No need to apologize, and quite honestly, I didn't think (at least, not previously) that you were trying to accuse me of some "doctrinal offence." (But those are certainly odd words that you chose to respond with.) Nor did I view the motive of your posts as subtly aimed at bringing someone into your way of thinking. I don't much care that you don't care to discuss my perspective on believing in the manner that I chose. C'est la vie.
Huh?! Are you serious? ....."Odd words" I chose to respond with?!?!
Did you forget your "odd" wording in post # 74? (see quote directly below please)
(SNIP) ...BTW, are you aware (i.e., have you read or surmised elsewhere in my post in other threads) ofmy proclivity towards being a Socratic?
It's just not much in my nature to think or act like a prosecuting attorney and "lay the case out before you" and try to persuade you with it into thinking a certain way.
(SNIP)
Do you even realize the mental imagery you drew upon in your post # 74? I thought my reply - point by point – was an appropriate response to that disparaging image of a prosecuting attorney you foisted upon me.
I was almost tempted to dumb down this response to your "odd words" remark by doing a skit of an old TV show,
PerryMason:
ladies and gentlemen of the jury, may I present exhibit A, post # 74 written by the plaintiff TLC, accusing my client Thelonious Hyphen Bone of passing himself off as a prosecuting attorney.....Later I will call upon an expert witness who will testify that in fact Mr. Bone has never even passed a bar. He always has to stop in for at least a drink or two…
ba dum bum – I'm here all week folks - hey – surprise ending - I just wanted to say lighten up, TLC. I am not your enemy and I don't consider you my enemy – let's take a break, kick back and have a few beers.
you probably don't want to hear some friendly advice - especially unsolicited advice....but anyway here goes...
You might want to take the suggestion of Waysider and Rocky and start your own thread in doctrinal.
If I may be so bold as to suggest you brush up on the Socratic Method before starting a thread somewhere else. I don't pretend to have this discussion business down pat….but you say you're into being Socratic and yet your posts read more like you're into dodge-ball…
seriously i'm not trying to insult you - - - that's just the impression i get;
believe it or not i actually admire folks who really work at honestly expressing their point of view. :rolleyes:/>
i'm reminded of that fake it 'til you make it slogan. Maybe that works for some folks – but I don't think that sentiment flies at Grease Spot…especiallynot at Grease Spot!
From our "collective conscientiousness" we may be one of the sharpest groups around that can quickly spot a fake. Probably comes from years of indentured servitude to a cult leader that promised us spiritual riches and earthly abundance for all our labor – a cult leader who exaggerated his own knowledge, experience, and accomplishments.
"Because what was/is so prominently thought and taught as believing doesn't appear to me to always square up with what pistis means biblically. "
OK, so what exactly does "pistis mean biblically" define?? What does that even mean from the point of view of objective exegesis and valid textual criticism?? Nothing.
When DPW croaked, he left a "dying commission" to Wally-the-researcher to ensure and enshrine dictor a biblical research legacy(sic!).
1) Produce a "rightly divided" Harmony of The Gospels, and
2) "finish the work on pistis".
A third legacy DPW wanted to drop was the Advanced Class redux. He commissioned geer da busdriver to carry out that dying wish. As of this writing, Wally-the-researcher and da busdriver are still working on this project! LOL! And, Wally-the-researcher, John crouch, and several other old research department hacks still teach at SOWERS, as if nothing has changed since 1982. Eewwwwww!
The only reason there was a pistis "problen" was because DPW had the intellectual capabilities of a fig. He had already botched Bullinger's research on all the uses of pistis in The Greek New Testament. Ethelbert published this in a series of articles in Of Things To Come, his research journal while he was the Chairman of the British Trinitarian Bible Society. It was always Bullinger's trinitarianism that DPW used as an excuse not to just completely endorse EVERYTHING Bullinger's ever written. That was THE chief thing that DPW used to place himself above Bullinger "spiritually", and prove his own "apostleship" as being the more "accurate" and rightly divided than Ethelbert's. Effect? We don't need to dig deep into Bullinger, since dictor has rightly divided and accurized all the truth to be found in Bullinger's works.
