socks

Somewhere in the bible there's that thing about lying. Of course "all men are liars" anyway, so I guess it's to be expected. A little white lie doesn't matter here or there, does it? An inference or implication that one's own stuff wasn't really someone else's. No one owns anything, anyway, right? It's all God's, we're just stewards and good stewards lie, they have to, all men are liars. What's important is dividing up the stuff correctly so future generations can have it, right? Ring around the rosey. For anyone who says they believe the Bible and have actually read it there's quite a bit about ownership and measurement, appropriation and recognition. Both the OT and NT are aligned very well on the topic, particularly when we factor in "love" and God's ultimate justice exemplified in Jesus Christ. But if one never reads the Bible and just goes on gut feelings or what someone else propounds that the Bible "says" they're never really going to give a crap anyway. For anyone who might, a little bit, some verses from a large stack of many like them - and best of all without the usual drivel I provide to illuminate their meaning as they're really pretty easy to understand. For "Christians" so-called, ownership, respect of property and diligent stewardship of God's "Inheritance" and the abundance it provides the story's really open and shut and has a happy ending. If we respect that guidance and follow it. If we don't we can do any dammed thing we want and say it doesn't matter anyway. Deut 19:13 Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour's landmark, which they of old time have set in thine inheritance, which thou shalt inherit in the land that the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it. Deuteronomy 27:17 "Cursed is the man who moves his neighbor's boundary stone. Then all the people shall say, "Amen!" Job 24:2 Men move boundary stones; they pasture flocks they have stolen. Proverbs 15:25 The LORD tears down the proud man's house but he keeps the widow's boundaries intact. Proverbs 22:28 Do not move an ancient boundary stone set up by your forefathers. Hosea 5:10 Judah's leaders are like those who move boundary stones. I will pour out my wrath on them like a flood of water. Exodus 20:15-17 You shall not steal. You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor. Prov 16:11 A just weight and balance are the LORD's: all the weights of the bag are his work. Exodus 22:7-8 "If a man delivers to his neighbor money or goods to keep, and it is stolen out of the man's house, then, if the thief is found, he shall pay double. If the thief is not found, the owner of the house shall come near to God, to show whether or not he has put his hand to his neighbor's goods.

To resnip the quote: I don't think VP was an evil man. I think he did evil things. I think he was part of an entire generation of men who thought women existed for their pleasure. Lot of men who were bosses who hired secretaries for something other than just stenography. Did Esther sleep her way to the top? Some would think so. I think VP really WAS called of God to teach his word. Around age 50 his farm began to host many young women at a time. He's not supposed to notice? The events, facts and issues around what VPW did or didn't do with women other than his wife is a topic of it's own but some degree of honesty, intellectually and emotionally, has to be at the foundation or discussion is useless. Still, persistence has it's virtue I guess.... His farm didn't host anyone, he did. Your statement disconnects the events from the reality as if VPW was an observer of something that occurred, an innocent bystander to a population increase or something. People didn't go there that never knew it existed, they arrived there with an expectation related to The Way and VPW and I think most of us, a lot of us anyway related that to the efforts of learning the bible and participating in some form or fashion in and with the Way ministry. Now - I was there too and know all kinds of people, all ages, sex, backgrounds, interests and intentions showed up. Some intents better than others. The mix of people and influences were diverse and not all were interested in learning anything about the bible or God and more interested in the activity, the action, the buzz and mixes of all of the above over time. That's human nature and the nature of how society flows. "an entire generation of men who thought women existed for their pleasure. "......... Oh come on. Please. Gimme a break. Stop it. Get oudda here. Go-waaaan, beadit. No no no no no no no no no no no no. No. Uh uh. No way. Not. Ixnay on at-thay. That dog won't bark and ain't gonna move if you don't kick it. No. Did I say no? Somewhere I hear a distant refrain......."I wanna be a man o' God like you, Sir...." Harve, hit it. A product of his times? A look at that period historically will no doubt show up the many 1,000's of dirt bags of all stripes who ran under the radar for lack of information and transparency. Lots of RC priests playing spin the bottle with altar boys too. Much bad, then as always. I can't continue, I'm going to laugh up a lung here. Carry on. PLEASE drop that line of thinking in relation to any discussion of VPW though as it will not attract serious discourse and I'm not intending to trash VPW anymore than anyone else but I'd only end up being cruel and unkind drilling into that particular line of thinking as it's so.........well, it's vulnerable to say the least.

