socks

Perfect attendance is always desirable. : ) I'm going for a Lifetime Achievement award in that category. Like with the Oscars. They don't give an Oscar to somebody their whole life but then after a bazillion films they figure, hey, this guy won't go away. Give him something. : ) Next year, I've vowed before God, Family and the Boss, (Mrs. Socks), that I will not only show up present and accounted for but I will actually do something. (right after the World Series, and that's a promise). Hopes are high and there's positive vibes in the air. Whoo hoo! 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

Thanks everyone! I appreciate your comments so much. Happy Monday back to all! I have achieved my most important goal in life for another year: perfect attendance! Love ya'll! :)--> 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

:)--> Thanks Kit and thank you all! Two days to go, or so. Every year I get the same little present, my daughter Jennie was born the same day, and her brother Jesse on the 19th. Keeps me busy. ;)--> Thanks again, love to all. "If all our tomorrow's were never to come, I'd be happy with all that I've done. Loving you is the best thing I've done." 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

Hey Paw, saw Art Garfunkle on an interview program a few weeks ago, not sure when it was taped. He's a very articulate person, enjoyed seeing him. He talked about his part in S and G music over the years and I was surprised to hear how involved he was in production, not sure why. Guess I've listened to Paul Simon more. It was good. Looking forward to catching them out this way if I can. 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

Ex, is that like internet reincarnation? :)--> I want to come back as a tie. "Tie". or "Ty". Ty Tabor is a rippin' guitar player in the band Kings X and I've always thought that was a cool name. Sudo, once a sock, always a sock! def, if you're like me time is hard to come by. But posting here when you want to is kind of fun sometimes. The posts don't go if you don't type. I've heard from a couple people that Larry Panarello has a ministry/church/operation of some kind and advises, tells, not sure of the right word - people to not post here. Now that may not be accurate so anyone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I've heard that buzz indirectly and also that if you do you can't "go" to his stuff. True? Apparently posting, reading, participating on GS erodes the mind or something. I'll grant you, diciphering some of my posts can be detrimental to sane thinking but overall, I find that kind of control degrading and well, silly. Or maybe it's just advice. Whatever it is, I don't like people telling me what to do with my free time, but that's just me. Anyway, it's a good question. Can you be deleted from the Book of Greasespot? --> 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

Hills Bro, ya rascal! Happy Birthday! 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

Very true, Mike. Experience is no guarantee for truth. Yet our lives are just that - experience - and for the part of me that types this and reads that it's all there is. I'm reminded of how illogical Christianity is at it's core, for some reason. A dead man rises up to life 3 days after being killed...doesn't make sense does it? And for all that that is, it wouldn't mean a lot even 50 years after to people who hadn't seen it for themselves - if that's all there was to it. My usual mantra - knowledge is one thing, understanding is another. Experience another still. The Light shines eternally and if we ever really see it, it will burn everything else away and there's no going back after that because even if we don't walk in that Light all the time we will always remember what the world looked like illuminated, even for a moment. You can doubt it, ignore it, toy with it, but it's left it's mark. When we embrace it it will blind us to the darkness of life, lift us to love and relieve us of the burden of needing to prove day after day to ourselves by words and deeds that we're really here. We can just live. I can't think of anything that I would wish more for you and for everyone. A life fully illuminated by that Light and the freedom to live in true peace. I don't believe it's in the temporary shelter we can find in the cracks and crevaces of this word or that, where shadows are cast and meanings evade us, it's in Life. Put another way, I hope you have your day at the pumps and the snow is so deep you have to ski out. ;)--> 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...' [This message was edited by socks on July 14, 2003 at 4:42.]

