Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: What if Klemp had "come clean" in 1983...

Expand Messages
  • prometheus_973
    Hello Jonathan and All, Good points. Yes, Klemp could, also, have handled the situation with Darwin with more compassion, tolerance, and finesse as well, but
    Message 1 of 14 , Sep 18, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello Jonathan and All,
      Good points. Yes, Klemp could,
      also, have handled the situation
      with Darwin with more compassion,
      tolerance, and finesse as well, but
      didn't choose to.

      And, it's obvious that Klemp holds
      onto grudges (anger) or else he
      would have mentioned Darwin's
      death and maybe said some kind
      words about our former LEM. After
      all, DG did hand HK the Rod of ECK
      Power!

      And, Darwin didn't have to resign
      and step-down at that time did he?
      So, why does Klemp have animosity
      toward, a now dead, EK Master after
      all of these years? The initial act of
      kicking Darwin out of Eckankar and
      then the omission of his death, years
      later, tells volumes about Klemp's
      character... then and now. And, this
      is more proof that Klemp's Not what
      he claims to be... enlightened and
      of a high consciousness.

      Yes, Klemp Could Not share the
      throne. Nor could he be honest
      about the real origins of Eckankar
      and of Kirpal Singh who was Paul's
      real Master and who once possessed
      PT's "The Tiger's Fang" manuscript.
      For this reason Klemp knew that
      Kirpal was PT's true Master and
      not the "Sudar" character/name
      that PT created and substituted.

      Klemp did say that Twit did a lot
      of research and took the "best"
      of many religions etc. in order to
      form Eckankar. However, why then
      was Rebazar necessary if PT took
      other teachings to create Eckankar?
      Wouldn't/shouldn't Eckankar be
      based upon a purer form of truth
      and of what Rebazar had taught
      him? Well, no! PT needed the EK
      Master lineage story involving Rebazar
      in order to be initiated. Therefore,
      with the help of a fictional character,
      that he created, Twitchell initiated
      himself.

      So, the "outer teachings" seem to
      be based upon the "best of" Sant
      Mat et al (excluding the mandatory
      Vegan diet and and the Chastity
      requirements) while the "inner
      teachings" are based upon what
      the fictitious Rebazar "shared,"
      but only to Paul alone. Therefore,
      the LEM becomes the only source
      of divine "truth."

      This is actually just a "shell game"
      where, now, HK can switch it around
      as he sees fit. It's a convient lie and
      what PT referred to as "paradoxes"
      and HK refers to as a Catch-22.

      Fortunately, for many, Klemp's
      limited consciousness and character
      flaws have limited Eckankar's growth.

      Prometheus

      jonathan wrote:
      At the end there "many tears" was supposed to be "many years" It was a typo, but
      it is looking to me now more like a Freudian slip.


      jonathan wrote:
      >
      >
      > What if Klemp had "come clean" in 1983 when he first learned about how
      extensive Twitchell's lies, exaggerations, and fabrications were?
      >
      > Eckankar would have had to publicly admit:
      > 1. Paul copied a lot of his stuff from other sources. Eckankar would then have
      to start documenting all of the instances of that. In hindsight, if Eckankar had
      decided to pursue this path, they should have just paid David Lane $100,000 for
      doing his first batch of undergraduate research on Twitchell's plagiarism, then
      hire him to continue his work. Why not? He seemed to be very good at it. Plus,
      David did not even have access to all of Paul's stuff that Eckankar had in its
      possession. How many more examples of plagiarism and lies are hidden away in
      Eckankar's safe?
      > 2. That Eckankar was copied from, and modeled after Sant Mant, etc.
      > 3. As a result of admitting number 2 above, Eckankar would then have to admit
      that it is NOT the original religion from which all other religions have sprung.
      > 4. Eckankar would have to retract their stories about all of the people
      throughout history whom they claim were Eck masters.
      >
      > As you can see, by the time Eckankar does all of this, the entire religion
      would have "unraveled" which is the exact word Ford Johnson often used when
      discussing Paul's lies and the possibility of Klemp doing something about it.
      >
      > How would the membership of Eckankar have reacted? Most of the members would
      have reacted as if a rug had just been pulled out from underneath them because
      the entire justification for Eckankar is now gone. Eckankar would have lost at
      least half of their membership, maybe more. Meanwhile, the remaining members
      would have been constantly wondering "What else did Twitchell lie to us about?"
      That's pretty much how I felt after reading David Lane's and Ford Johnson's
      research on Twitchell's plagiarism.
      >
      > When I initially accepted the fact that Eckankar had lied to me for 29 years I
      actually had thought that Klemp would eventually do something about it. But
      after awhile I realized that this really was just a fantasy. I even then tried
      to say to myself "But there are still a lot of good things about Eckankar." But
      I had to eventually admit that this was just a fantasy too. Klemp was never
      going to do it. It was never going to happen. And then I had to completely
      accept the fact that David Lane's and Ford Johnson's research was correct. Paul
      Twitchell WAS a pathological liar. It was very difficult for me to do that. So
      when I left Eckankar after being a member for 29 years, it was difficult. I had
      to restructure my entire thinking process. Everything I had previously believed
      to be true had to be restructured in my brain, and maybe my heart too.
      >
      > I've been reading a lot of Ford Johnson's book lately. And I got the distinct
      impression that when he was still a member of Eckankar he too was wondering
      whether Klemp would "fix" Eckankar with regard to Twitchell's lies and
      fabrications. If you want to research this, just do a search for the word
      "unravel" in the free digital version of his book "Confessions Of A Godseeker"
      which is available as a free download on the Internet. "Unravel" was Ford's
      favorite word for what would happen to Eckankar if Harold attempted to "come
      clean" regarding Twitchell's fabrications.
      >
      > Klemp was never going to fix Eckankar. He never will do it. But the real
      reason is that it is impossible for him to do that without Eckankar basically
      starting over from ground zero as a religion. And I know Ford realized that, but
      "when he realized it" is something that I don't know. Ford, like the rest of us
      was "under the spell" (my choice of words). And he mentions something along
      these lines more than once in his book. He mentioned that that there were things
      about Eckankar that were "not quite right" (my words) but he never saw them for
      what they truly were for many many tears during his membership in Eckankar. That
      made it easier on me when I realized "Yes, it happened to Ford too."
      >
      > Jonathan
      >
    • etznab@aol.com
      Some interesting dialogue, IMO. Two main things prevent the come clean approach. IMO. (1) The membership has to be on board with it. It has to be all or
      Message 2 of 14 , Sep 18, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Some interesting dialogue, IMO.

        Two main things prevent the "come clean"
        approach. IMO.

        (1) The membership has to be on board with
        it. It has to be all or nothing, so to speak. It
        has to be not only the LEM, but the board of
        directors, the president, the HI's & long-time
        members, and the members in general.

