Oakspear

LOL...I try to make a habit of not telling someone what to do when I can't do what they're doing...I think giving birth is at the top of that list :D-->

Seth: I am now cleaning orange juice off my monitor after spewing it while laughing at your post

On several threads recently, I have seen people accused of lying. One accusee explained that he was misinformed and apologized for not doing his homework. He was ripped for lying anyway. Is something a lie simply because it does not equal absolute truth? Isn't it be possible to be mistaken? Isn't it possible to misinterpret events or motivations? Isn't it possible to be just plain stupid? :D--> My ex-wife was like that, if I forgot what the exact amount the electric bill was and told her it was $25.40 and it was really $24.50...holy carp! I was LYING!!! I saw it in numerous fellowships: A new person would express an opinion that was "off the Word" according to TWI doctrine. "That's a LIE" the leader would thunder. Geez, great motivation to come back --> Maybe it's been here at GS all along and I'm just noticing it now. What is a lie?

Because you can't stand to see someone throw around scientific sounding terms in support of something that has not been proven to work? Because you don't like seeing people b.s.ed by someone who tries to sound informed? There are plenty of things out there that seem to work, but where there are no tests proving a correlation, much less proof of a cause-effect relationship. Heck, there are things that I do when I'm sick that seem to work for me, which I wouldn't dream of promoting as a universal cure. But when a promoter of one of these products or whatever starts spouting scientific sounding words, and producing "data" to support the claims, then it's fair game, open season. Those who use these products are not being attacked by those, like Zixar, who produce real facts to counter the quackery. But if you want to claim that something works because the pressure is such-and-such, or the pH is something-or-another,a nd someone shows that what you claim is physically IMPOSSIBLE, then maybe you should be glad for the education. And then this quote: Does the author of this quote realize that Zixar is a bible believing Christian? He's not one of those infidel atheists.

WordWolf, the resident expert on summaries has declined to provide one, so here's what I've got so far: Rochelle sure was great LEAD was tough The truck went into a ditch People got hurt Other people waved as the plane went over HCW is shorter than he used to be A new metric to inches conversion is introduced It's all the Trustees' fault No it's not Yes it is Shut up Oldies No HCW took advanced driver training & saw the other guy do the same evasive moves that HCW had been trained to do Derailers are disrespecting Rochelle's memory It's still the Trustees' fault Good things happened in TWI dammit! Santori is reviled It's satori, you idiot, not saNtori Satori is advised to "back off" Satori is advised to apologize Satori is advised to "back the .... off" Nobody admits to watching "Arthur" Did I miss much?

squirrelly... :D-->

Yup, and interpretation means to let moose...

Post on Grease Spot. It worked for me.

I never really had anybody try to "melt my face" until 1993 or 94. I wasn't in the Way Corps, and when I was a WOW our coordinator, who was interim Way Corps, was so far from doing the program himself that he never really roads our butts about much. The first time or two somebody got in my face I was so stunned that anybody would talk to me like that I froze. Mostly I just shut up and took the crap because my then-wife interpreted any resistance to the abuse on my part as disobeying "leadership", being "out of fellowship", et cetera. Since we already had problems in our marriage I wasn't willing to strain it any further by having her think that I was possesed or something :D-->

Oldies: They still really, really, really want you to "abundantly share" and still use CSBP. Wasn't that one of your main doctrinal beefs? Maybe try going over to "Family Tables" and start a discussion about it.

One thing that a lot of parents don't realize is that very young children will tell what is not the objective truth without batting an eye. Why? Not because they are necessarily trying to deceive, but because, as "the center of the universe", the way they want things to be is the way things are. The way that they feel becomes reality. Why do you think that a child cries that a parent "yelled" at them when the parent was talking in what they thought was a normal tone of voice? Eventually we teach our children that the way that they see things is not necessarily the way things are. Children who never learn this and move into adulthood with the same center-of-the-universe mindset have problems. Some of the same kind of problems that we've been talking about.

I sometimes get piles on my bum. Does that count?

My second example, about the dogs analogy, is also an illustration of how these examples and analogies sometimes took on a life of their own. During the waning days of my "innieness", another GSer and I (who was also an "innie" at the time) were comparing notes about various errors and inconsistancies that we had found in WayAP and PFAL. One of these was "private interpretation". We believed that Wierwille had it wrong, and referred to Bullinger's How to Enjoy the Bible, as well as verses that used epilu? in questioning our respective "leadership" about it. Both of us got an explanation of how hunting dogs act, how they are trained, more than anyone could possibly want to know about dogs loosed on the game, but NO reference to a single bible verse, NO reference to a lexicon that would contain the actual meaning of the word...nothing, except a detailed explanation of the explanation.

Oh I remember that ROA. The first time that we decided to bring all the kids (SIX - in previous years one of us would stay home with the younger ones) and it rains for the first two days. It's hard for a tent to remain watertight when a freakin' RIVER is flowing through the campsite And on top of that, it the freakin' CLASS on Living Sanctified -->

Anyone who has spent any time around me knows I have a very sensitive b.s. detector. Any time one of my children was accused of anything, whether by a teacher, twig leader, another child, anybody, I would sit them down and ask them a lot of questions. I could spot an inconsistancy in a story a mile away. I could smell a lie in the next county. If they convinced me that they were wrongly accused, or their accuser had misunderstood the situation then I would back them up with every fiber of my being. If I found out that they were in the wrong, they took their lumps (not literally ), and God help them if they lied to me. Parents who unquestioningly believe everything that their "little angels" tell them are fools. Parents who never back up their children are cruel.

Are you the Bob Burke from Long Island?

Let me add that just because you think that bad things didn't happen to you in TWI, doesn't mean that bad things didn't happen to you in TWI. I find that I, and others who post here as well, rationalized away some of the crap that happened. Maybe the bad didn't seem so bad in comparison to what we thought we were learning, or was worth enduring because we were "moving the Word". To a certain extent we were conditioned to accept the abnormal as normal.

From Wierwille, courtesy of Galen: From Bullinger, copied from appendix 182 of the Companion Bible

Where did I say anything positive about this foo-foo water? To my knowledge I've never consumed any. --> And you couldn't tell that the "TM" after FEDGOV was a joke? --> and THIS section, geez, I didn't know you were into conspiracy theory ]"FED", when referring to Greenspan, is an abbreviation of "Federal Reserve", but you knew that, right? :P--> Then it's got to be evil, eh? :o--> Yup, yup, yuip. Where do the Illuminati figure into this?

Wierwille wanted us to "check it out" for ourselves, sure, but armed with off-beat definitions and assumptions. What happened to those with dissenting "research"? Shown the door.

I decry the attempted destruction of Israel by the descendents of these survivors! Decry it I say! ;)-->

Sir! Step away from the orange book! Slowly now, keep your hands where I can see them

It was the plaid suits and the ruffled shirts, that's why :D-->

There was NO weirdness in the 70's?Oh wait, you didn't say that, just that ALL OF THE WEIRDNESS hadn't arrived yet :D-->