The 1942 promise...of gas and snow pumps. I've never addressed it much over the years Mike and I was a little surprised when it got so much discussion here. Just goes to show me. I never gave it much credence. I didn't jump whole hog in to PFAL or the Way because of it. It was something VP said in PFAL, but right from the get go it seemed like a moot point. I can see now more of why it wasn't, especially because of the way it affected some people that have posted here about it. It's unprovable and has nothing to do with anything. If it happened, fine. If it didn't, fine. But either way - if VP had a vision, an ecstatic experience of some kind, real snow fell, one hell of a case of dandruff, whatever. It doesn't matter. Nothing is proven because of it. VP said the promise was "teach it and I'll teach it to you like it hasn't been known since..." So there was never any standard to match that promise up to. Nobody has originals, no one has complete copies of any of the epistles or gospels to refer to. No one knows, that's what the promise WAS he said, "like it hasn't been known since WAY back when". For all practical purposes, VP was out past the edge and entirely on his own. It's silly to say "if PFAL 'works' then it validates the 'promise'....it doesn't. VP could have taught that pigs fly and if a pig flew, it wouldn't mean the promise was true or that it even happened, it would just mean a pig flew. Are the two related? Oink. Not necessarily. I was always surprised right from the first time I heard it that he told it. Who cares? What does it mean to me? Why is he telling me that? I believed and pursued PFAL because I wanted to, and I wanted it to work. Much the same way you're approaching all of this stuff you're doing. You see it the way you want to, and you ignore the things you don't want to consider. And so it goes. 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

Sedona! Quite a place I've heard, still want to get there. It'a a small one alright, much more connected than I knew at the age of 17. :)--> One of the PFAL benefits on the old green card was "Disciplines the mind by believing". Wassat mean? :)--> Yknow, one of the interesting quandries of PFAL is that on the negative believing side of the coin, it stated that all the doubt worry and fear will issue in UNBELIEF. The net result of fear is UNBELIEF. To unbelieve there has to be a belief. This is where I think PFAL leads to the idea of believing being bible/God's Word based - fear makes it harder to accept God's Word, but...that gets sticky. Issuing in unbelief fits in to the chart and teaching built around the record of the man with the withered hand. He believed when he stretched forth his hand. He accepted the promise of God. Had he applied a negative attitude to his healing, he wouldn't have stretched forth his hand. No belief in the promise. But just prior to that PFAL says that what we fear we will receive, IT'S a LAW. Fear of job-disease-accident-death. Again, there's no promise of God included here that isn't being believed or responded to. You're simply fearing that something will happen a certain way. To quote directly: To BELIEVE Negative -------- FEAR is Believing ----------------- Believing in reverse. Wrong believing. Negative results. There's several scripture references and the apostles prior to Pentecost are one example, they were in hiding, full of fear. The question is asked "what caused the change?". Answer - Pentecost. All of which deals with people and promises of God. ??? So many of the examples had nothing to do with the promises of God...red drapes, no promises about those. Woman with the child, no mention that she had a promise of the Word she was deliberately denying. As the story goes, she just had great fear over her child's safety. Another quote: "when and where we have fear in our lives we will not act on the promises of God. When and where we believe we will not have fear". Soooo...fear/negative believing will keep us from acting on the promises of God. But the only sure way to eliminate fear is by believing those promises. So it's a catch 22 teaching if believing is limited to being intrinsic to the promises of God. I can't get rid of fear without believing the Word, but if I have fear I can't believe the Word. .....faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word? If that applies exclusively to building my believing by studying and listening to tapes, I may have a problem. And many people did because this is a convoluted teaching IMO. It would be much simpler to say that life is simply a matter of choice and decision. Period. What a person decides to think and do will likely lead to those things because that's what they choose to do. If a person wanted to rely on a scripture as their means to health and feels that God will provide, fine, do that. But don't overdo the entire teaching on BELIEVING being the key. But if I believe that snails are oranges, I'm going to have a hard time opening a fruit stand because snails taste funny to a lot of people no matter what I believe. NO? 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...' [This message was edited by socks on July 13, 2003 at 5:17.]