Yeah, well. The statements are just an off the cuff example - the first two present the question that's stated in session 1, PFAL in fact it's given as one of the driving forces behind the teaching "power for abundant living". The Bob has "more of an abundant life" than many of the Christians, looking round about, etc. If Jesus Christ gives it in whole, how does The Bob get some of it, if he doesn't get it from Jesus? So - the assumption would be, Jesus gave it to him. Apply the same thing to anything else - I come that you might have desert. Ham has desert. Ham got it from socks. Or did he....? If what you have is in fact a desert item, and I and only I have deserts to give the answer's clear. Enjoy the deserts which I give. What if you didn't get it from me? Counterfeit deserts!!??! Say it isn't so. Scratch Ham AND The Bob out of Deserts for Abundant Meals, session one!! Recalibrate the flanges Sally! This is where "abundant life" has to be defined otherwise the foundation can't support the conclusion. If the abundant life is a menu of items, some of which can be had without Jesus, then we need to know that, upfront. John 10:10a might then read: I am come that you might have life and have it more abundant. Some of that life you already may have but I give all of it and only from me can you get all of it. Or: I am come to give that part of the abundant life that you don't already have and give it more abundant. Or maybe: you think you have abundant life but you don't. Check this out.... But if Jesus is the means by which abundant life is given, ya gotta get it from Jesus. Further on in PFAL there's taught "the Giver and the Gift"....................................................................................................... Sessions 1 and 2 amplify the basic foundation of John 10:10a and ff as to how to understand this - positive affirmative believing versus negative destructive fear. Fear is sand in the machinery of life, etc. etc. People live in fear all their lives, guilt, shame, feelings and thoughts that prevent them from ever receiving what God has available. So what about The Bob? Bob's life is no doubt rife with as much sand as anyone else and he doesn't believe in Jesus. Yet................if you think about it for a minute you can see where I'm going, a wonderful happy place where the breezes in the treeses are soft and cool and the pork is in the pit. Well, it's soon to be another day come and gone. Hasta la vista, babeee! Have a good one.

