socks

Indeed, the whole SITE looks and reads like a cheap tract. Some of the photos look like reprints from a 1959 "Boys Life" magazine. I expect to see an ad of a woman in a dress, apron and heels leaning over a stove with a big smile saying "I just LOVE my Westinghouse oven and ALL my Westinghouse modern conVENiences! And the food tastes GREAT!" while over her shoulder "Dad" is leaning in holding a pipe and smelling the pot roast that the dog is eyeballing, tail wagging. But that's another story, really. The Way loves it's past, as long as it doesn't include anything bad, in which case it's better to ignore it and "move on" and "freely give". You too can forgive someone today, just don't asnwer or ask any questions.

Refresh - fresh again. Yes! Request. Quest again. Repair - ? Redundant - ? If something was dundant, I'd think once would be enough. But there it is, redundant. Oddly, when I searched a little advert thingie came up with a link to Amazon.com and said "looking for dunant?" and linked me somewhere. There's no such thing as "dunant' apprently,but there was a Henri Dunant, who founded the Red Cross. That was a relief, I got scared thinking that someone MIGHT be looking for something called "dunant". Just doesn't sound right. Regurgitate - gurgitate v.i. bubble. gurgitation, n. ebullition. Ebullitions is a cool word. I'd give that a "PU", right there. Calvin seems frozen in space there. Not sure what happened. I'm not jumping any less on this end. I'll have to check, thanks dooj! :)

I dunno BW - it just occured to me, I was about to say "by and large" and I realized I had no idea why anything would be or could be "by" and "large" at the same time. So I looked it up. Frankly I don't say by and large that often, and I doubt I'll start. Maybe I should. Dunno. :blink: :blink: I can't seem to get the word refresh to show up again, hitting the Persons of Smile Icon Selection Dropdown Menu. Weird.

Per request of Dooj, I = interesting PI = Pretty interesting PUI = Pretty uninteresting RefreshRefresh :) Now that's interesting, something I pressRefreshed put "refresh" in - wonder what did that? I'm fine, DWBH. How are you? Refresh :) Hey - it did it again - it's when I pull down the smiley guys (should we call them "persons of smile"? ) and I hit the window. But if they don't show when I post this, this won't make any sense. Which might be perfectly normal. We'll have to see.

The Way reflects on forgiveness this month.

I've used and heard the phrase "by and large" for years, and known what I meant by it but didn't know, until today, exactly where it came from. Now I, socks, know and felt it would be good to pass this valuable information on so that you too can know if you don't. BY AND LARGE (Please rate this post: U = Useful UU = Unuseful PU = Pretty useful PUU = Pretty unuseful Thank you.)

Mean Not Mean X

Yah, 70 times 7 just sounds like too much, at some point, enough's enough. Whack Ow Sorry Whack Ow Sorry Whack Ow Sorry Are you sure? Whack Ow Sorry I wonder, and I'm not sure about this - but when Jesus speaks to Peter there, is He indeed "commanding", saying DO THIS or else your ears will fall off or something - or is He simply saying, "Do this", Peter. If I were you, if it were Me (did he capitalize Me? ...sorry) this is how you should live. But then I read Matthew 18, and there's some specific cha-cha in there. Repeated offenses - isn't that how the Christian views God's forgiveness? Over and over. Sorry, sorry sorry. The general state of how some people live is indeed sorry. Won't they ever learn? What if they're trying, really trying. Do one thing right here, another wrong there, again, again. Sorry. Again. Got it. Then something else. How many times does God's forgiveness extend itself? When does the well go dry? Demand is a strong word - Jesus can't demand activity in a hypothetical situation. He can state how it "should" be handled, or "go and do likewise kiddo", but in practice - who knows how it plays out? I think it's a great point too, Mr. Hammer - some things aren't mine to forgive. And doing so - in any case, I'm not completely sorted out on how that would apply to "sin" and "God"s view of anything. If I forgive someone, say awwww, let's settle this now - forget about it, we're good. I don't speak for God in that regard. That could very well be a different account. Jesus tells His followers they have binding authority at one point - do we? I have a lot of questions too, I guess.

