Tom

I see. Okay, fairly clear example... Start out at a party doing card tricks - your basic (no magic) tricks - to set up the susceptibility of the people. End up by sending someone into another room by him/her self where he/she can take a card out of the deck - inspecting the deck in any way. Call out through the door the card they've picked. End up with five people sitting around you - have them each take one card out of the deck they've shuffled to their heart's content and place it face down - call each card while it is still face down. Tell someone to think of a three digit number, then call it. Hear your friend coming up the walkway and say to yourself if this is real, so & so is going to walk in the door and say "27," and two seconds later it happens. That's all for starters. Mix in some LSD, & you might be communicating with your friend for hours without saying a work - not just your mind, he is in on it - as mine was. Throw in some lust spirits and a few initiated friends and you've got a network going where you can "visit" your friend on the other side of the country in an apartment you've never seen - describe the apartment, the pictures on the wall, the party he had the night before, what went on in the bedroom at the party. About that time I started to feel that what was going on was somewhat "spooky."

No offense intended, Cool, but "None of it is real" is not necessarily so because you "cast many spells," and none of it was real. I never was conscious that I cast a spell. I didn't usually think about what was happening in those terms or call it witchcraft, but that's what it was - and it wasn't just in my mind. I wasn't a big wizard or anything - as I said, I rarely thought about it in those terms; although, I did pick up on how to do some things from a friend who called some of the thngs he was doing magic.

Ah, yes, the Cheering Charm, "Laetificus Pronunciation: Lay-TIF-ik-is Effect: Also known as the Cheering Charm, this Spell causes the Target to become happy. Caution should be taken, as overuse can lead to Hiccups." I do believe I've over-invoked that spirit once or twice myself - h'cup

Hi all, I haven't read all the posts - actually, the only one I read was Linda's because it was the first one listed on the page I open up when I get to gs. Posting when I haven't read what's going on is usually a mistake, but here goes. I read the first HP book & liked it - apparently not enought to read any of the others. I've seen the movies and liked them. I was at a faculty meeting the other day speaking with the librarian and the school newspaper, yearbook, newsletter, you name it teacher. They started talking about the latest book, and turns out they both had read it, and when I asked, they both had read all the HP books. "Wow," thought. I'm not sure what "wow" means - just that I was impressed that two such adult literary people had read all the HP books. At that point, I figured it might be a good idea to read the last one. All that having been said, I must disagree with Linda and whoever else thinks so that the theme of witchcraft is secondary to the humanity theme and the characterization. I think it is an integral part of the mix. While I don't think the "harm" is "irreparable," I do think it is a mistake to think that all the "fantasy/fairy tales" we grew up with or they are growing up with doesn't effect us. The old question of whether art effects culture or culture is an expession of art has a simple answer - both are true. There is no doubt in my mind that the sci-fi & fantasy I read growing up led me to believe in esp, and to my subsequent involvement in esp & witchcraft. I had to learn about it SOMEWHERE. And that's where I did. And I'm not the only one. I wouldn't make an absolute statement like "kids know the difference between fantasy and reality." They might know that some things are definitely fantasy, and other things are definitely real, but few know where the line is. A lot of the things they think are fantasy, I know to be real magic. Also, there are quite a lot of "gothic" kids out there, who, while they might enjoy HP, yet believe a lot of it is fantasy; nevertheless, espouse a lot of ideas that go under the umbrella of "nature worship" that many others would consider to be witchcraft, and there is absolutely no line between fantasy and reality agreed upon. Humanity, nature worship, feelings, the feminine side, magic - it's all in the mix. Even here at gs - or anywhere else for that matter, there is no line agreed upon. It's all up for grabs. IMO, there is legitimate concern here. The last two years, at the fourth quarter of the year, I gave all my classes the opportunity to vote on 10 selections from our textbook that they most wanted to read. Each year the five gothic selections in our book - of a gazillion selections - made it to the top 6 positions. Having said all that, I must say that I get along with my "gothic" students better than any other teacher I know, and we communicate about these matters very well. The "Christian" church, again IMO, has abdicated any authoritative say so in many matters concerning life such as dance, dress, nature, literature, movies, alternative medicines - just art and life in general by summarily termimg that so much of it is devilish without regard to the fine qualities involved. Unless it is about God, it is considered anathema. How can that be when God has given us all things richly to enjoy. That God doesn't sound very attractive to me. I guess what I'm trying to say is don't censor, enjoy together, and discuss, and educate. It's that or write something better - or, I guess be a monk (no offense meant to any monks - or non-monks). Tom

