johniam

Wow. I'm #55. (a double nickel guy??) But Pirate 74 is close behind. I average 3 posts every 2 days or so. Excathedra averages about 9 posts per day.

quote: As one poster pointed out earlier, this ain't the same stuff we remember from the 60s and 70s. This is pot on steroids,so to speak, that is circulating in the current market place. Yeah, when I started in 70/71 it was $10 per oz. for OK stuff and $20 for better stuff. But you could smoke that all at once if you wanted. By 1973/74 it was $30 for OK stuff and $40 and up for good stuff. Once I bought stuff the guy said was cured with heroin. It was "one toke" as we called it, but it was rare then to get stuff that good unless you paid $50 or $60 per oz. Had a friend who would put crushed ice and pink chablis in a bong like it was a religious ceremony. Yeah, I, too, don't miss being paranoid and forgetful.

Agape's piano player Val Linneman (sp) wrote that song 'Father and Child' that Claudettee covered. Real tear jerker. I'd love to hear Agape's version of that one again.

There are many verses in the gospels where Jesus exhorts people to follow him, but it is a different Greek word (akoloutheo). I think it is significant that Paul encourages us to imitate him as he imitates Christ (1 Cor. 11:1); imitate us AND the Lord (1 Th. 1:6). I assume that means to imitate his walk with God, not his flesh (drinking Drambouie, smoking cigars, dirty jokes, etc.). As I said before, I enjoy Drambouie and risque jokes, but that is who I am, and VPW (or any other leader) have nothing to do with it. Your post makes a good point in that I don't think we are ever encouraged by Paul to 'copy-cat behavior'. I think his meaning is completely different. Sorry, guys, I forgot to log in again. This is Jean not John.

I remember during my AC (Emporia '84) LCM kept showing scenes from the movie 'Stayin' Alive'. This heavily influenced his portrayal of the seed of the serpent in AOS.

Yeah, I've got a couple of Cracker Barrels on my route. Food's OK. The nostalgia items can be pricey, but they have lots of DVDs of old TV shows like the Rifleman, Underdog, I love Lucy plus music. I hear songs on their music track that I don't hear anywhere else. Us baby boomers are sure a generation for nostalgia.

Which great lake is that? I got lots of fond memories of growing up 30 miles away from a fresh water 'ocean'.

I got to add my 2 cents to this one": That radio broadcast in 1938 or whenever it was. Orson Welles was involved in it. Something about war of the worlds and how space ships landed in New Jersey and it caused a large scale panic in that area. My mom and dad listened to that live and it didn't phase them. Of course, they were in MO, not NJ, but ever since that happened, various media people have tried to re create the hysteria if they could. Y2K is just one example of this and this 2012 thing looks like another.

Uniform is uniform, but sometimes asymmetry is more uniform.

quote: Maybe Meyers has a point.. Brothers, not Meyers. You seem to be in stooge mode. quote: Women have made some strides in our society (even as some minorities have), but there's a long way to go. Yes they have, and there was definitely a need for reform, but it's all too clear that minorities can be just as bigotted as white people and women can be just as chauvenistic as men. This isn't 1920 or 1947! Yeah, right, let's build monuments to Jackie Robinson and Susan B. Anthony and anyone who does not bow down when they hear the sound of the sackbut, psaltery trumpets, etc. shall be cast into a burning fiery furnace. You nailed it.

quote: In our curent culture, when a wife walks away from a marriage, it is a sin. It does not matter why....no one even ever asks....she is wrong, possessed, tricked by the devil, wanting too much, using the man, over-dramatic....whatever. Folks will believe what they want to believe...and nine times out of ten, it is the man who wails to the high heavens about the "injustice" done to him, how he is a "victim", etc... Yet how many times do we see the woman's side of the story? If she speaks up....whether wife, failed relationship, girlfriend, whatever....if she speaks up she is a "b*tch" an opportunist", a "user", "poisioning others minds". This is not just relegated to twi and it's rather dizzying circles...it is evident in every single walk of life, every forum, and any where where humans interact. ---*--- I don't know where you are getting your information from, but I heard on the radio not terribly long ago that 75% of divorces in this country are initiated by the woman. One of the so called experts who commented on this was Dr. Joyce Brothers; she said the reason for the lop sided percent was that men in general are stupid and can't see reality if it bit them and so women have to take the lead. Every job now shows a video called 'Respect in the work place'. Who do you think is deemed worthy of this respect? The men? Nope! I see no evidence that men are actually catching a break anywhere. If there's a conflict it's always spun by the media as the man's fault until proven otherwise.

quote: johniam, it is clear you will always have some reason that physical violence toward a wife is justifiable. Sad, very sad, I'm sadder for jeaniam--sad because she has to live with a man that holds these views and even sadder because she defends those views. It is clear to me that some of you are just going to see whatever you want to see. Like LCM used to say, there's no place like numb.