Way too long here. I apologize in advance, my keyboard's on auto or sumpin'. Brain dump follows, Clean Up Crew! back table!! Interesting subject. Philosophy is often pitted against Christianity or Christian thought, as a "philosophical" approach to life or a specific issue would emphasize human reason and capacity to sort through to an end conclusion. Apologetics in religion attempts to take reason and logic and support or argue conclusions and beliefs. VPW used to refer to it as "apologizing", and thought it rubbish. Likewise "defending" the truth - "truth needs no defense", only declaration. To some extent I can go with that as a lot of apologetics ends up chasing it's tail forever, when in fact the basic conclusions are already assumed so it begs the question "why bother?" And all strains of thought in philosophy can't be reconciled with each other without some give and take on the part of each. That can work from the philosophical discipline but not from the religious platform where there are basic tenets in place at the outset. Looking at PFAL the basic premise is much like a philosophical premise - looking at John 10:10 and the "abundant life", defining that, and then looking around at the world and attempting to reason where that is, why it doesn't appear to be in evidence and how it's be both understood and experienced. VPW makes these statements clearly in Session 1 and presents the question - why don't I see it and why do non-Christians who don't believe in Christ's words often appear to have it? One could say then that PFAL doesn't follow a philosophical path but rather simply goes to the Bible and presents the answers to the question - however the basic premise implies that some reasoning has gone into developing the question and some assessment has been done and some basic statements for the question (argument) are established. There's both deductive and inductive reasoning and argument made. On a very fundamental level John 10:10 without that question would simply be taken "as is" and there'd be nothing more to say about it. PFAL is about "power for abundant living" and the direction follows a series of assumptions that have been concluded as to what that generally is and from that specifics follow. Not everyone has come to the same conclusions about those verses or that question as PFAL. An example that came to mind of how to see this, as statements: Jesus came to give abundant life. Bob has abundant life. Jesus gave Bob abundant life. In PFAL that isn't the answer to the argument made in, the fist session of the teaching and based on the first session you wouldn't come to that conclusion. The teaching defines abundant life as "zoe", "life in all it's manifestations" but non-Christians have it or some of it and Christians appear to struggle without it or part of it. The question would be better presented as - "what is real abundance" and what is the life that Jesus came to give? PFAL actually goes in that direction but the early pieces fragment the teaching IMO. This has less to do with "the law of believing" and all of that and more with setting a solid foundation to go forward from. Reading the gospels though we can see that what Jesus said throughout didn't occur in a vacuum, it occurred in the context of humanity, the entire purpose of Jesus Christ would be to "save" - mankind, preach a true message and bring true godly thought into human reasoning. The context is God reaching out to man. Jesus Christ's use of metaphors (and throughout the Bible) alone presents a philosophical kind of stance - if God is spirit and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth then what do metaphors serve? Metaphor = something in common between things that aren't alike. Simile, "this is like" that. Analogy....use of these show an attempt to understand something that might not be understood as well without them or not at all. God seemed to promote this kind of rendering by all appearances as a means to knowing Himself and coming to a true "knowledge of the truth", ie it's "integrity" as an outcome. If there's no context there's no way to define what's being said, asked or answered. Truth may "be" and that's enough however once it's perceived the process of working with it and "living" it begins. I'd take the position that human existence is largely a process that' puts the realities of God into application and forms a collection of moving parts - "truth in operation", where the nature of the participants - people - requires logic and reasoning to bring the ultimate outcome to pass. We are part of it by definition and given that we are required to participate. Those who take a stance of "don't think only believe" aren't participating fully IMO. It's not a truly philosophical approach by definition I know and that's not my own personal goal but I do think human reasoning and logic are facilities that are required to fully come to "know" the truth and be "set free" as Jesus described. I do think on a personal level many Christians realize that and do that but socially denigrate the process they're involved in to appear more "full of faith". It's not a terrible thing but it can muddy the water for clear, honest communication.Others admittedly don't and basically listen and believe what they're told. That's not terrible either but it can have gaps if you're pressed outside what you've been told and someone ends up completely reliant on someone else giving them "answers" and having no personal realizations of what they "believe".

"His job was to shed light, not to master." Wellllll, yes and no, mostly no IMO. Based on the Word (and it's integrity if we're addressing that) everyone's job is to master following the Master, Jesus Christ. This goes back to the statement "the way, the truth and the life", of course. God who is "invisible" and larger than human comprehension by definition was declared and made known by a "living word", Jesus Christ. We can't see God, they could see Jesus Christ and the "logos" had some flesh and bones on it. (and the reality that the Torah looked different in the flesh and in what Jesus Christ preached isn't that hard to understand really - the O.T. law had 100's of requirements and they'd been extrapolated into an even greater set of applications. That Jesus Christ was said to observe them and yet preach a message of love, forgiveness and individual committment to God is actually kind of - incredible but fortunate in that we have a living lesson in what's important - Jesus Christ established a baseline if you will). The more we look at the world around us, whether it's to look small and down or big and up the more we see the infinite and seemingly endless capacity of creation - and if the creation reflects in the "glory" of itself the Creator - we benefit from a means to synthesize and if not fully understand it, appreciate it and find our place in it. In 1 Cor 2 those things that were being spoken and taught by His followers as the doctrine of who and what Jesus Christ was were said to be revealed to them by God, by "pneuma hagion". The relationship of God, Jesus Christ and what they taught was described in 1 Cor 2, and then the writer "Paul" goes on to describe in 3 his own role in the teaching and building of that "church". (and there are many ofher places where the lifestyle of Paul and those with him is described). That's important if again, it's integrity of the Word that's "at stake", as Paul and the other apostles were those teaching what was then taught as it hadn't been taught - since they'd taught it - right? So there's a relationship between the bibllical records and today that's being drawn by that statement. I Cor. 3 uses a basic kind of metaphor to describe the roles of those first generation "new light" teachers, an agricultural one. There's seed (the Word) and those who plant and water (Paul and the other disciples teaching) and there was increase - those who heard and believed. The term "laborors" is used there also, The term "ministers" or sevants is also used. Food is also used as a way to see what they did - "meat" and "milk" with the presumption that nourishment is being provided, something of substance that would usable by those "hungering" and consuming. "Mastery" is a term that has a lot of bang to it - can anyone teach something they haven't mastered? Of course. There are plenty of average teachers that produce poor students. (Knowledge is one thing, understanding is another) Jesus Christ would be our example of a true "master" as He "always did the will of the Father". Mastery of following The Teacher. Lofty thoughts to be sure but ones that could certainly require a lifetime of endeavor. Point being - if the records of the N.T, are an indicator those who shed that "new light" for the first time were a serious, drop dead on a dime pursuers of what they believed. Again in 1 Cor.3 the people of God are described as a temple and that those who defile that temple are, in a word, SOL. Anyone who aspires to "teach" or otherwise plant and tend, serve, labor and feed the ol' flock needs to have their hat on straight or they'll just screw up royally. The job is to work, hard and with respect for the Lord and true Shepherd of that flock. I would assume that violators can expect to get their as ses kicked sooner or later. Human capacity is large but inconsistent at best. No one's perfect, we know that. But something I've written before and absolutely believe - people need to step carefully and deliberately into the House of God and deal gently with it's occupants and furnishings. Many jump at the chance to be tour guides but if you don't know the terrain it can be very dangerous for all. Absolute respect is required or the end result will be devastation. Someone might say I take it too seriously but I've been on both sides of the gate here and I know now the deep end of the pool requires serious effort and diligence. "Mastery"?.....if I were in the ocean being swallowed by wave after wave....I'd definitely want a life guard heading for me who could swim like a fish and who knew the way home.