Interesting - the last few days the moon has been eclipsing the star Antares. I googled "Antares Semitic," the Semitic names supposedly the clue to meaning. Apparently the Semitic name is from the root Kolob (the same is true for three other stars as well). Literally, the root "Kolob" means heart, center, or middle. Some Mormons think the star literally is where God lives. Others, figuring that God doesn't live within the confines of time, think that symbolically the star represents Jesus Christ - where God lives. Some of the etymological (concerning the study of the sources and development of words) lines drawn that I read seem pretty sure - others seem rather iffy. If this meaning of Antares has some truth to it, what would it mean that the moon eclipses it? People's feelings, natural man, or feminine side is taking precedence over Jesus Christ in our culture? And what would it mean that next on the event horizon is the near approach of Mars, "the Archangel Michael, whom God commissions to stand and fight for His people" is coming into close engagement in battle for us (according the meaning of Mars in JCOPS)? To help us against the spiritual forces behind the humanitarian philosophical tide that is washing the salt from the earth and turning people into into weak, one world government sheep? Rock on, Michael! Who knows? I can see where this sort of thing can turn into fantasy, guesswork, and Astrology. But the heavens still declare God's glory, & I'm still intrigued by the notion that the sheep (different kind of sheep - I realize we are not sheep) still hear the true master's voice, and that with the guideline of the Word to keep me from getting too far off course, I can develop a further feel for His glory by what's going on by observing the heavens. Tom

I don't know, but maybe this is what you're talking about - this is from the stargazer guy show: To Be Aired : Monday 7/18/2005 through Sunday 7/24/2005 "Use the Moon To Find Mars Which Is Now Brighter Than Almost All The Stars In The Sky" Horkheimer: Greetings, greetings fellow star gazers. Next week on Wednesday and Thursday July 27th and 28th you'll be able to use the Moon to find Mars which is racing towards Earth and will be at its very closest and absolutely spectacular on Halloween. It is already 6 times brighter than it was at the beginning of the year and is now brighter than all but two of the brightest stars. Let me show you. O.K., we've got our skies set up for 1 a.m. your local time any night this week looking due east where the brightest thing you'll see will be a reddish orange light, our old friend 4,000 mile wide Mars a planet almost exactly half as wide as planet Earth. Currently only five objects are brighter, the stars Sirius and Canopus, the planets Jupiter and Venus and our Moon. And if you haven't started to watch Mars on a regular basis now is the time to begin because Mars is hurtling towards us at breakneck speeds and will be brighter than any star in the sky and exceeded only by the Moon and Venus on Halloween when it reaches its brightest and closest to planet Earth until the year 2018. At the beginning of this year on January 1st it was 209 million miles away but this week it is 126 million miles closer only 83 million miles away. And if you watch it at least once a week from now through October you'll be absolutely blown away as it steadily brightens! And fortunately if you're one of those people who has a problem finding the planets, one or two nights every month you'll be able to use the Moon to help you locate Mars. In fact next Wednesday July 27 at 1 a.m. you'll be able to see a 21 day old Moon only 6 degrees away from Mars which is roughly 12 full Moon widths away at which time the Moon will be 234 thousand miles away while Mars will be 79 1/2 million miles away. But if you go out just 4 hours later at 5 a.m. before sunrise Mars and the Moon will be much higher but the Moon will be only 5 degrees away from Mars, 4 full Moon widths closer and Mars will have raced a hundred thousand miles closer to Earth, only 79 million 400 thousand miles away. But if it's cloudy Wednesday, on Thursday morning you'll have another chance to use the Moon to find Mars because at 1 a.m. Thursday the 28th the Moon will have moved to the other side of Mars and will be only 8 degrees away. Plus to show you just how fast Mars is racing toward us, in just one day Mars will be half a million miles closer less than 79 million miles away. Wow!! So start your Mars watch now. Go out around 1 a.m. any night this week and next, and it will be just above the eastern horizon and to find it super easy use the Moon as a finder on Wednesday the 27th at 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. and on Thursday the 28th at 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. Believe me if you watch Mars only once every couple of weeks you'll be absolutely astonished at how it brightens because as I said by Halloween when it's at its brightest it will be 6 times brighter than it is right now and it's already 6 times brighter now than it was in January. Keep looking up!

