socks

Interesting article on Mr. Rogers, I enjoyed, you might too.

My pern't exactly Garth and T-Bone. Go back to one year Before PFAL - how familiar were you with Bullinger? If you weren't, was PFAL what introduced him to you? After PFAL, he was a valuable resource. Before, I'd never heard of him. Realizing how much his work benefitted VPW, and the use of it in PFAL itself, it would have been more normal to include him in credits to the material (as well as others) than it seems now, to not have. Course his stuff was in the Wayness Bookstore, but it's suprirsing - even back in The Day, the Way redid his "How to Enjoy the Bible" into a taped class of it's own. Took it.

Kraft Now we're talkin'. A lot nicer than DP which I thought was carbonated prune juice. Indeed. A tad too sweet for these tasters. Coffee - not big on it today but back in that day - practically had a 30 cup stainless steel monolith java maker installed in my car. Lotsa coffee downed.

Ha! Well good, WG! Eat that liver! Again, I confess, my culinary compass went coo-coo in the midwest. No offense to the many fine foods and preparations to be found there but there were some meats and vegetables that didn't deserve the kind of treatment they were subjected to post-mortem. In fact I did find some - like liver - to my liking. I liked it, and I'd never even had liver growing up, before moving to Indiana, and had it there once and remembered why I didn't like it. But the Way Nosher kitchen prepared it a little left of center, and didn't fry it to a hard leather like consistency and I found it rather tasty. Always liked onions, so hey. Slap it on my plate and pass the forks. Worst meal - the carrot and raisin salads. Remember those? Carrots and raisins don't belong together in close quarters, they're bad bunkies. If it had been some sort of Mediterranean preparation, maybe. But that semi-sweet gelatinous consistency was, in a word, gross. Talk about evil vegetables - that's evil FRUIT and vegetables. Spiritual wickedness in high places, that.

Weirwille worked around the materials that he used in such a way that the actual portions that were quoted verbatim and/or paraphrased weren't clearly credited at the time they were used. In other words, in PFAL for instance, he says "the man who's done the most work in this field of figures of speech is E. W. Bullinger", words to that effect. However in places where he uses the information and language of Bullinger in figures of speech, he doesn't cite the source. He treats Bullinger's work as one might treat a dictionary, where a definition of a word is given for instance, and the actual dictionary used isn't noted. Which - is....dicey, simply because - show of hands - how many of you had ever heard of and studied E.W. Bullinger's figures of speech appendixes in the Companion Bible, or How to Enjoy the Bible, or the Figure of Speech book itself, to the point that they were as commonly understood as a dictionary? Well no one, I'm going to bet. Bullinger's just one example, but once you know VPW's history, and are exposed to the PFAL series - and follow Bullinger's work afterwards - you can see how much he owed to Bullinger. It's to the point where if it had been me, I'd have felt it just honest courtesy to the material and the students to put documentation in the film credits of PFAL to Bullinger. It wouldn't have been distracting, or taken away from the presentation because it would have been in the screen credits. I deal with the legalities of language everyday, in my work. Someone said it already - I had a meeting with Legal where I work to go over some language being used and it wasn't a complex, ethically slippery slope of a discussion - as we figured out the correct language, the attorney said - "It's very simple. Do the right thing. Make it clear. We don't need 50 words to say "Would you like to know more?" Just say, "Would you like to know more?" and if they respond "no", they don't want to know more, so don't contact them. It's simple". No understanding of the motive is required when it comes to the VPster, IMO. The action speaks for itself. He cut corners and avoided these issues rather than deal with them. Plenty of fine minds disagree with that estimation. No problem, they're wrong, but that's fine. As long as they don't get caught doing it themselves today, it's academic. To add: Jeff's words of wisdom - but that God's standard requires voluntary compliance. That's it. That's the ticket. Love says do it. Law says I may not need to in this situation, I don't need to. Love says think of the other person, don't do it because you have to, do it because it's the right thing. Do it because no one's watching, no one may ever know the good intentions you act upon, it may be completely transparent to everyone until someone realizes wow - you could have not done that and no one would have ever known. Yeah. But you would have.