geisha, thank you. This characterizes some basic problem areas. "...if it makes sense...." .... then watch some more and cheggidout. The mention of Jesus Christ's resurrection and ascension would, I assume, peg a viewer's "makes sense" meter. Now I do believe in the resurrection, for many reasons - but it doesn't make sense, didn't to His followers and was only a matter of "sense" AFTER it happened and they saw him, felt, touched and carried on conversations with him. And Jesus even recognized those who would in the future believe - without seeing. VPW's method of teaching a class on How with a capital H was to say - resurrection? I can tell you exACTly how it happened, ready?...... God did it! And God did, but we already knew that. So the makes sense kind of approach so common to churches and ministries who want to reach the masses is b-s. IMO. The man behind the curtain has no magic that will make it make sense. (Gene Scott of L.A. did a great Resurrrection series that would pulverize anything that's come out of TWI or it's splint-offs, with air to spare. He was kind of a goose too, but if you're going to watch weirdness, he's off the chart on capturing the logic and reasoning as to the resurrection). A lot of the important stuff in Christianity doesn't "Make Sense", regardless of the semantics we use to describe or define it. Now if I'd been through the dream prophetess personal profit-see movement, I might have a different view of what "makes sense", I'll allow that. But lest anyone forget, there's some history with these guys that is worth considering before buying anything. John's approach degrades the whole deal in order to make it entertaining and exciting. That video is not, like, all that entertaining. I guess for some people yes, far be it from me to assume there are people who won't just giggle their panties off at this but I also have to be honest and say those same people should get out more cuz John sounds scripted, stilted and unsure of exactly what's coming next. I like John. He's intelligent and thoughtful. I don't agree with all his theology but that doesn't make him a bad person, nor I. We probably agree on more than we disagree. But this whole cheeze-whiz approach doesn't really sound all that entertaining. Or exciting. And it really isn't teaching like it's not been taught since-when. So I'm confused, but the paying fans will likely get their red meat from this.

On a lighter note: This latest entry in the Class Chronicles may be a new type of content - yes! Actually new and improved as promised: religious pornography. When I think about it, and I don't want to for long but this kind of titillation certainly has an audience. It's not as satisfying as the real thing but if you've never actually had a date it's hard to imagine what "third base" is like, let alone if the backseat of your Civic will accommodate a sneaky steal to home plate on a wild pitch. Navigating that field can be tough your first game, so a well structured playbook complete with graphic representation would certainly have it's own, uh value. Just sayin' - if you read it somewhere else, remember you read it here first and all money's, renumerations and other such recognitions go to me, socks, the true originator of this term. Thank you.