Vic had no intellectual, academic, or scholastic capability to comprehend Bullinger. He was much more at home with the anecdotal and experiential Christianity B.G. Leonard taught than he was with the gravitas of Bullinger's intellect. He totally co-opted VERBATIM Leonard's definitions of the "gift of faith", i.e. the manifestation of believing, along with Leonard's "definitions" of "the faith of Jesus Christ" and "faith, the manifestation", and "faith the fruit of the spirit" and just plain old faith. Vp's incapable intellect, inherent laziness, and the compulsions of his pathological sexual perversion along with a love for alcohol precluded any legitimate intellectual capability to combine the two. Hence, the root of the entirely manufactured "pistis problen". There is NO PROBLEN outside the paranoid narcissistic personality disorder which drove and consumed a rural German Ohio neo-nazi with the delusions of grandeur at the core of his self-chosen Pauline MOG identity. What a mess!! All to make up the answer to an illogical presumption by a drunken, malignantly paranoid narcissist. What a wagon to hitch your "biblical research" star to, TLC. Yikes! TTFG.
Do you even realize the mental imagery you drew upon in your post # 74? I thought my reply - point by point – was an appropriate response to that disparaging image of a prosecuting attorney you foisted upon me.
Frankly speaking, I'm stunned that you somehow managed to think that I was somehow referring to you in any way, shape, or form with something that I was merely trying to communicate to you that I wasn't. But it's plainly not the first time you've misunderstood or mistaken something I've said. We are on such different wavelengths, I guess maybe I should just ought to bow out of any further discussion with you altogether.
You might want to take the suggestion of Waysider and Rocky and start your own thread in doctrinal.
I've had no intention nor inspiration to do so. My initial post in this thread was merely to point out that not everyone was entirely drawn into and captivated by this "magical thinking, TWIt version" back in the day, as there were "known issues" with it that were never sufficiently addressed or resolved, and that "believing" was not - and is not - thought of by everyone in the way and manner that it was being described in this thread.
My statement was subsequently challenged, and I responded to it, explaining further what I meant by it, and why.
That's it, and I am done with it.
If I may be so bold as to suggest you brush up on the Socratic Method before starting a thread somewhere else. I don't pretend to have this discussion business down pat….but you say you're into being Socratic and yet your posts read more like you're into dodge-ball…
seriously i'm not trying to insult you - - - that's just the impression i get;
Sorry you feel that way, I was merely trying to express my genetic proclivity as best I could think of to describe it.
Maybe it's not the best fit, but I don't know what else to call it.
believe it or not i actually admire folks who really work at honestly expressing their point of view. :rolleyes:/>/>
i'm reminded of that fake it 'til you make it slogan. Maybe that works for some folks – but I don't think that sentiment flies at Grease Spot…especiallynot at Grease Spot!
From our "collective conscientiousness" we may be one of the sharpest groups around that can quickly spot a fake. Probably comes from years of indentured servitude to a cult leader that promised us spiritual riches and earthly abundance for all our labor – a cult leader who exaggerated his own knowledge, experience, and accomplishments.
The GSC has had a number of posters down the years who started posting only questions
and never stating an opinion for themselves and ducking all questions directed at them,
then hot hostile when others refused to answer their questions, or to answer them the
way THEY wanted them answered. So far, that's never gone well for the questioner.
If you intend to aim that in my direction, WW, I'd suggest you try something with at least one aspect of it close enough to the truth that it's taken more seriously.
If you intend to aim that in my direction, WW, I'd suggest you try something with at least one aspect of it close enough to the truth that it's taken more seriously.
If you don't think it applies to you, why even respond to it?
It's not about Socrates either. Don't blame him for your own vanity. Don't blame us for "not liking you" again. You seem to take joy playing the victim card. Momentus anyone? And, imo, your pugnacious attempts at using anything "Socratic" is more along the line of an intellectually pubescent Socratic circle jerk than Socratic method. Pleasing yourself again are you? Get some tissues......clean up your mess and try to keep your overwhelming need for validation and authority in check. It appears to make YOU hard to get along with. Blame it on the bossa nova. TTFG.
As if you know what star I'm hitched to...
Whoops! My bad! My telepathy is a little off today. I have no desire to know what dark star you're hitched to. Apparently, YOU don't even know. Looks like you have a hitch in your giddy-up pal. Limp along now. TTFG.
oh yeah Skyrider - going L.E.A.D. was a tremendous "gimmick" - it had no real value other than attracting attention as in an ad "hey, we've put the law of believing to the acid test ! Thumbs up for thumbs out !"
in my humble opinion it's just bravado to make you and others think that you're capable of doing great things for God - it was obviously nothing more than a merit badge you earned; you've gotta pay your dues if you want to be considered a success - - a "BELIEVER" .
maybe there was a "bright side" to it, though....i remember this one young lady constantly whining about the poor riding "accommodations" in the vehicles and the depressing conditions around truck stops.In one of my "finest" callous wise-cracking moments i said to her now you can sing the blues.
seriously - now i shudder to think how we - especially the women - put ourselves at risk to all kinds of dangers!!!! there's been threads that have covered such horrifying incidents while going to and from or at LEAD.
