Some of Wayne Bent’s followers now joining him in fasting

Update (June 8, 10:50am PST): I received a brief e-mail from Wayne Bent this morning. Bent wrote, “About 40 people have joined me in the present fast.

One day after The Lord Our Righteousness church leader Wayne Bent (aka Michael Travesser) announced that he is fasting until a girl is returned to her parents, some interesting responses have arrived at Beyond90Seconds.com.

Dean Cline (former husband of Amana Travesser and stepfather of former church member Prudence Welch) sent me the following e-mail (published here–unedited–with Cline’s permission):

Dear Mark,

Thank you for giving us, at strong city, a forum that has not tried to spin what has transpired.
Perhaps I should identify myself first. My legal name is Dean Cline and I am the ex husband of Amana Travesser, mother of Prudence Welch. I to am a member of the LOR church but have not been actively participating on the church site so am now unable to contribute my support for Michael, in his fast, on that site. I do want to let it be publicly acknowledged that I am in full agreement with Michael and will not eat until there is resolution.
Thank you for posting this on your site.
Seth
aka Dean Cline

Other members of Bent’s church have reportedly pledged to join him in fasting, too.

Last month, a New Mexico grand jury indicted Wayne Bent on four charges: Two counts of criminal sexual contact of a minor in the second degree, unclothed. And two counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

One of the alleged victims is believed to be the girl whom Bent says should be returned to her parents; thus, prompting his decision to fast.

In a comment posted overnight on Beyond90Seconds.com, Bent writes:

I am protesting the illegal imprisonment of a young lady who did nothing wrong.

Bent’s entire comment can be read here.

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

, , , , , , , , , , ,

42 Responses to Some of Wayne Bent’s followers now joining him in fasting

  1. avatar
    Richard Harty June 7, 2008 at 12:38 pm #

    This is pretty clever manipulation and way to get coverage. I really hope that no one dies from fasting because I think it is unlikely that Willow will be returned. It appears that Wayne has some type of loophole in his statement in case Willow isn’t returned.

  2. avatar
    Stephanie June 7, 2008 at 8:26 pm #

    I have read the posts over on their blog thoroughly. Wayne and a few others emphasize that this is not an act of suicide however it is. When you claim that you will starve yourself until you get what you want or die, you are still taking your own life. You are the one refusing to take nourishment to keep your body alive therefore this is an act of suicide.

    He already states his crime for all the world to see that a minor laid naked on his bed. These people claim that Wayne did not *ask* or *tell* them to come to him. What Wayne Bent did was use scripture to usher them toward these thoughts of being naked with him. He asked for them to come not directly but indirectly. I cannot believe this man is walking free right now. First he sexually abuses minors and now he is leading a group of people possibly to their death.

  3. avatar
    Michael Travesser June 8, 2008 at 5:54 am #

    Richard and Stephanie: No one will die unless the State and YOU decide to keep the child Willow from her parents. I cannot believe you are so utterly brain dead. You are part of mentality the kidnappers. You are also utterly ignorant. It is not against the law for someone to be naked next to someone else. You are just making that up as the other psychopaths are doing. Perhaps you should read http://strongcity.info and receive a little education. No, never mind, you don’t want an education. You want to keep your utterly empty head right down in the sand where it is.

  4. avatar
    hornerscorner June 8, 2008 at 6:20 am #

    Recently on this blog, I shared my concern about the direction some of the comments had taken in a thread concerning the Wayne Bent case. I’ve attempted to make it clear that this blog is not a place for personal attacks. Rather, the aim has been to see a constructive and respectful sharing of ideas in the comment sections.

    Over the past two days, it was encouraging to see what has appeared to be a genuine effort by some people to express their differences in a respectful way.

    Once again, though, personal attacks have returned.

    As a result, I’m going to spend the next part of my day learning how to shut down the comments sections within posts related to the Wayne Bent story.

    I don’t know if I’ll permanently suspend these threads or not. I’ll give that some thought.

    Sincerely,
    Mark Horner

  5. avatar
    hornerscorner June 9, 2008 at 10:18 am #

    Some of you have sent me some well thought-out e-mails requesting that I allow additional comments to be added to the Wayne Bent / Strong City posts.

    I’m going to do so.

    The lively debate in these threads is much appreciated. Please keep it respectful.

    Sincerely,
    Mark Horner

  6. avatar
    Stephanie June 9, 2008 at 3:09 pm #

    First of all, thank you Mr. Horner.

    Mr. Bent you wrote:

    “Richard and Stephanie: No one will die unless the State and YOU decide to keep the child Willow from her parents. I cannot believe you are so utterly brain dead. You are part of mentality the kidnappers. You are also utterly ignorant. It is not against the law for someone to be naked next to someone else.”

    With all due respect I have nothing to do with the state, or their mentality. If anything, I believe CPS in most states are in need of a serious overhaul. We would probably agree on many issues regarding this. But I still cannot agree that an adult exposing himself to a minor if even for spiritual reasons, is not healthy or legal. Children are not mature enough to make adult decisions such as this.

    As for your fast Mr. Bent, that is by your choice and it’s not on anyone but you what the outcome will be. No one is responsible for your choices.

