The reason they are recommended is because they are very conservative...pictures of girls in longer sleeves, never in pants, long skirts, much discussion of modesty and purity, etc. That's all.

 

 

Ah, okay. The pictures and modesty/purity topic doesn't really bother me in moderation. We stopped using Paces because I felt half of EVERY lesson in EVERY subject we tried was a Biblical lesson. But not really "Biblical" but more so a narrated story with reference to a Bible verse. It was a bit much for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh okay, on the other thread, I had read something someone stated something about ACE paces and ATI being affiliated somehow.

 

Eta: we have used Paces in past but they bothered me, even as a conservative Christian. I couldn't pinpoint my discomfort at the time. So, was just curious.

I may have been the one who drew a connection between the two. I do not know if there is or isn't any official affiliation between ATI and ACE, but in my childhood, the two went hand-in-hand. The Christian school I attended used ACE paces. The pastor/principal was also very involved in ATI. He often promoted ATI materials. My parents had the Character Sketches books and, IIRC, my father bought them after attending a "conference." (I was probably only seven or eight years old, so I neither knew nor cared about the conference.) I do remember hearing the pastor promote IBLP materials and I heard the name Bill Gothard a zillion times.

 

The school utilized corporal punishment; a thick wooden paddle hung in the principal's office (and also in the kitchen of his attached home; I was friends with his daughter.) There were a lot of bizarre rules for dress, jewelry, hair, etc.; it mostly did not affect me because I was too young to care. The pastor/prinicpal got serious at one point when I was in the sixth grade. We were all supposed to sign and agree to a list of rules to obey, not just at school, but for the whole of our lives. My parents correctly discerned that this was over-stepping the boundaries of what a school is for, and they did not have rules that rigid for us (no music except true church music, no skirts that show the knees, no shorts above the knees, etc., etc.). So we left.

 

In summary, the ACE curriculum was (or is?) compatible with the other features of Gothard, so, while I don't think there is an official link between the two, people who would embrace one are also more likely to embrace the other, which was what my pastor did.

 

P.s. My sister, who was five years older than I, did have some booklets about "charms" for girls, i.e., how to look/present oneself a certain way. Kinda wish I could look at those again now; i wonder what was included in them. The only thing I remember was some info about how to sit down "attractively"- you weren't supposed to smooth the back of your skirt with your hands. And something else about not "encircling the dinner plate like an animal." I don't know if this was an ATI resource, ACE, or a completely different thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have been the one who drew a connection between the two. I do not know if there is or isn't any official affiliation between ATI and ACE, but in my childhood, the two went hand-in-hand. The Christian school I attended used ACE paces. The pastor/principal was also very involved in ATI. He often promoted ATI materials. My parents had the Character Sketches books and, IIRC, my father bought them after attending a "conference." (I was probably only seven or eight years old, so I neither knew nor cared about the conference.) I do remember hearing the pastor promote IBLP materials and I heard the name Bill Gothard a zillion times.

 

The school utilized corporal punishment; a thick wooden paddle hung in the principal's office (and also in the kitchen of his attached home; I was friends with his daughter.) There were a lot of bizarre rules for dress, jewelry, hair, etc.; it mostly did not affect me because I was too young to care. The pastor/prinicpal got serious at one point when I was in the sixth grade. We were all supposed to sign and agree to a list of rules to obey, not just at school, but for the whole of our lives. My parents correctly discerned that this was over-stepping the boundaries of what a school is for, and they did not have rules that rigid for us (no music except true church music, no skirts that show the knees, no shorts above the knees, etc., etc.). So we left.

 

In summary, the ACE curriculum was (or is?) compatible with the other features of Gothard, so, while I don't think there is an official link between the two, people who would embrace one are also more likely to embrace the other, which was what my pastor did.

 

P.s. My sister, who was five years older than I, did have some booklets about "charms" for girls, i.e., how to look/present oneself a certain way. Kinda wish I could look at those again now; i wonder what was included in them. The only thing I remember was some info about how to sit down "attractively"- you weren't supposed to smooth the back of your skirt with your hands. And something else about not "encircling the dinner plate like an animal." I don't know if this was an ATI resource, ACE, or a completely different thing.

 

 

Sounds like Keepers of the Faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

P.s. My sister, who was five years older than I, did have some booklets about "charms" for girls, i.e., how to look/present oneself a certain way. Kinda wish I could look at those again now; i wonder what was included in them. The only thing I remember was some info about how to sit down "attractively"- you weren't supposed to smooth the back of your skirt with your hands. And something else about not "encircling the dinner plate like an animal." I don't know if this was an ATI resource, ACE, or a completely different thing.

