socks

I refuse to worship the Guido/God. Reminds me, at the end of the movie "The Hustler", George C. Scott is facing off with Paul Newman over getting his "share" of Fast Eddie's winnings and screams - "YOU - OWE - ME ... MONEY!!" Linda, thank you for your zupport.

Oeno, Tzaias original post to start the thread addresses what I think is the core issue in the discussion. "Each one of us has a unique, authentic self, and I believe that is a necessary element of Christianity even as it causes an element of divisiveness in the body. I also believe that the deeper one's involvement in TWI, the more likely the tendency to distance oneself from being authentic and the deeper one has to go to un(re)cover the authentic self. The irony is that either way, you can't fool God." We've all come down different roads of entry and egress in regards to "The Way Inc." But I would say that the single consistent elements for everyone were those relating to Christianity - God and Jesus Christ, and the bible as an inspired source of teaching. I know some here don't feel that was a part of what they did or got or saw, that it was all a lie and BS and a sham. I don't feel that way - but it doesn't matter and really isn't even worth discussing (for me) except when I get like this and like to hear my own voice (o so exquisite, it!) quacking. If Christianity is all about establishing a true relationship with God to the end that our present lives are enriched and fulfilled - Then each one of us that are Christians will have a singlular and unique story to tell, the one we're living. It will absolutely include good and bad parts, successess and failures. Just as you, if I said anything different I wouldn't be being hmmm, "authentic". The weird reference was a joke, sorry. (make that extra dry barkeep!) :) Of all the weirdo's you're definitely high on the weird scale, possible 9. something. The crazies here, that's whole 'nother storee.

I've always allowed for that, since Day 2, Oeno. That's assumed. And it forms the basis for my post. GS gets a lot of "agree to disagree" going on. That's practical. But I don't think it answers the "real" questions and the topic of this thread actually addresses them IMO. :) :blink: I only speak for myself. That's all I do. There are others that I would offer an educated opinion on and be very close based on what I know. But other than that, it's me O Lord. So when you say "rose colored" myopia, there's only one way to apply that - to me. I don't know about the rest of you weirdos. My observations on the rest of this stuff lead me to certain conclusions, and I'm pret-ty sure I'm correct. But where the rubber meets the road is in how each person is able to work it all out for themselves and more forward. So it doesn't matter if I'm right or wrong or if anyone else agrees or disagrees - agreement isn't the issue, understanding and application is. I'm not offering my own conclusions here, there's no whole enchilada for everyone on GS or the world of ex-Wayfer weirdness forthcoming from me. I fully believe that the same conclusions will however reveal and render themselves in each person and it has nothing to do with what specifically "happened" to each person and their own experience. Cheese, enchiladas - I'm hungry now.

Dunno Ham. Not if there's one God and many of us which is what I wrote but then, maybe that does in fact mean many God and none of us, or whatever you'd like it to say. I haven't counted Gods recently and they do seem to proliferate. So do we. It may be getting crowded in the Deities, Aisle 9. GS and the civilized rules of engagment do provide a reflection of how I think. GS has rules about being courteous and respectful or something along those lines. Not to be insulting but it certainly doesn't control the mind, only the written words and those words as they appear on these pages. So I can think as rasty as I want about anyone or anything, I just need to treat others "respectfully" here or something to that effect. And that's good as rules go I think. But I doubt it does much to really control what's typed. I try to be reasonably respectful, as you do. But (and I'd suspect it's the same for you) That's not why I do that, to follow the rules. Or to not get poked and prodded endlessly, or banned or whatever the consequences might be for breaking the rules. I never pay attention to the rules here despite the fact that I chimed in with my scintillating observations and contributions about them. I just write what makes sense to me, what's of interest, what might be helpful or interesting to someone reading and I do it the way it seems correct to do, to me. If that coincides with the rules, fine. But they don't shape me, myself or I - or have any effect whatsoever on what I write. And the day I go off the rules, I will, should be, reminded of what they are and if I can't abide by that I should be treated like any rule breaker would be. I have no problem with that. But my "self" here isn't controlled or governed by the rules. They don't make me courteous if I am, respectful or considerate of others. If I am, at all and I'm not sure that I am. Others can judge, I really don't much care. I try to treat others as I would be treated. I fail regularly. When I was in the Way and all of the years I worked there for them and with the people I knew, I was pretty much the same. My personal introduction to the bible was through many of the people who, with me, later joined up with the Way, PFAL, and all of that. I'll die with a stake in my heart before I sell those people and the years of loving life we shared, short. That ain't gonna happen. I was in the program because I was asked to go into it and I wanted to be there so I went, and stayed. Over the years - then as now - I did things at the direction of others but I never did anything I felt was wrong or harmful because I was forced to. I may have been mislead in some things. That happens. I may have been taught something that wasn't right. That happens. I may have been lied to about something. That happens. I may have done those things myself, and others. That happens. It didn't happen though because I was brainwashed by a scummy cult leader and led to live in a fog of being anyone other than myself. I may have been highly incompetent in anything and everything and a whiz at others. That happens. Ecathadriski said something once that just hit the bottom line for me - maybe not the way I feel all the time but when push comes to shove, it works: I'll take what I get in this life and I'll take what's coming to me in the next. If others are to blame, so be it unto them.

