socks

What's up widdat image???? What can be tackier than taking an image that millions hold to be sacred - the crucifixion of Christ - and use it in such a way to make a point, a point that's marginal at best in the context of a discussion on "persecution"? It's a perfect example of how a person will stretch the boundaries of decency and respect when it somes to - VPW or the Way or anything to do with any of it. Right outta the gate, all bets are off. Nothing's too low or too nasty if it denigrates any or all of that. Is that it? Time for a heart check. Still ticking. That's a relief. Sorry Mark. It's a free country though. I'm surprised. I don't consider myself to be superstitious, despite what others might consider my Christian faith, but on the other hand I don't spit in the wind either, if I can help it. Has nothing to do with VPW, a lot to do with Jesus Christ. Don't be insulted, but I'm going to stand over.........here. I'm bummed. But it'll pass.

ck, it's' just difficult to understand where you're coming from, because what you say changes from post to post. Maybe not what you mean, but what you write. Here's an example - At one point you wrote: Why do you think it is important to read Revelations?? When A few books back you look in Thessanlonians 1st it says We are saved from the wrath to come,(I Thess 1:10) then in the same book it says Jesus will descend from heaven to get us( I Thess 4:16,17). So then what more is for me to learn in Revelations... Then at another point you wrote: I have also learned that Revelations is not important to us. Then another place you wrote: The book of Revelation has alot of things about how the world is going to end but I guess you just erased it. Though it is nice to disregard those sections that is the wrong thinking. The bible is here to show some things of the past, some of the things that we need to live a more abundant life, and things to come. There are sections in Revelation where God has no mercy on non believers. That whole part about being cast in the lake of fire comes to mind. Please don't get confused by my use of the references to Revelations as having some hidden agenda or meaning that I really want you or anyone else to read Revelations and that's why I'm posting this. That's not my point. It's just an example of how you picked out a mention of it and have referred to it several times, in opposing ways. You state it's not important, then say it it wrong to disregard sections and point out sections that you think are important, apparently only to make a point you want to make. I'm just pointing this out, but I'm not going to get into it with you back and forth because I don't see it being worthwhile. You're studying the bible and pursuing it as you see fit is a good thing and I'd encourage it. Discussing it like this is kind of a vanity thing I think on your part more than anything. At least that's the way it appears. Best wishes.

Ditto, SafariVista. They can start on their acoustic guitars with the lessons. Basic stuff they'll learn in the first few months, it won't matter. That's great you're encouraging them! :)

Well, I do declare! 'S Belle! "But you didn't stop there....did you....?" Nice stuff. I've been teased, now I need to be pleased! when's the whole biscuit coming??

Aaaah, I think CK has a personal gripe against the Pope, dmiller. Weird. I don't get it. Why would anyone with a personal gripe, post it on this board??? :) Y'know?

Well speaking of wolves, I wasn't referring specifically to VPW or anyone in particular CK. Here's the section in Acts I was thinking of. Following it, my scintillating comments: 27 For I have not shunned to declare to you all the counsel of God. 28 Take heed therefore to yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost has made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he has purchased with his own blood. 29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. 31 Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears. 32 And now, brothers, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified. 33 I have coveted no man’s silver, or gold, or apparel. 34 Yes, you yourselves know, that these hands have ministered to my necessities, and to them that were with me. 35 I have showed you all things, how that so laboring you ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive. 36 ¶ And when he had thus spoken, he kneeled down, and prayed with them all. 37 And they all wept sore, and fell on Paul’s neck, and kissed him, 38 Sorrowing most of all for the words which he spoke, that they should see his face no more. And they accompanied him to the ship. Step into that record for a second and listen to what Paul's saying. Now, gently, so I don't give Sirguessalot the impression we're getting weird here...I'm not interested in hammering on VPW or anyone in particular when I mention "wolves". What I meant was, it's an important function of the church, and what you'd probably consider the quality of "leadership", to watch out for, help and warn others in the church when you believe it's going to help. Paul did that. It's a good example of being honest with people here, in a caring way. Paul was living the love he taught about. He could have just said hey folks, it's been a blast. Thanks! I'll be passing the hat around, so if you've been blessed don't be stingy! But he didn't. He really cared about these people and so he left them with the best he had to offer them. He reminds them of how honest he's been with them in other things too. He worked for a living, supported himself and others, and did so that he wouldn't be grifting off of them to do what he believed he was called to do. And so that he'd have to help others himself. Paul did what he says Jesus taught. Not that many ministers do that, VPW included. Many feel they're called to do "the Lord's Work" and want everyone else to pay their way to do it. That's not honoring the God who made the call, IMO. I haven't always felt that way, but that's the way I feel today. That's just one point, not to be harping on it, but it's a point worth considering when we talk about "wolves". Most of the religious world is in the business of building successful Christian businesses, AKA "churches". It's a personal peeve of mine. Has nothing to do with VPW, the Way, the Roman Catholic church, or anyone specifically. I feel the basic message of the LIFE of a minister is often lost in the pursuit of a ministerial career. Big whoopdee doo. But - as an example - it's one of the things I do post on this board from time to time, if possibly to remind, "warn" people looking into churches like the Way, that we've got some simple clear examples of honest pastoriing and ministering in the bible to look at - certainly Jesus Christ Himself. Paul, many others. To me, that's a part of being loving. Doesn't mean you or anyone else has to or needs to go along with it. I put it out here, as I do in other ways and places, for consideration.