 

Someone tries to eat my nachos and I'll show you what 'encircling the dinner plate like an animal' looks like. I'm not even kidding. My nachos are very important to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, is TeA an acronym? I get the euphemism. But why TeA?

 

"Bosoms and Butt" or more commonly "T!T$ & @$$"  has always been my understanding of the euphemism here. At least that's what I always assumed.

 

But I am by no means an authority on the acronyms. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Bosoms and Butt" or more commonly "T!T$ & @$$"  has always been my understanding of the euphemism here. At least that's what I always assumed.

 

But I am by no means an authority on the acronyms. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

You are wrong.  It isn't an acronym.  It is an analogy that someone used involving brewing etc,  I'm too lazy to look for the initial post which was hilarious and quite clever.  Perhaps someone else will find and post it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are wrong.  It isn't an acronym.  It is an analogy that someone used involving brewing etc,  I'm too lazy to look for the initial post which was hilarious and quite clever.  Perhaps someone else will find and post it.  

 

Right- I remember the "brewing tea" thing, but I always thought that it emphasized the "T" and the "A" and used the "&" symbol beause it means "and" but vaguely looks like the letter "E".

 

But maybe I'm too much of a detail person, and my literal black-and-white thinking brain needed a reason for it. :coolgleamA:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Bosoms and Butt" or more commonly "T!T$ & @$$"  has always been my understanding of the euphemism here. At least that's what I always assumed.

 

But I am by no means an authority on the acronyms. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

 

 

You are wrong.  It isn't an acronym.  It is an analogy that someone used involving brewing etc,  I'm too lazy to look for the initial post which was hilarious and quite clever.  Perhaps someone else will find and post it.  

 

 

Right- I remember the "brewing tea" thing, but I always thought that it emphasized the "T" and the "A" and used the "&" symbol beause it means "and" but vaguely looks like the letter "E".

 

But maybe I'm too much of a detail person, and my literal black-and-white thinking brain needed a reason for it. :coolgleamA:

 

Here's the thread : What the world needs now...(Warning: OT & Intimate Content) The specific posts you want to read are #9 and #74, but you'll want to read more to get the context. Have fun!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are wrong.  It isn't an acronym.  It is an analogy that someone used involving brewing etc,  I'm too lazy to look for the initial post which was hilarious and quite clever.  Perhaps someone else will find and post it.  

Right.  And then ten (?) years later, the rest of the world finally cottoned on... This hilarious (G rated except for one language bit right at the start) video is actually quite relevant to this week's issues...

 

 

 

Here's the thread : What the world needs now...(Warning: OT & Intimate Content) The specific posts you want to read are #9 and #74, but you'll want to read more to get the context. Have fun!

Oh, good, you found it.  

 

WTM Classic, not to be missed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have been the one who drew a connection between the two. I do not know if there is or isn't any official affiliation between ATI and ACE, but in my childhood, the two went hand-in-hand. The Christian school I attended used ACE paces. The pastor/principal was also very involved in ATI. He often promoted ATI materials. My parents had the Character Sketches books and, IIRC, my father bought them after attending a "conference." (I was probably only seven or eight years old, so I neither knew nor cared about the conference.) I do remember hearing the pastor promote IBLP materials and I heard the name Bill Gothard a zillion times.

 

The school utilized corporal punishment; a thick wooden paddle hung in the principal's office (and also in the kitchen of his attached home; I was friends with his daughter.) There were a lot of bizarre rules for dress, jewelry, hair, etc.; it mostly did not affect me because I was too young to care. The pastor/prinicpal got serious at one point when I was in the sixth grade. We were all supposed to sign and agree to a list of rules to obey, not just at school, but for the whole of our lives. My parents correctly discerned that this was over-stepping the boundaries of what a school is for, and they did not have rules that rigid for us (no music except true church music, no skirts that show the knees, no shorts above the knees, etc., etc.). So we left.

 

In summary, the ACE curriculum was (or is?) compatible with the other features of Gothard, so, while I don't think there is an official link between the two, people who would embrace one are also more likely to embrace the other, which was what my pastor did.

 

P.s. My sister, who was five years older than I, did have some booklets about "charms" for girls, i.e., how to look/present oneself a certain way. Kinda wish I could look at those again now; i wonder what was included in them. The only thing I remember was some info about how to sit down "attractively"- you weren't supposed to smooth the back of your skirt with your hands. And something else about not "encircling the dinner plate like an animal." I don't know if this was an ATI resource, ACE, or a completely different thing.