Spike! Still use it, great stuff. Kosher salt, the only way to go though for salt. Now - that apple in the familia thing just went "boink" in my brain. Yeah, familia and the granola stuff, wasn't familia a little softer, kinda. Yeah, that was hateful without milk, although we did have milk a fair amount of the time at the Way Nashville. And brown suguar. I personally liked millet best - still do, in small doses. I know - cooked bird seed to many, but the stuff really does a good number to my digestion. Always has. It's like tryptophan without the sleepies. Dr. Pepper - okay, to a degree. But Fig Pep WG? Horrible stuff. Of the evil vegetables, the MOST would be wilted mustard greens, seriously. That's some serious skank in your tank, there.

IMO< the shallowest part of the "Corps Committment" was to hang around New Knoxville Ohio's leadership regardless of what they did or didn't do. A person has to decide what they want to do and who they want to do it with. The worst part of having to get away from some of those mean bas-tards was getting cut off from so many others of good heart and spirit. But for my own part, my trust level went into the minus category, so low I wouldn't have trusted a one of the "leadership" at that time with having any kind of an effect, even indirect, on me or my family. Quit? Dam right. But the personal committment I fed over the years in the Way is fat and happy and living large even today. Certainly not by their standard. Which provides me with a good compass - as long as I'm on their sh-it list, I'm probably doing something right. Staying away. Which is exactly what they need to do with me - stay away.

Welllll, yeah, John Mark is mentioned again, in the bible, later. Barnabas is not. Assumptions being what they will be...to each their own. Acts 15 occurs approximately 50 AD, 49-50 AD. Later, Paul wrote 2 Timothy and in 4:10 and 11 makes the following note - For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus unto Dalmatia.Only Luke is with me. Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the ministry. This was written about early to mid-60 AD. Demas is noted point blank as having forsaken Paul. Titus is in Dalmatia. Only Luke is with Paul at that time. Only Demas is noted as having gone south. Mark is asked to accompany Timothy, and since his overall profile seemed to be one of help, "service" to the church and guys like Paul, Paul must have seen a place for Mark. Paul was inbetween (probably) his first and second imprisonment. Since Paul took issue with Barnabas over John Mark's leaving earlier in Acts, sure - something was up in Paul's mind. Barnabas saw John Mark in a different light. But later, who's Paul ask for? John Mark. Barnabas's contribution was huge, in the early church. Paul was brought along by him, I doubt - and it's only my opinion - that Barnabas faded out of God's Polaroid, in my view. A lot gets read into what these guys did and didn't do. A lot.

Well, no one said that's an easy admonition to obey did they? Believe as you will, Mike. Someday, when you get 'round to it, it'll all be posted. All 90. Yup.

both of your editors then wrote something that doesn't read or hear as intended. The context of PFAL itself in the audio and context of the material makes it so plain you'd have to be a writer to go that route - it's called "repurposing" Mike and that's what you're doing. 3 wrongs don't make a right. Two editors and a Mike don't either. Faulty memories AND faulty language. Leaks - a poppin' everywhere.

Is that the reunion where H. Allen got wind of it and wrote them not to show up at the Way? I think the new motto he was citing was "I never met a friend I wouldn't refuse at the Way", or something to that effect. No - it was "You're never welcome at the Way - anymore". Yeah. I understand your point and think it's well taken....were Way Corps supposed to walk step-for-step with wierwille/twi a lifetime? I think anyone who saw the Wayski's in the late 60's could tell by the early 70's - within a few years - we weren't going to hang with VPW forever. Even if we thought we should, we weren't going to and actually, IMO, shouldn't have. And didn't, although for different reasons I envisioned at that time. Loose affiliations over time - fine. But not the kissy-hugsy seeya at the Rock, forever, no. Wade probably went the best of all routes, excusing himself quietly and acquitting himself as a gentleman on the way out. He has nothing to be ashamed of or apologize for. Why would he? He saw his life's work and got to it. Common slant as you probably know is, that both Barnabas and Johm Mark specifically had problems over the corporate structure of the early church - Jerusalem in charge as opposed to local church rule. Add to that the incorporation of "grace" in Christ with a Jewish lifestyle and view of God, there were disagreements, we know. That's a generalization of that viewpoint but more or less how it's put - they didn't "stand" with Paul and so were off in the back forty somewhere, regardless of what they were doing. Not a lot of detail though, not a lot of facts. Paul himself was characterized variously as a kind of intellectual, spiritual esoteric, a dillattante, difficult. I'm not knocking him or taking away from what he did or wrote - I'm just saying - I doubt he was a picnic either.