Well, I received my RedShift program & checked out my first heavenly happening from JCOPS, and it was right on the money. Ckeer, I realy like the program - thanks for the tip. I don't think I'm going to "all conjunctions between Christs birth and resurection to see how they lined up with the ministries teachings, ckeer, so I guess yoiu onever will find out unless someone else does it. I wonder, though, if the original Semetic names are the key to understanding the foundation of biblical astronomy, I wonder if I can get some sense of the significance of some of the heavenly events going on these days from time to time. If the heavens declare the glory - have they stopped? The Magi knew enough to read the birth of the Messiah to the extent that they travelled 1000s of miles to see him. VP said that we may never recover the extent of the understanding that they had in reading the stars, but - I don't know, its 4:30 AM & I haven't gotten to sleep yet, so I'm not going to take the time to look up exactly what he said, but basically, we can catch some of what's been lost in biblical astronomy. I know with limited knowledge, it's easy to read meaning in things that isn't there. But can I develope enough of a sense of this means of communication from God to pick up on something that's happening? Hmm, I don't know, but I'd like to know something along those lines if I can know anything. Knowing that I know that I know that I know? Well, who knows? Tom

Is that for real - only five WC graduates last year? No! Seriously? What was the training for? I mean originally, the WC was to train those with gift ministries. Then, when there were too many WC, the doctrine changed to the purpose of the WC was always to train twig coordinators. Well, I know a while back, the doctrine was that only the very best and most highly qualified were to be accepted to the WC; What was the purpose of the WC according to the present truth last year - to train vice presidents? How many WC are graduating this year - one? What is the ministry theme this year - each one win one - the true meaning of submission? Is there an equivalent to the light bearer assignments? I wonder what that is? On Corps night, does the director still rant and rave and spit if there is only one person listening? If there is only one WC, would that one still wear a name tag? Would that one still have to memorize the names of everyone in his/her WC that year? How does one go out two by two? If that one practices teaching techniques before the WC, who listens?

I don't want to sidetrack the thread, but I would think from your comments that your training in speed reading never clicked in. I would guess it didn't for the vast majority of Corps who were trained in it, but IMO the Corps training in speed reading was based on sound practice, but one would have to have practiced the speed reading training exercises consistently for a while for the benefit to finally "kick in." I know the theory behind why speed reading works is controversial; as a matter of fact, whether it even works or not and how much those who speed read actually comprehend is debated among those in the field of reading, but, as far as I'm concerned, if it is done right, it works. The reasons for slow reading and lack of comprehension that were taught are valid, I believe, and speed reading done properly overcomes those reasons for slow reading and lack of comprehension. I took speed reading in the Way Corps three times, and it wasn't until the third time that it worked for me. Maybe I'm a slow learner of fast reading:)--> - just kidding. Actually, I think the Way Corps didn't apply enough training time to it for it to work for most. I just finished a year of teaching intensive reading to high school students who scored in the bottom 1/4th of their classes in reading, & I had appreciably better results as measured on state standardized reading tests than all of the other - maybe ten or so - reading teachers in the high school. I use the speed reading principles taught in the WC in my classes. Although I also don't give them enough "training" for the speed reading to "kick in," I teach it, and I utilize the speed reading principles in our reading practice throughout the year here & there. Anyway, there are a lot of other principles I use (with which those principles we were taught actually integrate well), and I'm not saying that speed reading is the magic bullet. But reading is a field I spend a lot of time in - both teaching and measuring tons of data to determine effectively the results of my teaching practices. Poor reading comprehension is a big problem in our country and in our schools, and again, IMO, there are too many mothers and fathers on this website to summarily dismiss the effectiveness of speed reading, especially when taught in conjunction with other principles fostering reading comprehension. Okay, just something I'm involved with that I think is important - I'll shut up now about it:)-->. Tom