I also went briefly to an ACE School of Tomorrow and it was heavily ATI influenced. They went hand in hand here in Michigan in thr 80's when ACE schools were popping up all over. My guess is that the leaders who were drawn to the ACE extreme conservatism were then also drawn to the extremism of ATI. The two organizations are unrelated, but Dr. Howard who create d the "School of Tomorrow" system also espoused many of the same ideas as Gothard and especially as it pertained to women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P.s. My sister, who was five years older than I, did have some booklets about "charms" for girls, i.e., how to look/present oneself a certain way. Kinda wish I could look at those again now; i wonder what was included in them. The only thing I remember was some info about how to sit down "attractively"- you weren't supposed to smooth the back of your skirt with your hands. And something else about not "encircling the dinner plate like an animal." I don't know if this was an ATI resource, ACE, or a completely different thing.

 

Quill,

 

Is this the book that your sister had?  http://www.amazon.com/Christian-Charm-Course-Students-Book/dp/0890815089

 

I remember doing this is my Assembly of God Missionettes class when I was in 7th or 8th grade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not one of them, but we do know some families who, back in the day, had adopted ATI for their families. You may not believe it is possible, but they were not crazy, not whackadoodles, not lacking in good judgement and common sense. Some of them drew narrower boundaries than we did (TV and music come to mind), but it really would be inappropriate to paint with a broad brush and say that these families were crazy.

 

.

I have absolutely no trouble believing this. For every lifestyle, extreme or not, you will find people who make it work for them and lead happy, healthy, fulfilled lives. Good, decent people can find a way to make almost any lifestyle work for them. Mean, messed-up people can make any belief system warped and toxic. The particular belief doesn't matter so much as the people applying it. You'll always have people more invested in 'the rules' with an interest in micromanaging their brethren.

 

Lately, I've even seen what can only be described as Evangelical Atheism or Fundamentalist U.U. When a group, ANY group, starts getting their "congregation" to "spread the (exact same) word" with a focus on dismantling the beliefs of Others, that's when my Cult Alarm goes off. It's really more about the group think of particular people than how their official doctrine is written. Extremists come in EVERY flavor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lately, I've even seen what can only be described as Evangelical Atheism or Fundamentalist U.U. When a group, ANY group, starts getting their "congregation" to "spread the (exact same) word" with a focus on dismantling the beliefs of Others, that's when my Cult Alarm goes off. It's really more about the group think of particular people than how their official doctrine is written. Extremists come in EVERY flavor.

 

I find that interesting in light of what staceyobu brought to the table with regards to what kinds of things determine a group is a cult:

 

1) Exclusive. They may say, "We're the only ones with the truth; everyone else is wrong; and if you leave our group your salvation is in danger."

2) Secretive. Certain teachings are not available to outsiders or they're presented only to certain members, sometimes after taking vows of confidentiality.

3) Authoritarian. A human leader expects total loyalty and unquestioned obedience.

 

I can't think of a single fer instance of atheists (the term you might be thinking of is new atheist). 

 

Not exclusive. No one cares who's an atheist and who isn't. Atheists come from all walks of faith and cultures and political and social backgrounds. 

Not secretive. I suspect some Christians wish they were, though.

Not authoritarian. The lack of appeal to authority (walk by faith, not by sight) is a major component in rejecting faith. 

 

I don't mean to tease you, 'Panda, but I find it interesting to see words like "cult" comfortably thrown out as a kind of identity between "us" and "them" with regards to what is decent and healthy and moral. I suspected it has more to do with comfort and confusion. It's why I wondered how one identifies a cult, because as a Catholic I had been told I was participating in a cult and I wondered if the same was happening to followers of ATI. As an atheist outspoken about my opinions, I'm apparently part of a cult (or could be, or might be, or close to it, or whatever). I think staceyobu's list makes more, objective sense. Anyway, I just found it interesting that you articulated a kind of assurance that every lifestyle (group?) contains happy, healthy people, but then your radar goes off with "that group." I think that's probably how most of us think of cults - our radars just go off, but maybe not for the reasons we might think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that merely being evangelical or fervent about something does not make it cultish. Someone could be evangelical about tooth brushing. Expanding on the given definition of cult:

 

1. Exclusive- there is a clearly defined group boundary with real or imaginary threatened punishments in place for stepping over the line, and shunning for rejecting the groups reason for being, cultivating debilitating fear of leaving or deviating from the group think .

 

2. Secretive- including hiding or forbidding access to information that could lead to questioning the group's purpose or value.

 

3. Authoritarian- rigid hierarchy that invades the privacy of the members to maintain doctrinal purity. Monitors thoughts as well as actions.

 

Most atheists are skeptics and iconoclasts who would not stand for any of the above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the thread : What the world needs now...(Warning: OT & Intimate Content) The specific posts you want to read are #9 and #74, but you'll want to read more to get the context. Have fun!