Yea, several points, that list breaks them out, Dot. I'd consider extending forgiveness to all an option. Whether a person on the other end wants it or has responded appropriately before, during or after is up to them. I do have the option to choose to forgive and work through that process on my own. With them, preferably. There's some instances where it may only matter on a practical level to me at the time. When someone's dead or otherwise unavailable would be one. The parable of the guy on the road being helped can be considered with others of Jesus's teachings. The question about who's my neighbor looks to define the relationship in loving others as I love myself. Who is that - friend, family, member of the synagogue? Someone I know, don't know? The answer defines it by how I respond - by being the neighbor to everyone, "loving" them. A stranger on the road is loved the same as someone I might know well. The people Jesus was talking to had a hypothetical relationship with his exampe, in that they would have had an aversion to Samaritans, and a reason to avoid contact with them. So His audience there may have had an intellectual and emotional hurdle to make to apply that. In a way though, it's offered as the only answer that makes sense - perhaps not in every situation - but overall, a way to craft your own behavior. Jesus actually applies this in a form in the record of the "woman at the well", who was Samarian. Rather than refuse her as a stranger as well as a person other Jews of Jerusalem might feel obligated to avoid he engages her. When Jesus tells Peter to forgive not many times, but 70 times 7 or whatever, He implies a wllingness to forgive another past the point it would seem worthwhile. Not negating other points of this thread, but to add to it hopefully.

Fly spit - brings to mind Jeff Goldblum in "The Fly", but I'm about to eat dinner... I would apply the parable of the "good Samaritan" to forgiveness, in a practical way. The queston posed to Jesus, we all know. In response to loving your neighbor, it was "who's my neighbor?" The answer was posed as a question about the parable - who was the "neighbor", out of all the people that passed the guy? Answer - the one who helped him. Go and do likewise. The question dealt with obligation, who am I required to love as my neighbor. The answer covers it from the angle of the one doing the loving, not the one who gets loved. Put another way, don't look for neighbors, be the neighbor. Is it moral to love some, and not others? That's a good question. If love requires a blind eye, so to speak, how can I justly not apply it to some and not others? How does everyone get loved? If I'm being the neighbor doing the loving, I would respond appropriately to anyone, everyone. I don't read that as being "the same" acts to each person, because each person and situation can be different. Different ones could require different responses. Everyone gets a response, but not the same one in other words. What I do and how I do it could change, but my care and concern would be the same for all. Jesus says there that regardless of who the person is, the help given was appropriate. That's being the "Good Neighbor". But if the man had refused the help, it wouldn't have reduced the desire, compassion, there to help them. They just woudn't have gotten it. When a person refuses to recognize what they've done to cause harm to someone else, they can't receive the forgiveness, regardless of what I do. To them, there's nothing to forgive. In that sense, I would think that everything involved with a wrong done - examination, recognition, restitution - can't be truly "forgiven". It's like punching the air, there's nothing there to hit. What I do in my own brain and heart is might benefit me, but it's kind of like buying a dozen roses for a date who never shows up. If we've been "stood up" in this regard, we can still value the love we were prepared to extend, but basically, ya gotta sleep it off and find another date.

Great questions, DWBH, thoughts. I'm on the way out the door, but a couple comments - When I look at an injury, I know the extent of the injury is going to determine the extent of what needs to be done to recover, heal, get right again. While there are limitless resources available through Christ, I believe, we are the people we are, and we benefit from that recource not only in a "snap" immdediate fix-it-be-done with it recovery but for all those times throughout life when we require time, understanding, consideration, etc. Put another way, God may be fast, but we can be slow to respond. It's just the way life is, the way we are and I think we have to recognize that with patience and as much as we can muster. So, a big hit requires some big medicine. When I look at the injured person, where's my concern go? Towards the injured, first. There they are, lying hurt. What's it going to take to help them? The parpabe of the "good Samaritan" comes to mind, and Jesus's response in that record but gotta go....

