socks

Now I'm really curious...but hey, :blink: How ya gonna have a good bible class without a few puking amoebas?

Well George. It's 2006 and the year ain't over yet. Customer: Hey, waiter, what's this maggot doing in my breakfast cereall??? :blink: Waiter: Sorry bout that, I'll remove him. They complained about the soup being too hot. <_<

That sounds like a great book, Wayfer Not. I'm going to get it. Thanks. :) George, you're getting lots of free advice and discussion, others too. I mean that in a good way, this discussion is wonderful. I do believe, as ya might say, in the "power of love", and that giving, acting towards another in their best interests, is a good way t live. No rocket science there, don't even need a bible to come up with that, although I think Jesus's teachings on love pushed the envelope a little, offering another level of consideration that's both exhilerating and confounding at the same time. Or silly and even stupid, depending on your viewpoint I guess. Between two people there's a huge capacity to love, like in a marriage. When that goes south, it seems that love is lost, maybe forever. Or maybe it was never there to begin with. Love as a way of life, an attitude, a precept, is strong. And there a person can always commit their heart to love, can always dedicate themselves to it, with the hope that it will flourish and grow and return in it's own way and time. Will it, for everyone? I think it can, so that's my "IMO". But I can't predict how or when, and I don't think anyone can. Disappointment will make me not want to do that. when there's been a loss, a failure. It seems to make "love" useless, but everything isn't going to succeed the way we want it all the time, we make mistakes, other people do. In a perfect world, everything would be, well, perfect. But this world is not. Again, not Nobel Prize stuff. I understand that certain things make some people "do" better than others. I don't have looks to offer, nothing dramatic going on there. (although if a guy looks in a mirror and thinks he's good looking, does that make him gay?....I'm side barrig that one, sorry).....I have whatever I have, and that's that. I certainly am somewhere south of the ideal companion, for a large percentage of the population, both male and female. I have no magic bullets to offer, but hope this contributes something to the mix.

Thanks jkb. Paste on. I'm not an expert on any of the fields being pasted in, so don't want to come off that way. But I've studied a lot of the same things over the years, and have my own conclusions on some of it, others I'll likely continue to read and ponder for years. If this has helped you, good. There are some very interesting threads of thought that run through a lot of this material. I just wanted to make a final note to your comment Krys- Short answer, knowing you and your times and from what you say - "no", and yes your intent to help was an honorable one. I don't think the logical conclusion to the information being pasted in here is that to pray to God and want to help others is wrong. The heart is all anyone has to work with at anytime, really.- the best of of who you are and what you want to do.

Condiments rock!

So, the table has been Set. Question - does the devil need a Devil's Advocate or will he need to fight his own battles? more Sorry, jkb. Really, you're describing an alternative view of Judeo/Christian faith and how it developed, in general, not just TWI's. Can we make that point here, or am I misreading you? Weirwille didn't dream up Seth/Prince of Darkness or his storied beheading of Osiris, and probably had only an inkling of Egyptian mytholigies and their influence on Jewish religious traditions. Likewise I doubt he seriously debated dualism or spent much time trying to figure out which way to go - left, right or synthesized. I'm not trying to enter a defense of his theology at this point, but want to make the point that your postings are actually covering a history of how "modern" Christianity is the product of many historical philosphies and religions - certainly one viewpoint. Am I right or wrong?

Aw, don't. Don't feel that way. You're on the sunny side now. I would compare "committment" to velcro. Both sides have to have the sticky, and the stick in the wick is to each other. I think that's something a lot of people don't understand. Individuals have their own "committments", plans, desires, goals, stuff. Marriage is the "committment" to join those. What's mine's yours and bossa nova. It works both ways to work, or it doesn't. Your marriage wasn't like that. You had your part to bring to it and it was refused, diminished, ignored. That's not a marriage "committment", there's no mutual sharing or respect. What are you, chipped beef? That's not right. Getting married is, to me, like two people making a place to pour themselves into and sharing the result as "one". Love is never wasted, I believe. It'll come back to you, in bushels. Believe it.