I sincerely appreciate all of your help, Jean, Rebel, and Twigs, in fulfilling my insatiable curiosity regarding the etymology of arcane Internet acronyms. Off to read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find that interesting in light of what staceyobu brought to the table with regards to what kinds of things determine a group is a cult:

 

 

I can't think of a single fer instance of atheists (the term you might be thinking of is new atheist).

 

Not exclusive. No one cares who's an atheist and who isn't. Atheists come from all walks of faith and cultures and political and social backgrounds.

Not secretive. I suspect some Christians wish they were, though.

Not authoritarian. The lack of appeal to authority (walk by faith, not by sight) is a major component in rejecting faith.

 

I don't mean to tease you, 'Panda, but I find it interesting to see words like "cult" comfortably thrown out as a kind of identity between "us" and "them" with regards to what is decent and healthy and moral. I suspected it has more to do with comfort and confusion. It's why I wondered how one identifies a cult, because as a Catholic I had been told I was participating in a cult and I wondered if the same was happening to followers of ATI. As an atheist outspoken about my opinions, I'm apparently part of a cult (or could be, or might be, or close to it, or whatever). I think staceyobu's list makes more, objective sense. Anyway, I just found it interesting that you articulated a kind of assurance that every lifestyle (group?) contains happy, healthy people, but then your radar goes off with "that group." I think that's probably how most of us think of cults - our radars just go off, but maybe not for the reasons we might think.

I take back "cult" and replace it with "Borg." It's still annoying and redundant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that merely being evangelical or fervent about something does not make it cultish. Someone could be evangelical about tooth brushing. Expanding on the given definition of cult:

 

1. Exclusive- there is a clearly defined group boundary with real or imaginary threatened punishments in place for stepping over the line, and shunning for rejecting the groups reason for being, cultivating debilitating fear of leaving or deviating from the group think .

 

2. Secretive- including hiding or forbidding access to information that could lead to questioning the group's purpose or value.

 

3. Authoritarian- rigid hierarchy that invades the privacy of the members to maintain doctrinal purity. Monitors thoughts as well as actions.

 

Most atheists are skeptics and iconoclasts who would not stand for any of the above.

 

#2 makes me wonder how well ATI fits. Their info is in the bible, available to anyone who asks at their local church, and available in whole online. The conferences require payment, but then so too does Seminary school. I can sign up for the conference as it comes to my area. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take back "cult" and replace it with "Borg." It's still annoying and redundant.

 

It can be hard to hear one's beliefs constantly criticized and held to accountability. When the last answer left can only be, "I believe it because I believe it," all kinds of unwanted emotions may be inspired when pressed for accountability. When I was still a believer, it became more an more embarrassing to me to try and convince dh that I wasn't like "them," whoever "them" may be at any given time (ATI wasn't big on our radar at the time, but the GOP was a steady stream of humiliation with regards to the way in which they incorporated faith-based beliefs into proposed public policy). Still I never thought of atheists as being a part of a mindless collective any more than people who don't collect stamps are a part of a mindless collective.

 

Each Christian sect argues against the beliefs and practices of other sects, claiming they are not justifiable beliefs, that these beliefs are erroneous because they're based on faulty logical connections, or misplaced faith (such as people calling out ATI as being "cultish," or the latest thread in which people argue about which is the really right way to understand and practice communion). It's not only acceptable, it's a source of identity and pride. Each denomination believes it is addressing what the others miss. Atheists just go one step further and don't accept any faith-based argument. If that makes atheists "Borg," does that mean the "wrong" Christians are "half-Borg"? What stops Christians from being Borg-like with respect to other religions whose faith-based claims are confidently rejected? Surely all Christians feel they are being perfectly appropriate when they reject the faith-based claims inherent in Islam, or Hinduism, or Scientology. The only difference between Christians and atheists in this respect is that atheists reject the faith-based claims of one more god than the Christians. And yet only atheists are Borg-like? Or only those who don't keep quiet? Would Muslims and Jews be right to think Christians are annoying and redundant, especially considering most public policy and social behavior in the US serves Christian preferences? Should Christians stop being annoying and redundant like atheists should? Do you think the nation would naturally adopt a truly secular government, and Christians like Mike Huckabee and Jeb Bush would divorce their personal beliefs from their political behaviors because they are annoying and redundant to many of us? Or should people speak up in order to preserve or secure rights and equal privileges? 