Lesseee, there's been The Sower and the Contender. Without much thinking I assumed the Sower was to sow some seeds and generate interest in newbies and the Contender was for the more serious CES bibliophile who felt contention was their cup of tea. I got the Sower for awhile, without asking for it which was kind of nice as it meant that I had a secret buddy out there somewhere who put me on the list, or maybe it was for the benefit of my lovely wife who is always remembered fondly as she has historically had the good grace to pass up opportunities to needlessly tell people what she really thinks of them. Either way, it came like clockwork for awhile. Then - a year ago? - a letter came that talked about how it wasn't going to be sent to people that never responded back with any interest, which I guess means never wrote back a thank you, or sent money or bought something. I guess. Which made sense, sort of. Since I'd never asked for it to be sent, I had no interest in it really. Nothing caught my eye in it, which may be a giveaway of some kind that I'm too much of a deadbeat to benefit from it anyway. Don't know for sure. After a bit it stopped coming and hasn't come since then, that I know of. But we get a lot of mail from businesses that we didn't ask for, so I could be wrong. And in a way, it's kind of nice getting all that unsolicited mail even though I complian often and loudly about it. That mailbox is always full. Mailers, fliers, offers, serious opportunities for me to buy, sell, borrow, from friends who only have my best interests at heart, they say. It's nice. It's definitely better than an empty mailbox. Empty mailboxes seem so - depressing. Hey! I'm here! Doesn't anyone want to send something? In this world we live in, it's almost suspect. No mail. What's your problem, bud? It costs money to do stuff like this so I think it makes good business sense for anyone in the higly profitable and fast-money-streaming business of Christian-ware and Religious Gee-Gaws to balance the books now and then and see who's really being helped and responding iwth some hard cash, and who's just suckin' the straw for free. Or like me, taking valuable resources by mistake and ulitmately by false pretense as I'm too lazy to tell anyone to correct the mailing list. I like free stuff. It's cheaper than the stuff that costs money, no question about it. If it's free, and I could use it, I'm there. But personally, getting another e-version of something I didn't want to begin with would be a waste of cyber-resources that could be put to better use sending penis enlargement ads and ways to Make Money Fast! notifications. So frankly I welcome this opportunity to avoid clogging the info-money highway. Not doing something is actually a way of doing some good. For some reason, that appeals to me.

Well that settles that. Paul followed the same pattern of leadership as the verses that Goey posted. He very clearly spends quite a bit of time discussing the inappropriate and unloving behavior of the Corinthians. Without pointing out what was wrong he couldn't clearly direct them to what was right. Paul makes no bones about saying who he thinks the people in the church should be wary of either, in other places. He names names. Also tells his protege Timothy to watch out for certain kinds of people. He tells us all to beware of wolves getting into the flock, posing as good guys. Paul knew as well as anyone what it meant to be a bad guy, by the standards of his new faith. He judged himself least worthy of all on the one hand, and on the other clearly aspired to the higher vision and standards of his new faith. "Love thinks no evil". It begs the question "what is evil?"

Two - two! Two meetings in one! That explains it. The first reference I read to it online was the "November" meeting, which was held in the BRC and that Randy A walked out of in the middle, etc. That meeting, me go. No see gun. Maybe gun, maybe no gun, but me no see gun. But there was another meeting, me no go, and there were guns. Or a gun. Pistoleros. Hardware. Blue steel. One eyed Jacks. Colts. Shorties. Sleevers. Serious protection for the seriously deranged. I can see that. Guns? For or against what, I'm not sure. Don Weirwille couldn't have taken 10 quick steps without hacking up the remains of his first shortie Kool of the day. What's Craig going to do? Dance? Badly enough to scare people? Howard's another case. That wiry frame, beady eyes. He might have been worth watching. Maybe they weren't to keep people out, but to keep people in. As another hour of Geer's relentless posturing and snorting would have led any sane person to have at least feigned a bathroom break. Hopefully, no new ones will be ripped due to this post, as it would be a waste today, really. Other days, of possible benefit. Maybe I can take a Rip Credit, as some days it would be a help. Put me down for one. I'll be back.