My pleasure. :)

Thanks djs. Long ago I said, and would still, it's a free country. If you're happy, be happy. As long as people don't break the law and don't hurt each other, have at it. -You're right, a lot of companies probably don't adertise their lawsuits, problems, fixes, what went wrong and what's going right to fix the wrong. That doesn't make it right. Doesn't make it "best" . Just because organizations of all types hide stuff and gloss over things doesn't make it right. So if that's the standard the Way's keeping to, it's not a very high one. Like my example with the car busting down before it's time - this isn't rocket science here, or "Advanced Class" principles, y'know? It's common sense, decency. You'd think that wouldn't be that hard. I guess I get the idea that if the Way's taking so long to rebuild to basic standards of courtesy, honor and dignity and it's a big accomplishment to treat people decently in some locations, it may be worse off than it appear. I'm glad you're happy. Knowing nothing about you, what you want out of life or expect, I'd be hard pressed to deny your personal experiences and opinions. They're yours and if you've come by them honestly, more power to you. You certainly don't owe me an explanation but making the comments you have is appreciated. My feeling is, I'm much happier with the way my life's developed on this route I'm on and if any "innie" didn't like it, I've got a short pier they can hop off of anytime. I guess the same works in reverse. It's nice to see a level of communication that isn't forced on your part (I assume) but is freely given. Be careful out there.

Oh yeah - when you say blues, jazz, pop - Lou Rawls comes to mind, folks. Lou Rawls died last Friday. Any Rawls fans? His site has this message -Memorial Message I've so enjoyed his singing and music since I was a teenager. I remember sitting in friends living room when I was 16, 17 years old, learning his version of "Tobacco Road". His range was so broad, and his sound so expressive. His voice changed some in later years, but the quality and class were always there. One of our favorite songs of his is a pop tune, kind of a dance thing but very characteristic of how he could take words and wrap his deep voice around them in that strong but gentle grip of his and make them sound like he was singing them right to you. He makes it sound like, yeah...... :) It's title is "Lady Love", and here's a link if you want to listen to it. The lyrics sound like dictation, from me to mine. (But she knows that). :) Click and Download or Save. Dedicated to the Ladies, from Lou... Lady love LOU RAWLS (V. Gray - S. Marshall) Lady love, your love is peaceful Like the summer's breeze My lady love, with love that's tender As a baby's touch You give me all of the things That I need so much You're my world, lady love Lady love, your love is cooling Like the winter snow My lady love, with love that's cozy As a fire's glow And I keep on needing you, girl A little more and more And I thank you, my lady love You know, it's not easy to keep love flowing smooth People are people and they all have their moods But it's so nice just to have someone like you Who wants a smooth and easy thing And all the good times that it brings My lady love, you've been with me Through all of my ups and downs My lady love, I once was lost But now with you I'm found You got the love I need And I want to stay around Heaven sent you down, my lady love Let me tell you that it's not easy to keep love flowing smooth You know, people are people, they all have their moods But it's so nice just to have someone like you Who wants a smooth and easy thing And all the good times and the joy that it brings My lady love, you've been with me Through all of my ups and downs And my crazy turn-arounds My lady love, you got the love I need So stay around Heaven sent my lady love Lady love, sweet lady love You are so good to me Lady love, like a warm summer breeze (So glad I found my lady love, lady love) (so glad I found my lady love, lady love)

djs, as you're pondering and puttering, I wanted to add a pet theory of mine. It's not based on thin air, but I won't get into the details unless we end up getting a dicussion going and you're interested. Point - a lot of time and words have been devoted to the need for forgiveness amongst those who have been, or feel they've been wronged by the Way, it's teachings and it's employees. (and if you consider what "hurt" actually is to a person, the perception of wrong is a valid type of concern). In so many words there's been a coneyance that those who have left and have a problem should forgive, forget and quit bellyaching. Point - it's been said by more than one person that if an ex-Wayfer who has "issues" with the Way, it's teachings or employees doesn't forgive and move on they'll never really heal from their hurt and will only stew in their own diseased soup, ad nauseum. IE - they're just hurting themselves in the end, no one else. My Pet Theory - that until the acting Way Trustees take responsiblity for their past and open the door to that very forgiveness and lead the way, they and the Way will never fully heal or recover. If you follow my Pet Theory, by not doing that which would make it easiest for others to act correctly on the Word (make it "easily entreated") a person stands to make it harder and at best does nothing. At worst they impede correct action and actually make it harder. They also close the door to what the Way teaches it values most - doctrine, reproof and correction. This leads to the Bleating Sheep Syndrome. Without a shepherd to care for the sheep they struggle. Would any true pastor working for the Chief Shepherd ignore them?