    One thought that remains is, what would I do if I were in this position? I would more than likely leave the land and do everything possible to get my child out of a situation that was not good for him/her.

    I wish you the best in your endeavors and pray that the outcome of this is a good one.

    Respectfully,
    Stephanie

  7. avatar
    Akakios June 9, 2008 at 3:58 pm #

    Wayne Bent said “Richard and Stephanie: No one will die unless the State and YOU decide to keep the child Willow from her parents.”

    Wayne if anyone does die it will not only be suicide on thier part, but it will also be your fault for misleading these people to do it. Wayne if you want to be a martyr to these people go ahead and do it.

    It is against the law to lay naked with someone if that person is a child Wayne! If they had to stand naked before you, why did it have to be in your bed?

  8. avatar
    Michael Travesser June 10, 2008 at 12:20 am #

    Stephanie: I want to say that my “empty headed” remark from my earlier post was not simply a slander. It has meaning. I will explain.

    You said, “I still cannot agree that an adult exposing himself to a minor if even for spiritual reasons, is not healthy or legal.” Stephanie, I have NEVER exposed myself to a minor. This has never happened. I have often received attacks from people simply charging me with something that never occurred. The District Attorney even went so far as to say I sexually touched a minor. This never happened, even by the clear definitions in the law of the State. I had not even thought of it.

    So when I receive false accusations, I term that with terms like “brain dead” but there is no personal offense in me. If I see an empty lake, I say “empty lake.” The media has to a great degree twisted something that happened into a picture of something that did not happen.

    You must know this Stephanie, for you reported having read my Web site. If you had read it, you would know that your attacks in regard to me are simply groundless. I am trying to be as factual with you as I can.

    This is a statement from Willow’s mother:

    “The event that CYFD is calling “sexul abuse” is an event that brought real healing to Willow. During Willow’s birth, she was stuck in the birth canal for many hours, and the emotional and mental effects from that were seen throughout her life. She had inordinate fears that made her not be a normal child. The greatest of her inordinate fears was the fear of fire, and she had had no traumatic experience in life that would have given that to her naturally. She would also wake up at night calling out, “Help me! Help me!” if the covers got over her mouth or head.

    “In July of 2006, the Father in heaven gave me, Anaiah Travesser, Willow’s biological mother, a vision for Willow. In it, I saw Willow ask to lie naked on Michael’s bed, and for him to hold her. The Father said that it would bring healing to Willow of her many fears. I did not tell Willow the vision that Father had given me for her. I know how the heavenly Father works, and I knew that He would begin opening it up to her and opening her up to it, in His time and in His way.”

    The young woman wrote to me some time later and said:

    “The other night I had a dream. In the dream I was lying on your bed
    and you went out of the room to do something for a minute, like answer the
    door or something. While you were gone I had a strong desire. In the
    dream I wanted you to hold me on your bed without me having any
    clothes on. In the dream I decided to tell you when you came back in the
    bedroom. End of dream.”

    I did not immediately respond to this but a number of months went buy while I considered her dream. The day came when she again strongly asked to be naked on my bed. In the meantime I had considered her difficult birthing process and felt that “rebirthing” her would help. I then felt instructed by God to go ahead and heal her.

    I left the room so that she could get undressed. I then came into the room and laid next to her fully dressed, putting my hand on her sternum. I talked her through the act of being born and told her that this time she would not be stuck in the birth canal. I held her for a few minutes and then left the room. She then got up and dressed and went home. That was it. It happened once about a year ago. Stephanie, that is NOT illegal, and no little girl was molested. After she was healed, her fears and personal torments rapidly began to fade away. She was not the same girl. She was much more confident and happy than before. God instructed her mother, me, and the young lady to fulfill His will so that she could be delivered. Is that not okay in a free country?

    I feel that the media to a large degree and the others who attack me, simple make up a picture of what happened out of their own imagination but nothing like what actually occurred. If I had molested girls, I surely would not have made it all public and broadcast it everywhere. But in general people want to believe the evil about me, largely because of their own hearts. They are mentally driven to imagine evil of me because they imagine it often enough in their own minds. People who sometimes imagine molesting a child, imagine that that is what I am doing. Others simply believe the media spin, without understanding the details. I have never hidden the details. I was open with the District Attorney and everyone else. This is simply how it is. I hope that this gives you a little insight to the actual facts in the case.

  9. avatar
    Michael Travesser June 10, 2008 at 12:32 am #

    Akakios: Please read the statement to Stephanie and that will give you some of your answers. Also, Akakios, no one has ever had to stand naked in front of me. I never even inferred anything like this to anyone.

    About the fast: I have never, ever, inferred or directed, anyone to fast with me. The fast is on my own and for myself. Others told me that God had told them to fast with me. I never asked them, expected it of them, or even thought that they would fast also.

    These things aside, I will deal with the “dying” part. Yes, there is a possibility that I might die while fasting. This is true. I don’t expect it, but it may occur. I will explain why this fast is important to me.

    After having received the false charges from the District Attorney, I was so utterly dismayed that the man would lie so blatantly that I no longer cared to live in a world of such lying injustice. I was utterly shocked by it. So when I saw the same perversions coming against the young lady, Willow, by grown and experienced interrogators, I knew that the back of the beast had to be broken or I would die. I could not let them use me as an excuse to hurt her. If God answers my request there will be no deaths. If He does not answer, then I care not to live in a world that treats people like this one does. But my fast is to appeal to the King of heaven for His help. He has not failed me yet.