Shortly after we started our fellowship "back in the day" :)-->, we had over 30 people coming, & I always knew how everyone was doing - sure we talked and communicated about it, but it was more than that - I had a spiritual sense of what was happening - who was ministering to whom - the "joints and bands" ministering nourishment. And it just wasn't me. I remember we (the "branch") were accused of not following the Way Tree (well, we weren't, but at the time I didn't realize how the rigid Way Tree, by design, cuts across lines of ministering set up by God). I spoke to the "branch leader" and others about it, & we all always had that spiritual sense of how things were going throughout the area - a cranking area with a solid year of back to back film classes (over 30 students - if you want to use that as a measure of growth). It was a most desired spiritual grasp on what was happening in our section of the body of Christ that those "following" the Way Tree didn't have. Perhaps, Linda (thanks for the kind words), that was the "aware[ness] of it deep inside, spiritually, but those are just glimpses" that you were talking about. It was just a glimpse of the glory, but even that glimpse was supremely effective practically. I think, as you indicated, Linda, VP had it right when he said that all growth that happens in the Body of Christ is spiritual. I think the history of the growth of the Body of Christ is a history of growth outside the organizations born of men, or if it happens inside an organization born of men, it happens in spite of the organization. Like the fruit of the spirit, there is no law against it. In that sense, it can't be touched - GOd is always on top of the show, has the broad view, and makes everything work together for good to those who love Him. On the other hand, on a very practical sense, the things that men, Christian men, do that are carnal, works that are wood, hay, & stubble that men try to build on the foundation of Christ; although, they don't utimately adulterate the Body of Christ - because they are in a sense burned at the point of entry into the glory of the bema, do, in the meanwhile, in this present age, serve to hinder the purposes of God, and divide the body in a real sense. Sorry for the long sentence; I haven't the time to correct it. So, Linda, & Catcup, I think you are both correct. Tom

All organizations designed by men, or in which humans participate, have the possibility of error, because they are designed by or led by or made up of imperfect human beings. If you don't believe that the body of Christ is included in that scenario, and is susceptible to a down side, you need to read Corinthians again. I'm afraid your missing my point, Catcup. No doubt all those things are true. I don't need to read Corinthians again to see that; I said as much in a subsequent post, I wasn't talking about an organization "designed by men" or "designed by...imperfect human beings." No doubt being "led by or made up of imperfect human beings" brings "the possibility of error" into the body of Christ. Again, I wasn't talking about an organization "designed by men." I was talking about the perfect design and operation of the body of Christ that is "not an organization of [by the design or origin of] man." I was talking about "the increase of God" in the body, the "knit[ing] together" within the body that comes with the "increase of God," the "joints and bands" within that body of Christ through which we have "nourishment ministered," which is the knitting together that comes "with the increase of God." I was talking about the fit joining together and compacting of "the whole body" that is the organization that comes only "from Christ" and not from or of man "according to the effectual working in the measure of every part," as the design of God, not man, "makes its own increase unto the edifying of itself in love." I don't see any error in that design yet; although, I see people involved. I do see great intricacy in the design and great practical "effectual working." The simple point - which can't be seen if people are caught in error, division, envy, I'm of so & so, etc. - is that "in Christ we [all of us working together] are complete." Of course, when people get involved, there is going to be imperfection, but why start out screwing with the perfect design of the thing, by imposing a design of man upon it by way of a Way Tree, or an incorporation as if God's design isn't good enough? Yeah, we give lip service to the idea that we are complete in him, but in practice we think we need something else to operate in the "real" world because we are not "really" complete. IMO, when TWI pulled its power play on revival that was happening with the free movement of the Word in areas, they did so by the imposition of the organization of TWI starting with the Way Tree, an organization of (designed by man) that was antithetical to the godly design of the joints and bands that God was energizing in the body of Christ among admittedly imperfect people with great godly results. To whatever degree offshoots (or whatever term applies agreeably) have remedied things that were wrong with TWI...) I'm just saying why come out of the gate with an organization of man similar to the Way Tree, by doctrine, hamstringing God's working in the body of Christ. That's what I'm referring to when I'm talking about an old wine skin into which people don't put new wine - it can't hold it. Perhaps some offshoots have not organized themselves that way - I'll drink new wine to that. Tom