On the Apologeez front - Pigs will be ice skating in hel l the day any of the Way principals like Rosaliee apologize for anything from the past. Chances - slim to none. Expect the Devil to send God a Birthday card before that happens. If they did, that would probably be a good thing but it wouldn't make anything difference, better or worse for me. Imagine the effect a fly spitting on my lawn would have, it would effect me slightly less either way, good or bad. My wife likes to say "we left before they had a chance to be really mean to us". I like to say "we left before I had a chance to get really mean with them". It's better this way, believe me. But I understand the sentiments expressed here, I think, a little anyway. As far as any chance for any of them to "make it right" with me, I don't need it. I encourage everyone to make their own lives as right as they can, like you have BeHappy, and get on with it. Look at it this way - You were in the Way. Now you're not. You win. They're still in the Way. They lose. If you need revenge, they're living it. If you need to forgive, just do it. If you don't want to, don't. You win either way. Wash their dirty bodies down with the clean cool rain of your love. Just don't be surprised if they're filthy dirty again this time next week. Not much you can do about that.

Don't worry. Be happy.

Hello Happy Person. Seems we may have known each other at one time. Greets. Since nearly everything a person truly needs to know to succeed in life and indeed, be happy, can be learned in an Eastwood movie, I would have to quote this from Magnum Force, which your posts reminded me of: A man's got to know his limitations. We lift our weight when push comes to shove, whatever it is. Knowing where we're at on the topic of forgiveness is important I think. We can't do more than we can do and we should learn to live with that even as we try to reach a little higher, if we sense there's a higher level we can achieve. One of the takes on the snip "no condemnation in Christ" that I've pondered over the years is how easy it is, how human, to condemn myself and generally feel like crap when I don't live up to what I feel I can be or what others see in me. At my best I'm probably reasonably good, not all that bad. It's depressing to see myself ever live down to my lowest standards. I feel bad and I condemn myself as being bad. But I'm not. I have hope, in a new day. Get up and put one foot in front of the other and no matter what, do it again. And again. There's really nothing else you can do. It's exhilerating to hit the brighter side and be the me I know I am. If I can forgive myself, it's the start of learning to forgive others. Others - seems easy compared to living inside this skin, somedays and getting on with it. Others - you can do whatever the hel l you want, if I forgive you that's that. Now beat it. Me, I have to live with. Try waking up to that every morning. It's no picnic, trust me. But I can only get better by moving on and up, best as I can and trying to learn to live within my limits, while working on extending them. Who knows what can be done, given the time and effort?

I like it! But I flunked. Pop Tarts Kool-Aid It just got worse from there. I have a pony.

Black patent....Stealth mode....

Captains Log - Stardate: 9.17.07.59.003....our ship!!!...the Spot....rife with...mines! Mines...everywhere....Spock! What do you make of it!? Spock: Information is incomplete Captain, but it appears that you are correct. There are mines, and they are scattered approximately every 2 meters, although in irregular patterns. I'll have to analyze the scans to see if we can - Captain: Analyze then, man! Don't talk, analyze!! I need information. Scotty! Report! Are they in the Engine Room too....??? Scotty: Aye Captain! and I don'no where in the heck they came from neither! I've got men searching now but it's going to take time!! I have to divert the Power Grid, and take all systems offline for at least --- Captain: Time? I have no time man!!! Do it!! These mines....insidious....mocking me....mocking my...ship!!! Look out there Sulu!!! LOOK OUT ------!!!!!! Bones: Jim........looks like that new First Mate went down with that one....too bad, it was his first assignment.....now....nothing we can do...nothing but... Captain: NNOOOOO! I'll never give up my ship like this! Never!! We have to do something!!! Bones: Jim, I'm just an old country doctor! I can't locate these things! The copper casings prevent them from... Captain: That's it!!! Bones, you old saw you! Copper! Of course!!!! Of COURSE! Spock, take this down.... to be continued.....or will it be....????

Thanks WhiteDove.I appreciate the time you used to find that information. WordWolf,, thanks also for your thoughts, considered as you've given. I confess I wondered myself if it wasn't over the money and reading your comments above lends to that - See....not knowing much else about it, but knowing there's been a licensing fee charged to have use of the class (contracted for a year's use?) and putting that into Geer waiving that but still requiring a 10% tax is....it makes me sick thinking about it. Which is why I don't like to think about this stuff. From a business standpoint, it's a heluva deal for the provider. After all, if the "class" will produce growth and that translates itself into money the case can be made that a percentage of that should be owed back to the provider of the materials that brought it in. Forget a set fee, the real money's in the percentages. Everybody makes out, I scratched your backs, pass a little of that scratch back this way. (break to empty puke bucket). Never mind that the "profit" being realized is - should be - owned by God and in the souls of the people hearing His Word being taught. Now - I'm thin on facts here, but this adds a whole new wrinkle to the historical face of Geer's Way, a face already showing some serious scarring and wear. I guess based on this, I'm glad that they at least refused the offer. I have to wonder what it made them think of the man making it. The Preacher in Pale Rider said it well: How much is it worth to have a clear conscience?