    But consider this: Did Jesus commit suicide? He knew, and told his disciples, that he was going to his death. He walked right into it with his eyes wide open. He could have simply gone to Tyre and escaped it all. No one would have killed him. Sometimes, a man must do what he does, and sometimes it costs him his life.

  10. avatar
    Michael Travesser June 10, 2008 at 12:40 am #

    Richard: No one is manipulating anything to get coverage. We are very often approached by the media. We did not start all of this. If there is anything that is certain, it is that the media has manipulated us. It writes whatever it wants, no matter the facts. You seem to judge me of having a mentality such as your own, for how would you even think that I would manipulate the media unless that is something that you would do? I do not mean to be offensive in regard to this. Just think it over.

    My fast is simply what it was. I explained it to others here. It has nothing to do with manipulation. It has to do with what I must do. And surely, I want things to change. I want something to come of it. I will not stand down.

  11. avatar
    hanifa June 10, 2008 at 3:04 am #

    Though touted by some as an age of expansion and increased knowledge, growing up in a post WWII society held a great deal of shifting sand for morality and integrity. I believe I experienced the last gasping breaths of those qualities as I came to awareness throughout the 50’s and 60’s.

    The generational upheaval, revolution, questioning of authority, sexual focus, hedonism arising like never before, convenience, “instant” products and service and a host of other factors all contributed to a whirlwind of change that overwhelmed me as well as shaped my thinking for many years to come. I was part of it all, no doubt, but in hindsight, I see much more in that “changing society” than might have been noticed at the time by a soul growing up in it.

    What happened was that morality and integrity became disposable commodities that fell under the tidal wave of “if it feels good, do it” and “if you can’t be with the one you love, love the one you’re with”. Who could have known at the time that the counterfeit “freedom” offered by that generation of idealists and revolutionaries, would result in such a loss of integrity, as well as ability to be real. It’s almost as if the subsequent generations, in general, didn’t stand a chance to develop those qualities as those things became obsolete like so many sturdy and well built material goods did also.

    The death of personal, as well as corporate, integrity is quite evident in the society that has resulted since that time, the offspring of which can hardly be discerned as moral or knowledgeable in what integrity is at all. Seemingly, all can be swayed by either enticements or punishments to do and say things that they initially feel goes against their conscience, but the cost of resisting or not complying cuts too deeply into personal interests in the outcome. What is truth in the situation gets overrun by “What is this going to cost me?” or “What will I get out of the deal?”

    When I speak of knowing truth or having integrity, I’m not referring to being “nice” and saying the”right” things or doing “good” deeds. I’m talking about brutally honest, totally naked, no holds barred, get to the root, in-your-face, truth…..honesty and reality….the kind that cannot be shaken or undone no matter what comes against it.

    Michael has CONSISTENTLY displayed this kind of integrity in his public and personal life. His posts, that offend so many, are simply the natural outpouring of who he is. His connection with Father is as the sides of a jar are to the bottom of it. They are One. Most people have a sugary or, conversely, terrifying, view of God…what He might say or do…but Michael shows us that Father is NORMAL…a word that has lost its definition in a society that has gone wild with every indulgence.

    I know the ache personally of seeing people turn from truth as from a blazing fire. No natural man can stand the heat. But, a soul trapped under miles of confusion and filth can only be liberated when that Truth-that-never-changes fire penetrates and uncovers the Seed of God that was given in the beginning.

    No wonder God said, Few there be that find it.

  12. avatar
    Akakios June 10, 2008 at 11:30 am #

    Wayne said:”I left the room so that she could get undressed. I then came into the room and laid next to her fully dressed, putting my hand on her sternum.”

    Wayne so now you say you didn’t take your cloths off……..You are changing your story now. Hard to tell the truth all the time when you keep telling lies. I don’t care what you say you have no business laying on the bed with a naked girl! With your clothing on or not it is not right and you know it.

  13. avatar
    Michael Travesser June 10, 2008 at 12:04 pm #

    Oh, please, tell me Akakios, just where did I ever say that I took my clothes off. Please give me the quote. Waiting…..

  14. avatar
    Stephanie June 10, 2008 at 10:54 pm #

    Mr Bent,

    I was raised by parents who taught me quite alot. I find my education and my open mind well intact. I’m also patient and forgiving enough to ignore slanderous commentary.

    You did indeed have it on your web site, and so did some of your brides on their blogs that it was “skin to skin” contact. I went back in search of a reference point but it has been either removed or edited. I went to a few other blogs and noticed material in some stories edited. So now I cannot prove the “skin to skin” comment in regard to the minors you laid with. Interesting!

    A thirteen year old child doesn’t have the maturity or understanding that she should lay naked with an adult, unless an adult is encouraging that line of thinking.

    I have yet to find a verse in my bible that either commands or tells a story about children needing to be naked for healing from Jesus. Nor do I see a verse where Jesus had to heal others specifically naked or on a bed.

    I have no problem with nudity in itself. No – the body created by God is beautiful.