quote: I think that the person in a given partnership who has more power (i.e. physically stronger) rightfully bears greater responsiblity, and should exercise more restraint. Usually it is the man. Why not be the first one to agree. be the one not to raise the voice above normal conversational level.. If somebody is SCREAMING at you, it is pretty obvious that they don't particularly want to hear what you are saying at the moment. NEVER threaten, scream, or call names.. NEVER strike out with harsh words, in anger.. I really think the tongue can be controlled, unless someone is missing that part of the brain that enables the muscles to hold the mouth shut.. ESPECIALLY- NEVER strike physically. There is no excuse.. I wouldn't strike a woman.. even if she was striking me. I'd walk off. 99% of the time, exiting is a valid option. If a man can't stop himself from striking a woman, he has no business even being around women. Or even verbally abusing a woman. Whether he's "baited" into doing it, or not.. I think if you have to resort to extreme measures to get someones attention, something's wrong.. Why do you put it all on men. Sounds like back door chauvenism; like you think that women are too stupid and undisciplined to control their tongues. Like the man has to always be the bigger person. If that's true then men and women are NOT equal. If that's true then relationships between men and women are no better than relationships between humans and their pets. That's not God's perspective.

quote: I've stated this before...the bible was written during a time when people thought differently than we do today...different culture, different norms...that does not detract from the message of the risen Christ and our salvation Nor does it detract from the bible being God breathed. Our salvation doesn't begin in the next life; we have benefits NOW! Do you remember that Walter Cummins made a point of differentiating between what scriptures meant to first century believers and what they mean to us? Rigid legalism has never worked for God's people. Not in the OT when Solomon and Rehoboam "oppressed the people", not when the Pharissees laid grievous burdens on people, not when the believers of Jewish background tried to get the gentiles to be circumcized, and not today in fundamentalist style churches (including TWI under LCM). Funny, one book on cults in the 70s actually admitted that cults were the "unpaid bills of the church". Likewise, GSC is some of the unpaid bills of TWI.

quote: In my experience many times the man initiates a fight by what he does or does not do and then the woman starts verbalizing, eventually she has to yell to get the mans attention. It escalates. Now of course this is not always what happens...but in a majority of cases when traced back to the actual beginning... Is it possible that what the man "does not do" to "initiate the fight" is agree with his wife? Is it possible that she doesn't yell to get his attention, rather she yells to bully him into submission? quote: It is possible that these women that "start" the fights are asking for or expecting something unreasonable from the man. And then the man gets frustrated because of this and verbally "strikes" back at the woman. Physical abuse almost always starts with verbal abuse. Some women have a warped sense of entitlement. Just like the stereotypical male chauvenist who expects sex on demand 24/7 regardless of headache, menstruation, pregnancy, fatigue, etc., these women expect to be heard 24/7 no matter how inconvenient it may be for the man. If there's a time sensitive situation, that's one thing, but sometimes we all just need our space. quote: Certainly a woman may confront a man because he just came home drunk at 2 am and has nothing left of his paycheck...and she "starts" a fight. Or a woman may ask the man if he will watch the children while she goes shopping and he refuses because they will interrupt the game and she "starts" a fight. This is preventable. In the 2 above examples the man is the unreasonable one. Sounds like things the man was accustomed to when single; just needs to make the adjustment. For the record, yes, if a man marries a woman, then she has the reasonable expectation that he will spend time with her much more than with his old friends.

quote: Now mind you this is only my experience in law enforcement for 17 years and in one County in one State. Are you an officer, or a dispatcher? quote: In my experience domestic abuse cases run about 60/30/10. 60% of the time the man starts it, 30% of the time the woman starts it and 10% of the time it's a mutual slug fest. Just to be clear about something: when I said the woman initiates it, I meant verbally, not physically.

quote: ...did it ever occur to anyone that Paul's "letters" were his own opinions based on his cultural prejudices?... OH!...but Groucho, Dr. Wormwood assured us that every verse in the bible is God's will!...Hogwash!...Paul of Tarsus was a pyschotic Christian killer who bought into the strict thinking of the pharisees (before he converted)...and all this was 2000 years ago! He wrote these letters to people who had a TOTALLY different culture and way of thinking than we do today....and you're going to hang your hat on THAT? Yes. So now you believe that Christ died in vain? There's no divine nature to be partaker of? Everybody's only as good as their worst mistake? No thanks.

quote: John, I do realize that the post in question was written in 2005 and written during the heat of an argument. And I do want to give you the benefit of the doubt so I am asking you just as Exie is, "do you really believe that?" I would add "still?" Well, truth...I didn't ASK all of them. Maybe 90% is a bit high. I think there's this public perception that all domestic disputes are the man's fault; that men are guilty until proven innocent, and they're NEVER proven innocent because it happened behind closed doors and we gotta keep these uppity men in their place and...you get the idea. In 1 Peter it says that a wife's "good conversation" (behavior) can cover for the husband if he's off. This happens a lot, thank God. But this implies that a wife can help a situation go south as well. I think this happens a lot, too. I just want a level playing field. Also, full disclosure is not a biblical concept. People have a right to privacy in their lives.

Mr. Natural? Naw, Mr. Natural's got a beard.

Belated, perhaps, but congratulations.

Jean's alzheimer's example is good: sometimes a man may have an emotional issue with something in which he really needs another pair of eyes to work with. Abigail posted that Abraham had to be told by God that Sarah was right, that Hagar and Ishmail should leave. Abraham certainly had emotions to deal with over this. Like Jean said, I didn't want to put my mom in a nursing home; she was fiercely independent and I had emotional issues with this, but she was ultimately better off in the nursing facility. We had 2 young children at the time and, while nothing bad happened when my mom was staying with us, the staff at the nursing home told us later of stuff she did there that would have definitely been unsafe for the kids if she were still with us. I think there should be a sort of tiebreaker clause in a relationship, though, because to me it's not decent and in order to have strife over something, especially if there's a time sensitive situation at stake. I think the husband owes it to the wife to listen to her pov. If the wife gets it in her head that the husband is not really listening to her, but just waiting for her to stop talking so he can "pound the gavel" on the situation, well, that's not good. Of course, I'VE never done that. I thought somebody might have issues with Gary King. Irrelevant to the point I was making. Just for the record, that was the only time I ever saw him make a public presentation; I have no "special place in my heart" for him. Perhaps the connotative meaning of the word 'abuse' leans toward a chronic character flaw not shared by all, but I don't think it's too far of a stretch to consider that there's first degree (premeditated) and second degree (heat of the moment) abuse. Apparently some posters cannot disagree with me without bringing up "past sins". Says more about you than me.

A few things come to my mind when I read this thread: 1) EVERYBODY ABUSES! Some posters come off as though only the most vile devil possessed creepy individual ever abuses, but we all do it. VP used to say that all forms of energy are measured in terms of the positive...cold is merely the absence of heat, darkness is the absence of light...etc. Perhaps it is sound to say that abuse is the absence of love. We all see both love and abuse in the homes and schools we grow up in. I admit that there's a difference between premeditated abuse, where someone makes a personal doctrine out of abuse and rationalizes that it's really love, the kind of abuse alluded to on this thread, and what I will call 2nd degree abuse, where people are under pressure in the heat of the moment, become impatient, and abuse rather than love, just because it can be done RIGHT NOW. We all do that, especially here on GSC. 2) NOBODY was forced to stay in an abusive relationship; coerced, maybe, but not forced. In summer of 1980 I was at Emporia for some special event. Lots of people were there, including VP. At one point someone was teaching from the rear porch (they had everything set up outside, music included). I think it was Gary King, then limb cordo of Kansas. Can't remember what he taught on biblically, but at one point he said "If you really feel you were doing better in life before TWI and THAT'S what you'd like to do again, go ahead and do it; there's no shame. I'm here because I want to be." Kinda like that. There were several occasions back then that I would hear that same basic message; that we had free will. Perhaps over time the message of "Be committed for a lifetime; no excuses!" drowned out the free will message, especially during LCMs last years, but nobody stuck a gun to our heads.

I wouldn't be afraid to go to a fellowship or 2. I had a funny experience in 1987. I lived in MI but I vacationed in LA for 4 days. The trip was in Sept. so at the ROA 1 month before I went to the Way of the USA tent and asked them if there was a twig I could go to while in LA. No problem, but the funny part was that ... OK, the twig was run by a couple, and I called them and talked to the man and he gave me directions, but he didn't tell his wife I was coming. So I get there and I happened to walk in the door right behind a trinitarian who had been at the twig off and on for a month or so. The wife assumed I was "with" the trinitarian because she'd never seen me before. She thought to herself, whew, it's going to be a spiritually rough night I guess. Then, during manifestations, she said would "someone" SIT and interpret, didn't name anybody, so I did it. Then she's like...WTF! Wait a minute! Who IS this guy? She told me after the fellowship was over and we had a good laugh. But THAT'S how I would like to go to a TWI fellowship. Incognito. I'd just sit there and act like a new person, just taking everything in. They'd ask me well, what do you think and so forth. I'd probably be tempted to say something like, "I believe that Jesus is Bhudda; you people are of the devil!" Something like that. But doing that might be fun at this point; I've been out for almost 13 years.

I once heard that when Sir Arthur Conan Doyle had Sherlock Holmes get killed (finally got sick of writing about him) he received a lot of death threats so to appease those fans he wrote "memoirs' or something. Previously unreleased stuff. I also heard that when books came out from popular writers back then that there would be long lines around the publishing houses on the release date. So the madness has always been there, even if this was a spoof.

quote: But I would love to hear her again someday. Her name-Vicky Allen. She was present at CFFM events. Let's see...they debuted the Tipp City property in June of '98. Perhaps that was when I saw her with her sister. I know that organization has changed somewhat since then, but you might try the CFF website; they might have a link to her music.