By Thy Words

[Abbott]

I just today became aware of this FB site and frankly I did not find the posts funny. Rather I found them very disturbing. Particularly the recent post where Cory Anderson was quoted on what he felt different positions reflected. I have very seldom been that angry in my life as I was after reading that. If that is the type of thinking that is being propagated in CM circles then perhaps a bit of sarcasm is needed to wake us up. There is nothing funny about that. It literally IMO shows the workings of a reprobate mind, I am sorry. It just really made me angry.
This stuff needs to me spoken out against. I would prefer it is done in a serious way and yes I would prefer if there was less mocking on the site. But arrrgh…. Sorry I am just furious right now, God help us all.

https://www.rangefinderonline.com/news- ... ge-basics/

For anyone that agrees with Appleman, read this and tell me how Cory stating these things actually is a reflection of a reprobate mind. Seems to me he is just stating opinions that are already out there. If you don't believe a pose communicates something... I think you are sadly mistaken to how the world thinks and works.

Now perhaps the entire world is some what a reflection of a reprobate mind... but it doesn't take much searching to turn up stuff supporting what Cory actually says...

We can probably all agree that body language communicates, and that it *can* communicate something inappropriate. The issue is that Anderson seems to be saying that the inappropriate meaning is exclusively or predominantly communicated in all the poses he lists. (I recognize that there could be some context in Anderson's writing that is missing from the page reproduced on the BTW Facebook page.) The article you linked to does not support this view at all, saying that "nothing is clean-cut with body language" and giving as an example an over-the-shoulder look which could communicate either flirtiness or disdain. But Anderson draws a straight line from "leaning against or grabbing trees" to "striptease pole" (his exact words). This is not to draw any conclusions about Anderson's overall spiritual or mental condition, but I don't think that's a healthy way to think about leaning against trees.

The book is filled with many more unhealthy ways to think about everything from features and functions of clothing to things in the natural world. Considering what the book claims to be "implied" by leaning against trees, would you like to guess what the book suggests large flowers represent? Or what a woman is inviting if she wears "creamy, smooth fabrics"? My concern is that the book actually teaches readers to think in perverted, harmful ways, and these need to be called out as such.

[Wade]

https://www.rangefinderonline.com/news- ... ge-basics/

For anyone that agrees with Appleman, read this and tell me how Cory stating these things actually is a reflection of a reprobate mind. Seems to me he is just stating opinions that are already out there. If you don't believe a pose communicates something... I think you are sadly mistaken to how the world thinks and works.

Now perhaps the entire world is some what a reflection of a reprobate mind... but it doesn't take much searching to turn up stuff supporting what Cory actually says...

We can probably all agree that body language communicates, and that it *can* communicate something inappropriate. The issue is that Anderson seems to be saying that the inappropriate meaning is exclusively or predominantly communicated in all the poses he lists. (I recognize that there could be some context in Anderson's writing that is missing from the page reproduced on the BTW Facebook page.) The article you linked to does not support this view at all, saying that "nothing is clean-cut with body language" and giving as an example an over-the-shoulder look which could communicate either flirtiness or disdain. But Anderson draws a straight line from "leaning against or grabbing trees" to "striptease pole" (his exact words). This is not to draw any conclusions about Anderson's overall spiritual or mental condition, but I don't think that's a healthy way to think about leaning against trees.

The book is filled with many more unhealthy ways to think about everything from features and functions of clothing to things in the natural world. Considering what the book claims to be "implied" by leaning against trees, would you like to guess what the book suggests large flowers represent? Or what a woman is inviting if she wears "creamy, smooth fabrics"? My concern is that the book actually teaches readers to think in perverted, harmful ways, and these need to be called out as such.

And that is why Cory is nothing like any experience I have had with any Conservative Anabaptists.

[temporal1]

I just today became aware of this FB site and frankly I did not find the posts funny. Rather I found them very disturbing. Particularly the recent post where Cory Anderson was quoted on what he felt different positions reflected. I have very seldom been that angry in my life as I was after reading that. If that is the type of thinking that is being propagated in CM circles then perhaps a bit of sarcasm is needed to wake us up. There is nothing funny about that. It literally IMO shows the workings of a reprobate mind, I am sorry. It just really made me angry.
This stuff needs to me spoken out against. I would prefer it is done in a serious way and yes I would prefer if there was less mocking on the site. But arrrgh…. Sorry I am just furious right now, God help us all.

it’s hard to read this thread. i couldn’t begin to read the material. too heartsick.

[Abbott]

And that is why Cory is nothing like any experience I have had with any Conservative Anabaptists.

Because he doesn't actually think like a Conservative Anabaptist. But his thinking has significant overlap with a segment of ultra-Conservative Anabaptists, among whom he now has a voice. Back in the day Cory loved playing flute, was more than slightly obsessed with opera, and had a massive classical music CD collection. He loved dramatically reciting Dr. Seuss books to captive audiences and, according to his friends, was a great guy to have as a friend. He would lead the charge against CA practices and requirements that were archaic and had become irrelevant. Over time he developed a fascination with CA culture, and shifted into a MO of preservationism at all costs. So while he shares many of the same values as CA, he doesn't actually think like a CA. He has become an insightful scholar, but I take issue with many of the conclusions he reaches as a result of his analysis influenced by his current set of values.

