Oakspear

It's like pole vaulting in the dark: you don't know how high you're supposed to jump, nor how long the pole is that will get you there, nor how far away the cross bar is, nor how far you missed it by. Welcome back to the fray Mike, working on the logic I see, although still operating from an unsupported premise ;)--> - we disagree as usual, but at least you use complete sentences (lots of 'em) and appear to have a grasp of spelling and basic grammar

...and how convenient to have something that can't be measured (i.e. your own believing) to blame if things don't come to pass as imagined.

Okay, so there is (according to Mike and the now deceased Wierwille) a law of believing that "simply stated" is believing = receiving, but is in reality more complicated than that. Other variables include "community believing" and the negative impact of the non-believing world. Apparently the only way to really know if you are believing is if you are receiving, because if you're not receiving, your not really believing. Naw, that's not circular at all :P-->

If the "law of believing", i.e. believing = receiving were true, then the world would be a lot more chaotic than it already is, with people "believing" for competing things. If the "law of believing" is true, then why do people not recieve what they "believe" for 100% of the time?

You say "witchcraft" like it's a bad thing ;)-->

I always look under my therapist's car when I hear somebody honk their horn while counting steps.

Heck, praise me, if you can't come up with something better ;)-->

Happy birthday my brotha'

Happy Birthday Brother

You would have to quit talking about them to accomplish that. It's not possible to forget something you constantly talk about. That's the biggest reason why they don't go away. That is why I always close my posts with the following: Lindy not talking about TWI would cause his family and friends to have TWI erased from their minds? -->

We really oughta plan for a bunch of GSers crashing one of these events. It'll be fun ;)-->

Lindy: Sometimes I forget that for you, leaving TWI meant breaking with your family, unlike most of us for whom leaving TWI meant reconciling with our families. What paperwork do I have to fill out to adopt you? :D-->

Just don't bring your critical thinking skills

I'm not an expert on conferences, but I liked the setup of the Dallas location. Is it the Wydham Anatole? Before they started trekking to Dallas, we had a few WIB's in Chicago at the Hilton. Beautiful Hotel (I was there this June for a grocery industry conference and trade show), but wasnh't set up to handle the flow of big crowds very well. You left the meeting rooms only to find yourself in narrow corridors. Dallas' meeting rooms let out into a roomy atrium; much better. I gotta say that the so-called "meal packages" were a joke. I always ate better and cheaper in the reastaurants and kiosks.

My experience of Christmas in The Way (never in the Corps or on staff) was of a confusing mish-mosh of traditional observances and self-righteous "accuracy". Most people I knew decorated trees, opened presents on Christmas Eve or Christmas morning and put up lights and other outside decorations. Some would get together with non-Way relatives. On the other hand just saying the word "Christmas" would get you a lecture on how Christmas came from "Christ-mass"; the mass celebrates Christ's death (it doesn't) so therefore saying "Merry Christmas" was equivalent to rejoicing in death --> We did the carolling with the stupid "accurate" lyrics as well, and I even wrote Way lyrics to a lot of the traditional carols myself :o--> It was my observation that TWI couldn't make up it's collective mind what it wanted to do, they railed about the pagan origins of many Christmas traditions, yet celebrated them anyway. And the name change to "Household Holiday" --> - other than the convenient abbreviation to "Ho Ho" - what was it about December 25th that made it a HOUSEHOLD holiday? -->

Sounds like it fits in nicely Evan

Explanation about what I mean by "seed" having to be figurative: Just as a reference to "the hand of God" is figurative, anthropopatheia, since God doesn't have literal hands; God doersn't have literal sperm, or seed, so it seems like a reference to "seed" would also be anthropopatheia.

Interesting point G. Wierwille pushed the point that the "seed" was literal, when if you think about it, since it's spirit, the reference would have to be figurative. I imagine this would have implications as to the spirits being permanant, and not "conditional" as we were taught in PFAL

That's deep ;)-->

Are you talking about the physical click that the mouse makes or the electronic noise that the computer generates whenever you click? I wouldn't have thought that the physical click would be that loud.

In my opinion, most of "the keys" that Wierwille taught in PFAL are common sense: read what is written, read the context, words must be understood in light of biblical meaning, not modern. Looking back, I question some of them: The three major categories of how "The Word" interprets itself were In the Verse, In the Context and Used Before (Previous Usage) Is how a word was "Used Before" necessarily an infallible guide to how it's always used? Words don't always have the same meanings or connotations. An example could be agape. We were told it meant "the love of God". But what about the verse in I John were it says that men loved darkness? How about Orientalisms? While I agree in principle that understanding various customs of the time period clear up some idioms, is it reasonable that KC Pillai's 20th century Indian culture would be nearly identical to the Judean culture of the 1st century? I'm sure I'll think of more

I'm always so proud when a Nebraska story makes the Open Forum *sniff*...just brings tears to my eyes

After my normal Monday night visit to the bar I thought that then title of this thread was "Calling All X-TWI MUSLIMS!!! :D-->

Yeah, whut ma wumin said ;)-->

Actually dmiller, you have lots of credibility, with me anyway, mainly because despite our differences of opinion and differences in what we believe, we have always had civil conversations including when we vehemently disagree. But 100% dmiller? - this magician guy as a possible "beast"? Now to Joe Believer: Let's go to your closing remark to me: "Understand better, now?" - Joe, Joe, Joe. I understand perfectly. My question did not imply that there was no such thing as spirit manipulation, or "real" magic; it suggested that your inability to spot a trick did not necessarily mean that there wasn't a trick. Now, do you understand better now? And another thing, what do you mean by "You might not have ever been out of Nebraska or maybe you have, I don't know"? Are you suggesting that if I hadn't ever been out of Nebraska then I would somehow be less able to spot the "spirit manipulation"? Pretty arrogant of you. (If that's what you were suggesting that is) And one more thing: since the "true" God is lord of the universe and omnipotent and all that, why is it dangerous that supposedly inferior spirituality is available?