 

Are Christians in this thread being Borg-like for showing disrespect, if not utter contempt for one sect, and by extension the leaders affiliated with that sect? Are Christians being Borg-like if they see and promote the idea that the followers of this contemptible sect are victims, valued as individuals and worthy of knowing alternatives to the things they've been encouraged to accept on faith? Are Christians in other topics being Borg-like when they speak up about unshared faith-based claims, for example certain claims that are used to justify restricting a woman's autonomy to choose her own reproductive or economic or social role in her life? Or is it only atheists who are Borg-like because they challenge all faith-based claims equally? In other words, it's okay to challenge almost all faith-based claims, that's not being a part of a mindless collective, but to challenge all faith-based claims is a part of being a mindless collective? It appears it doesn't matter which faith based claims are held and which are challenged (so long as it's mainstream? not sure if ATI are Borg as well), a mindless Borg-like person is one who doesn't accept any faith based claims (with the exception of other religions - then all doctrinal differences are equally dismissed by the Christian and that's not Borg-like). Basically, I'm trying to understand how atheism relates to being mindless Borg, and didn't want to assume you were throwing this out as a generic insult in hopes I might be encouraged to just shut up

 

Ultimately, I'm curious about the moral justification for Christians to discriminate and mock atheists and fringe group Christians like ATI, with the expectation that other mainstream Christian sects will be not be discriminated against or mocked in the public sphere. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#2 makes me wonder how well ATI fits. Their info is in the bible, available to anyone who asks at their local church, and available in whole online. The conferences require payment, but then so too does Seminary school. I can sign up for the conference as it comes to my area. 

 

Much of ATI's information isn't straight from the Bible. And not just anyone is supposed to have access to it. A family must be approved to become members of ATI and use the curriculum. In addition to having attended the Basic and Advanced seminars, the parents had to submit an application that included a recommendation from a pastor (and/or?) a current family. And the family had to submit pictures -- men with facial hair were excluded unless they agreed to become clean shaven, although that has changed. And then the family had to attend a national or (later) regional conference each year, which was not cheap, especially when the Mom isn't working outside the home. 

 

Thanks to the internet and some former (usually disillusioned) members, some of the material is available for viewing online. But loyal members held the material very dear and did not share with others. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much of ATI's information isn't straight from the Bible. And not just anyone is supposed to have access to it. A family must be approved to become members of ATI and use the curriculum. In addition to having attended the Basic and Advanced seminars, the parents had to submit an application that included a recommendation from a pastor (and/or?) a current family. And the family had to submit pictures -- men with facial hair were excluded unless they agreed to become clean shaven, although that has changed. And then the family had to attend a national or (later) regional conference each year, which was not cheap, especially when the Mom isn't working outside the home. 

 

Thanks to the internet and some former (usually disillusioned) members, some of the material is available for viewing online. But loyal members held the material very dear and did not share with others. 

Agreed. I have read the OT and NT thoroughly and can find nothing to suggest that Cabbage Patch Dolls cause women to be unable to birth without medical assistance, or that college for women is evil, or that abstinence cures infertility, or that women should not be able to buy make up without their husband approving the colors, or....

 

You have to be a member in order to purchase his "newletters" and these little snippets of "wisdom" are what contain the whackiest of his teachings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not one of them, but we do know some families who, back in the day, had adopted ATI for their families.  You may not believe it is possible, but they were not crazy, not whackadoodles, not lacking in good judgement and common sense.  Some of them drew narrower boundaries than we did (TV and music come to mind), but it really would be inappropriate to paint with a broad brush and say that these families were crazy. 

 

I do think that many ATI families were deceived and had no idea that Gothard would go off the deep end in his beliefs.  He triggered my legalism bells from the beginning, but his early teachings, from Scripture, were very helpful to my husband's healing and wholeness after years of struggling with dyslexia.   ETA: Just to clarify, hubby is still dyslexic, but the healing was in his self-image and his understanding of God's purpose for him, and it came from teaching of Scripture, through early Gothard materials.

 

That said, I've seen several teachers who start out relatively sound and go off on a tangent that irreparably damages people who are not discerning or who have no frame of reference.  It grieves me that this is part of human nature.

 

 

 

I don't know how Gothard was in the beginning but none of this is new. It has been around as long as I can remember.

 

How extreme does someone have to be before they start the whole "girls should not be educated" nonsense? That is hardly something that is hidden within their more secretive literature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#2 makes me wonder how well ATI fits. Their info is in the bible, available to anyone who asks at their local church, and available in whole online. The conferences require payment, but then so too does Seminary school. I can sign up for the conference as it comes to my area.

