waysider

Thanks I'm sure a lot of folks will find this information helpful.

Yes, and he allowed people to think that he had some kind of spiritual insight that enabled him to discern which works were "on" and which were "off". He was a master at manipulating people and situations. He surrounded himself with people who had real talent so that onlookers would associate him with their creativity. Like a form of name dropping.

The Way was already stifling creativity and individuality in 1972, when I first sat through PFAL. I was essentially told, by local leadership, that I had to make a choice between pursuing my artistic endeavors and going forward with my "spiritual" growth. I made that choice. And, although I can't blame anyone besides myself for making it, I realize now that my decision was, at least partially, based on erroneous or misrepresented information supplied by The Way. The whole movement was mushrooming so fast, it took time for VPW & Co. to get control of the direction it was headed. And, I think, too, that VPW allowed a certain amount of it (independent creativity) to continue as an enticement. There was kind of an idea that you could "redirect" your creativity to more Godly ventures if you fully dedicated yourself to the movement. Thus, there were still renegade artists sprinkled throughout the "ministry" for a good while in the early years. I think VPW had a pretty firm grip on it all by 1975 or 1976.

According to Way theology, the extra books, as well as The Dead Sea Scrolls, etc., are "counterfeit". Not in the manner that a piece of currency is deliberately faked, but in the manner of not being directly inspired by God. They don't fit neatly into the "inerrant" format of the rest of the canon.

Scroll down the main forum page. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/forum/20-doctrinal/

'Cause when it's rainin' Ain't nothin' but love rainin' down And when the sun shines Ain't nothin' but love shinin' all around And when the wind blows I'll be talkin' to you Sayin' that I loved you always And I know that you loved me too Paul Delay (1/31/52--3/7/07)

Yes, they present serious health problems that put human lives at risk. Remember The Black Plaque?

Another thing you could try is a metal detector. You sweep it around until you find something that "sounds out" a 3-5 inch circle. That could be an old metal well-head. They are buried below the frost line. That's probably about 40 inches down in your area. Or, you could wind up finding an old paint can lid. LOL. But, I have actually dug up old paint can lids that have been purposely buried over the top of the well-head to make it easier to find. If you do find the well-head, don't open the seal on top. There are bolts on it that can be dropped down the well if not properly loosened. Also, some places have code that require you to modify a well to current code standards once it is opened. That entails extending the casing up above ground level. Best to leave that to a pump man.

I didn't say the farmer was eating the chickens. I said it could be his livelihood. (ie: his business) If you owned a restaurant, would you allow rats and roaches to wander about blissfully? They're God's little creatures too.

If you had to choose between feeding your own kids and the coyote feeding her pups, I would certainly hope you would choose your own kids. Coyotes aren't dogs. They are wild animals that have a keen instinct for survival in a cruel world.

Your state's dept. of natural resources may have a record of any wells drilled on your property. It helps if you know your plat number.

To some extent, circumstances dictate right or wrong. For example, if your livelihood depends on raising poultry, it would be ok to kill a coyote that is stealing your chickens. On the other hand, killing a coyote simply because he is guilty of being a coyote would be wrong. Killing anything without a valid reason is wrong. (IMO) Does the coyote experience emotion? I haven't a clue.

Wasn't it you who stated, in a previous post, that you didn't believe the story of Jonah and the whale was literally true?

I never said you "had a screw loose" or were "out to lunch" or were "a couple fries short of a happy meal", or anything of the sort. You said this: "It either is inerrant or it isn't. . . . . you either believe it is or you don't" See, this is the problem. If something is a Palomino Pony, for example, it really makes no difference what I believe it is. It doesn't change reality one tiny bit. It still gallops and kicks up its hooves. You believe it's inerrant. I don't. What does that really change? Nothing, as far as I can see. Unless, of course, we're talking about an organization, like The Way, whose beliefs on the matter had a direct effect on peoples' day to day lifestyle. "If one little piece doesn't fit, the whole thing falls to pieces." By that sort of reasoning, I would need to have a vested interest in making sure any contradictions or discrepancies are resolved. Sorry----I don't subscribe to that train of thought anymore.

Thanks, GT. Your hard work does not go unnoticed.

Very cool, SirG.

"The bible or scripture if you like. . . . is literature. . . . the subject matter God. Not only do the words convey something. . ... but, the subject matter is able to guide us Himself in understanding. The more we read and consider the times, the characters, the depth of story. . . . the more it fits together and is alive. It is obscured to be sure. . .. . similar to the depth of Jane Eyre. . . . but, there is an enlightening process." So then why must it also be "inerrant"?

'nother thought crossed my mind. FLO (Fellow Laborers of Ohio) used Ecc. 5:12 (The sleep of a labouring man is sweet, whether he eat little or much: but the abundance of the rich will not suffer him to sleep.) to squeeze extra work out of us and convince us it was a good thing we never had much money or enough to eat. And some people STILL don't think it was a cult!

I remember Wierwille teaching, in the earl 1970's, that, if you dream, you are leaving yourself in a vulnerable position for devil spirit visitation. This is the old "trap door" concept. According to Wierwille, people in the OT needed for God to speak to them in dreams because they didn't have "new birth spirit" by which to receive revelation. In retrospect, this contradicts "the great principle". (ie: "God is spirit and can only speak to spirit.") Wierwille rationalized this by saying that God "momentarily put spirit ON the OT dream recipients."----I believe VPW taught this in AC/1973. When I was a Fellow Laborer, in the mid 1970's, we were actually taught that the human body could circumvent the need for sleep by virtue of "speaking in tongues much". (If we were tired it was our own fault for slacking off in the SIT category.) Wierwille taught that God could talk to you in dreams but would only do so if you were so far out of fellowship that He couldn't get through to you via revelation. Naturally, if you did have a dream, you found yourself wondering how you had fallen out of fellowship. And we bought it-------That's the scary part.

Excellent points, Steve.

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHtK4nAbsbI&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHtK4nAbsbI&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHtK4nAbsbI&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object> <object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qqhl_8WwhMc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qqhl_8WwhMc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qqhl_8WwhMc&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

No idea.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value=" name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src=" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

very nice performance.