    Respectfully,
    Stephanie

  15. avatar
    Stephanie June 10, 2008 at 11:05 pm #

    Hanifa wrote: “What happened was that morality and integrity became disposable commodities that fell under the tidal wave of “if it feels good, do it” and “if you can’t be with the one you love, love the one you’re with”. Who could have known at the time that the counterfeit “freedom” offered by that generation of idealists and revolutionaries, would result in such a loss of integrity, as well as ability to be real”

    I agree. However my parents were not part of the counter culture at all. They shunned all of it. I was raised to believe that adultry is a sin. That when you marry, you do not leave your spouse for another or have affairs. My parents “earthly marriage” has been extremely close and happy. My parents are still that happy. I’m very lucky. I cannot imagine the pain one goes through when their parents split and go with other people.

    Respectfully,
    Stephanie

  16. avatar
    Michael Travesser June 11, 2008 at 12:54 am #

    Stephanie: Nothing has been removed from the Web site, or edited. The term “skin to skin” has been used numerous times as a statement of the event itself, but I was never exposed to an underage girl. I have sometimes used the term “skin to skin with God” to mean that we are very intimate with him and nothing in between. Yes, I agree that adultery is sin, but there has been no adultery here. I have not ever been intimate with another man’s wife. You seem to be missing some of the information we have posted. I believe you are getting your picture from the media. We believe in keeping the commandments.

    Stephanie, there is a commandment that says “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.” Do you keep the Seventh day holy? Do you keep the Sabbath? That is the fourth commandment. It is in the Ten Commandments just as is “Thou shalt not commit adultery.

  17. avatar
    hanifa June 11, 2008 at 1:28 am #

    Stephanie

    I also wrote:

    “I’m not referring to being “nice” and saying the”right” things or doing “good” deeds…. ”

    There is a way of life that seems right unto a man but the end of it is death. A “good” human life (or marriage) is impossible and a lie in the face of heaven. As “good” as it gets, humanly speaking, is viewed as treason and infidelity in the eyes of heaven. Only God is good so only God can have a good life or marriage. When He is the life, it truly is good. His Life NEVER has any trouble or arguing or self-serving or division or any such thing.

    Human righteousness is as filthy rags. It is always flawed with self-interest and self-serving. When I said, “I’m talking about brutally honest, totally naked, no holds barred, get to the root, in-your-face, truth…..”, I was referring to the look of God, peering into the very depths of one’s being and exposing one’s utterly selfish and base motivations for all their “good”, that is most often hid from consciousness.

    In the beginning, Adam and Eve were married TO GOD. It was only after the fall that they became married to each other, which was only a mirror of how they had become married to their natural self. It was a curse when God said, “…thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” Truly, that “self, often reflected in a spouse, rules with an iron fist, instead of the rod of iron that is given by the spirit of the living God. Where once, Adam and Eve had been union with God, now there was a human relationship, with God on the side. It was the first adultery.

    The reason you see what has taken place here in Strong City as evil is because you have not seen the depths of your own personal evil. It’s very much like a mathematical equation that is lopsided and comes up with the wrong answer every time because crucial factors are missing.

    In referring to this mystery of how this Life of God takes hold of a soul…or not….it is written:

    “For whosoever hath, (this Life) to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, (this Life) from him shall be taken away even that he hath.”

    One more thing, Stephanie. It was absolutely astounding to read what you said about “slanderous commentary”….unless, of course, you were referring to your own. Otherwise, what you revealed is a stunningly impeccable definition of hypocrisy.

  18. avatar
    LGG June 11, 2008 at 7:14 am #

    I am sincerely wondering why these 3 particular children who lived on the Strong City land are so important to you all, when all the other families with children were asked to leave. I’m wondering why these 3 particular children are so important to you when other adults who’ve wanted to come to the land were asked to put their own children *in foster care* before they came to the land.

    Why are these particular children more important to the people of Strong City than any of the others? Why is Willow more important to you than Healed or Matthew? They’ve been taken too, but fasts until death if need be were not taken on. (I do realize there was a short fast when Healed was taken, but Michael felt he could begin to take a food again a few days after the fast began).

  19. avatar
    ron June 11, 2008 at 8:39 am #

    Come and join my cult, don’t think for yourself, and anything that anyone says that doesnt agree with me is from the devil. Also, if you dont agree with me, you will go to Cleveland(Hell).

  20. avatar
    ron June 11, 2008 at 9:06 am #

    He said, “Yes, but I remember they said they trusted Me. That is enough.” I said, “So I really can, right now?” He said, “Yes.” So, I jump off His bed, strip my clothes, and jumped in bed with Him. It felt so natural to me and it did not feel weird, almost like I had done it many times before.

    He held me skin to skin with Him. I felt Michael’s heart for me in a deeper way than ever before. I saw Him as my Husband, REALLY, not pretend.

  21. avatar
    Michael Travesser June 11, 2008 at 9:22 am #

    LGG: The children who left were in families that were crowded five into an RV. I suggested to the families that it would be better to have a house provided so that the children could have a bedroom. These three children were not so cramped in their circumstances.

    No parents were ever told to put their children in foster care. That never happened here.

