T-Bone

yes - i read all about that in the catechism of the Catholic church Waysider, thanks for the Sam & Dave.....love those guys

This picture is for you, Don't Worry....that's Luna with her soulful look.

great post LaniK - i don't think that's off topic at all; those birth to the way corps papers was one of the many tricks they used to exploit people - like what Twinky was sharing about - finding out your weaknesses one way or another - to develop a profile of their target. yikes!

Hi LaniK and welcome to Grease Spot !!! I can relate to lurking; my wife Tonto was into previous ex-way sites before Grease Spot – between what she shared from them as well as from Grease Spot got me interested enough to join here. I got a kick out of your wide-eyed-with-wonder reference. I think a lot of folks were that way – myself included; Grease Spot draws upon the experience and wisdom of us all; I believe this place can help one develop critical thinking skills – and over time that wide-eyed-with-wonder look is slowly replaced with vision that easily penetrates the fog of nonsense. thanks for sharing……..I’m glad you joined - have a cup of cappuccino, kick back and enjoy Grease Spot!

Yeah – I can understand that….it may be a little off topic but my dogs are definitely mind readers and manipulators; if they see me put on running shoes they go crazy because they know they’re getting a walk; Tonto and I have to spell out certain words because the dogs recognize them and get crazy excited: “Hey Babe, want me to let the dogs O – U – T one more time before we go to bed?” or “want to take the dogs for a W – A – L – K ?” If we start packing for a trip the dogs act a little nervous because they know something is up. If they want to get fed earlier than the usual late afternoon time – they start acting super cute and cuddly. If they want some attention or want to play they’re all over us on the coach while we’re trying to watch TV. I just know my dogs are into all that powers of the mind stuff…one day I just happened to walk in on them doing their yoga routine – who knows what else they’re up to when we’re not around. PS - here's a tip for all you folks wanting to get a pet; NEVER get a pet that is smarter than you....you've been warned.

wow - that's funny the "Magic Yacht" - thanks, Twinky - your post is like a believing image of victory for me....cuz if i owned that yacht i would be-leaving the country on a cruise around the world!

Hell - that’s impressive! I didn’t even know I had a yacht! Who cares about the name on my yacht – can they tell me where it’s located ?! …oh wait – I get it….I’m supposed to read the magical thinking thread now.

That show sounds like it might be interesting, DogLover…..some of my favorite movies have a lot of courtroom drama and tension – and being able to read a jury as you described reminds me of Runaway Jury – Gene Hackman portrays a jury consultant who advises the defense attorney during jury selection as well as thru the trial itself. One of the many “talents” of Hackman’s character is the ability to read people; the movie also has an interesting counterpoint to Hackman’s skills – John Cusack’s character driven by a personal interest is perhaps just as sly as Hackman and especially skilled at deception and manipulation - he actually manages to get himself selected as a juror….so you have the two things in play – a person trying to read each member of the jury and a certain juror who is intentionally “giving off” false “tells” as well as manipulating others on the jury. Runaway Jury

Bolshevik, thanks for starting an interesting thread…I believe there’s something to what Penworks said about being on the same wavelength; I know couples, close friends, and co-workers experience that. as far as TWI leadership “reading” someone’s mind - like how Waysider said (God giving a leader revelation of what you were thinking) that’s one of the many nonsensical things I ejected from my belief system after leaving TWI; but I will say this - I found Rocky’s reference to social intelligence VERY interesting! You’ll find some popular books reading body language – I’ve checked out a few of them; but usually I’m not a very observant person when it comes to social settings or interactions – I tend to focus on exactly what is being said, processing that - or I’m doing the really big no-no of thinking of what I’m going to say while they’re still talking. But one doesn’t need to read books to learn how to read a person – it’s more about becoming familiar with all the typical “tells” of people – like a card shark who reads the reactions and body language of opponents. I think some TWI leaders were very adept at that – and if you combine it with being skilled at manipulation I think it almost simulates telepathic powers…. Reverend Card Shark picks up on your “weak hand” and by deception / bluffing gets you to go along with his or her line of thinking. That makes me think of the movie Focus – a fun movie to watch about con artists reading and deceiving people. the movie "Focus"

Hey Twinky - after reading your post i remembered the way we were "encouraged" to have just that kind of thankful attitude while in residence - kinda reminds me of the "thank you sir may i have another" scene from Animal House (edited for typo: i originally had it "kinda reminds me of the "thank you sire may i have another" - while probably a little more accurate in terms of my status compared to LCM - in my former frame of mind, anyway - it did not reflect what was said in the movie)

that's a great link too - thanks for adding that one, Bolshevik ! you know, this is one of the many reasons i like coming to Grease Spot....expanding my horizons by picking up on what others share....thanks again !

yeah you could say that about the old class too - PFAL.....man oh man let me count how many times i went to that funeral...

thanks for those cool links, Bolshevik ! it makes sense about finding cancer in dinosaur remains as well as other lifeforms - and it's not just from UV rays; there's enough info available about the health problems caused by ingesting heavy metals whether in a food or water source; this world isn't perfect - carcinogens have always been present - but i think modern man's footprint has definitely upped the ante for those concerned about their quality of life. below are a couple of links that show hits of a Google search: heavy metals in food + water heavy metals in food chain

in my humble opinion - applying the title Diameter of the Ages to Jesus Christ - always sounded kinda clunky or suggesting something high tech - with a sprig of new age thrown in to boot....maybe i'm just old fashioned - i prefer sticking to the titles applied to Jesus Christ that are given in the Bible....anyway i have no interest in his seminar - even though i noticed it was on itunes.