"You look back with rose colored glasses if you want, I like calling a spade a spade and a cult a cult." If you're referring to my references, Oeno, that's not what I'm doing. You can however give me an effin' break if you are and we can definitely discuss it directly and further, here.

We don't disagree for the most part, pond. I can only speak for myself. I got and get lots of comfort from the bible, from fellowship with other people, from holy spirit, from a decent night sleep and another sunrise. This happened in spades for years in the Way and what I did there and who I interacted and worked with. Without question, there was failure at some points, in me and others. TWI didn't take the process of growing up and becoming "a self" from me nor did it lead me away from Christ. There's reasons for that. I don't expect that you or anyone else would have the same reasons. I've long stated and held to (since the late 70's) the premise that in The Way Inkynational the entire idea of "likemindedness" was ill conceived, understood and realized. And over the last, what - 12-13 years online it's shown unquestionably that "everyone" wasn't. People held widely different beliefs, opinions, ideas and attitudes over many different locations and time periods despite the fact that "everyone" "heard" and "spoke" the same thing. It was never so. Common ground and understanding, to degrees. And that's the way it should be, we're not all alike and we don't all pop in or out of the same mold.

Yes, actually I did. I've stated before on GS that my own 'sense of self' was fully intact during "my Way years". I don't really understand how a person could lose that but I certainly allow for the fact that some did because they state they did. I'll go with that, on face value. My point about PFAL is that the logic of the opening material covered doesn't denigrate or diminish the individual's sense of self - if John 10:10 "b" is the foundation of the entire premise, in Jesus's own words He came to provide life, more abundant. I've got life now. If I have more of it and in abundance, I end up with - if not more in quantity (debatable) than certainly in quality, in some form or substance that can be valued as better. The relationship of being a "child of God" by a "new birth" adds a new dimension to the life I now live - as Galatians states "I am crucified with Christ: neverthless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." A "new creation" in Christ, yes, but I know that, I'm aware of that, "me". For a person to have written that they must have known who they were and that their individuality, their own sense of self as having been "crucified with Christ" and now living with "Christ in me" was intact. In that way Bergson's proposal that memory is a way to define present cognition makes complete sense to me. To be redeemed from sin and know it I must have memory and therefore some awareness of who I both was, and now am. I can't exist now without a past. Put another way, the future has a past, this present moment. And so it goes. In that way I'd use the word "blossom" or grow to describe what an ongoing relationship with God produces. For my self, anyway. It's certainly not worse than it was, that's for sure.

Nothing in this cheek other than lunch and it's going quick.

"...much less authenticity because *our* essence is dead in trespasses and sin." Oh yeah, that's a big topic alright. I'll be honest, my understanding of the basic tenets taught in PFAL regarding salvation in Christ are that they're fundamentally correct. Taken on face value the idea of a "life lived with abundant power" as taught in PFAL does one thing very clearly - it assumes that an individual has a life that can be improved by an abundance of power. That unique indvidual, loved by God and redeemed by Christ, manifests their true selves "in Christ" as they "walk worthy" of their calling. Etc. Etc. For that to occur there really can't be a loss of individual identity, in fact the individual identity would be assumed to blossom under these proper, abundant conditions. The end result is one of God's direction, one that flourishes within the new relationship a person has and grows into with God.