        (2) Changing the dogma changes the story
        about the LEM considerably. Also Mahanta.

        ***************************************************

        For examples about what happens when a
        person tries to "come clean" by presenting
        the truth instead of prescriptions for pseudo
        religion, history and myth there are many of
        them in the archives and in books. Also, in
        the memory of personal experience and the
        way fundamentalists treat those who speak
        for change.

        When those who want change, who want
        the "come clean" approach are met not by
        "old-timers" with open arms, but with disdain,
        those members leave. And with them leaves
        the chances for any greater reformation of
        organized religion. Instead - for those people
        who stay in it - there is generally a "wait &
        see" attitude. A waiting for something to
        happen that is not going to happen by itself.
        And so, there is a "turtle's pace" of reform
        where there could have been (and could be)
        a tidal wave. IMO.

        Etznab

        -----Original Message-----
        From: jonathanjohns96 <jonathanjohns96@...>
        To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Fri, Sep 17, 2010 9:48 pm
        Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] What if Klemp had "come clean" in
        1983...

         

        What if Klemp had "come clean" in 1983 when he first learned about how
        extensive Twitchell's lies, exaggerations, and fabrications were?

        Eckankar would have had to publicly admit:
        1. Paul copied a lot of his stuff from other sources. Eckankar would
        then have to start documenting all of the instances of that. In
        hindsight, if Eckankar had decided to pursue this path, they should
        have just paid David Lane $100,000 for doing his first batch of
        undergraduate research on Twitchell's plagiarism, then hire him to
        continue his work. Why not? He seemed to be very good at it. Plus,
        David did not even have access to all of Paul's stuff that Eckankar had
        in its possession. How many more examples of plagiarism and lies are
        hidden away in Eckankar's safe?
        2. That Eckankar was copied from, and modeled after Sant Mant, etc.
        3. As a result of admitting number 2 above, Eckankar would then have to
        admit that it is NOT the original religion from which all other
        religions have sprung.
        4. Eckankar would have to retract their stories about all of the people
        throughout history whom they claim were Eck masters.

        As you can see, by the time Eckankar does all of this, the entire
        religion would have "unraveled" which is the exact word Ford Johnson
        often used when discussing Paul's lies and the possibility of Klemp
        doing something about it.

        How would the membership of Eckankar have reacted? Most of the members
        would have reacted as if a rug had just been pulled out from underneath
        them because the entire justification for Eckankar is now gone.
        Eckankar would have lost at least half of their membership, maybe more.
        Meanwhile, the remaining members would have been constantly wondering
        "What else did Twitchell lie to us about?" That's pretty much how I
        felt after reading David Lane's and Ford Johnson's research on
        Twitchell's plagiarism.

        When I initially accepted the fact that Eckankar had lied to me for 29
        years I actually had thought that Klemp would eventually do something
        about it. But after awhile I realized that this really was just a
        fantasy. I even then tried to say to myself "But there are still a lot
        of good things about Eckankar." But I had to eventually admit that this
        was just a fantasy too. Klemp was never going to do it. It was never
        going to happen. And then I had to completely accept the fact that
        David Lane's and Ford Johnson's research was correct. Paul Twitchell
        WAS a pathological liar. It was very difficult for me to do that. So
        when I left Eckankar after being a member for 29 years, it was
        difficult. I had to restructure my entire thinking process. Everything
        I had previously believed to be true had to be restructured in my
        brain, and maybe my heart too.

        I've been reading a lot of Ford Johnson's book lately. And I got the
        distinct impression that when he was still a member of Eckankar he too
        was wondering whether Klemp would "fix" Eckankar with regard to
        Twitchell's lies and fabrications. If you want to research this, just
        do a search for the word "unravel" in the free digital version of his
        book "Confessions Of A Godseeker" which is available as a free download
        on the Internet. "Unravel" was Ford's favorite word for what would
        happen to Eckankar if Harold attempted to "come clean" regarding
        Twitchell's fabrications.

        Klemp was never going to fix Eckankar. He never will do it. But the
        real reason is that it is impossible for him to do that without
        Eckankar basically starting over from ground zero as a religion. And I
        know Ford realized that, but "when he realized it" is something that I
        don't know. Ford, like the rest of us was "under the spell" (my choice
        of words). And he mentions something along these lines more than once
        in his book. He mentioned that that there were things about Eckankar
        that were "not quite right" (my words) but he never saw them for what
        they truly were for many many tears during his membership in Eckankar.
        That made it easier on me when I realized "Yes, it happened to Ford
        too."

        Jonathan
      • jonathanjohns96
        All, I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson s book Confessions Of A Godseeker. That is where I originally read Ford s assertion that if Klemp
        Message 3 of 14 , Sep 18, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          All,

          I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read Ford's assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's lies that the entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection back in December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I immediately accepted his conclusion.

          When I decided to write this post I started out with the supposition that "If Eckankar ever attempted to come clean, what would be the likely approach, and what would be the likely reaction by the members of Eckankar." But I didn't go back to "Confessions" and read Ford's stuff again. I simply started out from scratch, but with his general conclusion already in my head because I accepted his conclusion the first time I read it in his book.

          Just giving credit where credit is due.

          Jonathan
        • etznab@aol.com
          I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson s book Confessions Of A Godseeker. That is where I originally read Ford s assertion that if Klemp had
          Message 4 of 14 , Sep 18, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
            "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read Ford's
            assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's lies that the
            entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection back in
            December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I immediately
            accepted his conclusion.

            Jonathan,

            Even after writing Confessions, Ford Johnson apparently believed that
            .".. Eckankar could survive the cleaning." (See: 2nd-last paragraph.)
            Granted, not in the same form.

            http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/FirstOpenLetter.aspx

            -----Original Message-----
            From: jonathanjohns96 <jonathanjohns96@...>
            To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 5:11 pm
            Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: What if Klemp had "come
            clean" in 1983...

             
            All,

            I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
            "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read Ford's
            assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's lies that the
            entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection back in
            December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I immediately
            accepted his conclusion.

            When I decided to write this post I started out with the supposition
            that "If Eckankar ever attempted to come clean, what would be the
            likely approach, and what would be the likely reaction by the members
            of Eckankar." But I didn't go back to "Confessions" and read Ford's
            stuff again. I simply started out from scratch, but with his general
            conclusion already in my head because I accepted his conclusion the
            first time I read it in his book.

            Just giving credit where credit is due.