    Willow is not more important than Matthew or Healed. They are the same. There are complications with Matthew and Healed. Their parents are not here, and their parents are not with us. Matthews mother was told that if she let Matthew come back they would jail her. They would let him come back if they were not afraid of CYFD. I do not know Healed’s situation since we have not been permitted to make contact with her. The time will come when that is resolved also.

    Your comment here smacks of a someone who has already made a judgment, yet knows nothing of the details. Don’t you think you should get some truth in you, before you judge us?

  22. avatar
    Michael Travesser June 11, 2008 at 9:23 am #

    Ron: Your comments do not deserve an answer.

  23. avatar
    Julie June 11, 2008 at 2:05 pm #

    The reference to children being put in foster care came from me.

    While I was still in Des Moines, V.T. came over one day, she had been over to talk with Wayne. It had been on her heart for her and her husband to be able to move back onto the land. The “gist” of what Wayne said to her was that for that to happen she would need to put her children into foster care. That is what came out of her own mouth to me.

    Another incident occurred when we moved to the land in 2000. M.B. and his wife wanted to move to the land but in order to do so they had to send their son to go and live with someone else. Their son was not allowed on the land. And they did it.

    Many other incidents occurred through the years. I watched many times when parents were told that if they wanted to go to heaven and remain in the church they needed to send their children to live with someone else. And they did.

    The term foster care was used in conversation with V.T. by Wayne Bent, the other children I spoke of were sent to live with family members or friends. But the same principle has remained constant throughout the LOR experience.

  24. avatar
    hornerscorner June 11, 2008 at 2:20 pm #

    Ron,

    I don’t know how long you’ve been following the comments on this thread, but I suspended the comments section on the Wayne Bent posts a few days ago. The comments sections were then re-opened after a couple of days or so of careful consideration.

    I’d suspended the comments because of the frequency of personal attacks & condescending statements.

    Some have written to say that you’ve crossed that line again. I am not deleting your posts at this time.

    Please keep any future posts respectful. Go ahead and lock horns and debate, just leave out any personal attacks.

    Also, if you’d like to share the source of the quotations you included in your second post, that would be appreciated. The very strong contention from some at Strong City is that there is no such source.

    Okay…I’m done refereeing for now.

    Best,
    Mark

  25. avatar
    Prudence June 11, 2008 at 2:25 pm #

    Wayne/Michael said, “The children who left were in families that were crowded five into an RV. I suggested to the families that it would be better to have a house provided so that the children could have a bedroom.”

    This is a complete lie. My son and another boy each broke a bone. After that Wayne called a meeting and he said that ALL children needed to be in complete submission and obedience ALL THE TIME (24/7) In this meeting NO ONE was allowed to take notes or record it. He made it sound like we were lost. HE gave the families 2 weeks to accomplish this OR they had to leave within 30 days. He said that if a family stayed there was a possibility that their child might fall off a cliff. He also said during that meeting that since HE owned ALL the property NOW, he could tell anyone he wanted to leave and they would have to leave. I cried my eyes out for DAYS… because leaving meant we were lost…. LATER Wayne came up with the “families were crowded” B.S. I recall WAYNE in several meetings would tell us, “All I have to do is sign a piece of paper and this property is gone” It was a threat he would make when someone was “bad”

    So it wasn’t a suggestion. Wayne laid down the law about this, and he made it clear that he was in control.

    The blessing that came from having to move ….. IS our eyes were opened and we were able to see how deceived we had been.

  26. avatar
    Michael Travesser June 11, 2008 at 3:08 pm #

    Prudence and Julie,

    You both have lost your ability to reason, and you have developed a great offense against me over the years. You have developed a great skill in bringing your offense into the public. You spare no words in your hatred of me. Unfortunately, when a person comes to this place, reason is impossible. You cannot reason with a mad person. I know that no one can have a happy life while they are offended. That is a sadness to me because I truly wish that you were happy. But before you can be happy, you would have to be happy with me. The things you mention are very easily understood when one thinks reasonably. But I would not to expose you or others in order to explain it again. There are some things that I want to forgive people for, and not just rail away and condemn them. That goes nowhere. For this reason I cannot say any more than this.

  27. avatar
    Prudence June 11, 2008 at 3:18 pm #

    You don’t have an answer because you know what I said is true. I remember you sitting in my living room telling me the NEW reason why we were leaving …. Forgive ?? I have done nothing but tell the truth about you.

  28. avatar
    Michael Travesser June 11, 2008 at 4:40 pm #

    No Prudence, you can only tell your offenses. What you say is not true. It is only the imagination of an offended heart. You have made giants out of ants. You have made mountains out of sand grains. I will not come to this Web site again, while all there is to speak to are offended souls. Previously, the Father has forbidden me from going to your own Web site, because it is so utterly gross. There is a spirit in you that I am not to speak to anymore.

  29. avatar
    Julie June 11, 2008 at 5:28 pm #

    No Wayne. You are the one who is living in the land of delusion. We have only recounted events to you as they have happened and there is nothing false in what we have said. But for you black is white and white is black I consider what you have done is gross.

  30. avatar
    Stephanie June 11, 2008 at 10:14 pm #

    Hanifa wrote: “One more thing, Stephanie. It was absolutely astounding to read what you said about “slanderous commentary”….unless, of course, you were referring to your own.”