Mmm, I'm back shoehorning in to your discussion with Gingertea, Mike, but she brings up a really interesting point about selling fear. If I look at the original PFAL syllabus I have, the chart renderings are laid out to present it as the flip side of "positive" believing, right? Fear is "negative" believing. What you do when you have positive believing you do on the negative side when you have fear. Two sides of the same coin. In fact, one of the listening with a purpose questions for session 1 was "what are the two sides of believing"? Understanding and accepting fear as an element of believing was a basic teaching to be both understood and put into practice. Don't have "fear", have faith, believing. Negative believing was an important point to understand that VP wanted people to examine and integrate into day to day living. Why? So they could identify the cause of bad results and events in their life that prevented the more than abundant life from being realized. PFAL was to learn H-O-W. PFAL session one expounds the position that when something "bad" happens, it could be because of 1) not knowing a part of God's Word or 2) not believing it, and not believing it could clearly be believing "negatively", as in say, God says be healthy but you worry and have fear that you'll be sick. So you get sick because in that instance it was your negative believing or fear that you would get sick. It's not an extreme outlandish possibility, it's taught as a basic foundational first session let's get this straight first kind of thing. Key point: it's not taught that it's the ABSENCE of "positive believing", it's the PRESENCE of negative believing that causes the result. Negative believing applied to a situation will produce those results that the person focuses on, and on the flip side positive believing will produce those kinds of results that the person focuses on and if...those results are those of God's Word, they will receive that. It's right in the class, first two sessions. Believing isn't presented as being restricted in it's rightful place to God's Word, because as it's been stated in this thread before, if a person believes negatively there's no God's Word involved. Christian or non-Christian, saint or sinner, Joe Blow or VP, Years ago I read a couple of Rufus Mosely's books, a lot of Kenyan, some of Lamsa, some Edgar Cayce stuff. There's a lot of stuff about the "god mind" and the "Christ mind", the eternal spirit mind, stuff like that. This idea of pneumatikos energy in operation is in a lot of those teachings that VP absorbed. If you took some of those ideas and attempted to teach them exclusively from the bible, that would be a lot like the PFAL teachings IMO. 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

Ginger I think that's an excellent point. In all the discussions I/we/they/us have had about that infamous tragedy, there really isn't enough in the original tale to base a solid or even reasonable analysis on. "It's all just guesswork!!!" :D--> "Scratch it out!!!" It's taken on mythical proportions but really, we have no idea if it ever even happened, and if it did anything about the why's or the wherefores. It was presented wholecloth as a dramatic example of believing and fear. 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...' [This message was edited by socks on July 12, 2003 at 18:12.]

Miguel, that one point is a big point, methinks! I know this isn't the lionshare of what's been discussed in regards to this topic, but to my mind's eye, it's extremely important. Again, if the instrument of executing legal business was the bookstore, what was in that bookstore needs to pass muster. I'm just amazed as I look back from this vantage point, years later, at how Mssr. Weirwille handled his writing. It's indicative of what was going on in his mind and how he was applying biblical concepts to practical, everyday matters. Years ago I had kind of an awakening. I'd heard someone teaching from the bible, a Way guy and he was going on about how getting "spiritually angry" was okay, that sometimes we needed to "stop patting people on the back all the time and pat a couple feet lower". I think he was paraphrasing something VP said. Anyway, I began to look at the records in the gospels, as to how Jesus conducted Himself. The only records of Him "losing His temper" if you will, are in the ones where He tossed the money changers out of the temple. That's the only time he "raised His hand" against anyone, so to speak. The way the records lay out there's a strong possibility He did this twice in fact, not just once. His complaint - turning His Father's House, a house of prayer, in to a a "den of thieves". Jesus didn't like it. He felt it degraded the House of God. No one was stealing really - they were selling offerings to people coming to pray at the temple, exchanging currency, etc. etc. and doing it right there where you couldn't pass by the temple or go in without having to deal with all this hustling bustling commerce. (Isn't it ironic that just inside the main entrance of the "old" BRC, there was the bookstore, where people would line up to buy whatever gee gaws were out that month? Just an observation, nothing heavy, but some nights you couldn't get in that way for the backup. The first thing you went by from the south side was the bookstore) We're the "House of God", the temple, the body of Christ. Brothers and sisters selling the "truth of God's wonderful matcheless Word" will never wash clean for me. Ever. Been there, done that. Anyway, thanks for discussing this. I really don't have much more to say on it, but I thought I'd post this much anyway, as food for thought. 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