            Jonathan
          • jonathanjohns96
            Thanks, Etznab, That s very interesting. As stated on Ford s website, this letter that you link to is the transmittal letter for when Ford sent one of the
            Message 5 of 14 , Sep 18, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Thanks, Etznab,

              That's very interesting. As stated on Ford's website, this letter that you link to is the transmittal letter for when Ford sent one of the first copies of his book "Confessions" to Klemp. Ford actually does sound optimistic about the possibility of Eckankar cleaning up Twitchell's lies. I'm going to go ahead and quote his paragraph here:

              Ford Johnson's letter to Klemp:
              "Perhaps you will finish what you started in your 1980's talks when you began to reveal the truth about Paul Twitchell. Obviously you did not go far enough. Instead, both you and Darwin Gross settled into Paul's mythology, perpetuating and reinforcing his fabrications. I know how difficult it would be to remove the lies in Eckankar — extensively detailed in Confessions — and strip it of the distortions of truth that mislead soul. However, I believe that Eckankar could survive the cleaning. Not in the same form that it is today, but in a purer form that accomplishes what all paths to God should; to teach, to empower and then to set souls free to realize and experience their oneness with ALL THAT IS."

              Jonathan


              --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@... wrote:
              >
              >
              > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
              > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read Ford's
              > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's lies that the
              > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection back in
              > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I immediately
              > accepted his conclusion.
              >
              > Jonathan,
              >
              > Even after writing Confessions, Ford Johnson apparently believed that
              > .".. Eckankar could survive the cleaning." (See: 2nd-last paragraph.)
              > Granted, not in the same form.
              >
              > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/FirstOpenLetter.aspx
              >
              > -----Original Message-----
              > From: jonathanjohns96 <jonathanjohns96@...>
              > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
              > Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 5:11 pm
              > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: What if Klemp had "come
              > clean" in 1983...
              >
              >  
              > All,
              >
              > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
              > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read Ford's
              > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's lies that the
              > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection back in
              > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I immediately
              > accepted his conclusion.
              >
              > When I decided to write this post I started out with the supposition
              > that "If Eckankar ever attempted to come clean, what would be the
              > likely approach, and what would be the likely reaction by the members
              > of Eckankar." But I didn't go back to "Confessions" and read Ford's
              > stuff again. I simply started out from scratch, but with his general
              > conclusion already in my head because I accepted his conclusion the
              > first time I read it in his book.
              >
              > Just giving credit where credit is due.
              >
              > Jonathan
              >
            • jonathanjohns96
              All, I thought about this again for one minute. I still think the chances of Eckankar cleaning up Twitchell s lies are minutely slim. But I admire Ford for at
              Message 6 of 14 , Sep 18, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                All,

                I thought about this again for one minute. I still think the chances of Eckankar cleaning up Twitchell's lies are minutely slim. But I admire Ford for at least suggesting the possibility to Klemp. I don't think Klemp will ever do it. But I will accept the theory that Klemp's writing about it on Ecknakar.org about Paul being a master compiler, etc may have actually opened a crack in the door. So I can almost give some credit to klemp for that, although I am sure that a lot of former Eckists will disagree with me that this was Klemp's purpose in writing that stuff.

                I think when the next Eck master comes along there is a possibility of SOMETHING happening, but I'm not sure what. Based on what I know at the present time I would find a complete housecleaning very hard to believe. However, Eckankar wrote Darwin Gross out of the history of Eckankar. Whose to say they can't write Paul Twitchell out of the history of Eckankar over the next 50 years? Keep his basic principles that Ecknakar needs, but phase his personage out more and more.

                Jonatahn


                --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "jonathanjohns96" <jonathanjohns96@...> wrote:
                >
                > Thanks, Etznab,
                >
                > That's very interesting. As stated on Ford's website, this letter that you link to is the transmittal letter for when Ford sent one of the first copies of his book "Confessions" to Klemp. Ford actually does sound optimistic about the possibility of Eckankar cleaning up Twitchell's lies. I'm going to go ahead and quote his paragraph here:
                >
                > Ford Johnson's letter to Klemp:
                > "Perhaps you will finish what you started in your 1980's talks when you began to reveal the truth about Paul Twitchell. Obviously you did not go far enough. Instead, both you and Darwin Gross settled into Paul's mythology, perpetuating and reinforcing his fabrications. I know how difficult it would be to remove the lies in Eckankar — extensively detailed in Confessions — and strip it of the distortions of truth that mislead soul. However, I believe that Eckankar could survive the cleaning. Not in the same form that it is today, but in a purer form that accomplishes what all paths to God should; to teach, to empower and then to set souls free to realize and experience their oneness with ALL THAT IS."
                >
                > Jonathan
                >
                >
                > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@ wrote:
                > >
                > >
                > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
                > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read Ford's
                > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's lies that the
                > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection back in
                > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I immediately
                > > accepted his conclusion.
                > >
                > > Jonathan,
                > >
                > > Even after writing Confessions, Ford Johnson apparently believed that
                > > .".. Eckankar could survive the cleaning." (See: 2nd-last paragraph.)
                > > Granted, not in the same form.
                > >
                > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/FirstOpenLetter.aspx
                > >
                > > -----Original Message-----
                > > From: jonathanjohns96 <jonathanjohns96@>
                > > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                > > Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 5:11 pm
                > > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: What if Klemp had "come
                > > clean" in 1983...
                > >
                > >  
                > > All,
                > >
                > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
                > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read Ford's
                > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's lies that the
                > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection back in
                > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I immediately
                > > accepted his conclusion.
                > >
                > > When I decided to write this post I started out with the supposition
                > > that "If Eckankar ever attempted to come clean, what would be the
                > > likely approach, and what would be the likely reaction by the members
                > > of Eckankar." But I didn't go back to "Confessions" and read Ford's
                > > stuff again. I simply started out from scratch, but with his general
                > > conclusion already in my head because I accepted his conclusion the
                > > first time I read it in his book.
                > >
                > > Just giving credit where credit is due.
                > >
                > > Jonathan
                > >
                >
              • jonathanjohns96
                All, I wonder whether people are getting tired of all my commenting here, but this paragraph by Ford Johnson is really sending me off the deep end. It is
                Message 7 of 14 , Sep 18, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  All,

                  I wonder whether people are getting tired of all my commenting here, but this paragraph by Ford Johnson is really sending me off the deep end. It is doing that because I have no idea why he included it in the transmittal letter.

                  Lets summarize. Ford Johnson wrote a very long book detailing all of the lies, fabrications, and curses by Paul Twitchell, all of which had been continued by Harold Klemp for the 20 years between the time Klemp took over in 1983 and 2003 when Ford sent a copy of said book to Klemp. In the book, Ford also points out many of the deficiencies of Harold Klemp himself. And then Ford sends a copy of the book to Klemp. The letter includes a paragraph nicely informing Klemp that he still can clean up Paul Twitchell's lies, fabrications, and curses. Hmmm.

                  On the surface of things, I am having a very hard time understanding why Ford would have thought that Klemp would care one bit about anything Ford said in "the paragraph." Did Ford add it just for the sake of completeness? Did he add it just so Klemp had one last reminder about the right thing to do? That's the only theory I can come up with now. Otherwise, "the paragraph" looks like a bunch of craziness to me.