Belle, you da WOMAn! Classic! My gift to you... Check it out...HERE! for an audio treat of biblical proportions! And yeah, the marriage thing, the one thing I'm absolutely sure of that would be the most important aspect of any relationship and upon which success or failure would completely depend would be [deleted] but even moreso [deleted]. Most important though, if you do decide to go with these suggestions, remember - the equipment should be assembled by a licensed, experienced technician so the [deleted] fit properly. These are really important instructions, as serious damage can occur to the [deleted] and [deleted] if they're even off a centimeter or two, which is why I would also suggest [deleted}. IMO, anyway. :blink:

I don't have anything to delete but I wanted to delete something, so I'm deleting the next part. reply to quote - deleted.

Howdy djs! I'm not 'going back' so there's nothing hanging on the answer to this question. Feel free to answer, or if not that's fine too. I've been long gone from the Way, since '89, and was involved for about 21 years prior to that. I would describe those times as being now "fully vested". :) That is to say, as my life's continued it's been informed by those years, what I learned, the people I knew and still do, etc. Life goes on and I'm happy, my family, etc. One thing I wonder about is if and when the Way board of trustees and current offices and leaders are ever going to deal openly, publicly, with the events of the last 20 years or so. I know, that sounds like ancient history, but it's not to those who left the way over that period of time. For instance, the "lawsuit" of the Allen's, no small event. There were many, many issues that came up in and around that event, yet I've never heard from anyone that any of those issues were ever dealt with by the Way, to try and clarify what went on, and what it was all about. Am I wrong about that? What was the range of information you were given about that? 100's of people have questions and concerns that could be answered. Not easily, I know a lot of it is difficult to deal with, but not impossible especially when you consider that there's a certain amount of responsibility the Way trustees have to their congregation. Another example would be the people who did get "M and A'd", under extremely difficult circumstances. I understand that you're saying the Way is going through it's own "healing" process and that it's members are benefitting from that - but - again, there's a responsibility to those who WERE members, to have some kind of resolution and closure, don't you think? If you'd bought a car 5 years ago, and it blew up on the road, how would you feel if you went to the company and told them and they said "Oh we fixed that problem. They don't do that anymore. Bye." That would't be fair would it? Or would it, I'm asking the question to get your feedback. I don't mean to put you on the spot, and I know it's not within your range to speak for the Trustees and what they do or don't do. But I'm wondering what you're feedback would be. Thanks.

Stardate 1.8.05G.009A...Captain's Log>enter>public-log>standard-protocol_337>start_sequence "record">enter.... Ship...my ship...strange inhabitants have entered through the bays...my crew, savaged but intact! Communications...cut off! Spock! Spock!! Dammit man! Come in, where are you!? Ship's drives....not responding!!! Scottie, report! Report!!! Belle, the book! What happened to the book??!!! Can we get a report...on...!@#$~~~! the b-!@#$$~!!.........D((MILLE}}R..... W - W - W - is...are we....all hands to the Bridge...!!...///^^^/////

I'm happily married, 36 years this March. Everyday is a gift of dedication and celebration to serve our Love. There's no accounting for the longevity of it other than we love each other and have wanted to build a life together and keep it together. I'm highly in favor of marriage, the ceremony and all of that, be it short and sweet with just two people or a whole gang of peeps in attendance. I suppose it's "biblical" if that's a concern, but the committment is what's biblical, to me. Ceremonies come and go. Morning's keep coming and staying year after year. If two people want to see the next one together they have to work at it, do the work. With love, practice makes perfect. Sounds like you're in love with your "sweetie". :) That's great. That's GREAT. Love is so good.