Shaz, I do the same thing! It's a great little melody..."He's so-o fine"..."My sweet Lord..." :)--> I think we agree, no free passes or coupons for being good or prolific or selling lots of units. Obeying the laws of the land seems reasonable and downra-ht biblical. Jesus did, He paid taxes didn't he? Really, I'd think that one bennie of being the Messiah would be you wouldn't have to pay taxes, but He did. Just goes to show ya, I guess. Shaz you've inspired me to drag out that old chestnut topic I like to pick on and give it a whack, and that's the selling of "God's Word" for money, IE personal gain. I think that the laws of ownership, copyrighting, licensing and all that good stuff pointedly apply to the writings under discussion becuz they were written, printed, published and made available in the marketplace. Sold for money, both as part of the registration fee/donation for the class(es) and through the Way Bookstore, or any other outlet that would carry them. Is that a bad thing? Let's say for a second no, not on face value. Peopel write books, they're published, they get sold. So what's the beef? The beef is that if and when we choose to function within the public marketplace, we have an obligation to observe and obey the laws that govern it. Maybe they're not fair or even right...so we could go about trying to change them, make new ones, better ones. But what's so bad about footnoting sections and saying "these x paragraphs have been used with permission by the author as they appeared in the book "ABC", or whatever the case may be. If you thought it represented the best way to express something, you could just ask the author for permission to use it and if you were granted it, you could use it. Course that opens a whole nother can o' worms I bet. ;)--> Otherwise...we should not do it. It just seems like basic honesty - and even more so when you're dealing with a topic like the bible as taught in PFAL where the core message is the INTEGRITY of the Word. VP decided to write, publish, print and sell his writings. By doing so, he was obligated to observe the laws and regs that govern such an enterprise. Whaddya think, Mike? Was every i dotted and t crossed? Given the estimated intelligence of VP, doesn't it seem like a somewhat more circumspect and expansive approach to his publishing enterprise through the Christian American Press would have been fair, honest, and the right thing to do? 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

Rafael, I figured you'd appreciate that. I really think the whole issue speaks first and foremost to the honesty of the person doing the writing. It's rampant in music on all sorts of levels. The Rolling Stones would be pumping gas if not for a few artist's whose music they absorbed, Muddy Waters, Chuck Berry, Jimmy Reed, some others. Now all these years later, they have their own "sound" but they clearly and consistently recognize and point others to the "originals" that influenced them so strongly. They obviously feel their music is their own but anyone who knows American music knows the bucket they carry their tunes around in was made by others. It would be laughable to claim it's cut from cloth of their own making. When we get to talking religion though all bets are off, every person who blows their nose with a bible can say their guided by the very hand of God and they're usually doing it while they're selling you brand spankin' "new" bible hankies for cold, hard cash. And that's the rub. It's all about money. Here's a guy who says he's got the very promise of God that if he'll teach it, God'll teach him bible like nobody's business, and what's he do? He sells it. 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

Hey Raf. Poked in when I saw your name. Just for the "record" :)--> :D--> the lawsuit regarding "My Sweet Lord" was over it's similarity to the song "He's So Fine" by the Chiffons, released in 1963, 7 years before George Harrison released his song. It was a matter of musical similarity in the chorus. And here's a quote from the court regarding Harrison's song: --- The court in Bright Tunes Music Corp. v. Harrisongs Music, Ltd., 420 F.Supp. 177 (1976), concluded that George Harrison had indeed infringed upon the copyright of He's So Fine . The decision was unique in that the court acknowledged that Harrison may have unconsciously copied the tune. The court stated: "His subconscious knew it already had worked in a song his conscious did not remember... That is, under the law, infringement of copyright, and is no less so even though subconsciously accomplished." --- I am a real fan of George Harrison and his music and have some familiarity with the field myself, so I'd have to state two things that could be relevant to the discussion of copyright law and it's moral and ethical underpinnings - 1) George Harrison was certainly familiar with the Chiffons music and the music of that era of that there is no doubt, he was steeped in 50's and 60's rock. The court decided against him because it allowed for a "subconscious appropriation" of the material in the Chiffon's song, and although he may not have deliberately copied it, I doubt he denied the similiarity. Morally there may have been no foul, but in application, the two songs were extremely similar to each other in parts. 2) Nothing musical is new under the sun, unless you count actual sounds such as artificially created sounds. All notes/pitches already exist and it would be safe to say (and I doubt any trained musician would argue) that their various combinations have been rendered at one time or another. So similiarites are going to abound and every musician that learns and develops will also take on an "ownership" of what they learn, in the same way any artist or craftsperson will tend to feel they own their own talents and experience. Still, it's all been done before, and where we see "new" musical renderings are in the various combinations and sounds that are written and performed. But no musician will likely say that their musical output is "new". Improved, rewritten perhaps but not new. Harrison could never have intelligently argued that he was "too late to get the legal ownership" of the song, because his song was in fact completely separate from the Chiffon's song and came years after the other one which had already been written. He wasn't "too late", he simply wrote his own song based on elements of another one. The similarities were in the melody of the chorus and of course the lyrics were much different. Because it was George no one held it against him over the long haul. Of all the musicians you could name, his was certainly a good heart when you look at his life. Had he argued and challenged the court I'm sure it would have only worked against him. Arguing along the lines of no one really owning anything "it's all Gods anyways" is an interesting argument though. Hey, I like your pants, gimme. They're God's anyways. Don't show me no receipt, GIMME. --> 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