    Hanifa, I was simply referring to your messiah calling me empty headed. I got quite a laugh out of it actually, because I have had many conversations with God and never recalled a time where He insulted me 🙂

    As for earthly marriages, I understand that you choose to be married to your messiah, but that doesn’t necessarily mean my parents marital experience has been any less happier than yours. Their constant love for one another, the trials and tribulations that I have been witness to show me that they were meant to spend their lives with one another and blessed with their personal relationships each has with God. As I said, I could never imagine what it would be like if my parents chose to abandon each other for any reason. I feel completely blessed. If Jesus were against relationships maybe He wouldn’t have bothered with that wedding in Cana. Yes yes, I know, the Lamb of God has returned to take his Bride to Heaven. And that he returns with a sword that may break apart families. Hanifa, I honestly have nothing against You, Mr. Bent, or anyone else. I take no issue against consenting adults and what they choose to do. As long as it does not involve a child who has not the maturity to fully comprehend what they are doing as far as nudity and grown adults goes.

    I have been getting “naked” with God since I came into this world. He sees me completely with or without my clothes on. I do not need to disrobe with anyone to foster a closer relationship with Him. He knows the hairs on my head, does He not? Surely he can see through my clothing as well. I have been down to the “root” the “bare bones” of my total being inside and out with God. Believe it or not, I have experienced and still continue to experience a wonderful loving relationship with Him. Just because I’m not living my life as you do doesn’t mean I don’t have what you have. I suppose I should say you wouldn’t really know what I have.

    Again, I have no aversion to nudity. Not at all. I realize many people of different beliefs equate nudity to sin but I am not one of those people.

    Mr Bent,

    I do keep the Sabbath, however what I believe (verse below) may seem unconventional to those who enjoy attending church in a specific building. (Not to say that there is something wrong with this either)

    “But you, when you pray, enter into your closet,
    and when you have shut your door,
    pray to your Father which is in secret;
    and your Father who sees in secret shall reward you openly.” – Matthew 6:6

    Respectfully,
    Stephanie

  31. avatar
    Stephanie June 11, 2008 at 10:21 pm #

    “empy headed” = “brain dead”

    Excuse me lol 🙂

  32. avatar
    Prudence June 11, 2008 at 11:51 pm #

    Wayne, I do not hate you. This must be your own imagination. I simply have pity on you. I would love to see you find salvation and the “peace that passes all understanding” I would love to see you repent of your lies and your malicious behavior. I would love to see you a sane and happy man. Before I left your group I used to feel like I was going crazy. I have not felt that way in a long time. I will admit when I first left… I did not like you very much, but over the past 2 1/2 years God has brought me to forgive you for all the things you have done. He has given me strength to do what he has given me to do. My hope is for you that all of your bitterness and anger toward everyone (from the government on down to all the people in the world not playing in your little charade.) would be taken away so that you could find the joy that I have found from walking in the ways of God. What I have said on this comment section I will SWEAR from the one who lives forever and foreverl… It is the truth.

  33. avatar
    hanifa June 12, 2008 at 12:51 am #

    So there you have it, folks. All of you reading this website have been presented with both sides of the issue by way of testimony for the prosecution and for the defense. Each of you now sits in the jury seat, deciding on the verdict for your own life. There is no fence-sitting in this trial.

    What decision you make, whether Michael is the son of God, or is as portrayed by adversaries, is the judgment you place on your own head.

    The whole controversy is about which God/god you are married to. The time of the Revealing is come.

  34. avatar
    Perspicacious June 12, 2008 at 2:17 am #

    Reading these posts, the sad character of Wayne Bent (playing acting the part of Michael) comes off as a petulant child, whose posts simply do not ring true. The writings of the two women, Prudence and Julie, have that unmistakable ring of veracity and authenticity. Michael (played by Wayne Bent) seems pretentious and self-aggrandizing (which is a glimpse of what a jury will perceive as well).

    I find his claims of divinity to be very amusing. He fails one major test… God is said to be “the Word,” as in the scriptural reference, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” And so, the incarnation of God (Wayne’s claim to fame) would seemingly have a command of the written and spoken word like no mere mortal. The “Word” would be such a sacrosanct and inviolable vehicle that he (of all beings) would be able to skillfully use it without error. It just doesn’t seem logical that God incarnate would make grammar errors like a junior high student flunking seventh grade English class. But, right there in front of the real God and everyone, Wayne made a glaring error of usage of the word “infer,” when the Godly (all wise and all knowing) thing to do would have been to employ the word, “imply.”

    Wayne (posting as Michael) wrote:
    “…no one has ever had to stand naked in front of me. I never even inferred anything like this to anyone.

    About the fast: I have never, ever, inferred or directed, anyone to fast with me”
    End of Wayne (writing as God) making a very amateurish grammar error.

    Here is the truth about the word “infer:”

    Infer is sometimes confused with imply, but the distinction is a useful one. When we say that a speaker or sentence “implies” something, we mean that it is conveyed or suggested without being stated outright: When the mayor said that she would not rule out a business tax increase, she implied (not inferred) that some taxes might be raised. Inference, on the other hand, is the activity performed by a reader or interpreter in drawing conclusions that are not explicit in what is said. You might find a dictionary or thesaurus showing “imply” as a substitute for “infer,” but that is merely a reflection of the common misuse.