Everyone should read your post notice for the page 83 section, at least once, Mike. A simple reading of that post - will prove it doesn't say what you're saying it be saiding. If you don't deliberately pull it into the direction you're trying to and reinvent the statements, it's very very simple and easy to see what he meant.

Thanks Whitedove. I don't have a problem with what Wade's saying. I'd assume it has reason to be on this thread as posted because it's meant to deal with some aspect of the Thread topic which is in relation to the Way, but as a general encouragement, it works fine as is. It's a simple message. I doubt he had the Way in mind when writing it, I thought you did in posting it. There's a few points to ponder in the JM/P/B relationship and what you posted, I doubt we're going to come to complete agreement. Although minor a couple of the points I'm seeing really speak to the Thread topic - When the quote from Vines (am I misreading?) says something like - never heard from in scripture again - that has an ominous sound to it - of complete silence. And that's not true, chronologically Barnabas and John Mark are mentioned "again" in letters written, after these events. So it's not factually true. We're not splitting hairs here or squeezing tomatoes - there's few mentions comparitively in the bible's epistles about anyone specific. So the fact they figure into - Paul's - letters and activities is significant as far as air time in what we call "the bible". There's some things we can derive from the records that yes, their doctrinal stances may have been an issue. But to paint them as gone and goner, is inaccurate - unless - Their goneness is based on the fact that they're not mentioned anymore in Pauls' journeys. The significance of that is a topic in itself I think. I think it does completely speak to the topic of the thread though - that quote is characteristic of the generalized statements that are made about people, that give an impression of they're being something wrong but not exactly whyyyyyy....when doing that we should have the facts straight, no?

So what's the point about John Mark being made, Whitedove? They disagreed with each other, that we know. A cut and paste of Vine's seems to imply that Barnabas fell off the planet, as did John Mark. We know that's not the case. That's completely imposing a viewpoint that doesn't hold up under examination, in my mind. It assumes the negative outcome, due - apparently - to the split between Paul and Barnabas and John Mark's actiions. "Never to be heard from in scripture again" is incorrect. Barnabas is mentioned elsewhere, in the N.T. by Paul. It's just as safe to assume from all the records that Paul and Barnabas didn't start wearing "That Other Guy Sucks" t-shirts and ended up on different sides of the spiritual fence but continued on with their personal ministries. The entire mentality of "never heard from again" comes and goes in relation to these kinds of records. It's like a form of "greasespot by midnight". It seems mildly idiotic for historians to take that stance when most of the disciples and followers of Jesus Christ during His life and immediately following are hardly mentioned at all. There's a huge tendency to focus on a few well known names, when we know from Acts itself that many 1,000's of people came into Christianity by the 6th chapter of Acts alone. Ignoring the mass growth of the early church and the impact the individuals must have had on the future of the church is just crayzee. It seems to keep the focus on a few, as if the church only grew because of a few people. That's rediculous. The lesson to be seen in these three guys in my opinion is resolution and continuance. Nothing stopped because they got ticked off at each other and split up. The issue in relation to Wayfers and The Way Nash has to do with idea of "quitting". John Mark may not have had any good reason to leave them when he did. The reason isn't given, so if we take the negative view we still don't know why. I don't know why he left their road trip. Anyone who leaves the Way today in route can speak for themselves. It can be known. Take it or leave it, but it's not a secret once stated.