vickles, it hurts to read about that. At least it's past. I can't think of many situations that would benefit from public discussion like that. It's a totally stupid way to deal with important concerns if they are that, yet it's so prevalant in the Way. I used to hate it when VPW would do that, too. Two of the very few times he and I had it out when I worked at the Way Nash involved his temper tantrums and his tendency to fly off in public over things that he could have handled privately. Everyone would figure "well, maybe God told him to do that". Right, that's a good excuse for anything, y'know. Unfortunately he set a horrible example in that category. Many of the people who were exposed to him up close picked up on it, figuring if that's the way he handled things there must be a good reason for it. They just turned around and copied him. It also gave people with short fuses a license to Rip, rather than control their anger and do good by people. Many people liked that feeling that "God is HOT TONIGHT!" when some toilet mouth would get on a rant about someone or something. Like cheap entertainment, but the cost to people is very very high. Sick... In observing various leaders over the years, I'm sure that the power/control side effects of that kind of thing were big motivators. Now, that might sound obvious, but some people act that way just because their callous boors. Others do it so that they can establish boundaries to control with. It's like "I'm the Boss and if I say you need a New One ripped tonight, that's what's gonna happen". Plus some people are just plain mean, they like to hurt others and some people like to watch it. Add a few Singalong the Way tunes and you've got a Branch meeting in some places. Very weird. Isn't it good to be out of that whole environment? As far as Nose Goblins in public, ya gotta say something! I'd want to be pulled aside and handed a kleenex or something. That's probably what I'd do with someone else. ;)--> I went walking in to work one morning with my zipper down. :D--> A guy I know grabbed me and pulled me over to look at the cafeteria menu that was posted up and leaned over and said "zip it up man you're going to catch cold!" I greatly appreciated his approach. :D--> 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...' [This message was edited by socks on June 19, 2003 at 2:42.]

Charcoal! Reason - flavor! 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

Tannis, our love and prayers are with you and your husband, and family. I pray his health will be there many more years to come. I can't help you with the people you're looking for, I hope someone can. Love. 'when you're in love, there's no time and no space. there's a permanent smile on your face... and hey somewhere, you threw your fear in the sea of no cares...'

"Change is good. You go first"....dilbert. Well, here goes, socks posting, winsrv.dll error coming up. Expect thread deterioraton in 15 minutes. All systems go. BSOD pending....Next stop, party at Ground Zero. :D--> "Oaks, play it again, you know the one, 'Sounds of Silence' ". I have to say that although I'm only reponsible for about 15, tops, of the 25,000+ hits on this thread, everytime I scroll past it I get a little rub at the word "ubiquitously" and the way it's used. This may have already come up. Dunno. It's a minor irritation, on par with say, that little scratch on the inside of the entryway in to our home. I have it down to address that little scuff this summer, so it's a minor irritation at most. I've wanted to offer this illuminating observation and had it down to do so in my little mental pad so here goes. Hope it's not too petty. Ubiquitous is an adjective and it means: Being or seeming to be everywhere at the same time; omnipresent: ?plodded through the shadows fruitlessly like an ubiquitous spook? (Joseph Heller). dictionary.com Ubiquitously is an adverb. A ubiquitously hidden teaching....? One that was/is hidden everywhere at the same time....I dunno. It reads as if to say that it was "everywhere hidden at the same time" by VPW. It seems to imply further that VPW therefore deliberately hid it from view so no one would see it. Or maybe the teaching was hidden until such a time that someone would "find" it. Another offering of same: "The Hidden Teaching That Was In Everything Taught".... Still another: "The Teaching That Was Hidden That No One Could Find". And yet another: "The Teaching That Was Hidden That No One Could Find But That Didn't Work Because I Found It And Now I Know That It Was Omnipresently Hidden So That It Could Be Found But Not Until Someone Found It And Finding It Is Only Part Of The Story". There are others, but these are possible options, and perfectly servicable and useable if they fill the bill and fit. I offer them expecting no renumeration or recognition of any kind, financial or otherwise, only the personal satisfaction of a job done, if not well, then well, done. I'm done. Which reminds me, that "done" is one of those words that, if said enough times, sort of loses it's meaning. Try it...."I'm done. I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done.I'm done." After awhile, it sounds weird. "Duhn". Then you have to try another word. "Finished". But then if you say it enough times, you get this whole Swedish-Norwayish-Finland thing going, or is that just me? Anyway... I'm finished. (note to self, check thesaurus.com for alternate words....) ----------------------------- quack