Bolshevik, I would say that the idea of "vain" philosophy probably wasn't clearly understood in TWI. Not that there aren't good kinds or bad kinds, I'm sure that's a topic in itself. But the tools of philosophy are the basic tools of thinking and reasoning, both of which God expects a person to do, by all accounts. That said, clearly there's a pattern of thinking and reasoning that God functions in and with that man would do well to understand or at least attempt to learn and recognize. In that sense, the "truth of God's Word" that TWI claims to promote need not fear any discipline, inquiry or type of thought. If something is true it will reveal itself from all angles, albeit to varying degrees. The verse in Colossions refers to being taken captive, or hostage, by things that are contrary to a true understanding of Christ.

True, TZ. On a basic level, perception goes with the territory of being a single, identifiable individual. Simply put, I would suggest to remember is to perceive, and the result of both is to be aware of our "selves" at the moment. Perception is unique to each of us because we are each unique. That's kind of a gimme, like saying the sky's blue - but once we think about that blue sky, we see the nature of perception. "It is what it is" and may be very different from another position of view or under different conditions, etc. etc. etc. . As people though we only have one true natural position of view and that's our own, our own memory, present, "self", soul. We see from "in here" - "this side" of the eyes. We're not out there looking in, we're in here, looking out. Individual awareness can be faulty and unreliable, no question about it, but it's what it is, and what we have to work with.

On raising a child, and the meaning of Proverbs 22:6....HERE Some of the alternative translations...HERE Also, I found that the philosopher Henri Bergson expressed "self" in a way that made sense to me and that I've been able to elaborate on and extrapolate on in different ways. Basically, that each individual instance of awareness, as say a moment of experience shared by two people of an event, is different and unique to each person because they don't share the same past. Memory defines our current "self" therefore and as a result our current individual experience can never be "the same". Similar perhaps but never the same. Individual self awareness is critical to a relationship with God then, as there is "one" God and many of "us". We all have a relationship that's unique and different. I could assume that if God had wanted something different - or for an atheist that processes would have produced something different - than we'd see it. But we don't and never have throughout human history. So it appears to be a done deal and one we would need to embrace as part of a healthy relationship with our own 'self" others, and indeed, God. :)

Undoubtedly, Jim. I'm sure he understood, it was just a protracted way of handling it. It's a simple, normal process that requires a minimum of evaluation. If you were there, completed the program, and graduated, there's a transcript of what was completed to fulfill requirements. He was just being a jerk, to put it bluntly but in so doing it left him looking like a petty buffoon, unfortunately. But I doubt he cared about that. I suppose it could have been a reasonable civil discourse but I didn't feel like exposing either of us to the risk of a bunch of toxic crap. I was glad it was finally handled expeditiously, and it was. From what we completed there were classes that would transfer easily for a portfolio assessment. The Greek class Walter J taught, Keys to Research, Business Writing, Public Speaking, and several segments of the Corps series our years - for instance "The Itineraries of Paul" as taught by Walter J, and the book of Timothy by VPW. Basically the material is rewritten in the form the school accepts, with outlines provided, etc. It's not a big deal really and actually takes a fair amount of work.

Very Funny, Belle! Clearly, The Weigh has become synonomous with scarey stuff.