Danny, on the Ventura guitars, I found this link to a site that has some information on them. I've played one or two in the past - different models though. Is this one like yours? HERE. The site research said they were made in the same factories at one time where Aria's were made. There's a couple Aria semi-holllow body electrics that are really nice. I like their FA series, HERE's SOME NICE PHOTOS ON THE ARIA SITE. The FA 71 almond is a nice guitar, as is the FA50E.

Nope, ain't just you, or us Chas! My wife keeps commenting on the song keys, they sound too low sometimes for the singers to navigate. Some of the stuff - Like Stevie Wonder's tunes - shows just how great a sound Wonder has in his voice. But it's tough to go from low to high in one verse or chorus and while I assume that the keys are selected carefully they seem like a half step up in some cases would help. It just doesn't always sound like the band is "there" all the time, dunno. Arrangements - one of the toughtest but most rewarding things to do I think is take a song that's very established and work with that arrangement to add your own mark to it. It can be tough. Some of the stuff the house band on the INXS show did was really good I thought. The guitarists had parts to play that were expected, and they had to hit the mark for the singers and be there, and they did a great job at it. There was a version of Bohemian Rhapsody they did and they nailed it, with energy and without sounding like karaoke. Seeing INXS up close must have been great! I always liked them, they've got the Big Riff sound down. I haven't really followed the new singer and the stuff they've recorded for release. If you can, post a pic! That would be cool. Well, this weekend I'm trying to get out with the Girl and look around for a used acoustic guitar, maybe a nylon string. :) If all goes well....might have one soon!

Sid! I cringe at the thought too Chas! Hopefully the Guild is one piece still. American Idol - speaking of guitars, the band and the broadcast mix - anyone else following the show and think the band is so-so? I've been disappointed with the sound - the drums are lost, and the overall rhythm section is hard to hear. I wonder if the monitor mix the singers hear is any better. It sounds pretty weak to me, and the electric guitar(s) are pretty muddy every song. Few weeks ago the acoustics on a song sounded out of tune. Is it just me? :blink: I like all the singers, would like to hear more from all of them, rather than just a tune each week. It's kind of a drag knowing that someone's always going to be lowest and off each week. Mandisa tonight - way too early! I thought she'd be in the final group. The INXS show that ran last year had a hot band, I thought they really were good and made the singers sound better. The concept was kind of cheesey, although I've always liked INXS and David Navarro managing to look and act normal was interesting to watch. But the guitarists in that band were both very good and adjusted to each song they worked up. Much better as a basic rhythm section too.

Greets! Good to sEe everyone! Lots of stuff to catch up on, so I'm reading back a few pages. :) JL, quickie on the wah-wahs-Vox is a good wah. Morley makes a couple. Their basic wah is a good size and floor shape but not too strong a "wah" effect so if he wants to really wrangle some guts out of it the price is right but the wah is a tad weak. Works though. I'd recommend a Vox or the Dunlop "Cry Baby" wah. But The Boss unit Bluzeman's got might be just the ticket, actually. :) There's a lot of effect pedals and manufacturers, and they can be hard to choose from. A pedal board would give him a lot of FX and a chance to learn them. Couple of the coolest and most used effects are vibrato and tremelo. This page had a good description of both. With a little amp reverb, they can add some cool sounds. Listen to the opening of "Gimme Shelter" and it's got that sound. "My Father's Eyes" by Clapton has a nice use of vibrato and reverb on the solo lines.

Moderately Greets! ChattyKathy, the 'inventor' of the guitar - this guy's probably the closest to the title, Antonio de Torres Jurado. He put together most of the features we'd recognize as a modern "acoustic nylon" string guitar in the early part of the 1900's. Neck length, top strut support, scale length, fret placement, bridge setup, all of that stuff. Prior to that the guitar was being developed over a few hundred years by a lot of different cultures. I may be mixing them up but I think there's two lines of thought, maybe more, on how we ended up with the guitar and one goes back to middle eastern roots and the other looks to the Greeks. Overall stringed instruments go way back 5,000 years to ancient Egypti-era pickers. There's been all kinds, 4, 5,, 6, 8, 12 stringed instruments in all kinds of shapes too. What came out of the the middle-Eastern instruments was more like a sitar-type instrument. I don't know that I'd call it a "guitar", although it had frets. But the use of the fretboard with imbedded frets and the string pressing into the fretboard against the fret, and set to a scale length for 6 strings that would reliably and consistently produce tuned notes is "generally" attributed to Jurado for being the one who put it together. Was he a Muslim? I don't know to be honest, I've never read he was. Not sure what difference it would make. Not to say by that that Muslim culture didn't make a contribution but it's a little overblown for anyone to say they "invented" what we today would call a guitar. It's really a culmination of a lot of stringed instrument designs over centuries of time.

