Oakspear

Kathy: Notice that I didn't say what you experienced wasn't real, or that you didn't experience it, or that it wasn't divine. What caused you to believe that this source of comfort was identical to the god of the bible? Assuming for the sake of argument that you weren't hallucinating, did the source of this "vision" personally lay out his agenda, or did you assume that he was the deity described in the bible? Yup, but still, people "know" things that can never be tested, verified, or repeated. Me, I have no problem with this. I do have a problem when those people try to push what they "know" on the rest of us.

time to log off...

darn, I usually go for the condescending snob attitude whenever possible!

Let me give you an example: My son moved this weekend. He asked me to help him move, I agreed to help him last night. I showed up at the appointed time, and helped. I demonstrated reliability of one sort. However, if my son had asked me for a large sum of money, or to help him on a different day when I had to work, I would have had to say no. There was really no way my son could have known in advance what my answer would have been. He knew that I would help him if I could, but had no accurate way to predict what would prevent me from assisting him. I believe that God is like that, if he exists. You ask God for stuff, you pray, but you don't really know if he is going to come through. Can anyone truthfully say that every time they prayed for something they received the desired result? Even in a narrow category such as health? Doubt it I guess I'll have to go back and re-read what you said the rsonse from God was. Okay...I just read your story. Very moving. I'll not question its reality (at least for the sake of this discussion) But it kind of illustrates what I am saying. What about the image that you perceived led you to believe that it was the god that you now worship?

How is this reliability demonstrated? But of course!

I don't think age is an issue. Cultural prejudices are set pretty early, even if active believing in them isn't

How is this reliability demonstrated?

I have no desire to explain my understanding of the theory of evolution, even to someone who didn't smack evolutionists around B) Seriously though, I didn't think you were the type to get that frustrated with someone else's beliefs, the "smacking" reference seemed out of character. Thanks for the explanation, and as usual, i don't need help

Warning! - maybe a little. Let's assume for the sake of argument, that the "spiritual" experiences that people claim to have are real. That they really feel some kind of divine connection. It's been my observation that these experiences are interpreted in whatever way the person's mind is inclined to believe. The Christian might say it's God communicating to him. The Atheist might identify a natural phenomenon to explain it. A believer in reincarnation might see it as a memory from a past life. An ESP enthusiast could interpret it as telepathy. The UFO researcher would see an alien abduction as a possibility. The pagan might decide that the goddess was involved. But most of these folks would KNOW that the experience was what they were predisposed to believe it was. Unexplained phenomena have always been with us, and probably always will. Religion is our way to try to make sense of them.

We can "know" plenty, without being able to quantify it, we just can't prove, or demonstrate it to others. For example, I love my wife, I know that I love my wife, there is nothing that can talk me out of it. However, I cannot prove that to anyone else, although they can choose to take my word for it. On the other hand, although many believers will say that God (or whatever they call the "higher power") is known to them, loves them, listens to their prayers, has "a relationship with them", none of them can, with any reliability, predict what their god will do in any situation. Granted, none of us can reliably predict what our friends, neighbors, co-workers or children will do in a given situation either. Sure, there are formulas, and "holy scripture", and other so-called guarantees, but does your god do what you expect him to do, or even what he supposedly said he would do? Which raises the question (at least in my mind ), is God someone who can be counted on? It says that he can in the bible, but can he really?

Hmmm....I think both "sides" in this discussion stipulate that man exists. George was illustrating the relative tangible values of science and religion (or, if you prefer, a realtionship with God). Of course science couldn't have proceeded if man didn't exist, and would have proceeded whether man was literally created on the sixth day, or "crawled out of an amoeba". Now that's the way to conduct a proper discussion! I don't know, that you're kidding? :wacko:

Wow, Mrs. W wasn't perfect then, was she? Seriously though, this is a perfect example of someone high up in TWI making a decision based on little or no genuine knowledge.

I didn't disagree with Martindale's rationale for doing a new class. True or not, much of PFAL was dated, many of the religious doctrines that Wierwille addressed in PFAL were unlnown to folks in the 90's and 00's. PFAL could have been retaught in a much more exciting and modern format. WayAP didn't do it. It was a collection of pitiful attempts at rebuttals of misunderstandings of scientific theories and religious doctrine (or perhaps deliberate strawmen)

Good points in the last post George. I agree that religion often promises the moon, and just doesn't deliver. Then the little follower can't admit that they didn't get the bang for their buck as advertised, so they promote the spirituality du jour as well. While I still have my agnostic card, I do have religious beliefs and experiences, but I'm not setting my sights real high either. Nor am I so convinced about the objective truth of my experiences that I try to convince anyone else. Works just fine for me. I've also given up on the idea that God, or goddess, or the "all" or whatever, is out there making decisions for me. earlier this year, after being passed over for a promotion, I was told "I guess the Universe didn't want you to have that job" - my reply, which has become my credo, was "Well, next time, the universe damned well better ask me!"

It was me...I killed him...I killed the all!

The original sin of mankind was xeroxing

Ah...that makes sense. If it's stupid or "off the Word", we must have been misunderstanding "doctor"

It was in 2001 when I left

It all goes back to Wierwille and his brother signing over their inheritance to The Way, Incorporated. Whether one thinks that Wierwille had genuine godly motives or was a scam artist from the start, he benefited from and had access to ALL of TWI's assets, without being burdened by propert taxes, income tax, etc. We were so fooled, thinking it was our ministry. Who the h*ll is embarassed by a breach in protocol anyway? :blink: Does this remind you of anything? <_< Is this thread an eye-opener or what?

Did Wierwille personally own this golf cart? Or did it belong to The Way International? I'm thinking the latter. It wasn't really "his stuff" then, was it? Martindale learned this lesson well when composing his "loyalty letter" and throughout the nineties. Efforts to change were met with a tyrannical response and an invitation to leave "and don't let the door hit you in the rear" Good question. We all know many people who had good common sense. "Spiritual perception and awareness" implies something beyond what you can perceive with your 5 senses.

They "have fellowships serving the Word of God throughout the United States" Apparently no longer in all fifty of those states!

I thought that they kept it at 4 years, but changed it to:Candidate Year: Just like the old "apprentice year" Apprentice Year: Required to be a Way Disciple, and then work on staff Two Years "In Residence" :unsure:

I wasn't in the Corps, I am depending upon the testimonies of those who were in, and who testify to the difference between what was presented and what was later expected Okay, you do an apprentice year in exchange for future instruction. Makes sense. I think the difference of opinion here involves, not the definition of "lifetime", but the definition of "service". Most Way Corps grads would have been glad to use their training for a lifetime in Christian service running fellowships, teaching, "undershepherding", counselling, etc. Most would have also been glad to accept assignments in "areas of concern, interest and need". The problem is that a desire to define for oneself what that service would constitute, usually got you dropped from the Way Corps.

Oh, I don't know, screened a little better. Pulled people off at the first sign of trouble. Gee, practiced some oversight :huh:

Yeah, I have a question. Where does it mention giving up the freedom to live wherever you want to, working in the field you were educatted in, bringing up your children as you see fit. Where does it mention the "committment" to provide free labor? Having "A Liftetime of Christian Service" on the cover does not negate the aforementioned promises that it was a "four-year" committment.