Happy Birthday, my man! Join the club! A little birthday humor: Knock knock. Who's there? Squi. Squi who? Squi! Gee, can't you here??? See, windows, the things that...never mind. :D--> Have a great day! ----------------------------- quack

In honor of April 15th, George "the quiet Beatle" Harrison sings: The Taxman Let me tell you how it will be There's one for you, nineteen for me Cos I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman Should five per cent appear too small Be thankful I don't take it all Cos I'm the taxman, yeah I'm the taxman If you drive a car, I'll tax the street If you try to sit, I'll tax your seat If you get too cold I'll tax the heat If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet Taxman! Cos I'm the taxman, yeah I'm the taxman Don't ask me what I want it for (Aahh Mr. Wilson) If you don't want to pay some more (Aahh Mr. Heath) Cos I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman Now my advice for those who die Declare the pennies on your eyes Cos I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman And you're working for no one but me Taxman! ----------------------------- quack

Hey, almost forgot! The wif' an' me went with some friends and saw the Moody Blues a couple weeks ago. It was GREAT. They had 3 of the original band, with a keyboardist filling in on this tour, two backup singers and a second keyboardist plus a second drummer. I used to listen to them some, enjoyed their tunes, had a couple friends really in to them, but never followed them closely. I have to say I went thinking well, this will be interesting and enjoyable but I didn't know just what to expect. They completely knocked us out. They ROCKed, did some new songs plus lots of earlier tunes, so many songs I hadn't heard in YEARS. It really took us back to a cetain era of our youth that was to some extent all but forgotten. I found myself thinking of old friends, things we did. (my wife and I met as teenagers and I'm tipping the scales over 50 now. She's close but looks 30 wouldn' ya know. :)-->) It was a really wonderful night, nostalgic in a good way. We all felt like their lyrics were so much more meaningful now than when we were younger. It really made me respect the songwriting craft and thought they have put in to their music over the years. If ya like them way back when and you can see them now, do it! It was a great night. ----------------------------- quack

Mr. Hammeroni, welcome! Is that Spirit of Randy California/"I Got a Line On You", Spirit? LOVED that band! Not many others I've talked to have heard of them! COOL! ----------------------------- quack

Glad y'all enjoyed it! As to who sang it, I heard several do it over the years JessJoe, in the Way. It's just a great song. Charlie, I agree that is a great tune too, alright! Thanks for the word. :)--> The way it's put opens up on different levels, reading it. It's cool. There's a few Jeff Beck fans round here, good to have you! ----------------------------- quack

Jesse Joe, that would be "Turn Your Eyes Upon Jesus". Here's the original lyrics: O soul, are you weary and troubled? No light in the darkness you see? There?s a light for a look at the Savior, And life more abundant and free! Turn your eyes upon Jesus, Look full in His wonderful face, And the things of earth will grow strangely dim, In the light of His glory and grace. Through death into life everlasting He passed, and we follow Him there; Over us sin no more hath dominion? For more than conquerors we are! His Word shall not fail you?He promised; Believe Him, and all will be well: Then go to a world that is dying, His perfect salvation to tell! Turn your eyes upon Jesus, Look full in His wonderful face, And the things of earth will grow strangely dim, In the light of His glory and grace. :)--> It's a sweet, sweet song. ----------------------------- quack