Ham

hmm. Maybe this was TOO silly. OK, the Squirrel will go stand in the corner..

ummm... pecans..

but honestly, I'm not looking for proof any more. What if I told you that I actually saw it in someone.. actually more than one person. It would be my truth, my proof, not yours. The only thing I'll say.. if you see it, you'd better have on more than a pair of sunglasses and sun block.. Well, what can I say.. at the end of the day, it's just the word of the squirrel..

Well, the bible tells me so..

I have failed to see this work, in practice. I tried it for over twenty five years.. no soap. Just give enough, get vast enough understanding of God's nature revealed in the bible.. I think it is putting the cart before the horse. I would suggest, to see God's light, brings the recognition you speak of. Breathing for one thing..

I kinda think that "self" is just the skin. The exterior, that contains a being of light. true. but I wasn't talking about worship. I don't think a person can see this image, in themselves. Probably a good thing.. you'd walk around looking in a mirror for the rest of your days..

No, I'm saying we have this little itty bit of individuality for a reason. I for one, think we asked for it. 99.92% of this life we speak of may not be about "me", but .08 % indeed is. What I'm saying is, a person can't fully acheive this "God consciousness". Try as you may.. whatever methods you choose- "renew the mind", meditate, whatever.. and the .08% of "you" will not go there. Is it? He did create us in his image, did he not?

No laughs yet? Tough crowd.. Hmmm. Maybe I should have put this in doctrinal..

Probably eating fermented grapes.. or the modern equivalent.. I met a couple of kids who had inhaled way too much glue.. they plain weren't there. The one kid would just break the glass window on a drugstore.. and meander around, slowly finding the Valiums and other "goodies".. no hurry. Cops? What cops? Didn't make any difference. In his mind, the store was there.. the goodies were inside.. and, they belonged to him.. He was just mindless. I wonder if that was vic's mentality, as he helped himself to other's works. He was shameless.

Some people claim meditation does the same thing.. Some people think that we competed rather fiercely to have the chance to enjoy the tiny, itty bitty speck of individuality that this life affords us. about the only way you're gonna completely throw THAT off, and be totally God minded fella, is when you are stone cold dead. Many are given one of the gifts of the universe, and they treat it like a wool sweater. Itch, itch itch.. gotta get out of this thing.. what a waste of time. I mean, fight tooth and nail to just get here, and spend the time desperately seeking the great egress. If "they" are right, anyway.. What's the big hurry? :)

given vic's "preclivities" for women, I think donna could have been the first choice. according to vp, couldn't let a woman do a "man"'s job. Chose the next logical alternative.. I think she was fairly smart, until she was around loy long enough. Something about his demeanor that seems to depress the intelligence of those around him..

Still looking for this character.. last call.

Plus.. the people he chose to lift from- Stiles, Leonard, Bullinger.. with the exception of Bullinger.. who ever heard of Leonard? or Stiles? Maybe he thought they were so far on the fringe, that no one would catch on.

Yeah.. "converted, saved, born again, call it what you will.." that is a pretty big assumption that they are indeed all the same thing. I think what you are referring to is equivalence. A and B imply C, but for an equivalence relation, a person must show that If C implies A and B. the vicster broke so many rules of logic. He had a minor in philosophy, didn't really have an excuse.

On one of my foraging expeditions on the internet, I found this.. http://uselessmen.blogspot.com/2006/07/que...to-get-nut.html

Perhaps. But he did not create them in or by the hands of men. The idea that liberty and freedom allow us to do as we wish, and that in the end everything will be "fleshed out".. I suggest is little different from the Epicurean philosophy of old.

I wonder if they were fermented..

What good came of it.. I don't know. but having assessed the cost.. to myself, but especially to those less fortunate than myself.. for me, personally, I threw it all down the crapper. If God wants me to have it, he'll find a different way to get it to me.

Roy, I think you have a good point. "Daddy, daddy" is but just a beginning. And what about the millions of tongues.. have we heard them? Millions of different voices.. and they all may not contain the answer that we seek, but the answer that we need. That's about the best I have for you tonight friend.. :)

excuse me a moment.. but this sounds an awful lot like these folks.. http://www.crystalinks.com/crowley.html Just seems to be covered with christian terms. "do what thou wilt.. is the whole of the law.." One thing you could say for Crowley, at least he was honest.. vic on the other hand, could not entirely shed his religious exterior. But they had the same ideology. vp didn't OPENLY espouse it.. but for the "inner circle".. they had "liberty".. all things were "clean" to them.

Could be. Or these talents were learned from parents during a brief window of opportunity. Human speech is like that. I forget the age range.. but I think children are most susceptible to learning language from six months to maybe five or six years old. If they are deprived, they can never make up the lack of early exposure to language. Feral children (lived in the wild) could never recover from that loss, or become productive in society. Well, a sucker may be born every minute.. but not everybody can be convincing enough to sell them the Brooklyn bridge.

Sure he won't mind if we "borrow" it for a while.. Some people seem to be able to just turn on the light, and wowser.. they could sell you an iceberg in the middle of the winter. There are quite a few people who had this kind of charisma.. could draw in a very large crowd, and used it for evil purposes exclusively. Others used it for evil when they weren't using it to communicate the bible.. others, plain didn't do any evil with it, just good. I wonder how much of it really is connected to our concept of christian gifts of the spirit, or holy spirit.

quite possibly because he gives gifts to ALL. It's just, part of the package. I could use my "gifts" to be quite destructive.. but I choose not to.

My take was that he considered it a mark of true spirituality. Should have had Richard Pryor or Lenny Bruce up front. At least we would have had some entertainment along with the foul language.