    The reader, listener, or receiver of the message “infers.” The message itself “implies.” A speaker or writer can “imply” in his statement… but only the person reading or hearing what was “implied” can make and “inference” from it. In the world of appropriate grammar (or by the tenets of “The Word”), Wayne (posing as Michael) has been “weighed in the balances and found wanting.” When it comes to being a proper representative of the Word…. he has defiled its purity and distorted its appropriate usages. The true keeper of the Word would say to Wayne, “Depart from me with your corrupt and error-filled employment of the language, You are nothing more than a pretender, a perfidious representative of the purity and beauty of honest usage of the Word.” Or something like that.

    But, even if Wayne (masquerading as Michael) takes a few grammar lessons, he cannot escape the castigation of the shameful opprobrium he has brought on himself by his wanton disregard for the dignity of others. He has rightly been branded a true “bete noire” and will carry that assignation to his grave, all the time railing and ranting in the foul and malicious voice we have seen demonstrated here, spewing hatred to anyone who tries to be his counsel and guide..

  35. avatar
    ron June 12, 2008 at 3:52 am #

    My remarks were not meant as a personal attack, and I am sorry if it offended anyone, but what I meant to show was that when you are in a cult, you can only be in complete submission or you are out of the cult.
    The quote in my next post came from testimony 8 form Prudence’s web page, and it was written by a 14 year old girl. The DA needs to read that one.

  36. avatar
    TerryCzap June 12, 2008 at 6:34 am #

    To the Witch (as you refer to yourself on your website), and your fellow sorcerer. It is with great astonishment that I continue to watch you make posts on the web that have no accuracy. I have also listened to and watched some of your presentations, which the national audience swallows with a passion.

    Often an interviewer will suggest to you, and those listening, that Michael is doing some particular weird thing (which I know is not true); I wait for you to say “well… it wasn’t quite like that,” and then go on to explain the reality of the issue. But instead you will say “yes,” thus promoting your fabrications, and instilling the hatred that is in your heart (against Michael), into your cultish followers. It leaves me awestruck at how you can tell lies, but claim to be truthful. But then, all I have to do is look at Mr. Bush and his cabinet members and it becomes very clear how his manipulations are accomplished.

    Your malicious lies are being cast like spells; purposed to turn people into being just like you are; full of animosity towards Michael and his Bride. I remember A.A. on the Larry King show saying that Michael “calls himself the sinful Messiah.” This was a bold faced lie, but in a way, a less damaging presentation than the manner in which the “two queens” of liars operate. Your damaged egos take parts of truths, and twist them into something that is now a lie. This is a very deceptive method which you have learned from your father (the devil), and leaves the uneducated minions to take your bait.

    Julie, I just got off the phone with D.T and V.T. I asked them about your comments (in this thread) – about having to put their “children into foster care” if they wanted to move back to the land. D.T. told me that this was very untrue, particularly because he has not had an inclination to move back here. V.T. told me the same thing; that the statement you are making is absolutely untrue, and that Michael has never said that to her (both DT and VT are still members of our church).

    This twisting of reality that you do, Julie, is also what has taken place over the last year when you have written to me. It is because of this twisting of the truth that I had to move away from your foul spirit. Granted, the voodoo that you both partake of, and the concoctions (plagues) that you pour out upon the earth, do have their effects on a gullible society. As seen, Witchy woman, in that your church is growing in leaps and bounds, and some even proclaim you a savior (hero).

    I must wonder though, isn’t there anything more to your life than trying to smear the character of another, and attempting to get others to hate that person? If not, the excrement which you pass around, will be a representation of your final character on this earth.

  37. avatar
    wdawn55 June 12, 2008 at 6:51 am #

    Dear Wayne,

    Why are you choosing to die? This reminds me of the case of Judas who didn’t want to face the fruit of his own sowing. Please don’t repeat his sin. Death by hanging or death by starvation is the exact same thing. This is a rope in your hands; it has nothing to do with a true fast. Wayne, you have betrayed Christ just as did Judas and Peter. I entreat you to re-consider your choice to do as did Judas. You can do what Peter did. Realize that it is the Son of God that you have betrayed by claiming to be His Second Coming. Jesus, dear Jesus, is standing there with your sins upon Him. He has been crucified afresh by you. Please don’t let his death for you be in vain.

    Much love and prayers,
    John & Sharon

  38. avatar
    Prudence June 12, 2008 at 6:56 am #

    Terry, I have read places where you said you didn’t go to my website anymore… neither does Michael. I say certain things to see if you comment on them… you sure fall for the bait 😀 It just shows that you can’t even keep your own word.

    I wish you the best… I wont call you names like you are doing to me… I wont bow that low. I think if anyone has a nose… they can tell who has a foul spirit!

    I wish you the best…
    Prudence

    I believe in loving my enemies Terry 😀

  39. avatar
    TerryCzap June 12, 2008 at 7:19 am #

    Get real Prudence. If you were loving your enemies, you could not tell your lies. Therefore, you are not wishing either me or Michael the best.

  40. avatar
    VT June 12, 2008 at 7:21 am #

    FOR THE RECORD
    I am the very “VT” mentioned by Julie to “have on her her heart for her and her husband to be able to move back onto the land”.