It's not about Susan. It's about what she does. And she does it remarkably well. There ya go. The result was in the actual performance. Of course there was some set up involved. The audience reaction was predictable and amped up a little. However the woman could have been all of that and more going in, but still flubbed the actual performance and it would have been a non-story. For someone who took her looks at face value, dissaociated from her vocal and singing ability, it was a great performance but not a great surprise other than she's pretty much unknown - but everyone is until they're known. Pleasant surprise might describe that response. For someone who discounted any vocal or singing ability based on her appearance, the response is internal, self-realized and sudden - thus the wild applause, etc. Nobody has to say "you were wrong about her!" The conviction is made by the person themselves, based on what they've heard. It's one of the most meaningful ways to learn or become aware of something, where we are made to face our own perceptions with irrefutable undeniable evidence that counters what we previously thought. No one has to say "this is right". You see for yourself what's right and gladly accept it. "Yae! She's good! Cool!" How long the effect lasts, dunno. But it's a nice moment. In a world of non-stop horrible news a little bit of good goes a long way and I'll take it where I find it. :)

It took a couple tries but yes, we were able to get my wife's transcripts of the Way Corps program and completed classes/courses. A list and description of each, and a note of "completed", I don't believe there was any grade score associated with each, basically a pass/completed designation. The Way's obligated to provide on request a copy of the curriculum, classes and coursework and any additional activities that were part of the graduation requirements. If your friend graduated, it's there. Or should be and if not, they would be responsible to reconstruct a facsimile. It's possible to transfer these into credits in different ways, academic portfolio is one. You just need to follow the requirements of the school they're being submitted to and do some pre-counselling work to determine which, if any, would be most qualified for a portfolio approach. I would hope their response would be if not friendly, cooperative as they do have an obligation to maintain records and respond in a timely manner to inquiries. You should be able to call the main number, identify who you are and what you want, and get referred to the correct person to handle. Now, when we did this (early 90's) we called the main number and were told to submit the request in writing with the name, Corps year, campus information, etc. And we got back a bizarre short letter from then VP of the Way, Don W. that didn't include a transcript but identified our request as odd to him since we weren't members but were now seeking their "help" as he labelled it. He asked that we contact him directly if we wanted "help". It had the tone of wanting to open the door to giving me a hard time about leaving the Way. He had no idea what was waiting for him if that door indeed opened, and I wasn't about to stink up our lives with the toxic overload of sucn an encounter, though it would have had a kind of satisfaction to it I admit. But not a good kind. We didn't want help, we wanted them to do their job and send a transcript and wrote again for one. And never heard back, anything at all. So a month later my wife just tried calling the switchboard and got the person who took the information and said they'd have it sent within a couple weeks. And it did get mailed to us, as requested. So I hope they considered that switchboard operator for the the Vice President's job as she was able to understand English and do work that Don couldn't figure out how to do. Hopefully your friend has an easier time with it. Ours wasn't that bad but it showed me at that time how disorganized and petty they were. Still.

When I read the lyrics to this song I saw a kind of living counter point in Susan Boyle and the song itself. Could a soul be more bared? Life is certainly cool when it doesn't suck and for that few minutes, it was about as cool as it gets for her and now me! Totally dig it. This is the kind of distraction I need. Thanks exninski! Dreamed a Dream There was a time when men were kind When their voices were soft And their words inviting There was a time when love was blind And the world was a song And the song was exciting There was a time Then it all went wrong I dreamed a dream in time gone by When hope was high And life worth living I dreamed that love would never die I dreamed that God would be forgiving Then I was young and unafraid And dreams were made and used and wasted There was no ransom to be paid No song unsung, no wine untasted But the tigers come at night With their voices soft as thunder As they tear your hope apart And they turn your dream to shame He slept a summer by my side He filled my days with endless wonder He took my childhood in his stride But he was gone when autumn came And still I dream he'll come to me That we will live the years together But there are dreams that cannot be And there are storms we cannot weather I had a dream my life would be So different from this hell I'm living So different now from what it seemed Now life has killed the dream I dreamed.

When I "took the class" we were all friends so that's not at all like what happened for me either. Everyone liked each other or was getting to know each other. Over the years the dynamic changed ministry wide, I'd agree. But I encountered enough of this to realize that indeed - the best place to be in relation to the Way is "seriously considering taking The Class and want to hear more". That way everyone's nice to you, cares, calls, and provides supportive warm and fuzzies. After The Class, you're on your own, time to wake up and smell the coffee. In fact, buy the coffee, bring it, brew it and pour it. Clean up. Beat it. Do it again.

SWEET!