I was not only thinking of insider secret info, but also the tendency of some groups to attempt to keep their members from accessing info about thier organization of which outsiders may be in possession, the reluctance to discuss or allow discussion of certain topics, or the deliberate maintenance of some kinds of ignorance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. I have read the OT and NT thoroughly and can find nothing to suggest that Cabbage Patch Dolls cause women to be unable to birth without medical assistance, or that college for women is evil, or that abstinence cures infertility, or that women should not be able to buy make up without their husband approving the colors, or....

 

You have to be a member in order to purchase his "newletters" and these little snippets of "wisdom" are what contain the whackiest of his teachings.

Because of this my good friend was convinced that her vericose veins were a result of having sinned in the past by using birth control, not the fact that she had born many children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quill,

 

Is this the book that your sister had? http://www.amazon.com/Christian-Charm-Course-Students-Book/dp/0890815089

 

I remember doing this is my Assembly of God Missionettes class when I was in 7th or 8th grade.

She definitely had that book! I am not sure if the items I cited were in that book (I think so), but I definitely remember seeing that page of face shapes and hair styles. Might have to buy a copy just to have a laugh again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She definitely had that book! I am not sure if the items I cited were in that book (I think so), but I definitely remember seeing that page of face shapes and hair styles. Might have to buy a copy just to have a laugh again.

 

Yes, the items you mentioned were in this book.  I don't think I still have my copy, but I remember the exact things that you mentioned -- about not smoothing your skirt (that never made sense to me) and I remember the drawing of the girl with her arm circled around her plate, shoveling the food in!!

 

 

eta: an important "not"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does charm have to do with Christianity? Wow.

 

The idea was that we are representatives of Christ.  In order to do that, we should have good manners, look attractive, get rid of bad habits.  I remember that there was a chapter (like Quill mentioned) about finding an attractive hairstyle based on your face shape (oval, heart, etc.); there was a chapter about how to stand when posing for photos.  How to sit properly and be ladylike.  (If you could see the way I'm sitting on my computer chair right now, you would realize that I didn't learn much.) ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh okay, on the other thread, I had read something someone stated something about ACE paces and ATI being affiliated somehow.

 

Eta: we have used Paces in past but they bothered me, even as a conservative Christian. I couldn't pinpoint my discomfort at the time. So, was just curious.

Isn't ACE the company that requires women to wear dresses or skirts to their motel meetings, and if a woman shows up wearing pants, she isn't allowed inside? I thought it was insane, but I had to give them credit for standing up for their beliefs, even if it cost them customers.

 

I'm pretty sure that's what I discovered years ago when I was checking out different curriculum options and was attending meetings to see the materials in person. They were exhibiting in a hotel and there was a dress code on their website.

 

Needless to say, I passed on the ACE meeting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It can be hard to hear one's beliefs constantly criticized and held to accountability. When the last answer left can only be, "I believe it because I believe it," all kinds of unwanted emotions may be inspired when pressed for accountability.

Nope, you can be saying something I agree with and I'd still get all bristly and call you out as an a evangelical _________ if you insist upon beating a dead horse OR make it your personal mission to correct those who believe differently. (General "you," of course.) Aggressive conversion attempts make me uncomfortable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea was that we are representatives of Christ. In order to do that, we should have good manners, look attractive, get rid of bad habits. I remember that there was a chapter (like Quill mentioned) about finding an attractive hairstyle based on your face shape (oval, heart, etc.); there was a chapter about how to stand when posing for photos. How to sit properly and be ladylike. (If you could see the way I'm sitting on my computer chair right now, you would realize that I didn't learn much.) ;)

This is the sound of my jaw dropping. What the heck?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the sound of my jaw dropping. What the heck?!

Yeah, looking back on that book really triggers my gag reflex. I'm just fine with a book that indicates how to have good manners and there's certainly nothing wrong with learning how to place one's feet attractively for a photo. (My mother was a model many moons ago and she taught us to do this anyway and it does look better in a photo.) BUT, conflating Christianity with having the proper hairstyle seems extremely bizarre to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was reading a book on the Church yesterday and realized that ATI is like the new incarnation of the Gnostics. Exclusivity, loyalty to the group prized over actual faith, "special" knowledge that only those in the group have, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if there's a connection between the Maxwell family and ATI/Gothard, but Teri Maxwell struggled greatly with depression. They follow many of these same teachings and promote them even if they are not ATI. Basically, when Teri was home alone with multiple small children, she was severely depressed. Years later, with her mother living next door, an adult daughter still living with them, and her daughter-in-law across the street, and as they stopped having children because of age, she no longer suffered from depression. I've always thought that a large part of that was that she was not isolated anymore. But, at least as of 10 years ago when I stopped paying attention to anything they said, they were promoting the idea that couples should not have friends and neither should their children. Apparently, the mom should be home alone with all the children with only her dh for support, even though those are the very same conditions under which Teri suffered greatly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#2 makes me wonder how well ATI fits. Their info is in the bible, available to anyone who asks at their local church, and available in whole online. The conferences require payment, but then so too does Seminary school. I can sign up for the conference as it comes to my area. 