Chris Duarte, heard the name but not the music so I checked him out Oaks. KILLER stuff! Very nice. I will have to check him out. You've definitely got the blues music connection going, thanks. Saw John Mayer Trio new years eve, in San Francisco. Nice gig, he was billed with Phil Lesh and friends, and it was quite a night to ring in the new year! We caught Mayer when he started this tour last year, at the Fillmore in S.F. so it was interesting to see how he's progressing. The boy can certainly play the guitar and he's a good performer. He'd seem like a showboater if not for his youth and the relative innocence he projects. He's doing every blues trick in the book, and some of his own. He seems to know a lot of his audience may not be familiar with the blues history so he seems to really enjoy the role of educator, as it were. Example, he did a tune, forget the title, and went into a whole Albert Collins section in the solo verses. Finger style snapping and popping, thumb and index finger stuff, had the style down cold. So he went to the front of the stage and actually started explaining what he was doing - "now this is the way Albert would do it, Collins, check it out...." and then he'd do some riffs and move through the technique. It was interesting, again, one reaction to that kind of thing might be "yeah and so what, that's not that big a deal, dude". But he did it very well and seemed delighted that he could throw that music out to an audience that A) might not know specifically who's it was, and B) that would enjoy it. Plus, he's got the looks, the boy has the looks. 1/2 way through his set he took his song list and crumpled it up and said "that's enough of that, no list from here on out, we're just going to see where this goes". He tossed it out in the audience which caused a small squall of young girls grabbing for The Piece of John Mayer's Trash. :) Billed with Phil Lesh, this was an audience that would dig that kid of loose approach though, so it was a cool move. He's still very much in the blues rock realm so he was on solid ground. I enjoyed it, plus he's got Steve Jordan drumming and Steve Jordan is a master rock percussionist. They've got their cues down, it's tight. The only thing he's still doing is verbal and visible cues with his bassist, which seems kind of lame, as he seems to make it very obvious that they're "winging" it. He's good enough at this point to do what he does, which is burn. Phil Lesh - well, I'm not a fan of his/The Dead music, but they did some nice tunes, opened with "Not Fade Away" and didn't munch it up too much. In fact, there was a welcome absence of shoe-gazing noodling, and they kept it on track for most of what we saw. It has become rather mannered though. My wife commented afterwards that they always seemed to go into the same kind of spacey jam portions on every song and she was right - it had a very packaged feel. But we left about 12:30 and it was going till at least 2, so who knows what became of it after we left. Mayer was supposed to jam at some point, but we didn't want to wait. Dat was dat!

The day I have marked on my calendar is 6/6/6666 I'm stayin' in bed that day!

I like this part the best: I'm rooting around for more on this word. I've never thought much about where it came from, although Ive used the abbreviation "Fundies" a time or two so I should dig into it's meaning to at least confirm what I think I mean when I use it. Right now the only thing I'm sure of is that Fundamentalists are cultists, that's for sure.

Boy, the more I read about what Pat Robertson has to say the more I ask myself, why am I reading about what Pat Robertson has to say? Wiith everything that's going on in the world today - is he news?

Tom or She does not ignore the photograph or walk past it, but rather she comes to find me and says, “I saw Dave’s picture in our living room. Did you put it there, Bob?” My response is, “What picture, Dootksi?” She sits down and points at the picture of Dave on the wall. "Why, that picture, right there, Bob. Did you or did you not put it there, while I was out and without consulting me, the Household Spiritual Leader of Wall Coverings?" Dootski is so specific and loving that I am compelled to speak the truth, in love. "Why yes, I did Dootchka. I did put it there". Now Doots can follow up with appropriate teaching and correction, having confronted me, with love. "Sit down Bob, I want to share some things with you that I think will help, turn to Genesis in your bible, please...." (2 hours later) "Now Bob, do you understand more clearly exactly what I expect of you now?" To which I can now respond, clearly and with a fuller understanding! "Yes, Dootski, I do understand. Thank you, I will now take the picture down". You can see how simple and wonderful it can be! Now we can move forward and draft the appropriate Documents of Understanding, and schedule follow up reproof and correction times in the coming months.

Maybe that's because Paul and Titus weren't greedy, money grubbing blood-sucking tics, looking to make them sell their homes and use the money to support "their ministries". Maybe there weren't afraid of them. Just a thought.