                  Jonathan



                  --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "jonathanjohns96" <jonathanjohns96@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > All,
                  >
                  > I thought about this again for one minute. I still think the chances of Eckankar cleaning up Twitchell's lies are minutely slim. But I admire Ford for at least suggesting the possibility to Klemp. I don't think Klemp will ever do it. But I will accept the theory that Klemp's writing about it on Ecknakar.org about Paul being a master compiler, etc may have actually opened a crack in the door. So I can almost give some credit to klemp for that, although I am sure that a lot of former Eckists will disagree with me that this was Klemp's purpose in writing that stuff.
                  >
                  > I think when the next Eck master comes along there is a possibility of SOMETHING happening, but I'm not sure what. Based on what I know at the present time I would find a complete housecleaning very hard to believe. However, Eckankar wrote Darwin Gross out of the history of Eckankar. Whose to say they can't write Paul Twitchell out of the history of Eckankar over the next 50 years? Keep his basic principles that Ecknakar needs, but phase his personage out more and more.
                  >
                  > Jonatahn
                  >
                  >
                  > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "jonathanjohns96" <jonathanjohns96@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Thanks, Etznab,
                  > >
                  > > That's very interesting. As stated on Ford's website, this letter that you link to is the transmittal letter for when Ford sent one of the first copies of his book "Confessions" to Klemp. Ford actually does sound optimistic about the possibility of Eckankar cleaning up Twitchell's lies. I'm going to go ahead and quote his paragraph here:
                  > >
                  > > Ford Johnson's letter to Klemp:
                  > > "Perhaps you will finish what you started in your 1980's talks when you began to reveal the truth about Paul Twitchell. Obviously you did not go far enough. Instead, both you and Darwin Gross settled into Paul's mythology, perpetuating and reinforcing his fabrications. I know how difficult it would be to remove the lies in Eckankar — extensively detailed in Confessions — and strip it of the distortions of truth that mislead soul. However, I believe that Eckankar could survive the cleaning. Not in the same form that it is today, but in a purer form that accomplishes what all paths to God should; to teach, to empower and then to set souls free to realize and experience their oneness with ALL THAT IS."
                  > >
                  > > Jonathan
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@ wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
                  > > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read Ford's
                  > > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's lies that the
                  > > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection back in
                  > > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I immediately
                  > > > accepted his conclusion.
                  > > >
                  > > > Jonathan,
                  > > >
                  > > > Even after writing Confessions, Ford Johnson apparently believed that
                  > > > .".. Eckankar could survive the cleaning." (See: 2nd-last paragraph.)
                  > > > Granted, not in the same form.
                  > > >
                  > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/FirstOpenLetter.aspx
                  > > >
                  > > > -----Original Message-----
                  > > > From: jonathanjohns96 <jonathanjohns96@>
                  > > > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                  > > > Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 5:11 pm
                  > > > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: What if Klemp had "come
                  > > > clean" in 1983...
                  > > >
                  > > >  
                  > > > All,
                  > > >
                  > > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
                  > > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read Ford's
                  > > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's lies that the
                  > > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection back in
                  > > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I immediately
                  > > > accepted his conclusion.
                  > > >
                  > > > When I decided to write this post I started out with the supposition
                  > > > that "If Eckankar ever attempted to come clean, what would be the
                  > > > likely approach, and what would be the likely reaction by the members
                  > > > of Eckankar." But I didn't go back to "Confessions" and read Ford's
                  > > > stuff again. I simply started out from scratch, but with his general
                  > > > conclusion already in my head because I accepted his conclusion the
                  > > > first time I read it in his book.
                  > > >
                  > > > Just giving credit where credit is due.
                  > > >
                  > > > Jonathan
                  > > >
                  > >
                  >
                • prometheus_973
                  Hello Jonathan and All, I m finding this line of discussion interesting. I m sort of seeing Ford s approach with Klemp as being two pronged. When Klemp took
                  Message 8 of 14 , Sep 19, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hello Jonathan and All,
                    I'm finding this line of discussion interesting.
                    I'm sort of seeing Ford's approach with Klemp
                    as being two pronged.

                    When Klemp took over from Darwin in 1981
                    he did so with a Holier Than Thou attitude and
                    gave the impression that he wanted to present
                    Eckankar in its "pure" form. Thus, why wouldn't
                    Klemp want to present the "whole truth" and
                    cleanup the distortions that Twitchell created
                    (due to needing to get the EK teachings "off-
                    the-ground" so to speak). Maybe Ford was
                    under the impression, or delusion, that Klemp
                    was still this same person with the same goals?

                    Then again, it could be that Ford was baiting
                    Klemp and knew that 14th Initiate LEM/Mahanta
                    Klemp wasn't going to or was incapable of having
                    an equal/peer (one-on-one, Soul=Soul)) discussion
                    with him, a 7th Initiate and RESA, because (All
                    Knowing, All Powerful) Klemp didn't want to set
                    a prescient and have someone/anyone tell or
                    suggest to him what he should do. I wonder
                    how Joan handles that?

                    Basically, it's Klemp's way or the highway,
                    although, Klemp has said in the past that
                    he's "not perfect."

                    So, why wouldn't Klemp, who has claimed
                    he's "not perfect," Not be open to suggestions?
                    Well, Klemp discovered via booting Darwin
                    that he didn't have to listen to anyone or
                    bend to anything as well. HK's even said,
                    as well, that he's "not a good listener."
                    For Klemp, that's the whole point with
                    him being a 14th Initiate and a Mahanta!
                    He's over everyone else and is their boss.
                    What top boss wants to hear suggestions
                    from underlings? Except for one point...
                    the LEM/Mahanta is supposed to depict
                    the Five Virtues.

                    The Five Virtues were/are Klemp's Catch-
                    22 that Ford trapped him with. Klemp,
                    once again, as he had with Darwin,
                    showed a lack of compassion and tolerance.
                    And, once again, only a small group
                    of the more enlightened ECKists (who
                    had finally seen the truth about Klemp
                    in the light of day) responded. Well,
                    maybe it was a smaller group this last
                    time. When HK kicked Darwin to the
                    curb there were many ECKits that left.
                    If Klemp would have handled that
                    situation with some intelligence,
                    compassion, and love Eckankar
                    would have, today, many more
                    experienced H.I.s and members
                    in general and be much stronger.