Beautiful, ChattyKathy! Love it. I'm going to be out of town for about a week and may not be able to be online here with the thread for several days. I'll look forward to catching up with everyone later! Please carry on, with grace and charm! And guitars!! Love ya'all. :)

Michael Hedges - great stuff. One of his older tunes I love is "Woman of the World". It just floats along so nicely with long gaps of strumming that are just beautiful. I think you may have the lowdown on that Les Paul Chas. I visitied that Ibanez board, and took a look at mine, an older Japanese made RG 560. It seems to follow most of the comparisons they show between the real and the fakes. I don't play it much but it's a nice guitar. That Les Paul may be a "real" fake, which I've never seen before. Very interesting.

Thanks Mr. Heller. :) Tom, I think we're saying the same thing, maybe or pret' near? Linda Z, I agree too, that a teacher has an agenda, always. Bottom line, communicate information and develop understanding. Perhaps even to encourage further development.

Double whoa Bluzeman! It says Gibson on the headstock. That's a very good price. I'm really curious now. It would be a great deal at that price,

Whoa! Does it play itself!? We have two cats and yeah, I've noticed they love that plush lining!

Simple enough. A lot of what people have to say about their PFAL experience relates to the people they knew at the time and what those people did, typically good things, nice things. I think this is often overlooked and undervalued. Caring people acting on simple beliefs - trying to develop a love for a God they believed was good and loving to them, as a result of what they'd heard in PFAL and experienced with the people they knew. Many of the topics in PFAL itself are arguable, pro and con. But also, many of the basic teachings don't lead a person to do bad things to themselves or others. Speaking in tongues may be something that doesn't stick with some people, but to act on what PFAL itself teaches only leads a person to do so in the privacy of their own brain and if they follow the teaching it's not to any bad ends. If viewed as a waste of time, it's just that - a waste of that person's time but one that's done with good intent and an expecatation that it's potentially a good thing. Having said that I do think PFAL emphasizes some things to make a point, rather than to improve the quality of a person's life and what they really need. 4 Crucified, for instance. That's taught to illustrate "scripture buildup", which is nothing more than a way to view the gospels collectively. It's really no different than having 4 separate accounts and taking them all into consideration. But to hammer on religion and all of the blah blah about money-mongers wanting to make a buck on bible sales, that's petty IMO. It's completely unecessary if the goal is to teach more about the bible. So in parts all through it you have to endure the venting and ranting to hear what's being taught and I think it's wasted time. That's a big area where I think PFAL doesn't cut it - there's too much baggage that goes along with it, too much of VPW declaring this and that and all that he's about. It was interesting at the time, different for some like me. But if teaching from the bible and trying to help people is the goal, you don't need all of that. You only need it if you want to establish yourself in people's minds and build yourself out in people's minds. VPW was certainly in the throes of starting to do that with PFAL. There was a certain charm in PFAL, that here was this guy who was pretty straight laced in the way he presented himself, the suit, tie, rose, all of that, blustering on with gusto about how excited he was about the bible. Taken at that level, I think it could still have that charm for some people but when it's all said and done, the greatest value will come from hearts of the people involved. It could be a lot of different bible classes and teachers, but it will come down to that group of people and how they live and act. If they're hard-hearted and prideful about every jot and slash mark in the teaching it'll stink. IMO.

Oh, you two! Now you're being silly! To be honest, it's no laughing matter, this gun business. Because I have the image - have you ever had a memory of something from your past that happened to you, but for some reason you remember from the view of someone else, as if you're seeing it in memory as if you were actually standing off to the side? Remembering it you see it in your mind's eye from another's view. I'm not sure why that happens, there's probably a name for it. It may be because of the way I've reconstructed the memory of the event over time, not sure. Anyway, I have the image of "CG" at the podium now, after reading WW and JL's exchange, and he's walking up, no - lumbering in that doughboy-that-just-ate sort of stroll, towards the podium and he's doing that little chewy thing with his mouth where the lips look like they're trying to find where they're supposed to be. And when he hits the podium he sort of swishes his jacket back to the right side, and there in living color is...the gun...and then just as everyone's breath catches he...starts dancing around doing a little jig and clapping his hands together and saying "Just kidding! I was just kidding! Ha ha ha ha ha---ah!" and then stops and steps back to the podium, again very solemn and begins intoning... "I speak here tonight, for the dignity of man...." .... and everyone breaks out in laughter and applause and someone says "Let's have some BURGERS!" and amidst a holler of affirmative hoots and backslapping agreement everyone heads out to the Asphalt Terrace, where Ted is set up and singing "Too Many Do-Goods" to roousing accompaniment provided by the 2nd Interim In-Law Corps and there's people skating out on the Way Pond and as the memory slowly fades out the voice of Don Weirwille can be heard saying "No mustard, and I mean...no mustard please!"