"Then?" Is "then" when God is no longer giving the minister revelation about His children becaujse the minister would be untrustworthy with it(trying to give yoiu the short answer, but I have to be sure I have the short question right first)? If that's the question, I still couldn't say that any healing would not be genuine (I can't limit God's ability to heal - there are other factors present besides the minister), but any healing wouldn't be because of any energizing of the true spirit within the minister. Was that the short question? Was the answer short enough?

hey dear litwin, how do i join ? ;)--> My dear ex, you are forever joined.

Men don't put new wine into old wineskins for the wineskins will break, and the wine run out, but they put new wine into new wineskins, and both the wineskins and the wine are preserved.

They need a true/false format, "I'm holding up some fingers; true or false?"

Da Verd says concerning those who profess that their origin & presence in the Word is of men in 1 Corinthians 3:7 Â So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. Ya'd think in depth Biblical Research people would be able to get that far. It's in your basic concordance under "envy," "strife," and "carnal."

Catcup There is an organization - the only organization - that has neither negative nor downside. It is the body of Christ. Not an organization of man, it has the amazing organization of a living organism. It is by joints and bands, having nourishment ministered, knit together with the increase of God. From Christ the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplies, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, makes its own increase unto the edifying of itself in love. In him we are complete. It is God's organic masterpiece. Because it is complete, because it lacks nothing, any organization that man imposes upon it can only detract from its design. I know; I've heard it before, "But we need organization!" No, that's the point - not MY point, the Word's point - we don't need anything. We are complete. It's like in the OT, God told man that he would worship on an altar of earth or unhewn stone because when man lifted up his tool upon it, he polluted it. Boom, done, polluted. You want to lump the organizational work of man together? Lump it all under the category of "polluted." You want to spend your time sorting out the stuff in the polluted lump? Be my guest; not me. A little leaven leavens the whole lump. Why spend the time to figure out the intervals between a little leaven in the lump and the whole lump being leavened? Why? Because we just don't really believe we (not each of us individually, but we) are complete in him. We still think we need something else to organize ourselves with - put a tool to the altar, build God a house, make a law (how about a guideline?), a king (or a president or BOT). I guess the idea that the body of Christ is complete is just beyond our grasp - you know? The body of Christ would have to be so freakin practically functional, dynamic, independent, powerful, multidimensional, UNTOUCHABLE. Do ya think? Could the body of Christ be all that? The masterpiece of God? Could it be all that? Could it be anything less? Sure it could be less - as soon as man is allowed to yank his tool upon it - then it is no longer untouched. I could go on, but this is a family site & the rest of the story is X-rated as those of you who lived it know. Yeah; well, I think that's the truth - though those who want to shoot off (verb form of offshoot) will feel the heat of personal offense, "perceiving" the need & preferring the "freedom" to do it THEIR way. Not meaning to tick anyone off, but that's what I think. In recognition of Christ, in whom we are complete, the stone of offence, which rolls on. Tom

Congratulations Rafael! Assistant City Editor, I'll be expecting the city to change for the better.