 

The conference comes first, then ATI. Thousands of people have attended the conferences over the years who never, ever intended to teach their children at home. Mr. Ellie and I went twice before we even had children.

 

Not sure what you mean by "their info is in the bible." :confused1:  Many scriptures are slightly referred to in both ATI and the IBLC seminars (which as a different name since I attended in 1974...I forget what it is), many of them without the actual reference so that it isn't possible to look it up for oneself; and many are taken out of context. Most local churches have no information regarding ATI or the Institute, unless the pastor is involved.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if there's a connection between the Maxwell family and ATI/Gothard, but Teri Maxwell struggled greatly with depression. They follow many of these same teachings and promote them even if they are not ATI. Basically, when Teri was home alone with multiple small children, she was severely depressed. Years later, with her mother living next door, an adult daughter still living with them, and her daughter-in-law across the street, and as they stopped having children because of age, she no longer suffered from depression. I've always thought that a large part of that was that she was not isolated anymore. But, at least as of 10 years ago when I stopped paying attention to anything they said, they were promoting the idea that couples should not have friends and neither should their children. Apparently, the mom should be home alone with all the children with only her dh for support, even though those are the very same conditions under which Teri suffered greatly!

As far as I know the Maxwells were never ATI/Gothardites.  I knew them a very long time ago during her depression.  People did try to reach out to them.  There were some hard feelings when the attempts were rebuffed or were not quite good enough.  I am glad that it looks like later she did come through that depression.  The Maxwells follow sort of a cookbook approach to Christianity which can lead to the bondage of legalism.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The conference comes first, then ATI. Thousands of people have attended the conferences over the years who never, ever intended to teach their children at home. Mr. Ellie and I went twice before we even had children.

 

Not sure what you mean by "their info is in the bible." :confused1:  Many scriptures are slightly referred to in both ATI and the IBLC seminars (which as a different name since I attended in 1974...I forget what it is), many of them without the actual reference so that it isn't possible to look it up for oneself; and many are taken out of context. Most local churches have no information regarding ATI or the Institute, unless the pastor is involved.  

 

ATI is a Christian sect that refers to the Christian documents and Christian leaders for their doctrines. These are all open source. The same accusation of privacy and taking texts out of context have been lobbied against various Christians sects for centuries, from Roman Catholics to Mormons now to ATI. Everyone is sure there are these cults, but everyone is sure they're not involved in cults. Same thing with accusations of legalism and hypocrisy. It's always the other guy. The math doesn't add up. The more I hear Christians knocking down other Christians the more I think Frank Zappa got it right when he said “The only difference between a cult and a religion is the amount of real estate they own.†If ATI were given 150 years to develop and evolve, they'd likely integrate into society like Mormons and JW's have, and they'd be increasingly understood as "misguided," not "cultish" if history is any indication. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, you can be saying something I agree with and I'd still get all bristly and call you out as an a evangelical _________ if you insist upon beating a dead horse OR make it your personal mission to correct those who believe differently. (General "you," of course.) Aggressive conversion attempts make me uncomfortable.

 

Atheist evangelicals.

 

 

f82e743fd9dc4ffa3951ef8aaf89cb85.jpg

 

 

:laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ATI is a Christian sect that refers to the Christian documents and Christian leaders for their doctrines. These are all open source.

 

Gothard has not made his $$$ selling Bibles, or devotionals, or anything that would be at all open source, though. He considers other Christian leaders and doctrines worthless, but you have to pay hundreds of dollars to be let in on his doctrines. That's part of how he reels people in, by making his teachings exclusive.

 

Contrast with a megachurch, where the pastor may get rich by pushing people to give a lot as a sign of their spiritual strength--there's not a per capita charge to get in the door and hear whether he's any good in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea was that we are representatives of Christ.  In order to do that, we should have good manners, look attractive, get rid of bad habits.  I remember that there was a chapter (like Quill mentioned) about finding an attractive hairstyle based on your face shape (oval, heart, etc.); there was a chapter about how to stand when posing for photos.  How to sit properly and be ladylike.  (If you could see the way I'm sitting on my computer chair right now, you would realize that I didn't learn much.) ;)

 

But looking attractive is appearance. In the Bible and in the religion itself there is nothing I've ever seen suggesting a woman should focus on outward appearance, to represent her love for god, her family, or her community. There are repeated, vehement, clear commands to the contrary.