T-Bone, finally understands about a big problem I had with TWI; hitchhiking!! No way would I have hitchhiked anywhere!!! Not me! I read about some of the serious problems some experienced with LEAD! All sorts of problems happened with LEAD, and hitchhiking. Just so TWI could save a few pennies. I was so angry when I read about that woman having to cut-off her toes! Being from Central NY State, I know you don't go out in a blizzard, unless you have special training to do so. I have lived through some blizzards, and I stay inside, where I am safe. It's not Rocket Science; it's Common Sense. However, I think the TWI lacked Common Sense in so many areas; God expects us to use our brains.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
23
20
15
29
Popular Days
Jul 26
28
Jul 24
19
Jul 23
16
Jul 21
11
Top Posters In This Topic
T-Bone 23 posts
waysider 20 posts
Bolshevik 15 posts
TLC 29 posts
Popular Days
Jul 26 2016
28 posts
Jul 24 2016
19 posts
Jul 23 2016
16 posts
Jul 21 2016
11 posts
Popular Posts
waysider
Well, OK, here's the first part: "Perhaps the mere indication (from what I had posted previously) that I might not have been as "clueless as the rest of [some of you] back then" is part of the reason
T-Bone
Rocky thanks for that link to magical thinking – I've bookmarked it so I can review it a few times – good stuff. VP's skewed version of Christianity was a lot about being in control and manipulati
penworks
If I could put these two sentences in a flashing neon sign, I would. Speaking from experience, this lies at the heart of fanaticism.
T-Bone
Huh?! Are you serious? ....."Odd words" I chose to respond with?!?!
Did you forget your "odd" wording in post # 74? (see quote directly below please)
Do you even realize the mental imagery you drew upon in your post # 74? I thought my reply - point by point – was an appropriate response to that disparaging image of a prosecuting attorney you foisted upon me.
I was almost tempted to dumb down this response to your "odd words" remark by doing a skit of an old TV show,
Perry Mason:
ladies and gentlemen of the jury, may I present exhibit A, post # 74 written by the plaintiff TLC, accusing my client Thelonious Hyphen Bone of passing himself off as a prosecuting attorney.....Later I will call upon an expert witness who will testify that in fact Mr. Bone has never even passed a bar. He always has to stop in for at least a drink or two…
ba dum bum – I'm here all week folks - hey – surprise ending - I just wanted to say lighten up, TLC. I am not your enemy and I don't consider you my enemy – let's take a break, kick back and have a few beers.
you probably don't want to hear some friendly advice - especially unsolicited advice....but anyway here goes...
You might want to take the suggestion of Waysider and Rocky and start your own thread in doctrinal.
If I may be so bold as to suggest you brush up on the Socratic Method before starting a thread somewhere else. I don't pretend to have this discussion business down pat….but you say you're into being Socratic and yet your posts read more like you're into dodge-ball…
seriously i'm not trying to insult you - - - that's just the impression i get;
believe it or not i actually admire folks who really work at honestly expressing their point of view. :rolleyes:/>
i'm reminded of that fake it 'til you make it slogan. Maybe that works for some folks – but I don't think that sentiment flies at Grease Spot…especially not at Grease Spot!
From our "collective conscientiousness" we may be one of the sharpest groups around that can quickly spot a fake. Probably comes from years of indentured servitude to a cult leader that promised us spiritual riches and earthly abundance for all our labor – a cult leader who exaggerated his own knowledge, experience, and accomplishments.
Socratic Method
(edited for clarity)
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
DontWorryBeHappy
"Because what was/is so prominently thought and taught as believing doesn't appear to me to always square up with what pistis means biblically. "
OK, so what exactly does "pistis mean biblically" define?? What does that even mean from the point of view of objective exegesis and valid textual criticism?? Nothing.
When DPW croaked, he left a "dying commission" to Wally-the-researcher to ensure and enshrine dictor a biblical research legacy(sic!).
1) Produce a "rightly divided" Harmony of The Gospels, and
2) "finish the work on pistis".
A third legacy DPW wanted to drop was the Advanced Class redux. He commissioned geer da busdriver to carry out that dying wish. As of this writing, Wally-the-researcher and da busdriver are still working on this project! LOL! And, Wally-the-researcher, John crouch, and several other old research department hacks still teach at SOWERS, as if nothing has changed since 1982. Eewwwwww!