The gun. I was there, never saw the gun. I've never talked to anyone there who said they saw ... the gun. And after the meeting where...the gun appeared, no one that I spoke to or saw later was talking about...the gun. I never heard about...the gun...until Waydale and then here. So I dunno... Was there...a gun? I don't know. If someone I knew said that there was, I'd probably believe them. I was back several rows, couple three seats in from the aisle, so my view may have been blocked at key times. I don't really care, but I guess I care enough to add this insightful first hand account of what I didn't see. It seems like an account that has legs, it's certainly been retold enough times. But mostly I'm glad it's over. I doubt I would have stayed if I knew there was brandishing going on. Brandishing's never a good thing.

Amps - I've been experimenting with my 12 AX 7 tubes in my preamp. There's different kinds, I wanted a warmer sound and was talking to the guy in a local store and found one that's in the Fender Twin. I put two into my preamp and it added some nice sound. And they're a relatively cheap mod, think both were 20 bucks all totalled. I agree, tubes are the way to go. My Line 6 Spider is a digital modeller and does a good job, and is very convenient for most things. I'll switch to the preamp and amp setup sometimes which goes through either a little 12 inch speaker cab, or a bassman cab if I need more wind. :) But I don't play any large gigs these days so it's a lot of shlepping and not worth it. Reverb is a highly underated effect. For many years guitarists had that and not much else and did a lot with it.

<insert low moan...> Yuperrz. Hey, Guitar Player has --- Derek Trucks on the cover! Great article. Nice pics of his guitar, slide, and a good writeup. Highly recommended. Gave it to my daughter to check out. Yes, Joe Perry does have the classic sound for rock, I think. So does that guy, Slash, Slice, that guy. His tone is classic Les Paul stuff. I'm sort of a sound junkie. Sounds make nice colors. Uh, yeah man. Most of the time I like to have a full thick kind of sound, be it humbucker or single coil, but I love that unexpected jump you get when tone meets pick and there's nice overtones popping up. It's a distraction I confess. It's difficult to get the complexity in a digital model, but I find that a tad more volume than is needed and the position of the picking hand can add depth to the whole thing. A guy I like a lot tone wise is Johnny A. His tune "Had to Laugh" is a nice tune. He does a cool version of "The Wind Cries Mary" too. He's got a signature model Gibson, like a Les Paul but sometimes he gets a nice Tele kind of sound out of it too. Chas, I'm impressed you play bass guitar by the way. Y'know who's a great bass player, I think, is Shery Crow. First time I saw her strappin' it on, think a Framus, or looked like one, I thought "uh oh" here we go. Don't fail me now, cuz I definitely like Crow's sound and tunes and all. I was impressed at her ability to play, on the mark and do it. She wasn't just wearing it, she was the bass player in her band. I like her guitar players, they do a great job of making that vintage rock sound work in a contemporary way. If that makes sense... :blink: Bass ia great instrument, I love it. Can't really play it all that well, but I love that bottom feel, just diggin' down into it.

I have 3 favorite tones I like to hear. A Fender Telecaster, stock. The bridge pickup, with the treble rolled off a tad. The neck pickup, all treble up and played close to the neck. There's a lot of Tele players, Roy Buchanan's one of my fav's, and Vince Gill. I like a lot of the stuff Billy Gibbons of ZZ Top has done with it. He really gets the most out of the way the pickups frequencies spark and jump at high volume. And a 3rd - a 335, both pickups selected, treble and bass all up. This is similar to a Les Paul sound with humbuckers, to me, at high volume, but a little thicker. I'd probably go with a Les Paul under most circumstance to avoid feedback, but the 335 really has a great smokey sound I love. Ampwise, I look for the speaker setup. Either 2 - 10's or 2 - 12's. 10's are great for single coil pickups, like the Tele's and Strats although most players go to 12's, the ideal speak for a guitar. The 10 doesn't get all the low end, the bass but is a little more initmate sound at high volume. Acoustics? So many, so many.