Rocky

Here's what Mike's doing:

ICYMI, a staff UNION is a step toward the kind of collegial rather than hierarchical "church" structure as appears apparent in the Acts of the Apostles. Btw, does anyone remember our fellow GSCer Taxidev posting the point that RnR didn't ask for money? And IIRC, I told him more than once that I didn't believe they weren't interested in money.

You aren't accomplishing that mission. Your communications skills are easily overmatched. By that, I mean, your rhetoric is clumsy, your responses to being challenged on any point are easily picked apart, refuted. Do you not realize that everyone here realizes you completely dismiss the essence of anything and everything anyone says to you? Are you even honest with yourself about your "mission?"

Really, Mike, you ARE overmatched. You have not demonstrated any (significant) growth in understanding, communication skills, or ability to relate to the people you allegedly love and try to reach HERE with the "greatness of God's Word." In 20 effing YEARS. Maybe it IS time for you to take a time out (for at least a year).

You rest on words that YOU apparently recognize but don't really acknowledge you haven't effectively communicated.

Nobody here is able to read your mind. It MIGHT be easier to figure out what you really mean if we were face to face. We're not, so there's no body language to enhance your communication. Bottom line is you HAVE said essentially the meaning/message Socrates responded to NUMEROUS times. One time acknowledging you might not always be right doesn't outweigh. Really, Mike, you are overmatched on GSC and always have been. I don't believe you when you claim you have won GSC hearts over to your side/view. IF you see (read) that you have been misunderstood, telling the person they are wrong is an unfruitful way to clarify your message. IF you see (read) someone and you believe the person has misunderstood you, you might be more effective to say "It appears I wasn't clear, here's another way for me to state my message. I hope I succeed in making it clear. ANY time you blame the other person for getting your meaning wrong, you are BLAMING them, when they aren't able to control how you convey your intended message. That's ONE key to why people don't accept your 20 years of saying the same damn thing.

Unless there had been a policy of limiting staff service to only a year or two, that was an incredibly abusive practice. Of course there was no such limit on staff service. Exploitation, thy name is The Way International. I'm glad I was never on twi staff.

It's a good thing! Btw, it highlights the need for a twi staff UNION!

If the RandR gang hasn't had SS withholding for all or most of their employment in twi, that's a BFD. I would (and do) empathize with them in that regard. Not because of their tenure in twi, but as American citizens.

To succeed on that objective, it will take doing some emotional work. I hope you avail yourself of the insights I shared with video of Brene Brown. Her insights can powerfully assist in that regard.

Dude, I've been working on changing ever since I left twi. It's a journey. Am I willing to acknowledge your position on biblical matters of any kind? I might be, if that was the focus of my journey these days. But it isn't. Too many other, more pertinent, things to learn and to do before it's all said and done and I take my last breath.

Extra cash? Heck, I'm thankful to not be homeless.

A more contemporary scholar than Peck. Brene Brown. Has studied vulnerability for decades. The rhetoric you have used on this thread, today, is the opposite of vulnerability.

Mike, the way it happened between Gorbachev and Reagan was Gorby didn't keep insisting it was a two way street. He had to, in the words of the late M Scott Peck, empty himself of such an attitude and clearly, emphatically, indicate he was OPEN and willing to give first. Are you capable of doing the same?

Where did you find that common ground, other than in your head? I believe you believe you have found said common ground. But that's not reflected in any of your posts.

The following is a reflection on world history. The COLD WAR ended when Mikhail Gorbachev decided to implement glasnost. It's clear from the history books (and much is available on line) Russia and Gorbachev viewed themselves as victims of western imperialism. That was a legit point of view even though Europe and the US had a much different POV that was no less legitimate. I submit that the GSC cold war between Mike and the rest of us will end when Mike decides to implement glasnost. IF you're honest with yourself and with US, Mike, you'll have to recognize the corrosive impact of the rhetoric you employ. I cited a couple of examples in posts a little while ago. IF you genuinely want people here to take you seriously, you will have to engage with a different, perhaps more loving, tone.

An exquisite example, Socrates, of the opposite of Deep Canvassing. And of people talking AT you. And brilliantly illuminating the fundamental (bottom line) reason Mike has not, nor ever will (unless he figures out how dismissively unloving people perceive his schtick to be here). How do people change their minds? First step, someone listens to them BEFORE (or really, instead of) telling them how wrong they are. I sat in on a law school class session once a few years ago. The professor asked questions intended to elicit discussion. Instead of, "no you're dead wrong," he replied to students with thoughtful, acknowledging responsive follow ups like, "what about this..." or "have you thought about this angle..." Mike, all you're doing and have been doing for the better part of two decades here at GSC, is 1) talk AT us, 2) not recognize the humanity and value of the experiences that underlie the responses people have graciously (or at times, snarkily) given you. Have you given these things any thought over the years/decades?

THIS seems like a quintessential example of talking AT us. The opposite of dialogue.

Oh really? A thought (or two) occurred to me reading through some of today's posts. One of those thoughts is best illustrated and hopefully illuminated by a song from a 1969 movie. Everybody's talkin' at me. Can't hear a word they're sayin'... I guess we can be thankful. I suppose the history of humankind, of civilization, of religion is replete with people talking AT each other without really listening. A natural outcome of that kind of interaction through the millennia has been rampant wars. LOTS of them. I'm confident many at GSC have tried to listen when Mike has talked AT them. I'm confident Mike believes he was genuinely trying to engage in productive dialogue. I'm confident we'll really never, despite anyone's frustrations (including mine), ever really reach common ground to come to genuine connection with Mike. I also reflect on MY childhood history with the RC church and subsequent exposure to the different ways the RC church has accommodated and acquiesced to various local religious traditions... to ensure the survival of said RC church. Not that any of that would come into play here at GSC. But it might with various of twi's actual international "missions" in Africa or South America. But I digress.

No. I simply believe those reacting to you could be a bit wiser in how they let you push their buttons... whether that's your intent or not, it's the ultimate result. I do think it's absurd to realize we've all been having virtually the exact same discussion with NO apparent common ground found. You stated, earlier today that you believe you're correct and everyone else is wrong as it concerns twi and PFLAP. 20 years. Something or somebody really should consider figuring out how to actually "connect" such that you give genuine consideration to viewpoints on GSC you've stubbornly refused to do so. And if threads like this are going to be anything different than they've been for two decades, perhaps people here might benefit from figuring out a way to find tidbits of your message that they/we could acknowledge as valid. I don't know how to do so at this time, however.

I noticed and appreciate the effort. Thank you.

I was simply reflecting back to you the question(s) you posed to me about data. I had no expectation at all for what you would, could, or should do.

No. I don't.

He's made, apparently, 74 posts on this thread. Take your pick.