The only reason there was a pistis "problen" was because DPW had the intellectual capabilities of a fig. He had already botched Bullinger's research on all the uses of pistis in The Greek New Testament. Ethelbert published this in a series of articles in Of Things To Come, his research journal while he was the Chairman of the British Trinitarian Bible Society. It was always Bullinger's trinitarianism that DPW used as an excuse not to just completely endorse EVERYTHING Bullinger's ever written. That was THE chief thing that DPW used to place himself above Bullinger "spiritually", and prove his own "apostleship" as being the more "accurate" and rightly divided than Ethelbert's. Effect? We don't need to dig deep into Bullinger, since dictor has rightly divided and accurized all the truth to be found in Bullinger's works.
Vic had no intellectual, academic, or scholastic capability to comprehend Bullinger. He was much more at home with the anecdotal and experiential Christianity B.G. Leonard taught than he was with the gravitas of Bullinger's intellect. He totally co-opted VERBATIM Leonard's definitions of the "gift of faith", i.e. the manifestation of believing, along with Leonard's "definitions" of "the faith of Jesus Christ" and "faith, the manifestation", and "faith the fruit of the spirit" and just plain old faith. Vp's incapable intellect, inherent laziness, and the compulsions of his pathological sexual perversion along with a love for alcohol precluded any legitimate intellectual capability to combine the two. Hence, the root of the entirely manufactured "pistis problen". There is NO PROBLEN outside the paranoid narcissistic personality disorder which drove and consumed a rural German Ohio neo-nazi with the delusions of grandeur at the core of his self-chosen Pauline MOG identity. What a mess!! All to make up the answer to an illogical presumption by a drunken, malignantly paranoid narcissist. What a wagon to hitch your "biblical research" star to, TLC. Yikes! TTFG.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
BTW, just FYI,
The GSC has had a number of posters down the years who started posting only questions
and never stating an opinion for themselves and ducking all questions directed at them,
then hot hostile when others refused to answer their questions, or to answer them the
way THEY wanted them answered. So far, that's never gone well for the questioner.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
... and hilarity!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
Frankly speaking, I'm stunned that you somehow managed to think that I was somehow referring to you in any way, shape, or form with something that I was merely trying to communicate to you that I wasn't. But it's plainly not the first time you've misunderstood or mistaken something I've said. We are on such different wavelengths, I guess maybe I should just ought to bow out of any further discussion with you altogether.
I've had no intention nor inspiration to do so. My initial post in this thread was merely to point out that not everyone was entirely drawn into and captivated by this "magical thinking, TWIt version" back in the day, as there were "known issues" with it that were never sufficiently addressed or resolved, and that "believing" was not - and is not - thought of by everyone in the way and manner that it was being described in this thread.
My statement was subsequently challenged, and I responded to it, explaining further what I meant by it, and why.
That's it, and I am done with it.
Sorry you feel that way, I was merely trying to express my genetic proclivity as best I could think of to describe it.
Maybe it's not the best fit, but I don't know what else to call it.
Yeah, that arrogancy stink is sure hard to wash off. It's followed me around for years as well, so don't feel too bad about it.
Ciao.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
As if you know what star I'm hitched to...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
If you intend to aim that in my direction, WW, I'd suggest you try something with at least one aspect of it close enough to the truth that it's taken more seriously.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
If you don't think it applies to you, why even respond to it?
This thread is NOT about you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DontWorryBeHappy
It's not about Socrates either. Don't blame him for your own vanity. Don't blame us for "not liking you" again. You seem to take joy playing the victim card. Momentus anyone? And, imo, your pugnacious attempts at using anything "Socratic" is more along the line of an intellectually pubescent Socratic circle jerk than Socratic method. Pleasing yourself again are you? Get some tissues......clean up your mess and try to keep your overwhelming need for validation and authority in check. It appears to make YOU hard to get along with. Blame it on the bossa nova. TTFG.
Whoops! My bad! My telepathy is a little off today. I have no desire to know what dark star you're hitched to. Apparently, YOU don't even know. Looks like you have a hitch in your giddy-up pal. Limp along now. TTFG.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
I thought you smelled familiar
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I thought I smelled familia.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
you say familia
and i say familiar
you say it's magic
and i say it's static
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
T-Bone, finally understands about a big problem I had with TWI; hitchhiking!! No way would I have hitchhiked anywhere!!! Not me! I read about some of the serious problems some experienced with LEAD! All sorts of problems happened with LEAD, and hitchhiking. Just so TWI could save a few pennies. I was so angry when I read about that woman having to cut-off her toes! Being from Central NY State, I know you don't go out in a blizzard, unless you have special training to do so. I have lived through some blizzards, and I stay inside, where I am safe. It's not Rocket Science; it's Common Sense. However, I think the TWI lacked Common Sense in so many areas; God expects us to use our brains.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.