The interaction between the couple in this is so disfunctional as to make me queasy. Sort of a semi-professional business relationship where two people that live together don't know what the other one's doing, not much of a marriage really but may in fact be a good example of the state of matrimony in the Way. It also has a vaguely "Ozzie and Harriet" kind of tone, where the big issue is the drapes, or the new dress the Mrs. bought, or the new golf clubs Dad bought and has hidden in the closet cuz he doesn't want Mom to find out. But... Someone has to say it- When Bob comes home, does he say "Howdy, Dootie!"...?

The notion that LCM was just fine and dandy in '89 is recycled suds. On that I stand. In. When reading that he was. Something I've never shared in wonderful detail with anyone but my Wife is that LCM's Big Letter and subsequent actions to support it seemed - to me - to be ever so slightly - unmanly. Is that a word? I hope so. Not an adult, mature action to be taking given the 3 years since '86. Other words that might convey my impression then - weiney. Wussy-like. Pass the skirts, we're all out of pants now. You know, kind of well, weiney. To some it probably seemed like spiritual hootin' and hollerin' time. YEAH!! TAKE A STAND!!! STOP MESSIN' AROUND NOW, DONCHA KNOW!!! Get on the track or get off it, buddy!!! But coming from a person who'd been taking it in the...pants for 3 years, it held no water, no weight. Follow...who? Stand with who was that, with what? Who sent that letter? Ooooh, I remember that guy, he used to be President of the Way. Yeah. So I offer this observation, fully aware I may be alone in that impression, but maybe not. Either way, for what it's worth.....more scintillating observations you thought you could live without.

Assuming for a moment that there is no God... Isn't really all that hard although the outcome gets a little dicey I think. I look to the part in the gospels where Jesus states the first great commandment, "Love God with your whole being", and adds that the second is like the first - "Love your neighbor as you love yourself". I've asked myself the question what does it mean, the second commandment being like the first. How are they alike? How is the second like the first? If I understood the second commandment I might be able to understand more about the first. I think the record answers that, in it's own way. When the question comes back "who is my neighbor?", or who is it that I should love as myself? The response is a story - the man being robbed and beaten up and left on the side of the road gets helped by someone coming by, but ignored by first a priest and then a levite. But the Samaritan stops and helps, someone who would not be looked at favorably by the people asking the quesiton. Jesus asks back "who was the neighbor to the person who had been robbed?", and the answer is obvious, the man who helped - the person they wouldn't have liked but who nevertheless acted in love, despite the fact that he seemingly broke religious code. It appears to be defining loving someone as yourself in terms of being the neighbor yourself. I should be concerned about being a lover, not about who I should be loving. Love, in and of itself, is both the correct action to take and the reward, to whoever, whenever, whereever. Acting in the best interests of another person (as I would want to be treated myself) will define "true Love". For years I thought that the similarity was in the "love", one love God, two love others. There is that similarity of course. But I can see more to it. Where the two commandments are the same is in the answer - act towards God in the same way that you would act towards yourself and be mindful that anyone, everyone, can do that, regardless of whether I think they can or not. In "good faith". (Samaritans didn't worship in Jerusalem, at "the temple", they worshipped in their own temple where they'd relocated to). The element of faith is strong in loving another as you love yourself. It transcends whether another person is deserving or worthy. I would always think that I am worth consideration, another chance, help when I need it, understanding. If I was the person that had been robbed, I would want someone to be neighborly towards me, and act out of the pure desire to help, not restricted by anything that would prevent that. So to me, to deny God is in a way to deny myself. To love God with a faith that doesn't rely on our own human limitations and requirements is where I think that parable goes and is like Jesus's words that we become like children, child like. I might assume there can be no God because of the bad things I see happen in life and ask - if there is a God how could he "let" them happen? My thought on that is that God lets us live in the world we create for ouselves and at best it's going to be imperfect. I don't see that as spin, or copping a way out, rather that it's the way the world is. If I assume there's no benefit in that, if God doesn't answer prayer for instance than what's the good in believing in God - then I'm not loving like the second commandment teaches, where the action taken is done simply because it's the right thing to do. Again, to me, it's a matter of "good faith" towards God. Loving God because loving God is always the right thing to do in the same way that helping you would be the right thing to do. Do I do it? Do we? I try but I don't have some kind of perfectly lit life going 24 hours a day. But by consideration and thoughtfulness I do try as I think we all can. Thanks for posting this thread, JJ. I've enjoyed reading it. :)