                    Prometheus

                    jonathan wrote:
                    >
                    > All,
                    >
                    > I wonder whether people are getting tired of all my commenting here, but this
                    paragraph by Ford Johnson is really sending me off the deep end. It is doing
                    that because I have no idea why he included it in the transmittal letter.
                    >
                    > Lets summarize. Ford Johnson wrote a very long book detailing all of the lies,
                    fabrications, and curses by Paul Twitchell, all of which had been continued by
                    Harold Klemp for the 20 years between the time Klemp took over in 1983 and 2003
                    when Ford sent a copy of said book to Klemp. In the book, Ford also points out
                    many of the deficiencies of Harold Klemp himself. And then Ford sends a copy of
                    the book to Klemp. The letter includes a paragraph nicely informing Klemp that
                    he still can clean up Paul Twitchell's lies, fabrications, and curses. Hmmm.
                    >
                    > On the surface of things, I am having a very hard time understanding why Ford
                    would have thought that Klemp would care one bit about anything Ford said in
                    "the paragraph." Did Ford add it just for the sake of completeness? Did he add
                    it just so Klemp had one last reminder about the right thing to do? That's the
                    only theory I can come up with now. Otherwise, "the paragraph" looks like a
                    bunch of craziness to me.
                    >
                    > Jonathan
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    jonathan wrote:
                    > >
                    > > All,
                    > >
                    > > I thought about this again for one minute. I still think the chances of
                    Eckankar cleaning up Twitchell's lies are minutely slim. But I admire Ford for
                    at least suggesting the possibility to Klemp. I don't think Klemp will ever do
                    it. But I will accept the theory that Klemp's writing about it on Ecknakar.org
                    about Paul being a master compiler, etc may have actually opened a crack in the
                    door. So I can almost give some credit to klemp for that, although I am sure
                    that a lot of former Eckists will disagree with me that this was Klemp's purpose
                    in writing that stuff.
                    > >
                    > > I think when the next Eck master comes along there is a possibility of
                    SOMETHING happening, but I'm not sure what. Based on what I know at the present
                    time I would find a complete housecleaning very hard to believe. However,
                    Eckankar wrote Darwin Gross out of the history of Eckankar. Whose to say they
                    can't write Paul Twitchell out of the history of Eckankar over the next 50
                    years? Keep his basic principles that Ecknakar needs, but phase his personage
                    out more and more.
                    > >
                    > > Jonatahn
                    > >
                    > >
                    jonathan wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > Thanks, Etznab,
                    > > >
                    > > > That's very interesting. As stated on Ford's website, this letter that you
                    link to is the transmittal letter for when Ford sent one of the first copies of
                    his book "Confessions" to Klemp. Ford actually does sound optimistic about the
                    possibility of Eckankar cleaning up Twitchell's lies. I'm going to go ahead and
                    quote his paragraph here:
                    > > >
                    Ford Johnson's letter to Klemp:
                    "Perhaps you will finish what you started in your 1980's talks when you
                    began to reveal the truth about Paul Twitchell. Obviously you did not go far
                    enough. Instead, both you and Darwin Gross settled into Paul's mythology,
                    perpetuating and reinforcing his fabrications. I know how difficult it would be
                    to remove the lies in Eckankar — extensively detailed in Confessions — and strip
                    it of the distortions of truth that mislead soul. However, I believe that
                    Eckankar could survive the cleaning. Not in the same form that it is today, but
                    in a purer form that accomplishes what all paths to God should; to teach, to
                    empower and then to set souls free to realize and experience their oneness with
                    ALL THAT IS."
                    > > >
                    > > > Jonathan
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    etznab@ wrote:
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
                    > > > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read Ford's
                    > > > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's lies that the
                    > > > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection back in
                    > > > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I immediately
                    > > > > accepted his conclusion.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Jonathan,
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Even after writing Confessions, Ford Johnson apparently believed that
                    > > > > .".. Eckankar could survive the cleaning." (See: 2nd-last paragraph.)
                    > > > > Granted, not in the same form.
                    > > > >
                    http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/FirstOpenLetter.aspx
                    > > > >
                    > > > > -----Original Message-----
                    > > > > From: jonathan
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > All,
                    > > > >
                    > > > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
                    > > > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read Ford's
                    > > > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's lies that the
                    > > > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection back in
                    > > > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I immediately
                    > > > > accepted his conclusion.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > When I decided to write this post I started out with the supposition
                    > > > > that "If Eckankar ever attempted to come clean, what would be the
                    > > > > likely approach, and what would be the likely reaction by the members
                    > > > > of Eckankar." But I didn't go back to "Confessions" and read Ford's
                    > > > > stuff again. I simply started out from scratch, but with his general
                    > > > > conclusion already in my head because I accepted his conclusion the
                    > > > > first time I read it in his book.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Just giving credit where credit is due.
                    > > > > Jonathan
                  • etznab@aol.com
                    About the master compiler point, here is something perhaps none of you have ever seen (in such detail) before. http://tinyurl.com/2ua8pjx
                    Message 9 of 14 , Sep 20, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      About the master compiler point, here is something
                      perhaps none of you have ever seen (in such detail)
                      before.

                      http://tinyurl.com/2ua8pjx

                      http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/browse_thread/thread/638b86992cc197c3?hl=en#

                      Look at the third post, then go to the first one with a
                      paragraph by Swami Vivekananda.

                      Ford Johnson illustrated this topic in his book but -
                      as you will see - the apparent plagiarism of Swami
                      Vivekananda extends beyond the quote in The Path
                      of the Masters, by Julian Johnson.

                      Just recently discovered the extent of this myself.

                      Etznab

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: jonathanjohns96 <jonathanjohns96@...>
                      To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                      Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 7:09 pm
                      Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: What if Klemp had "come
                      clean" in 1983...

                       
                      All,

                      I thought about this again for one minute. I still think the chances of
                      Eckankar cleaning up Twitchell's lies are minutely slim. But I admire
                      Ford for at least suggesting the possibility to Klemp. I don't think
                      Klemp will ever do it. But I will accept the theory that Klemp's
                      writing about it on Ecknakar.org about Paul being a master compiler,
                      etc may have actually opened a crack in the door. So I can almost give
                      some credit to klemp for that, although I am sure that a lot of former
                      Eckists will disagree with me that this was Klemp's purpose in writing
                      that stuff.

                      I think when the next Eck master comes along there is a possibility of
                      SOMETHING happening, but I'm not sure what. Based on what I know at the
                      present time I would find a complete housecleaning very hard to
                      believe. However, Eckankar wrote Darwin Gross out of the history of
                      Eckankar. Whose to say they can't write Paul Twitchell out of the
                      history of Eckankar over the next 50 years? Keep his basic principles
                      that Ecknakar needs, but phase his personage out more and more.