Yah, sky. I always get a bad taste in my brain about the John Mark the Quitter rap. Doubting Thomas was the first "aha" moment for me. Yeah, that Thomas. Show me the marks, then I'll believe. Truth be told, per the records, all the disciples doubted, all mourned Christ's death, no one was clearly expecting His resurrection which occured completely outside human intervention or expectation. Thomas is the one who voiced it, but Mary looked right at Jesus outside the tomb and didn't recognize Him immediately. She was visiting the tomb of a dead man and found Him alive. (hard to even write that and not consider what it must have been like for her. It's still the essence of everything a Christian believes and comes to know). But once they heard He was alive, they all ran. They were human, people, but ones who once they knew, they knew. It changed them forever to the end 2000 years later I'm pondering their lives and what happened. That's change. Life is a span of time. Life has seasons, change. We act and react within the timeline, do and don't do, choose and avoid, get caught up in some things, swim against the tide with others. I suspect that's why Jesus Christ is viewed as the standard bearer for forgiveness and the expression of how God works. In the Big Picture, none of this really matters. In the end, not a one of us will be able to say we havent doubted, reconsidered, changed, been right and wrong, had questions, wished something was different, fought the good fight for a bad cause and vice versa. Dont like something today? Stick around, itll change. Everything does. The things that are constant that intersect or are a part of my life are few and far between and very recognizable.

John Mark - that was it! Back at the top - Very little is known about John Mark but a lot is assumed. We assume he was young, and he probably was. We assume he did work to help and assist the leaders of the early church, that seems reasonable. What exactly we don't know but it was useful work, by the few references we read. So John Mark was someone who helped make things happen. John Mark "quit" the work he was doing at one point but we don't know why. We assume it was wrong, because of the reaction he got, seemingly leaving the others he was with high and dry. But they continued on, Paul his own way and Barnabas his. Paul and Barnabas splitting up was their problem. I could assume as easily as anything else that if it hadn't been John Mark as the catalyst, it would have been something sooner or later. Who knows? No one. It's a sketchy record. Paul wasn't the designated "leader" when he went out the first time with Barnabas. He established his rep as time went on. John Mark is the writer credited with writing the "gospel of Mark". Not bad. His absence in the records of Pauls' (other than a couple short remarks) seems to indicate he dropped out of sight. Nothing really indicates that overall though. There are a LOT of people not mentioned in the N.T. records of the bible. More people aren't mentioned than are, clearly. Does that mean they all dropped out of sight, did "nothing", quit? Agabus shows up in Acts. Who's Agabus? Where'd he come from? He comes and goes very quickly. Others, the same, many unnamed. I think because the bible is a done deal, written, memorialized forever as is, it's very easy to go to any record and concoct an entire profile of history with next to nothing to go on. Doubting Thomas, John Mark the Quitter, Apollos the Silver Tongued Orater - it's like reading children's stories, mythical characters whose images grow and grow with nothing more added to them than what we read the first time we read about them. They make great source material for endless sermons and advice, but do they actually fuel the lessons that are taught or are they the crutches used to make points that would be made anyway but that sound better, truer, when there's bible material to support them? I'm just asking the question. My opinion - much ado is made about very little, so points can be made. Like ol' John Mark always gets kicked in the tushy for being a "quitter". Out of the 1,000's of people in the first and second generation of Christians that followed Christ - how many are mentioned? How many get their name tagged to a book that's been printed billions of times? One lesson I can get from John Mark and all of these people I read about today - they were human. Normal human people who are painted as being part of something that, if it's true, is truly incredible.

We be good O-Man! Excalater, that's the per'nt, IMO. You hits the nail on the head. "Truth" is not a separate reality, disconnected from all of us and everything else, a set of indexed principles, indexed in alpha order to be memorized. Life can be indexed and memorized but it isn't lived that way, is it? Life happens while someone's reading a book title "The Truth and How To Live It". The bible isn't written that way - an indexed book of point by point topics, "truths". It's a historical record, a story. Commandments, instructions, rules, we got 'em. If there's a "pure" way of viewing God, that's one way, but God doesn't present Himself that way, over history. His story, from our view, is of one lived. It is our view, but it's really the only one we've got, y'know? Time marches on... To add: point to remember - God is a "somebody" in the bible, less a "something". He's a something, okay, he's "God", but wazzat y'know? God didn't want a name when asked for one in the O.T. - just call Him "I AM". Odd name, but I guess it works, His choice, right? Throughout the bible though the anthromorph's and all of that constantly refer to God in human terms - so He may or may not actually "be" the way He's written about but I believe He's something like it. So that makes God a someone for me, with intent, purpose, and interests. Preferences. How that really shakes out at the checkout stand, good question, still working on that one. But when I think of "truth" ------ I'd bet any Wayfer Corps Ved in good standing would have a difficult time defining that in terms that would make sense and be usable. I think they could identify something that was in their opinion, "true", but even than there'd be validation on their part to define it. So no wonder, y'know..... I'm so off topic, I'm not even sure what my point was. Anyhoo -