These things will always come and always go and then there will be another one and another after that. Still, the records of the Bible memorialize what that first generation of "Christians" did and said. Inspiration to many - their actions must burn like salt in a cut to those who pursue it so hard, using so many words and so much time and money and yet never hit the mark. "Transformation" indeed. "Silver and gold have I none but in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk." Systematic teaching systems, reliant on outdated and unstable infrastructures and patented slogans promise big and deliver small. They gather the lame and issue canes and walkers. In another record, perhaps as the "man born blind" answered when asked who did what to heal him and he finally said: one thing I know that whereas I was blind, now I see. For all the promises and all the effort, few and far between are the students of these men who Live the Power. Talk the Power, sure. Talk is cheap. Knowledge = power? Tell that to a man who couldn't even see who healed him or where he'd gone afterwards. His faith abounded following the reality of his deliverance. His "point of sales" was Jesus, not methodology or information. At this stage of my life and what I see of this age, it's very simple. The world needs less speak and more do. Don't tell me what God can do if I believe - show me what God can do when you believe. Or shut up and find a seat.

Additional insight from former members of CES, trumpeting it's resounding success story for all the world to see is HERE> Or do a goggle search for Dan Tocchini and Momentus for further illumination. Advertiised as a "transformationalist" it's clear that these guys have left a trail that would make a snail blush, always moving on to the next field of gold to mine. Good intentions? Oh, no doubt. I'm just sayin' - it's worth a look for anyone who hasn't.

Perhaps it's a fitting swan song as GS transitions over these weeks, that the same tunes come back again. And again. I think of myself as a somewhat thoughtful student of the Bible and rather passionate follower of Jesus Christ, who I continue to learn about everyday. Yet, I can't deny that statements like: ...hearing the Word of God as it not been heard since the first century.... illustrate a disconnect from true understanding of what occurred then and what's occurred in the 2,000 or so years since then. Not because of what is or isn't in PFAL or anywhere else but simply because anything scripted and canned in a class has no resemblance to what anyone heard of the Word of God in or about the time of the first century. It may be a deliberate desire to use coded shorthand to initiate a desired response from those who heard it so many times over the years and who would now have those brain cells pinged by the familiar terminology, or just a general tendency to continue doing the familiar. But I find it very telling. And I would wonder - if it's that good, why reinvent it? And how much will this one cost? I assume a percentage of the income will be returned to the Way who still own the original, from whence these rivers run. It would be the only honest thing to do, if money's involved.

Hmmm, not sure Dot. Stuff just comes out. That might mean more of...well, you know. "One man's ceiling is another man's floor" is how the original saying goes I think.

"I dunno. It's not just *them*.. its us as well.." One man's ceiling is another man's sky, if you know what I mean. Anything done more than once, well say within a frame of reference that requires it to be done more than once, as in where an observed cause and effect would lead one towards an expected response, can become a ritual of sorts and will start to carry meaning and significance around the performance of the act or the uh, thing. Being done. Without real consideration of the relationship between the action and the outcome other than it feels right or good or seems to "work" the same way or in an expected way each time. All the stuff about watching one's favorite team and doing things the same way, wearing a hat that you wore every game where the team won, or stirring your nacho's 3 tiems before each play because they swished a basket when you did that - twice! and each time you stirred! and belched once so you want to do that now, that kind of thing. We are creatures of habit, we'd go nuts if we weren't and where there's constant reinvention you get a lot of wasted effort if you're only getting the same results each time or can't even measure the results. The measure of success people often end up going by is the way they feel when they perform the ritual. It can be soothing or just comfortable. Nothing wrong with that. But it doesn't mean that the actions performed have any relationship to what the action was originally intended to produce. A lot of stuff is just habit and cultural glue or as the artist Don Van Vliet once said "it gets him dressed in the morning". I've come to focus on the intent of the person doing the action and what they're trying to accomplish. For all the good Christians talk about, or Wiccans or Pagans or Witches or Don'BelieveNuttin's - theres a lot of greedy, selfish, meaner 'n' snot people of all stripe. (I should also add good ones too). Seeing a thing for what it is - without imposing anything on it other than the immediate perception of what it actually is - can be difficult to do but not impossible, and can be learned. I'm sure many around here do that. Doing that I believe allows for the characteristics and textures of something to reveal themselves for what they really are. Naturally that requires some form of receptor and therein is life's wonderful work, to me.