                      Jonatahn

                      --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "jonathanjohns96"
                      <jonathanjohns96@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Thanks, Etznab,
                      >
                      > That's very interesting. As stated on Ford's website, this letter
                      that you link to is the transmittal letter for when Ford sent one of
                      the first copies of his book "Confessions" to Klemp. Ford actually does
                      sound optimistic about the possibility of Eckankar cleaning up
                      Twitchell's lies. I'm going to go ahead and quote his paragraph here:
                      >
                      > Ford Johnson's letter to Klemp:
                      > "Perhaps you will finish what you started in your 1980's talks
                      when you began to reveal the truth about Paul Twitchell. Obviously you
                      did not go far enough. Instead, both you and Darwin Gross settled into
                      Paul's mythology, perpetuating and reinforcing his fabrications. I know
                      how difficult it would be to remove the lies in Eckankar — extensively
                      detailed in Confessions — and strip it of the distortions of truth that
                      mislead soul. However, I believe that Eckankar could survive the
                      cleaning. Not in the same form that it is today, but in a purer form
                      that accomplishes what all paths to God should; to teach, to empower
                      and then to set souls free to realize and experience their oneness with
                      ALL THAT IS."
                      >
                      > Jonathan
                      >
                      >
                      > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@ wrote:
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
                      > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read
                      Ford's
                      > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's
                      lies that the
                      > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection
                      back in
                      > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I
                      immediately
                      > > accepted his conclusion.
                      > >
                      > > Jonathan,
                      > >
                      > > Even after writing Confessions, Ford Johnson apparently
                      believed that
                      > > .".. Eckankar could survive the cleaning." (See: 2nd-last
                      paragraph.)
                      > > Granted, not in the same form.
                      > >
                      > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/FirstOpenLetter.aspx
                      > >
                      > > -----Original Message-----
                      > > From: jonathanjohns96 <jonathanjohns96@>
                      > > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                      > > Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 5:11 pm
                      > > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: What if Klemp had
                      "come
                      > > clean" in 1983...
                      > >
                      > >  
                      > > All,
                      > >
                      > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
                      > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read
                      Ford's
                      > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's
                      lies that the
                      > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection
                      back in
                      > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I
                      immediately
                      > > accepted his conclusion.
                      > >
                      > > When I decided to write this post I started out with the
                      supposition
                      > > that "If Eckankar ever attempted to come clean, what would be
                      the
                      > > likely approach, and what would be the likely reaction by the
                      members
                      > > of Eckankar." But I didn't go back to "Confessions" and read
                      Ford's
                      > > stuff again. I simply started out from scratch, but with his
                      general
                      > > conclusion already in my head because I accepted his
                      conclusion the
                      > > first time I read it in his book.
                      > >
                      > > Just giving credit where credit is due.
                      > >
                      > > Jonathan
                      > >
                      >
                    • etznab@aol.com
                      Read the second open letter. It s a little different. http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/SecondOpenLetter.aspx ... From: jonathanjohns96
                      Message 10 of 14 , Sep 20, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Read the second open letter. It's a little different.

                        http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/SecondOpenLetter.aspx

                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: jonathanjohns96 <jonathanjohns96@...>
                        To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                        Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 9:50 pm
                        Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: What if Klemp had "come
                        clean" in 1983...

                         
                        All,

                        I wonder whether people are getting tired of all my commenting here,
                        but this paragraph by Ford Johnson is really sending me off the deep
                        end. It is doing that because I have no idea why he included it in the
                        transmittal letter.

                        Lets summarize. Ford Johnson wrote a very long book detailing all of
                        the lies, fabrications, and curses by Paul Twitchell, all of which had
                        been continued by Harold Klemp for the 20 years between the time Klemp
                        took over in 1983 and 2003 when Ford sent a copy of said book to Klemp.
                        In the book, Ford also points out many of the deficiencies of Harold
                        Klemp himself. And then Ford sends a copy of the book to Klemp. The
                        letter includes a paragraph nicely informing Klemp that he still can
                        clean up Paul Twitchell's lies, fabrications, and curses. Hmmm.

                        On the surface of things, I am having a very hard time understanding
                        why Ford would have thought that Klemp would care one bit about
                        anything Ford said in "the paragraph." Did Ford add it just for the
                        sake of completeness? Did he add it just so Klemp had one last reminder
                        about the right thing to do? That's the only theory I can come up with
                        now. Otherwise, "the paragraph" looks like a bunch of craziness to me.

                        Jonathan

                        --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "jonathanjohns96"
                        <jonathanjohns96@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > All,
                        >
                        > I thought about this again for one minute. I still think the
                        chances of Eckankar cleaning up Twitchell's lies are minutely slim. But
                        I admire Ford for at least suggesting the possibility to Klemp. I don't
                        think Klemp will ever do it. But I will accept the theory that Klemp's
                        writing about it on Ecknakar.org about Paul being a master compiler,
                        etc may have actually opened a crack in the door. So I can almost give
                        some credit to klemp for that, although I am sure that a lot of former
                        Eckists will disagree with me that this was Klemp's purpose in writing
                        that stuff.
                        >
                        > I think when the next Eck master comes along there is a
                        possibility of SOMETHING happening, but I'm not sure what. Based on
                        what I know at the present time I would find a complete housecleaning
                        very hard to believe. However, Eckankar wrote Darwin Gross out of the
                        history of Eckankar. Whose to say they can't write Paul Twitchell out
                        of the history of Eckankar over the next 50 years? Keep his basic
                        principles that Ecknakar needs, but phase his personage out more and
                        more.
                        >
                        > Jonatahn
                        >
                        >
                        > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com,
                        "jonathanjohns96" <jonathanjohns96@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Thanks, Etznab,
                        > >
                        > > That's very interesting. As stated on Ford's website, this
                        letter that you link to is the transmittal letter for when Ford sent
                        one of the first copies of his book "Confessions" to Klemp. Ford
                        actually does sound optimistic about the possibility of Eckankar
                        cleaning up Twitchell's lies. I'm going to go ahead and quote his
                        paragraph here:
                        > >
                        > > Ford Johnson's letter to Klemp:
                        > > "Perhaps you will finish what you started in your 1980's
                        talks when you began to reveal the truth about Paul Twitchell.
                        Obviously you did not go far enough. Instead, both you and Darwin Gross
                        settled into Paul's mythology, perpetuating and reinforcing his
                        fabrications. I know how difficult it would be to remove the lies in
                        Eckankar — extensively detailed in Confessions — and strip it of the
                        distortions of truth that mislead soul. However, I believe that
                        Eckankar could survive the cleaning. Not in the same form that it is
                        today, but in a purer form that accomplishes what all paths to God
                        should; to teach, to empower and then to set souls free to realize and
                        experience their oneness with ALL THAT IS."
                        > >
                        > > Jonathan
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@
                        wrote:
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's
                        book
                        > > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally
                        read Ford's
                        > > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up
                        Twitchell's lies that the
                        > > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My
                        recollection back in
                        > > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I
                        immediately
                        > > > accepted his conclusion.
                        > > >
                        > > > Jonathan,
                        > > >
                        > > > Even after writing Confessions, Ford Johnson apparently
                        believed that
                        > > > .".. Eckankar could survive the cleaning." (See:
                        2nd-last paragraph.)
                        > > > Granted, not in the same form.
                        > > >
                        > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/FirstOpenLetter.aspx
                        > > >
                        > > > -----Original Message-----
                        > > > From: jonathanjohns96 <jonathanjohns96@>
                        > > > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                        > > > Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 5:11 pm
                        > > > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: What if Klemp
                        had "come
                        > > > clean" in 1983...
                        > > >
                        > > >  
                        > > > All,
                        > > >
                        > > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's
                        book
                        > > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally
                        read Ford's
                        > > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up
                        Twitchell's lies that the
                        > > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My
                        recollection back in
                        > > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I
                        immediately
                        > > > accepted his conclusion.
                        > > >
                        > > > When I decided to write this post I started out with the
                        supposition
                        > > > that "If Eckankar ever attempted to come clean, what
                        would be the
                        > > > likely approach, and what would be the likely reaction
                        by the members
                        > > > of Eckankar." But I didn't go back to "Confessions" and
                        read Ford's
                        > > > stuff again. I simply started out from scratch, but with
                        his general
                        > > > conclusion already in my head because I accepted his
                        conclusion the
                        > > > first time I read it in his book.
                        > > >
                        > > > Just giving credit where credit is due.
                        > > >
                        > > > Jonathan
                        > > >
                        > >
                        >
                      • jonathanjohns96
                        Etznab, As soon as I read the following sentence by Julian Johnson quoting Vivekananda I said Yep. That s in Eckankar s writings somewhere. A man may
                        Message 11 of 14 , Sep 20, 2010
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Etznab,