Well, thanks again! No, I don't have the gold top LP, but my Telecaster's a good fit these days. I am enjoying each post, and want to thank you all again - in the words of someone I can't remember, a bad sign perhaps (he he) ... "this too has passed". As we get older easy passage is SO important. I would love to share a celebratory glass of liquor with you ADan, one and all, but beer isn't my thing, unfortunately. I've always kind of wished I liked it but it's always twisted my stomach the wrong way. I do enjoy a rock glass of ice, tonic, lime and a splash of Tanq or something similar when the occasion calls for it. If the day comes that we do, it will be an homor to tighten that bolt down one more time with each and every one of you fine folks. (that kid's giving it a good run A la! Thanks!)

Thanks WhiteDove. That clarifies that period better. It is an important fact that the Way of and the Way in are two different groups. One was connected to the Way of Ohio gang, the other wasn't. If I'm getting it right - ? - the scheduled class in 1995 that didn't run was an early versoin or "the" version of the Geer class that's since been run in the U.S.A. by assorted ex-Way groups? Now I'm wondering why they didn't approve the licensing agreement. Sounds like the hosted Geer's teaching for the people that came in for it. Wonder why the class didn't fly?

Morning! Interesting. So in 1995, Geer had a working relationship with the Way IN Great Britain - is it correct to say that at that time that group didn't have a "friendly" working relationship with the Way of the U.S.A., the New Knoxville gang? I'm not challenging that - just wanted to clarify if possible. The only reason I'm asking is that I've gotten the impression 3rd hand and beyond that Geer had quit or been fired by the Way in GB, his own group, around that time but the facts are kind of mushy and I've never really tried to nail it down but reading this makes me curious. This clarifies that timeline better. A related question I have, from a spectator's view, is why he did eventually leave that group. Or did he? Does he still have affiliations with them? And another one too I guess - are the former New Knoxville-rooted Way of/in/from Europe, the collective groups that formed from New Knoxville's outreach back in the day - all severed from the Ohio Way? Just curious, if you do know. Thanks!

A-Spot, I'm not sure what you'd be picking on. I was trying to sound out what might be the reasoning behind some of the ex-Way teachings that I've heard teach that God doesn't in fact "know" what "we're going to do", IE, foreknowledge. I don't really know first hand what's being taught in those arenas these days but as I stated, I suspect/guess it might involve the idea of man's free will, as I've read that argument in other places. That's not my own opinion though, based on a variety of sources. If you reread what I wrote you'll see it isn't a postulation of biblical statements for or against but rather a consideration on an aspect of the nature of God. To my mind, questioning God's "foreknowledge", His ability to know the "future" and what anyone person might do or not do, isn't really a reasonable position considering who and what God is, or at the least appears to be. The "future", what you or I might do or decide tomorrow or 10 years from now, deals with time. I don't think God functions in that environment the same way as we do. We may not know what we'll choose to do a year from now because we're not there yet. I suspect that God is already "there", and that our experience of life as a sequence of events is unique to the physical laws we function under. Put another way, looking back on a life of say 78 years, everything that happened is knowable and all the decisions that were made are history.

Golly! Thanks! 57 feels pretty good. Much like 56 did, which wasn't that much different than 55. Ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss ssssssssssssssssssss orry, I dozed off there for a second. I hate it when that happens! Anyway, Thanks!!!

Happy Birthday! Glad to share this fine day with you Patriot! :)

I hope so coolchef! I'll take that on faith! Haaaa! That chocolate cake looks the cake on my face right now! Very nice Rainbow, thanks. I still have trouble with a fork! Or maybe it's getting harder as I get older! I do thank y'all. Youse all. Alla youse. Thanks!