Okay, gotcha.

I thought it was a great movie. I also thought Leo & CB both did an amazing job. Before I saw the movie I thought about Leo sort of like geo - I was really surprised at Leo's acting ability which I respect a lot now. I was also surprised at the life of HH; I'd heard a few things growing up which I dimly remembered going into the movie - then, watching it, I thought, WOW, this guy was amazing; I want to find out more. I talked my mom & dad into going to see it - that's when I found out more - or should I say less. My dad was contemporary to HH & worked in the airlines for decades. He said that much of what was portrayed about his accomplishments in the industry business-wise was Hollywood hype. He didn't like the movie at all - mostly because of that. I then figured much of the rest of the portrayal was blown way out of proportion & didn't want anymore to find out about the rest of his life. I still liked the movie - as did my mom. Her only disappointment was that she already knew about his insanity up to the point where the movie ended; she wanted to find out what happened after that. I figured it was in good taste not to reveal that.

"The preacher" said that it is more important to be Christ-like than to operate one's gifts and callings because one may operate gifts and callings aside from one's character whereas being Christ-like involves the character of a person - or words to that effect. I don't believe that is true. I believe everyone's gift is uniquely matched to that one's total identity. Body, soul, and spirit operate as one within an individual. One can no more operate gifts and callings without regard to character than without a soul or a body. God energizes the spirit within an individual in the light of who that one is - differently than He does within another - as a member in particular in the body - of Christ (Christ-like, no?) Even when one operates outside of love, that one's operation is still not separate from his/her character. God is gracious as our character grows up into Christ, but that doesn't mean we can screw the body of Christ with impunity. I do not believe God continues to energize untrustworthy people with that which will either heal the broken hearted or destroy what's left of them - "charismatic" though their "teaching" may seem. But what comes to mind when we use the term "Christ-like?" Compassion comes to my mind - an awareness of the sufferings of others and a decision to do whatever is put before you to do something about it. But the decision to help others like Christ did in this way always comes with an additional price - other than the simple doing - sooner or later. The sermon on the mount is filled with sterling examples of "Christ-like" qualities, yet it ends with something presented as significantly more challenging to the disciple of Christ, something definitive of what it means to be like Christ. Sooner or later, all who endeavour to walk godly (like Christ) will suffer persecution. People will betray them. They will be hated - for their professed stand upon the name of their compassionate Saviour. Christ was. So will be his disciples - those who discipline themselves to be like Christ. A defining quality of the character of those who determine to be Christ-like, those for whom it is enough to be like Christ, is that they don't fear the persecution of those who have forfeited their Christ-likeness for what appears to be personal gain by way of a position of authority above their master, above the Lord Jesus Christ over the inheritance of God. To attain their position they must have termed recognition of the true Lord devilish; much more must the present followers of the true Lord be termed devilish. Christ-like people don't fear that because they know that all the deceitful cover of the imposters will be removed. They'd just as soon scream it now in the light of day because they know - in the face of the accusers - their Father knows and cares for everything than concerns them. The Christ you serve is your reward. Tom