                          As soon as I read the following sentence by Julian Johnson quoting Vivekananda I said "Yep. That's in Eckankar's writings somewhere."

                          "A man may believe in all the churches in the world; he may carry in his head all the sacred books ever written; he may baptize himself in all the rivers of the earth - still if he has no perception of God, I would class him with the rankest atheist."

                          Interesting find because this sentence is such a memorable sentence for me. I remember the rest of the paragraph too, but not verbatim.

                          Jonathan


                          --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@... wrote:
                          >
                          >
                          > About the master compiler point, here is something
                          > perhaps none of you have ever seen (in such detail)
                          > before.
                          >
                          > http://tinyurl.com/2ua8pjx
                          >
                          > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/browse_thread/thread/638b86992cc197c3?hl=en#
                          >
                          > Look at the third post, then go to the first one with a
                          > paragraph by Swami Vivekananda.
                          >
                          > Ford Johnson illustrated this topic in his book but -
                          > as you will see - the apparent plagiarism of Swami
                          > Vivekananda extends beyond the quote in The Path
                          > of the Masters, by Julian Johnson.
                          >
                          > Just recently discovered the extent of this myself.
                          >
                          > Etznab
                          >
                          > -----Original Message-----
                          > From: jonathanjohns96 <jonathanjohns96@...>
                          > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                          > Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 7:09 pm
                          > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: What if Klemp had "come
                          > clean" in 1983...
                          >
                          >  
                          > All,
                          >
                          > I thought about this again for one minute. I still think the chances of
                          > Eckankar cleaning up Twitchell's lies are minutely slim. But I admire
                          > Ford for at least suggesting the possibility to Klemp. I don't think
                          > Klemp will ever do it. But I will accept the theory that Klemp's
                          > writing about it on Ecknakar.org about Paul being a master compiler,
                          > etc may have actually opened a crack in the door. So I can almost give
                          > some credit to klemp for that, although I am sure that a lot of former
                          > Eckists will disagree with me that this was Klemp's purpose in writing
                          > that stuff.
                          >
                          > I think when the next Eck master comes along there is a possibility of
                          > SOMETHING happening, but I'm not sure what. Based on what I know at the
                          > present time I would find a complete housecleaning very hard to
                          > believe. However, Eckankar wrote Darwin Gross out of the history of
                          > Eckankar. Whose to say they can't write Paul Twitchell out of the
                          > history of Eckankar over the next 50 years? Keep his basic principles
                          > that Ecknakar needs, but phase his personage out more and more.
                          >
                          > Jonatahn
                          >
                          > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "jonathanjohns96"
                          > jonathanjohns96@ wrote:
                          > >
                          > > Thanks, Etznab,
                          > >
                          > > That's very interesting. As stated on Ford's website, this letter
                          > that you link to is the transmittal letter for when Ford sent one of
                          > the first copies of his book "Confessions" to Klemp. Ford actually does
                          > sound optimistic about the possibility of Eckankar cleaning up
                          > Twitchell's lies. I'm going to go ahead and quote his paragraph here:
                          > >
                          > > Ford Johnson's letter to Klemp:
                          > > "Perhaps you will finish what you started in your 1980's talks
                          > when you began to reveal the truth about Paul Twitchell. Obviously you
                          > did not go far enough. Instead, both you and Darwin Gross settled into
                          > Paul's mythology, perpetuating and reinforcing his fabrications. I know
                          > how difficult it would be to remove the lies in Eckankar â€" extensively
                          > detailed in Confessions â€" and strip it of the distortions of truth that
                          > mislead soul. However, I believe that Eckankar could survive the
                          > cleaning. Not in the same form that it is today, but in a purer form
                          > that accomplishes what all paths to God should; to teach, to empower
                          > and then to set souls free to realize and experience their oneness with
                          > ALL THAT IS."
                          > >
                          > > Jonathan
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@ wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
                          > > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read
                          > Ford's
                          > > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's
                          > lies that the
                          > > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection
                          > back in
                          > > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I
                          > immediately
                          > > > accepted his conclusion.
                          > > >
                          > > > Jonathan,
                          > > >
                          > > > Even after writing Confessions, Ford Johnson apparently
                          > believed that
                          > > > .".. Eckankar could survive the cleaning." (See: 2nd-last
                          > paragraph.)
                          > > > Granted, not in the same form.
                          > > >
                          > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/FirstOpenLetter.aspx
                          > > >
                          > > > -----Original Message-----
                          > > > From: jonathanjohns96 <jonathanjohns96@>
                          > > > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                          > > > Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 5:11 pm
                          > > > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: What if Klemp had
                          > "come
                          > > > clean" in 1983...
                          > > >
                          > > >  
                          > > > All,
                          > > >
                          > > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's book
                          > > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally read
                          > Ford's
                          > > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up Twitchell's
                          > lies that the
                          > > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My recollection
                          > back in
                          > > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I
                          > immediately
                          > > > accepted his conclusion.
                          > > >
                          > > > When I decided to write this post I started out with the
                          > supposition
                          > > > that "If Eckankar ever attempted to come clean, what would be
                          > the
                          > > > likely approach, and what would be the likely reaction by the
                          > members
                          > > > of Eckankar." But I didn't go back to "Confessions" and read
                          > Ford's
                          > > > stuff again. I simply started out from scratch, but with his
                          > general
                          > > > conclusion already in my head because I accepted his
                          > conclusion the
                          > > > first time I read it in his book.
                          > > >
                          > > > Just giving credit where credit is due.
                          > > >
                          > > > Jonathan
                          > > >
                          > >
                          >
                        • jonathanjohns96
                          Etznab, So that paragraph in the Ford s first letter to Klemp where Ford seems hopeful that Klemp will actually address Twitchell s lies and curses was in
                          Message 12 of 14 , Sep 20, 2010
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Etznab,

                            So that paragraph in the Ford's first letter to Klemp where Ford seems hopeful that Klemp will actually address Twitchell's lies and curses was in July, 2003. Nine months later in April, 2004, Ford already concluded that Klemp wasn't going to do anything positive. Sounds fair to me especially since I would have assumed from the beginning that Klemp wasn't going to do anything.