 

Can anyone show me a single bible verse that suggests that a woman should smile and be happy when facing hardship?

 

ETA: I realize you are not a Gothardite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But looking attractive is appearance. In the Bible and in the religion itself there is nothing I've ever seen suggesting a woman should focus on outward appearance, to represent her love for god, her family, or her community. There are repeated, vehement, clear commands to the contrary.

 

Can anyone show me a single bible verse that suggests that a woman should smile and be happy when facing hardship?

 

ETA: I realize you are not a Gothardite.

There is a liberal use of the book of Proverbs as commands. There are scriptures in there about the behavior and attitudes of wives, also about cheerfulness in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gothard has not made his $$$ selling Bibles, or devotionals, or anything that would be at all open source, though. He considers other Christian leaders and doctrines worthless, but you have to pay hundreds of dollars to be let in on his doctrines. That's part of how he reels people in, by making his teachings exclusive.

 

Contrast with a megachurch, where the pastor may get rich by pushing people to give a lot as a sign of their spiritual strength--there's not a per capita charge to get in the door and hear whether he's any good in the first place.

 

I totally see what you're saying, but I'm looking at this from an historical perspective. A handful of centuries ago, the Vatican was accused of making money by selling forgiveness in the form of Indulgences. Catholics will deny that's what really happened. The Mass was exclusively held in Latin thanks in part to Martin Luther, and the accusation of secrecy and cultish rituals was likely a huge impetus for the second Vatican Counsel to modify the practice of the language of the Mass. Mormon rituals are secret, open only to those who profess their faith and are willing to make a vow before God and man that they won't reveal what goes on inside the Temple. A faithful Mormon won't talk about Temple ceremonies and rituals outside it. Do you see how I'm comparing ATI with various xian sects throughout history, not just in our lifetime?

 

There are always new sects being developed. Always. Some are popular for a short time only, some not at all. Very few see longevity in their doctrines, but I suspect each new one was at one time accused of being a cult for reasons you say, and others. Certainly they were considered heretical by more than one xian sect. Xianity has a long history, 2000 years, and in that time new sects are being developed and falling away constantly. No doubt ATI has some practices that seem bizarre and damaging to mainstream xians and non-xians, but if various xian denominations were to be voted off the island for inspiring bizarre and damaging behavior, or for teaching supposedly bizarre and damaging theology who would be left? Again, this is a matter of people thinking other sects and beliefs are bizarre and damaging, but never theirs. And I'll bet dollars to donuts the Duggars or Huckabee don't believe ATI is cultish, bizarre, or damaging. I think ATI is being ganged up on simply because they're small and don't have power. Power changes everything. Look at the history of Europe and the integration between religion and politics for examples. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there is "A glad heart makes the face cheerful. . . ." but that isn't a command to have a cheerful face no matter what. It is an observation of life.

I was thinking of " better to live on a corner of the roof than in the house with a quarrelsome wife."

 

Yeah, most people would take Proverbs as generalized observations, but that is not how they are taken in the "wisdom" of Bill Gothard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, but quarrelsomeness is generally not appreciated no matter what the religion. You don't have to not quarrel, ever, to be unquarellsome.

 

What a jackfruit this guy is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, you can be saying something I agree with and I'd still get all bristly and call you out as an a evangelical _________ if you insist upon beating a dead horse OR make it your personal mission to correct those who believe differently. (General "you," of course.) Aggressive conversion attempts make me uncomfortable.

I am extremely grateful to albeto, for continuing to point out logical fallacies, historical references, Neuroscience behaviors and ask the seemingly unanswerable (by religious faith) questions.

 

Her stuff makes sense. It helps those of us who haven't the time or inclination to do the vast amounts of research that she obviously has, to view bite sized chunks of info, analyze, and draw our own conclusions.

 

albeto is to me about religion as SWB is about classical home education. Both are well read and informed on their area of expertise or passion, with a healthy dose of experience thrown in. I don't agree 100% with either of them, but I am grateful to both for sharing what they know with the rest of us to help us make our our decisions that much easier or more informed, no matter where we fall on the agreement scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know the Maxwells were never ATI/Gothardites. I knew them a very long time ago during her depression. People did try to reach out to them. There were some hard feelings when the attempts were rebuffed or were not quite good enough. I am glad that it looks like later she did come through that depression. The Maxwells follow sort of a cookbook approach to Christianity which can lead to the bondage of legalism.

Some of her books are so, so good. Especially in dealing with depression, laziness, etc. not legalistic at all, but very encouraging. I think anything can be abused if someone is of the mind to do it, but Steve and Teri have always struck me as lovers of the Lord first and foremost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...