Very interesting topic, WTH. For background, I don't know enough about or have a real feel for how the mass of Christianity in America views their faith, doctrines, etc. today to really offer a fully informed opinion. But that's never stopped me before. I do see on TV a lot of the televangelists who deal mostly with the physical "abundance" message - in that regard I actually do think there's a need for people to understand that God is not the author of death, sickness or poverty. Yet, the idea that all death, sickness and poverty can be overcome through one's focused prayer life and/or a believing attitude isn't true according to the Bible either. The true victory, abundance and success of the Christian is a spiritually based one that spans more than this current lifetime. To focus on things, "stuff" as the indicators of a true Christian life is counter productive, based on what we see in the New Testament. (along the lines of what Tzaia posted earlier) In my own circles, there's an emphasis on wanting to know and understand God's will for people, personally. How to have a full relationship with God and Jesus Christ. Knowing how best to live in these current days we live in, our times and circumstances. Desires - a good point. As we develop our lives as Christians, it's assumed that the focus of our lives and desires should take on the character of a child of God. I see a combination of both the written words of the Bible and the inspiration and direction that one would expect as an outcome of a real relationship with God. Of the people I know closely, both ex-Wayfers and never-been, that's the focus. Of course, no one's perfect or necessarily consistent, so there's variation and growth all the time.

That's a nice one for sure, dmiller. Mine's just a wacker. I'd had my eye out for one and when I got it at that price was happy. I have a feeling it sounds "okay" but not great. I'm mostly interested in being able to have it in my bag, chord fills, up-chucks and chinks kinda stuff and a line or two here and there. I can see it takes some work to get a decent head of steam going on one. I'll just whittle away at it. Got a harmonica too recently, "C", at the House of Blues in Anaheim, CA. Lost the one I'd had, an ancient Marine Band. Same with it, just messin'. :)

Young man's a playah, Bluzeman! Been awhile. I always check how a player holds there guitar, these days. Quinn's holding his mid-chest high and that's good to see. The low down slung thing is bad for the wrists. If he (like many) goes the route of planting it up a tad higher like that he'll have the advantage of being able to adjust his wrist position up and down the neck, get where he needs to quickly, as well as see the whole range of the fretboard better. Govan's position is "classic" (little guitar humor there) and accomplishes the same thing. I find I'm using that position these days unless I'm just squanking chords. If I'm strapping it in the upright positon I like it higher up mid-chest though. Bought a mando awhile back, online. Inexpensive Aria, in near perfect condition, for 65 bucks, no case. Two sets of strings with it. It's fun to work on it. Little neck though.

Hmmm, not so sure about that. But I think that if you do feel a responsibility, you should take it seriously. If you think you're part of the cause, the problem, the disease and want to be part of the cure it makes sense to embrace that and work it out. That may be true. If that's what you believe, go for it. In your own world you seem to see everyone else the same as you in regards to cause and fault. That's understandable and is debatable but not true, IMO. By that I mean it's not a true or correct conclusion. That you've come to that conclusion is understandable though, from what you've written here. My only recommendation would be that this not be the only means of expression you have for your convictions (and I'm not assuming it is) and that you work out some realistic, helpful ways to act on your convictions and proceed with your life. I do wish you the best.

Now, if you were operating "all nine", you would know right away. . . That's a ridiculous statement, Bolshevik. You can maintain your attitude but it doesn't warrant any further serious response from me.

Hmmm...seeking...and figuring things out...and having one's eye full of light are 3 different things to my mind. If Genesis is the record of choice, there's nothing there about humanity's efforts to know God being a aweat. Not that many don't perspire in that pursuit. "Adam and Eve" didn't know God one minute and then lose half their brains the next. "Uh God, are you saying that...uh...God...uh...hmm...Eve...what were we...hey,what the fu....I'm sleepy". I know that historically Christianity has embraced the "oil and water" "now you saw Him now you don't know your butt from your ear" model to it's cold moist heart, but I don't see that as the progression of events, not in Genesis anyway. The most common euphimism I hear is that man "lost his connection" to God. But did he lose his memory? If there's something to be remembered, it could account for that human tendency to wander around like they can't find their car keys but know they've got a car around here somewhere.