Wellllllll....evaluation of "truth" and identification of "truth" is rather subjective, isn't it? Oldiesman, you make a very good point, one I would agree with "in theory", but until we recognize that our own selections can be flawed, we won't get off first base. In other words - you saying the truth of PFAL is true regardless of VPW's lifestyle already assumes that you know what's true in it and what isn't. What you really mean I think is - what you've chosen to be true is true regardless of, etc. etc. What's true and what isn't would be effected by VPW's motivation. If he knew he was swiping someone else's stuff who wouldn't like it if they knew it, and he did some quick editing of the information to make it appear differently - that taints the information. It's like stealing a car and changing the plates and giving it a quick paint job and retooling a few of the part around. The "truth" of the car is still there but it's been changed. There's parts of PFAL where I think that's very much what VPW did - he didn't change parts of the Holy Spirit sections based on years of additional work, he changed parts around based on a quick reassemly of the material of B.G Leonard's class, and to fit in parts he wanted to emphasize re: free will, and the "Christ in you" section. I do think he added to it from his own work, yes - but he presents the information as god given truth - he would have served the material better by presenting it working from his own foundation. That's why PFAL is kind of tweezey in parts, it's forcing pieces together that don't quite fit - "things equal to the same things are equal to each other etc. " - or whatever it is, that comes to mind. Assuming that this kind of re engineering of material was done - and I'm convinced he did some of that, although not as much as generally accepted on GS - you're actually getting your "truth" that's true no matter what from a flawed source, one that wanted to lay claim to full ownership of the material as revealed to him "by God" - soooooo there were some unkosher things goin' on there IMO . PFAL isn't important though - the information is. Y'know, the "true" stuff.

Oh man! waysider - T-Bone, tell me about it. Not ready, for real. But I like that Essential Butt Sock name, as it speaks to the truth of the B.S. being offered. Great idea! Glad I inspired you to think of it as that will make the trademark and copyright stuff easier for someone else to deal with later. No Belief System should be without the additional insulation a good set of E.B.S. provides. But alas, production outpaced interest. After some intense market research I came to realize I was ahead of the times, yet again. Nearly all Belief Systems offered in the years 2006/2007 had an over abundance of B.S., a lower grade to be sure, but effective due to the large amounts being delivered. Sales were nil, zippidy, nada. None. No go baby. I got two orders - diddly and squat. See - it takes 10 times as much L.G.B.S. (lower grade b.s.) to equal one good shot of the Butt Sock. So the market was flooded with counterfeit. B.S. My research showed that the curve will swing up again in about 4 years, so I'm planning a major, MAJOR earth-wide campaign of Real Authentic B.S. in 3 years. Serious B.S. So serious, it'll make serious look whimsical.

Right on wing! That's classic. Laundry stories! Off topic, perhaps but still of extreme value, validating once again that I, socks, am bringing true deliverance to this forum. Expect to see some Rewards Chits in your stocking this year. You still have to pay for the T-shirt but I'm sure you won't have a problem with that because y'know, I got time and materials into 'em. The Truth of it comes free though, so not to worry. Plus, the Chits thing. Expect to get some real Chit come December. Backing away, in all meekness and humility now...