I am but a reed in the wind... Camping rivals me per cubic yard for air warmed, I'll say that. But I do wonder if many are convinced as he is of the date of the "Rapture". Hopefully it's not the "Raptor" and he just mistranslated a greek word or something. That would be bad. (I'm reminded of movies like Aliens and Event Horizon where those pesky "distress" signals turn out to really be warnings, for some reason)

Witchcraft has just too many weird things about it, spooky stuff that's way too freaky for the normal person, IMO. Ceremonies are often held in dark, dimly lit locations, with all kinds of candles and special urns and mystical looking paraphernalia involved, crosses and icons all over the place. Incense burns heavily at some of these events, giving them a foggy smokey look. There's all kinds of secret practices and ceremonies too, that you can't participate in if you're not one of "them". Invocations and rituals abound, using ancient languages that are memorized and repeated slavishly by those who attend. Some of these are even held at midnight, after everyone else is normally asleep. The priests and priestesses always wear long robes and sashes and often wear caps that seem to hide their faces. Black is the color of choice and red - blood red. They all bow and kneel when one of the members of the higher orders is present, even kissing their hands or rings. Young boys, dressed in white gowns, silently assist with various details of their services after receiving special training in their practices. Although there are separate covens in nearly every town and city they all answer to a single authority in Europe where their leader lives in unmatched opulence in a palace with it's own name - "The Vatican". Leaders meet there every year to.... Oh wait. Wrong one. My mistake. The yellow jester does not play But gently pulls the strings And smiles as the puppets dance In the court of the crimson king.

A general question then - is it the controlling of others or witchcraft that's wrong. Or both? And what is the definition for witchcraft that controlling others falls into, if it does?

What I'd also add is that I don't actually dislike him for the way he does his show, although I think it borders on inhumane to call it a "bible forum" for discussion of anything other than what he chooses to talk about. He's boring yes, but fascinating in the way he applies his methodology so consistently. He does not believe that,,,, "all men" are to be saved ,,,,actually means all. He believes that God has chosen some and not others. That people who would want to be saved, would hear the message of salvation and come to God through Christ...may not in fact ever "be saved" because God hasn't chosen or called them. Thus, people don't "choose" God, God chooses them and God by Camping's rendering doesn't choose everyone. Why? That's God's business. All any one person can do is try, hope, believe, live as they might best choose to but in the end only those who God has chosen will be "saved". He dances around this at times but I had him dialed in one night where he took about 15 minutes explaining this, using various verses and moved around the bible quite a bit to document his stance. He made it absolutely clear to the caller that nothing they could or would do would have any impact on God's response to them, that God had already called those of His choosing from before "the foundations of the earth" so the deal was done, more or less mostly more. Far be it from me to argue with God if that's the case, it wouldn't do much good anyway. But until I hear it directly that's not what I understand the Bible to say, if it's the reference.

Harold Camping....local to Northern California. He's had a radio broadcast for years on "Family Radio", which he's a founder of. I believe he preaches weekly in a church in Alameda, CA. or did at one time. He's known as "Brother Camping" to his followers as he (by his own claim) holds no official office or responsibility as a pastor, other than being the ultimate authority on what the bible both says and means I've gathered. His broadcasts are generously called "The Open Forum". I've dialed him in at all hours of the night over the years. It'll keep you awake on a long drive and he's got some fairly odd interpretations of the bible, even by current standards. On the radio he literally drones - I'm being kind - when callers call in with their "questions" which he then answers as if on automatic. Typically he tells each caller at the end of the drone "But thank you for calling....and now can we take our next caller please...." and the show progresses. It's advertised as a "forum" for discussion on "biblical issues" but he pretty much stomps all over anything any caller has to say and imposes his own interpretation of scripture as exactly what the bible says and can be pretty rough on anyone who disagrees. Occasionally someone does and he gets a third wind with "NO, NOOOO. That is not what God has to say, NO. That is not....", etc. etc. Now, I don't agree or disagree with everything either he or the callers posit, but it's one of the longest running wheeze fests I've ever heard on radio, and since he's an owner and operator it's his show as long as he can stay on the air. This is the second time he's seriously laid out his math on the return of Jesus Christ. The first time he admitted to being wrong which I assume wasn't that difficult . This time he figures to have it right and he's got a group (or the group's on their own account I suppose) traveling around the country in a bus spreading "the word" on May. So that's what I think of him, not a whole lot. But I think that his dating approach will settle his argument once and for all. I've heard him go through it high level on the radio and it's about as reasonable as anything else I suppose. But I simply don't think the dating is held in the bible as he describes it, or that it is in fact datable from the biblical records. The Feasts are significant as he describes, the "holy days", I get that. Dating it - I don't believe that's the intent of scripture. But I've been wrong before....