Nice post, Oak. Regarding TWI looking at the JCOPS as the final word on the subject, I believe all in TWI took their cue from Wierwille on that (as in almost everything else). It bugs me to see Wierwille coming to such conclusive conclusions in the book itself. Shortly before his quote that "...meanings proposed for the planets cannot be affirmed with finality," he said ""the ancient names of the stars have meanings which, when properly understood, make up the foundation of a true Biblical astronomy." Well, if the foundation of Biblical astronomy requires proper understanding of the meanings of the stars, and those meanings cannot be affirmed with finality, then how can he declare the results of his research with such finality? That sort of thing seems to be rampant among Christians - it's a real pain. They'll be the first ones to tell you to watch out for those who spout their doctrine without thoroughly thinking it through just to get their own doctrine out, & in the next breath, they will do exactly that. Maybe everyone is subject to that kind of mental snow; I know as soon as point of view attains the status of a political base where people in unity are advocating for a position, the priority of truth goes out the window. Well, see now that's the hook that has me - not that it "OF COURSE" must be because of the Arabic language - because I know that language etymology, clue to meaning that it is, is subject to all the foibles of man - but if God really named the stars, now we have some leverage grounded in something absolute - even if we can't know it absolutely; I have no problem with that. Just give me a worm with some real blood in it, & I'll still bite. The nerves in my mouth are 1/2 dead from hooks tearing through them; screw the fear of the ravages of those who fish for (or should I say buy and sell) men. They won't hurt me much. My pool may seem small to some, but ain't nobody gonna pull me out of it with the promise of living water to those that have none, because I know my water lives, & it ain't for sale. Well, I don't know - no one is going to figure all that out without some help - I think - so, I figure Ethiopia - the garden & surrounding, those to whom the Word in the Stars was addressed - could & some cold understand the significance of the Word in the stars. The rest? Hey, the Native Americans have multiple prophecies concerning the coming of the Messiah. God doesn't leave any who reach out to him, & we can't limit God. Well, danged if I know. I don't need a universally recognized calendar - something people do generally recognize as a calendar will do for me. RedShift goes back to 6,000 BC - according to whom? Somebody, most people, apparently - that's okay with me. Universal recognition? Man, if I recognize my face in the mirror in the morning it is a good day - just kidding, but you get the point. Requiring universal recognition brings us back to the need for some jackass asserting that he knows that he knows that he knows. RE: The North Hahahaha, Oak, yeah, I went through a lot of that too - nothing in the North - how about the North Star? I didn't even understand anything about Martindale's explanation of that at the time - or now. Creepy, Tom

Very cool site with a lot of valuable things to say about a lot of things other than the current topic - thanks much Dmiller; it's a keeper. Tom

2003, really? Bummer! Oops, sorry about that. Thanks, Long Gone. I was figuring that the brightness thing is some sort of astronomical measurement which the author said measured "(next to the moon) the brightest object in the night sky." I figured that the moon, because of it size, would appear 1000s of times brighter than Mars, but that the naked eye, taking into consideration the difference in size, wouldn't be able to tell any difference in the actual brightness of the objects. Yes? No? Maybe? Bulldinky? I suppose size is a factor in the perceived brightness of an object. Maybe perception depends too much on the eye of the beholder to say anything conclusive. Anyway, thanks again.

Regarding the significance of Mars, this is from JCOPS: That is from a section in the book briefly describing the significance of the planets at the end of which Wierwille goes on to say This whole area of the Word being written in the stars is starting to engage my attention in active inquiry. When JCOPS came out, it was too complicated for me - what with everything else coming at us at the speed of light all of which we were supposed to swallow, much getting caught in our throats. But I am an English and a reading teacher, so I'm always dealing with the etymological origins of words (ideas) as clues to meaning, and the concept that "the ancient names of the stars have meanings which, when properly understood, make up the foundation of a true Biblical astronomy" revealing God's will is pulling me into a quest like The DaVinci Code or National Treasure; except, this quest might not be found in the fiction section - making it the quest for the true holy grail. Even if parts of what I uncover wind up being false, the quest is still engaging and will still yield enduring nuggets. JCOPS does seem to be one of the, if not the, best documented of Wierwille's books; nevertheless, I'm having a bit of a hard time dealing with one of Wierwille's works - God forbid Wierwille should have something of value associated with his doing. What then? Although a fig tree cannot bear olive berries, nor a fountain both yield salt water and fresh; nevertheless, out of the same mouth proceeds blessing and cursing. James says that these things ought not to be so, not that they are not so, for they are so. Scary thought! Perhaps I'm ridding myself of a prejudice, a root of bitterness, which, springing up, has defiled many. The fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace. Not making excuses. There is no excuse. Peace, Tom