Randy, you're well within the range of acceptable opinion, so please don't take this as a rebuttal - it's not. I think your points, which are many, deserve some direct feedback - So those of you that talk Smack about VP, I'm critical of VP in different ways, because I'm entitled to be. I worked with him, knew him and was trained by him. So my opinions of him, which are both based on common sense as well as biblical tenets and scripture with a range of direct contact with Da Man, are more than idle talk. If you don't like them, stick around. I've yet to write all my thoughts down, I'm sure you'll find some you like. ask yourself a ?What did you do to contribute,and walk with GOD, Actually, a lot. What did you do? And exactly when is "did"? Your questions lends to comparison. Jesus taught the first shall be last and the greatest will be the least. I'll leave it to you to pick your place in line. or are you just a poser who type pretty words that mean nothing? No, I don't think so. What would I be posing at? Implying I have experience or knowledge I really don't?Nope. How about you? What are your observations based on? What have you done to make the Word of live in your life? Quite a bit. In fact I'm going to start selling t-shirts on this site that will have "Socks IS the GREATEST" in time for Christmas this year. They were going to say "I'm the Greatest" but I was afraid people would get mixed up. What have you done for the family of GOD? Are you asking rhetorically or do you want an alphabetical list? What have you done? I don't provide private information to strangers and certainly not to someone who isn't in my league, which is in the Top Performers for God's Family, an elite group of people who have done so much, we've actually topped out in the "rewards" category, and we're qualified to distribute Rewards Brownie Chits to others. WHy the hell are you really so bitter? I don't know. I think it's from reading Greasespot too much. Now I'm really depressed. When are you goin to start edifying GOD instead of tearing him down. see below- Look at how many of the Ex way leaders have tried to pick up were he left off,and are failing.I've tried to go to some of these Fellowships but they fall so short,and the Heart just isn't there.Maybe I expect to much. Stop going to exWay leaders and expecting anything. No wonder you're ticked off.

Could be, not sure where it came from Whitedove although that would fit the profile. I only had a brief brush with it but it looked like the kind of cafeteria food you hear endless jokes about. It was a two edged sword by the sound of it - portions were small, a blessing or a curse.

Sugar shock! 4 to six glasses of Dr Pepper a day. Man. 7 Up is the only beverage suitable for human consumption. Taken in small savory doses it will lift the spirit, heal the innards and bring enlightened understanding to the consumer. But I digress... Sounds like The Athlete had to kick that turkey cold. Emporia food - bad history all the way around. It's first year Ermal Owens set up the food service and it was pretty poor, border line institutional quality. Weird splotches of strange mixtures spooned on to plates with thin slices of "meat", and watery peaches on the side, that kind of thing. Mr. Athlete himself was the one who finally complained and got it turned around a little for a time anyway, I heard. That Dr Pepper jones though - bad cha-cha.

wing, I will, we will. But if you're happy out East add to the happy knowing that Kahleefonya's current situation makes the 70's look like Camelot. With all his powers even the Governator's struggling to get things under control. More rambling fish wrap - it's Easter too. Grab your chocolate bunnies! I realized a huge lesson years ago, one night in the car - on the radio, believe it or not. I was listening to "Talk Radio", back in the day when Sally Jesse Raphael and Bruce Williams had talk shows on it, back to back. I was listening to Williams's show, a financial advice and talk show and someone was saying how they had an opportunity with a company but it required moving and they had kids and didn't want to uproot them. We had our son then and The Girl was to come along within a year so I turned up the volume as I'd been mulling that general topic over myself of late. He said he'd moved 20-30 times over the years to pursue opportunities. He encouraged the person to not get locked down into a location for fear of what it would do to the kids, their own comfort level, etc. Go for it if it looked like the right thing to do. He pointed out it's never too late or too early. Others say your crazy? It's your life, live it. It gave me a whole new perspective, in 5 minutes. We'd done that before, why not do it again? What "comfort" level was I trying to maintain? At the time it was more of a discomfort level. We moved once the next year and then finally back to California - here we met a lot of people who'd bought homes years before, a few that had mortgages paid down. Now that we'd decided to settle here I wished I'd started earlier. So I just started when and where I was. That's all I could do, so that's what I did. It's worked out very well, but if I'd told myself it was "too late" it wouldn't have happened. We've had 16 years in our home - if I'd talked myself out of it because it was "too late" - hey, 16 years is a long time. I'd still be kicking myself thinking I'd wished I'd done this or that. We added an addition up top. At the time I realized the kids would be moving out in a few years, maybe it wasn't that necessary. They moved out. And back in. And out and in again. We've had about 10 years with the addition. It was the best thing I ever did, despite the feeling it might be "too late". Decisions aren't always within our direct reach, I know there are other concerns we have to balance. But... It's never too late. :) The right time is always now.

The article say it was relocated for these series on the side of the coin. Note however the absence of the word "Liberty". The statement is retained in the image of the statue of liberty. If anything needs to be stamped in 5 places in as many languages it's that word. Keep Liberty! You can have mine when you pry it from my cold dying I-Pod