[temporal1]

And that is why Cory is nothing like any experience I have had with any Conservative Anabaptists.

Because he doesn't actually think like a Conservative Anabaptist. But his thinking has significant overlap with a segment of ultra-Conservative Anabaptists, among whom he now has a voice. Back in the day Cory loved playing flute, was more than slightly obsessed with opera, and had a massive classical music CD collection. He loved dramatically reciting Dr. Seuss books to captive audiences and, according to his friends, was a great guy to have as a friend. He would lead the charge against CA practices and requirements that were archaic and had become irrelevant. Over time he developed a fascination with CA culture, and shifted into a MO of preservationism at all costs. So while he shares many of the same values as CA, he doesn't actually think like a CA.

He has become an insightful scholar,
but I take issue with many of the conclusions he reaches as a result of his analysis influenced by his current set of values.

i’m not Anabaptist, i’m not familiar with Cory A.
reading this thread, reading about his advanced formal education, causes me to wonder if he isn’t motivated and capable of exploiting topics he knows will titillate+sell, that will give him notoriety, and possibly wealth?

i don’t know. but questions come to mind.
i don’t think i’ve met anyone with such advanced formal education that would go in this direction. in fact, it seems mutually exclusive. which causes me to wonder about motivation.

intelligent people can be shockingly manipulative. i wonder if he plays chess?

[Wade]

And that is why Cory is nothing like any experience I have had with any Conservative Anabaptists.

Because he doesn't actually think like a Conservative Anabaptist. But his thinking has significant overlap with a segment of ultra-Conservative Anabaptists, among whom he now has a voice. Back in the day Cory loved playing flute, was more than slightly obsessed with opera, and had a massive classical music CD collection. He loved dramatically reciting Dr. Seuss books to captive audiences and, according to his friends, was a great guy to have as a friend. He would lead the charge against CA practices and requirements that were archaic and had become irrelevant. Over time he developed a fascination with CA culture, and shifted into a MO of preservationism at all costs. So while he shares many of the same values as CA, he doesn't actually think like a CA. He has become an insightful scholar, but I take issue with many of the conclusions he reaches as a result of his analysis influenced by his current set of values.

Since I am classified as an ultra and still have never seen such rubbish I'm skeptical of people pinning any such overlap of thinking within ultra CA's. I've only seen attention given to such things by people and groups that are always classified as less conservative than Nationwide. But we are autonomous, so as they say your milage may vary.

[steve-in-kville]

There was one posting in the past few days on body language... apparently I'm quite the sexual deviant... if I hook my thumbs in my belt loop on my jeans, I am insinuating taking my pants off. If I lean against the wall, a tree or anything, I'm insinuating a casual/sexual encounter.

Been doing it all wrong all this time

[ABC 123]

There was one posting in the past few days on body language... apparently I'm quite the sexual deviant... if I hook my thumbs in my belt loop on my jeans, I am insinuating taking my pants off. If I lean against the wall, a tree or anything, I'm insinuating a casual/sexual encounter.

Been doing it all wrong all this time

From my observation, many ultra conservative people have confidence issues as it is without giving them more things to be self conscious and awkward about.

Imagine reading that book with a tender heart then trying to figure out how to present yourself in public without stirring up all the passions in others that you have been now become aware of. But it is a false burden that has been laid on you by people with a very odd, twisted way of viewing life.

[Wade]

Christians are called to be light in following Christ. Focusing on this stuff, thinking about these things, reading this stuff, mocking and sarcasm, making weird negative generalization about labels Cory has made when untrue is not right as I understand scripture. How is any of this sharing the good news of the Kingdom of God, living with eternal principles, praying for others, and God's will?

It isn't.

I once was bitter too against ultras - and these types of things don't help to find healing. Look at your own life and be open to Christ, be obedient, be a follower, be self-denying in looking for His will, move on in doing what is right and then you'll let go and find healing.

[Abbott]

And that is why Cory is nothing like any experience I have had with any Conservative Anabaptists.

Because he doesn't actually think like a Conservative Anabaptist. But his thinking has significant overlap with a segment of ultra-Conservative Anabaptists, among whom he now has a voice. Back in the day Cory loved playing flute, was more than slightly obsessed with opera, and had a massive classical music CD collection. He loved dramatically reciting Dr. Seuss books to captive audiences and, according to his friends, was a great guy to have as a friend. He would lead the charge against CA practices and requirements that were archaic and had become irrelevant. Over time he developed a fascination with CA culture, and shifted into a MO of preservationism at all costs. So while he shares many of the same values as CA, he doesn't actually think like a CA. He has become an insightful scholar, but I take issue with many of the conclusions he reaches as a result of his analysis influenced by his current set of values.

Since I am classified as an ultra and still have never seen such rubbish I'm skeptical of people pinning any such overlap of thinking within ultra CA's. I've only seen attention given to such things by people and groups that are always classified as less conservative than Nationwide. But we are autonomous, so as they say your milage may vary.

Note that I said "within a segment of ultra-Conservative Anabaptists" (it would have been clearer to say within small pockets of ultra-CA). I wasn't trying to indict all ultra-CAs.