                            I still wonder if Ford was just being polite.

                            Thanks for the additional information.

                            Jonathan


                            --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@... wrote:
                            >
                            >
                            > Read the second open letter. It's a little different.
                            >
                            > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/SecondOpenLetter.aspx
                            >
                            > -----Original Message-----
                            > From: jonathanjohns96 <jonathanjohns96@...>
                            > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                            > Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 9:50 pm
                            > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: What if Klemp had "come
                            > clean" in 1983...
                            >
                            >  
                            > All,
                            >
                            > I wonder whether people are getting tired of all my commenting here,
                            > but this paragraph by Ford Johnson is really sending me off the deep
                            > end. It is doing that because I have no idea why he included it in the
                            > transmittal letter.
                            >
                            > Lets summarize. Ford Johnson wrote a very long book detailing all of
                            > the lies, fabrications, and curses by Paul Twitchell, all of which had
                            > been continued by Harold Klemp for the 20 years between the time Klemp
                            > took over in 1983 and 2003 when Ford sent a copy of said book to Klemp.
                            > In the book, Ford also points out many of the deficiencies of Harold
                            > Klemp himself. And then Ford sends a copy of the book to Klemp. The
                            > letter includes a paragraph nicely informing Klemp that he still can
                            > clean up Paul Twitchell's lies, fabrications, and curses. Hmmm.
                            >
                            > On the surface of things, I am having a very hard time understanding
                            > why Ford would have thought that Klemp would care one bit about
                            > anything Ford said in "the paragraph." Did Ford add it just for the
                            > sake of completeness? Did he add it just so Klemp had one last reminder
                            > about the right thing to do? That's the only theory I can come up with
                            > now. Otherwise, "the paragraph" looks like a bunch of craziness to me.
                            >
                            > Jonathan
                            >
                            > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "jonathanjohns96"
                            > jonathanjohns96@ wrote:
                            > >
                            > > All,
                            > >
                            > > I thought about this again for one minute. I still think the
                            > chances of Eckankar cleaning up Twitchell's lies are minutely slim. But
                            > I admire Ford for at least suggesting the possibility to Klemp. I don't
                            > think Klemp will ever do it. But I will accept the theory that Klemp's
                            > writing about it on Ecknakar.org about Paul being a master compiler,
                            > etc may have actually opened a crack in the door. So I can almost give
                            > some credit to klemp for that, although I am sure that a lot of former
                            > Eckists will disagree with me that this was Klemp's purpose in writing
                            > that stuff.
                            > >
                            > > I think when the next Eck master comes along there is a
                            > possibility of SOMETHING happening, but I'm not sure what. Based on
                            > what I know at the present time I would find a complete housecleaning
                            > very hard to believe. However, Eckankar wrote Darwin Gross out of the
                            > history of Eckankar. Whose to say they can't write Paul Twitchell out
                            > of the history of Eckankar over the next 50 years? Keep his basic
                            > principles that Ecknakar needs, but phase his personage out more and
                            > more.
                            > >
                            > > Jonatahn
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com,
                            > "jonathanjohns96" <jonathanjohns96@> wrote:
                            > > >
                            > > > Thanks, Etznab,
                            > > >
                            > > > That's very interesting. As stated on Ford's website, this
                            > letter that you link to is the transmittal letter for when Ford sent
                            > one of the first copies of his book "Confessions" to Klemp. Ford
                            > actually does sound optimistic about the possibility of Eckankar
                            > cleaning up Twitchell's lies. I'm going to go ahead and quote his
                            > paragraph here:
                            > > >
                            > > > Ford Johnson's letter to Klemp:
                            > > > "Perhaps you will finish what you started in your 1980's
                            > talks when you began to reveal the truth about Paul Twitchell.
                            > Obviously you did not go far enough. Instead, both you and Darwin Gross
                            > settled into Paul's mythology, perpetuating and reinforcing his
                            > fabrications. I know how difficult it would be to remove the lies in
                            > Eckankar â€" extensively detailed in Confessions â€" and strip it of the
                            > distortions of truth that mislead soul. However, I believe that
                            > Eckankar could survive the cleaning. Not in the same form that it is
                            > today, but in a purer form that accomplishes what all paths to God
                            > should; to teach, to empower and then to set souls free to realize and
                            > experience their oneness with ALL THAT IS."
                            > > >
                            > > > Jonathan
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@
                            > wrote:
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's
                            > book
                            > > > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally
                            > read Ford's
                            > > > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up
                            > Twitchell's lies that the
                            > > > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My
                            > recollection back in
                            > > > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I
                            > immediately
                            > > > > accepted his conclusion.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Jonathan,
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Even after writing Confessions, Ford Johnson apparently
                            > believed that
                            > > > > .".. Eckankar could survive the cleaning." (See:
                            > 2nd-last paragraph.)
                            > > > > Granted, not in the same form.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/FirstOpenLetter.aspx
                            > > > >
                            > > > > -----Original Message-----
                            > > > > From: jonathanjohns96 <jonathanjohns96@>
                            > > > > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                            > > > > Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 5:11 pm
                            > > > > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: What if Klemp
                            > had "come
                            > > > > clean" in 1983...
                            > > > >
                            > > > >  
                            > > > > All,
                            > > > >
                            > > > > I just wanted to give some more credit to Ford Johnson's
                            > book
                            > > > > "Confessions Of A Godseeker." That is where I originally
                            > read Ford's
                            > > > > assertion that if Klemp had tried to clean up
                            > Twitchell's lies that the
                            > > > > entire teachings of Eckankar would unravel. My
                            > recollection back in
                            > > > > December of 2008 or "whenever I read it" was that I
                            > immediately
                            > > > > accepted his conclusion.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > When I decided to write this post I started out with the
                            > supposition
                            > > > > that "If Eckankar ever attempted to come clean, what
                            > would be the
                            > > > > likely approach, and what would be the likely reaction
                            > by the members
                            > > > > of Eckankar." But I didn't go back to "Confessions" and
                            > read Ford's
                            > > > > stuff again. I simply started out from scratch, but with
                            > his general
                            > > > > conclusion already in my head because I accepted his
                            > conclusion the
                            > > > > first time I read it in his book.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Just giving credit where credit is due.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Jonathan
                            > > > >
                            > > >
                            > >
                            >
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.