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_penLnDqIlE?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_penLnDqIlE?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_penLnDqIlE?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object> <br> <br> If you have or haven't heard, May 21, 2011 is the big day. Harold Camping's going on his 2nd prediction and this one, according to Harold, is fo' real. Comments?

Thank you Clay-Jay!!!! It's good to see not everyone's been squelched into silence by the fear tactics of those who would love to gag the truth!!!!!! That's a connection I hadn't seen but yes, it clearly makes sense - homogenization - Milk and "cookies"..........think about it, San Francisco politics being what it was at the time it's incredible to think that quite ppssibly there would be a media blanket of silence thrown over the entire history to hide this and just how many other facts???!!!! This just in - "California Highway Patrol, also known as "CHiP's" may have been infiltrated early on as part of the Cookie Conspiracy to act as security for the effort. Yes, there are CHiP's in the cookies, and if this plan fully implements worldwide the enforcement piece is already ready to go!!! Related - New Assault !!!!....."plug-ins".....rumors are flying the Hair Club for Men has in fact been installing micro chip cookie communicators into each and every browser "plug in" that you download, enabling their Club members hair plugs to communicate data to each and every web browser that's downloaded their plug in!!!!!! Plugs - hair plugs - plug-ins....sounds far fetched but the allegations are out there - don't be fooled! Continue to comb through the data and you'll be convinced!!!!

Excellent point Keith. Those who supported the cause in good faith shouldn't be penalized. As a NotALawyer, I'd assume that my bright idea would not be doable under current tax code as I kinda understand it. More practical would be to require that when the officers of an organization are convicted of crimes relating to the misuse of their office, position, resources, employees, etc. that the tax exempt status go under review and a temporary adjustment be made to the allowed deduction for donors. This happened to PTL during their uh, problems and the IRS made a reduced allowance for deductions but pending review the whole exemption status was canned. I think it was reinstated later, but based on the allegations made against the organization - which had a lot do with Jim Baker of course - the IRS stepped forward and acted. It only makes sense, the more you think about it. (notwithstanding that in Baker's case he wasn't much more than a dunce). "Settlements" like the Way's done (and many others) takes them off the radar, as there's no convictions and the legal entity that is the organization is protected. But - the more suits and legal actions against the org that occur and the more expense involved, be it insurance/reinsurance or that paid out of their own accounts - that's going to effect donor confidence, or should. And I would think some kind of legal audit/advisory review of how much and how often a tax exempt org is sued would be a good idea, across the board. The whole issue's about $$$ so I certainly don't want to see people acting in good faith hurt anymore than they already may be. But - if you give $$$ to get the deduction - you're working the same business angle the org is. It might be for very good reasons, but my expectation would be to accept what the market bears, current conditions and adjust accordingly, as one would with any business investments. There's certainly no "heavenly" reward involved if that's what someone is seeking (and I'm not addressing this to you specifically Keith, just generally shooting hot air here) - you get your reward when you file your tax return and lower your earned income amount and your tax liability. It makes sense to have some accomadation like that, I'm all for it. I don't think exemptions and personal deductions are a bad thing, at all. I do think there's a great deal of dishonest dealing with the entire idea. Looking back it's easy to see that regardless of what good the Way did (and I do think there was good) the $$$ structure was completely bassackwards and appears to be still today. Roman Catholicism, same - a mess. Religion in general is Big Business. "Greed is good", indeed, and no better greed than the good kind for a good cause.