    What is “false” is that we never made the request to move back to the land. Direct quote from DT “I did not ever desire or request to move back to the land” Soooo that being said, the accusation that Wayne said we would have to put our children in a foster home, would also be false.

    Both myself and my daughter did at separate times move back to the land for some time. But this again is evidence that there has been no rejection of parents or children.

    In fact our family has received support from Wayne financially, emotionally, spiritually and socially while living on and off the land. What Wayne actually said was that we were “loved, protected, respected, regarded, WELCOMED at all times and under any circumstances” This is not a “gist”, this is a direct quote. And this is the way we have always been treated.

  41. avatar
    Prudence June 12, 2008 at 7:29 am #

    I haven’t lied Terry…. so GET REAL!

  42. avatar
    Gabriel June 12, 2008 at 8:00 am #

    Perspicacious, my response to you is in harmony with the scripture of Psalm 18:26, where it says of God, “With the pure thou wilt shew thyself pure; and with the froward thou wilt shew thyself froward.

    Persp, I would like to thank you on behalf of all those here at Strong City for sharing your plain and clear revelations into the nuances of grammar and usage of language. I think, however, that what you have revealed of yourself in that mini-catechism quite clearly displays the nature and spirit behind your intentions.

    You predicate virtually your entire refutation of Michael’s claims on the vacuous logic that he cannot possibly be the expression of God’s Messiah because his grammar is not up to your standards. Yes, that is what you are clearly implying (and I am clearly inferring). The obvious implication — even to a child — is not so much that Michael’s grammar isn’t good, but that it isn’t as good as yours. Do I detect some much deeper disappointment that God has not chosen you as Messiah to this age, based on your more perfect grammar and sentence structure (the improper qualifying of the superlative was intentional)?

    By the way, for future reference, the more acceptable usage of your term “grammar error” is “grammatical error.” (Oh my, I guess that rather much disqualifies you as Messiah, at least according to your convoluted thinking.)

    If, in your vast command of vocabulary and language, you are not already familiar with the word “pedantic” you may want to look it up, for you are surely are an eminent working illustration of that lexical.

    …and your screen name, Perspicacious. How is it possible that any being with an ego that monumental could even nearly approach the clear, precise, quiet thought processes necessary to hear the Spirit of God speak? Your mind seems to be so noisily preoccupied with your own self-admiration, that were the “still, small voice” of God to become a hurricane in your head, it would be quite obscured by your own raging intellectual narcissism. But then, anyone so self-involved has no other navigational reference point by which to steer their soul off the rocks of their own imminent destruction.

    Your overly ostentatious display of worthless learning and intellectual egotism hangs about you more clearly than if you were piloting the Goodyear blimp with the message emblazoned on it, “Look at me, the brilliant, intellectual who can sling endless strings of words, composing virtually meaningless thoughts, conveying nothing worth pondering, but impressing everyone.” And the truly sad thing about that Persp, is that you are likely the only one who does not recognize that fact.

    You present yourself as a purveyor of truth and reason, declaring that were Michael whom he says he is, there would be no errors in his grammar, seeking to uplift your own as the standard by which God and His purposes should be judged. Well, Persp, this should reveal at least one of two things about your thinking: either you believe in levels of Biblical inspiration, i.e., that scriptural inspiration is not a superlative, and that some things in God’s Word are partially inspired, and others fully inspired (a ridiculous assumption, wouldn’t you agree?), or you are simply ignorant of Biblical construction, and hence the truths therein contained.

    For example, any Greek scholar will tell you that the Apostle Paul, one of the most learned, educated men ever to be used by God to pen holy writ, consistently misused his participles. Therefore, by your reasoning, he could not have been inspired by the Holy Spirit to write what he did, because his grammar was decidedly imperfect. If, therefore, you believe that every word spoken by Jesus was precisely accurate, grammatically speaking, you are then presented with the exegetical problem of determining, with your clearly flawed human reason, which part of God’s Word is fully inspired, and which is only partially so. But of course, by your logic, God should have checked in with you before the final draft of His Word was ready for the galley.

    In brief, the entire Bible is replete with grammatical errors, because inerrancy is not based on perfect grammar, but perfect principle. In that, the scriptures are absolutely inerrant. But then, Persp, you clearly do not believe them anyway. You simply display a pretense of it, and in that pretense you reveal yourself as surely an unbeliever as if you personally drove the nails through Jesus’ hands. When you stand before the judgment seat of God, you will not be judged by your grammar, but by your character, and no pedantic fig leaves will avail to cover your nakedness then.

    Further, you mention that “The writings of the two women, Prudence and Julie, have that unmistakable ring of veracity and authenticity.” I would have to say, considering the display you have made here of your own Byzantine thinking, that you reference them only because what we know to be their blatant lies and distorted truths would surely “ring” with your own principles and character. You believe what they say, only because they say what you want to believe, rather than anything resembling fact. One who does not desire truth will embrace anything presented to the contrary, no matter how outrageous.

    As to your labeling Michael as a “black beast,” how, in your abysmal blindness could you possibly know that? You see in a perfect photographic negative — black is white and white is black.

Thank you for visiting.

%d bloggers like this: