Mike

I just noticed on the main index that there are over 3000 guests reading the board at this minute. In looking at the "Last Click" list many of these guests area reading relatively nondescript threads, even mere banter. What's this all about? Are we being invaded? Is it merely a software artifact?

socks, Thanks for the info on posting pictures. I converted the illustration to .JPG and I successfully uploaded the picture. Then I found the button labeled "insert image" but it asks for an URL. What's next?

Oh Pulleeeeeeze Tom! And the rest of you, too! I was making light hearted banter with sirguessalot. I don’t feel like putting the effort into answering. It would take too much time, and require too much remembering. Some of those topics I delved into over 30 years ago, some less, but I’ve dispensed with them all. Read the context. I think I stated or implied all of this when I posted that. I think you’re tying to waste my time and I don’t buy it. Ask sirguessalot if he wants to take to the time to compose and type out the relative drivel for which you so wait with baited breath. ******* Ok, for reviews, these two referenced subjects are “free will” and “God’s foreknowledge.” Hold onto your hat WW, I’m going to be agreeing with you more than usual here. I have seen a tiny bit of what you (and Raf?) put together on foreknowledge and thought it was good. For many years I thought these two subjects were almost entirely absent from the surviving scriptures. Seeing a little of your work on foreknowledge here a few years ago got my attention. I also was influenced by the attitude of my fellowship teacher here in San Diego who seemed to have the same view as you on it. Since then I’ve been slowly changing my position on this. In fact, I’d very much like to have some links to the work you have posted on these two subjects. *** Now for a little disagreement. When you say “adequately” I take minor exception. I’d say that what is stated in the scriptures SHOULD be adequate for the average modern reader, but we know there are glaring exceptions. In the 70’s I almost fell into a hole in thinking my Young’s Concordance research was on the money as I noticed that those two specific phrases (foreknowledge [of God], and free will) are not OVERTLY treated at all the way we do in modern language and culture. Then we saw in the mid 90’s that Chris Geer and his minions fell into the same hole regarding foreknowledge. Then later the mighty Schoenheit and his CES research team jumped headlong into the same hole. (...reminds me of Rebus Canneebus & Co. in Firesign’s “Everything You Know Is Wrong” all jumping into the Comet Kahotek’s hole to the center of the Earth...) And aren’t ALL Calvinist’s in the same or similar hole regarding free will? It looks to me that these two concepts were culturally ASSUMED as part of the background against which the scriptures were written. These assumptions seem to pop out at times, but not as overtly as some modernists would like. Now in our culture the same two concepts are ASSAILED, and the pop-ups not easily seen. I see the cultural influences that have pretty well obscured these two concepts, and what may be adequate for one believer may be less than adequate for others. In the 70's it was Dr’s insistence (by revelation) on the reality of free will and foreknowledge that pulled me back up to safety. Any light you may share on finding these concepts in the ancient scriptures will be well received by me.

Tom, The terms I used there are my own, but they adequately describe things that go on in those circles, otherwise sirguessalot wouldn't have been able to follow me there. Using the internet or any paper reference books will not help very much in this area as it is too rarefied a field. I suggest you hang out in bookstores in the cognitive sciences section and the physics section if you want to follow me on those subjects. However, I rarely bring them up. It was Todd that brought it out of me since he and I have talked about these things before. For brain stuff read anything by the Patricia Churchland, Paul Churchland, Antonio Domasio, V.S. Ramachandran, Daniel Dennett, and the writers they cite. "The Astonishing Hypothesis" by Francis Crick (the DNA guy) gets into this a lot. For the physics try Heinz Pagel or Nick Herbert. Nick's "Quantum Reality" is a must. Also look for "The Dancing Wu Li Masters" and "The Tao of Physics." All these people and books are wikigooglable. One of the problems with Internet research is that it gives the illusion that the researcher finds everything on a subject if the key words used hit the target. Another problem with this method is that if just the right keywords are NOT used in searching, then it gives the illusion that you may have just suffered from: that the subject doesn't exist. This same problem comes up in Biblical research. Try looking up "free will" or "foreknowledge" in your Youngs Concordance. Many have and come away with the conclusion that those two subjects are not treated adequately in the Bible or that they don't even exist.

EAT it!

Todd, A lot of the types of thinking you do now I tried 30 and 40 years ago. I'm just done with it, that's all. It was fun and useful... to a point. There are a a lot of quantum/Zen connection enthusiasts who might disagree with this. Same with some artificial intelligence explorers, who deny any difference between a machine's "mind" and the brain's mind, and hence the difference between subjective and objective. And Cantor's infinities can suggest many spiritual invitations.

Hi Todd, Those were MY suggestions for MY "deeper-than-traditional imagery" kinds of inquiry. You seem to often suggest that, deeper-than-tradition kinds of inquiry. Upon re-reading my post I can see that I did not adequately express this.

Sirguessalot, Greetings oh most complicatarian from the artworld. Before seeing certain things in the last stages of written PFAL (magazine form, late ’84-early ’85) these recent years, I had looked deeply in the areas you often suggest here. Artificial Intelligence, Quantum Mechanics, Godel/Cantor Mathematics, Brain Anatomy, just to name a few. In those days I looked for modern scientific correlates for devil spirits and saw some. Here’s an example. One of the most powerful features of elementary calculus is it’s ability to describe and handle the very complex idea called “relative maxima and minima.” Some of you may need to wikigoogle your way through this to follow me now. In ordinary calculus the idea of relative minima is akin to an electron being stuck in an atom’s nucleus. It also corresponds to getting stuck in a rut in real life. It also corresponds to a lying influence, i.e. a devil spirit. In all of these related yet distant concepts the great thing to celebrate is that there IS “Release From Your Prisons,” which is the title of the first chapter of the Blue Book. The correspondence is that in relative minima calculus the tools are there to look (and to know that it’s worth looking) to see if there isn’t a way out of the minima. The function can take on different shapes and we can know of other minima by pushing the appropriate buttons. In quantum mechanics the electron escapes it’s nuclear prison by waiting for it’s probabilistic tunnel time to come up and it just ooozes out. In God’s Word we can see His Son has totally defeated the liar and set the captives free, casting out the devils. When we look hard enough at him and accurately enough we become like him. It’s only here in the Word (not at all in math or physics) that we see THE believer versus the defeated spiritual powers. Seeing the believer, Sirguessalot, has circumvented my need to “go beyond” the idiomatic imagery of the lost ancient scriptures and the recovered PFAL texts. They suffice just fine. *** I could have gone on with relative maxima and everyday life correspondents like illusions grandeur and “settling for straw.” Decades ago in computer programming I toyed often infinite loops and possession, and of course later the idea of a computer virus came up. Biological viruses and devil spirits or possession were actually discussed in some ACs I’ve heard. They didn’t come up in mine or in the taped ’79 version. But the only benefit of my “goings-beyond” the vocabulary and idiomatic imagery of the Word that I’ve ever seen is the ability to rid ourselves of embarrassing guilts-by-association that crop up when we want to hang out with the fiercely anti-biblical luminaries of modern academia. That’s not good enough for me. I want to DO what Jesus did, not just talk in circles about it. It’s how we interact (exchanging the Word) with the other elements in the Body of Christ that we see the Christ in us go from the HOPE of glory to the GLORY!

Ok, let's get technical. Paul Tibbets dropped a Nuclear Fission Bomb in 1945. It works by splitting the Uranium NUCLEUS, and the results are no longer Uranium atoms. As a result, the term "atom bomb" does not apply well here. Several years later the H-bomb was developed. It works by smashing together Hydrogen nuclei, and is best called a Nuclear Fusion Bomb. It's much bigger than Fission Bomb, although the fission process is employed to execute the smashing stage. An "atom bomb" or an "atomic bomb" is how Hollywood and the media labeled both of the above devices, but technically, those terms would fit better with chemical explosives like nitroglycerin, dynamite, and gunpowder. These use unaltered atoms and their outer electron shells only and don't involve their nuclei.

So Han is the solo knower... I think you're on to something, WG.....

I think the AC was a work in progress. As we screwed it up Dr tweaked it to get us (or those listening) back on track. I also think that it was for feelings similar to yours that in Dr's last/lost teaching, in his final instructions to us, mastering the Foundational Class and mastering the Intermediate Class was emphasized (through repetition), but the AC was twice missing from the list. Without mastering the Foundational materials, as Dr often pointed out in the beginning of his ACs, the AC is useless. But SERIOUSLY, even though the Star Wars trinity push is ridiculous, who can deny that Princess Leah is Mother Mary, the Blessed Virgin?

I heard that it was the roasting uranium over a campfire built inside a giant microwave oven that was the big breakthrough in the development of the atom bomb. ...but I could be wrong. ...but this post may someday be cited as the origin of a late 2007 urban legend, so I don't mind being wrong.

WG, I think a lot of this AC stuff was taught to us because HAD IT NOT, we'd have fallen into the same abuses EVEN FASTER. This happens to many churches when the Gospels are read, because they are loaded with devil spirit situations. I think Dr wanted to help steer us away from those typical churchy abuses, which he surely saw plenty of, by teaching us these LIMITS on Discerning of Spirits. It's too bad few heeded them. I helped design that poster illustration for just this purpose, that many were not reading their AC syllabus and few were walking in love to others. You're right, it was wrong what was practiced. Efforts were made to fix it but few listened.

Yes, each photon energy is described by E=hf, but I didn't want to get that technical. Yes, this is the exact example that settled it for me years ago. Like with campfires, I just make sure I don't fall into the oven. *** I think I've seen neon bulbs light up when held close to an electrical outlet, and not making contact. Maybe it was when held close to the spark plug wires of a running car engine.

Tom, I actually don't know the answer to that question. I do think it's worth pondering. I agree. When we finally get the information correct and complete then it CAN be useful and helpful. With partial or incorrect information much damage happens, especially when love is absent. In the early 80’s I was directed to help a grad artist to come up with an illustrated poster of the “16 Keys to Walking in the Spirit.” Key #8 is “Do not tell all you know. Receive Word of Wisdom.” To illustrate this we came up with a grad ministering to another who has a little devil standing on his shoulder, like in the cartoons. The ministering grad is looking lovingly at the face of the tormented one while reaching around his back to flick the devil off the shoulder from behind. The tormented one doesn’t even see this, because all the action takes place behind him. It looks to him like an one-arm hug is taking place. The Word of Wisdom spoken out by the grad in a soft, kind voice is “Hey, don’t think of the devil so much. Just magnify the Word!” The devil is sent flying by the mere flick of the grad’s finger. It was one of the best illustrations in the poster. It was much needed. I'm trying to post a .tif file of this illustration but it's not working. Anyone know how?

Sally, having swallowed cheese, Directs down holes the scented breeze, Enticing thus with baited breath Nice mice to an untimely death. Geoffrey Taylor 1933 "A Dash of Garlic" Tom, you missed my "wink." You are baiting me with your demand, as usual.

There are two “dangers” with microwave ovens that are no longer brought up much in public debate, but many years ago they were. I haven’t kept up with the subject for years, but maybe someone here has. 1. Leaking radiation from the oven might cause unwanted chemical reactions in the living cells of humans operating the device. I think this has been largely solved with shielding, but it still raised concerns in some. It’s a lot like the dangers of using cell phones excessively or living under high voltage power transmission lines. All three of these “dangers” are admitted by all to be very subtle and needing much more study to be definitive. Of the three, I suspect cell phones to be the worst. 2. Radiation within the oven is thought to POSSIBLY break some food molecules at unusual spots, making them susceptible to unknown chemical reactions in said food, which may possibly yield carcinogenic material that is consumed with the food. I just recently heard that these kinds of chemical reactions are even more likely with the molecules in the plastic containers that house the food. Arguments against #2 (and somewhat for #1) note that the energy needed to do this is higher than what the microwave can produce, but the idea of resonant frequencies casts some uncertainty here. Normally sound doesn’t have the energy to break a Champaign glass, but if the sound just so happens to be at the resonant frequency of the glass, then it does break. I too take my chances with my microwave, but I do try to remove the food from the plastic packaging first. I figure there’s much worse out there to “worry” about. For instance, I will not eat anything that comes from China or a "99 cent store." Nor will I plug in any device from said locations into my house electrical outlets. At any rate, I think LCM may have had some sound thoughts on this subject, but they may have gotten out of hand later on in his life, or in the rumor mill.

That's "baited" breath, Tom. ;)

Watered Garden, you are totally correct in your APP-CAPS warning. I too saw many cheap tricks that shallow grads pulled talking about spirits in a non-edifying manner. We are to walk in love. *** Now back to discerning of good spirits... From my AC syllabus (with my red highlighting) under the category of “What It Is”: “The manifestation of Discerning of Spirits is your operation of the God-given ability whereby you may receive from God by his revealing it to you the necessary information concerning the presence or non-presence of spirits and the identity of spirits present, and if evil , whether you may cast them out.” I highlighted the word “may” because there are times when Father give us “no cookie” and that’s just as important to receive as a cookie is because it’s from FATHER. I italicized the last phrase because I was instructed (at the second summer 1975 Emporia AC) to add it into my syllabus by hand. The syllabus I had received there was from earlier years. It seems this addition was necessary in 1975 (remember my trivia quiz in post #6 above?) in spite of something to the same effect THAT IS printed in my syllabus. This can be seen in another line under “What it is” which reads regarding Discerning of Spirits: “It is to discern, detect, be made aware of their presence, and to determine their identity, whether they be the spirits of the devil (diabolos), the holy spirit, or the spirit of man. If evil, whether they may be cast out (this requires the manifestation of Workings of Miracles).” Like what the recent thread on cancer disclosed, we can see here that the AC teachings evolved somewhat in accordance with what we were ABLE to receive, and especially to what we were ABLE to remember and apply. In 1975 we needed to be reminded (due to our spiritual immaturity) that Discerning of Spirits was NOT supposed to revolve around devil spirits as much as it was. It seems we STILL need to be reminded of the good side of Discerning of Spirits. *** Under the category of “What it is Not” we read: “3. It is not the discerning of faults.” So it was never supposed to be a tool for picking on personalities that bugged us. It seems this too was hardly ever read by many grads. We have a lot of catching up to do. *** Now, class, and especially you Mr. Smartypants Tom, tell me what you know about “the spirit of man” and how that fits into this long forgotten larger picture.

Focus away!

How about discerning of GOOD spirits? What about discerning of good angels in a situation? What about discerning of pneuma hagion in a human being? Why did so few of us focus on THESE things to discern with that manifestation, even though these possibilities were taught? Why do so few grads even REMEMBER being taught that what gets discerned MIGHT be holy? Why will most posters on this thread focus AWAY from the discernment of good spirits? I know the answers to some of these questions. It's a little like a trivia quiz. What was predominant in the culture back then?

Both pamsandiego's area and my area are ok so far, but it's a pretty edgy situation. The county (about the size of the State of Connecticut) is at a relative standstill. We've been through this kind of thing many times, but it's still a great hassle. Prayer works wonders.

socks, Thanks for taking this seriously.

If it's GOD doing the commentary, THEN it’s THE useful one, and we should chuck all the man-breathed ones. If God ADDS MANY WORDS, like He did in Jeremiah 36, THEN it's a format change. What I mean by format change is that what God gave us is NOT in the format of a word for word translation of the traditional canon. God didn’t give Dr revelation to produce the ultimate translation, but He re-vamped it altogether. I see Dr’s quoting the KJV (by revelation) a gentle touch by Father to help ease us into the new administration and new format of His Word. Some of the “many words added” I see in PFAL is the detail on the Gathering and Return. In the KJV traditional canon that’s all a hush-hush secret, like the mystery was, for strategic purposes. Once the Gathering begins (and it’s a long slow process, not the twinkling of an eye, atom of time thing, that comes later) THEN there’s no more strategic reason for God to keep the Gathering details secret. *** Please be specific. Then I can comment. I need to get this stuff out if I want to love and obey my Father, but YOU need to HEAR it. I don’t get paid for this. I certainly don’t get salaams for it *** Back to Jesus. He is not God. He is man. He is still subject to the Father. The Father teaches him now, just like before.