I think that's very true, overall WW and TandO. The more I see that, the more that I see the downside of religious commerce, whether it's selling classes or having tax exempt land, given by others. It opens the doors for those who supposedly want to dedicate their lives to "serving others" and do "what Jesus would do" can do the exact opposite and accumulate "treasure" where "moth and rust" can eat away. Upon the first conviction of member abuse a church/ministry/diocese should immediately have it's tax exempt status revoked pending review, with stiff penalties and back taxes collected for the years that the Tax Exempt clergy and officers were abusing their members and enjoying the benefits of being a "church". And for those ministries/churches/diocese who insist that they answer to a Higher Law and can't be required to open their doors or their books even after being convicted of abuses to their members, the government can say fine. Good. Pay your taxes, pay your penalties, and you don't need any protection or consideration from the Lowly Lower Laws of the Land. Do as you will and expect to be treated like any other business and citizens.

Ladie's and Gents, backatya! Toasted the New Year in with a healthy taste of Hendrix (the Gin) and tonic. Cheers! I only drink the stuff on special occasions so I had about 3/4s of the bottle my son gave me last year left. And he got me another one for Christmas this year. God bless him, in a pinch it's unacceptable to not have a decent gin on hand. Who's seen True Grit? Great flick, that and a drive by of a local watering hole comprised our New Year's. We ended up waiting till the last minute to plan and so went lo impact. We were at home early enough to pop on a log and await the birth of 2011 in cozy comfort.

For some people, teaching "the Word" was a way to "help people" That and the results that came from it weren't rare in my experience. Financial quotas - no. I don't recall anyone ever intruding on my own tithing, giving, or whatever you want to call it, nor I on anyone else. Other than the usual encouragement to give, and to tithe, etc. I can't imagine accepting that kind of intrusion for long and have nothing but sympathy for anyone who found themselves in the situation where they did. I still hear this a lot in various ministries and churches I've attended though, both in public sermons and general conversation. Christian religious business wants to get into your wallet. They need money to function, you have money so they want you to give them some of it. It runs the gamut from honest appeal to outright emotional and mental muggings.

Where I work the IT Powers That Is are currently working through issues with our security seals and authentication and yada yada in a new platform install that's underway. Well, undernotway mostly but will soon be underwent, we hope. Progress continues and hope springs anew with each passing day. Authentication rights can be a moving target depending on the system you're in, so...one never knows what awaits beyond that next click. Mod G appears to have Daddy's Cookies on this one, and possibly everyone else's by the sounds of it. Cookie accumulation is nothing new! Conspiracy indeed - it's been hinted on certain hacker sites not to be mentioned by name that the "delete your cookies" "solution" is actually the vestigal remains of a plot originally formulated by Bill Gates and Steve Jobs in the early years of PC development whereby all "deleted" cookies could be eventually gathered in one repository and unloaded back to PC's worldwide as a means of homogenizing all users of the internet into one faceless and easily controlled virtual identity, known as the "JARHeads" (Just and Righteous Holistic Excellence Analog Data Streams). As their economic success rose and they both moved on to their own respective PC Kingdoms these early plans were sidelined, soon to be forgotten by all but a few, but not forever. Read on...if you dare.... Little known but apparently true - Jobs had a son as a young man, never publicly recognized, who married Bill Gate's daughter by an early liason with a woman from Australia who is now known only by the user name Outbabe, mentioned in some correspondence rumored to be kept in an undisclosed underground vault in Palo Alto, CA. where it and other sensitive information has been kept for over 30 years. This son, now an adult, has been seen both on and off line in various AT&T and Radio Shack conventions, buying up contracts for low cost strip mall franchise locations from each company where he, reported by some, plans to stage this nefarious plan! with testing to begin sometime in 2011and launching in 2012. This incorporates a 10 year plan described in the oft referred to but never seen manifesto titled "A Recipe for Peace - One Cookie for Mankind" written by this son known variously by the names Gill B Wator, Billy Steves, Joba Dundee, as well as many others. Aided by his spouse "Worhleigh" progress has been steady by all reports of those who might know but prefer to remain anonymous at this time. (for good reason!) True or false? The evidence speaks for itself, IMO. Your own and this board's experience notwithstanding, further investigation is needed but the basic foundational realities as reported here are hard to deny.

"Socks, I tried all of those tricks, but, nothing worked." Yeah, well - as Grandfather told Hoffman in Little Big Man - "sometimes the magic works, sometimes it doesn't".