You have a good point there, Jay Dee - there would have to be a ginormous cancer-causing army of devil spirits.... and you know, after i read your post i started thinking about all the people that thru treatment or surgery are in remission or cancer free...what happened to the supposed "poor devils" that were in that malignant tissue? were they "cast out"- or evicted from the tissue when it was destroyed or cut out? yeah, VP's "spirit diagnosis" is a throwback to the dark ages. I read this book when i was a WOW, called World Without Cancer....i've always been technical minded and never really was fascinated by VP's stories of the devil spirit realm; please note my disclaimer: i know zip about the world of medicine, and i have a lot of awe and respect for doctors, scientists, researchers, and any medical professionals really - but one thing i still do after reader that book is i chew up the seeds when i'm eating an apple. It hasn't killed me yet and i read that book in '76. I know what my Aunt Lucy would say to that; when i was 5 or 6 - after she saw me swallowing watermelon seeds - she said there would be a watermelon growing in my stomach. I remember thinking about that for awhile - and thought of the upside to that - i would always have an emergency stash of fruit inside. Maybe she was concerned over the spirit of watermelon i dunno. book World Without Cancer a little off topic here - but sort of related - i'm more concerned how we ourselves in this modern age of technology, manufacturing and development are poisoning our environment, our food, even our bodies; i sometimes imagine if we had special glasses to see all the electromagnetic waves that permeate just about everywhere - even the RF radiation from the very wires that carry 120VAC power to the outlets and lights in our homes - it would probably be as thick as pea soup ! We don't need no stinking devil spirits to mess with our health....we humans have that covered....i'm not an alarmist though - i'm going to enjoy what time i have left on this earth - you won't see me putting an aluminum triangle on top of my head....Zul would spot that right away and then i'll be a goner. now if you'll excuse me i'm going back to my 38 inch Samsung LCD TV - jacked up with an Amazon Fire Stick in the backside and watch another episode of Lost on Netflix....technology is a beautiful thing.

Thanks for that great post, Twinky – and thanks again to Penworks! Hope this isn't too far off topic – but I've been mulling over Penworks' and Twinky's posts – and the dramatic changes that happened in my perspective after leaving TWI. I mentioned that on another thread – after gaining new information from others and what I was able to gather on my own – my attitude towards VP, PFAL, and TWI did a 180. It was a little uncomfortable at first – I don't know if that's growing pains, the ache of engaging "atrophied" parts of my mind…but it's a little exciting too - maybe it's re-kindling that child-like adventurous spirit – that sounds kinda hokey but maybe it's the precursor – I'm growing up to the next phase of my life. Twinky's reference to how a child grows is sort of inspirational in my opinion; maybe growth at any age is re-kindling that child-like adaptability…. Growth implies change – yeah, it may have been triggered by some change in your circumstances, health, etc. but does change always mean that we'll grow from it? I dunno – maybe so – if you can look back on how you responded to a crisis or a long drawn out season of hard times - even if it was a bad response on your part - - before you beat yourself up too much – consider the fact that you're still willing to continue on life's journey. That's growth - - you've at least grown in courage and hopefully gained some wisdom in decision making. I'm thinking there's two ways a person can change - adapt or conform. Is conform the cheap knock off of adapt? I don't know. They may both be a means to change or adjust –but I think the actual process of each is different. Maybe there's some mode switch in our heads. When I switched to the conform mode (and that's the only mode that's acceptable in the way corps program) there was a lot of strenuous – maybe even sacrificial work on my part to whittle down the real me so I could fit in. I guess conformity could be considered the easy route because there's less thinking involved – I'm basically imitating....while also betraying my true self. I do believe that one of the things that made my stint in the way corps program bearable were the times I would activate the adapt mode – like just hanging out with friends, messing around on the bass…exceeding the 2 drink limit (shhh……) at a little bar in Albion and dancing to The Heat is On playing on the juke box. Take it from me – someone who can't dance – that tune will MAKE you get up and move! Everyone has their own way to adapt. Whatever works for you! When we are switched to the adapt mode we're tapping into critical and creative thinking; we're not whittling down who we are to fit in – rather we may be adding something to who we are; re-inventing ourselves as they say….that's growth! A rather oversimplified analogy of the practical consequences of conform versus adapt would be a blade or slot screwdriver compared to a 15-in-1 screwdriver. A slot screwdriver works in only one application – driving a slot head screw. A 15-in-1 screwdriver has the slot bit but also has 14 other types/sizes in the handle that you can switch out (Phillips, Torx, Square, etc.) – it can work in a variety of applications. The conforming process of my way corps training was designed for one application – to mold me into an exemplary TWI follower – a first rate flunky in way-world. But rote learning of things like pat answers and pet verses does not prepare us to appropriately respond and/or adapt in the real world. Adapt means there's more than one way to skin a cat (maybe even asking why should I have to skin the cat in the first place – I'd rather have it as a pet…had one for 9 years btw). Conform means I better do it their way or else! I do think a certain amount of conformity is necessary if we want to enjoy personal freedom; I choose to obey traffic laws and hope everyone else does too – so I can safely get home from work and binge-watch Lost on Netflix. At that point I switch to adaptive mode: set up a TV tray next to the end table, round up a drink, dinner, desert, snacks (some earmarked as treats for our dogs), smartphone, comfy back pillow, Amazon Fire Stick Voice Remote, TV Remote for volume control, pen and post-it notes for when Tonto asks me to do something (…while I'm on a break? Off break? – binge-watching is a lot of work – so it depends on how you look at it). That should get me "tooled-up" for enduring hours on end of getting lost in Lost. I have adapted to "civilian" life so well!

you say familia and i say familiar you say it's magic and i say it's static

I thought you smelled familiar

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)

I am sorry if I've given you that impression from my posts. I do not look at you or anyone else who posts at Grease Spot (or even the lurkers, for that matter) as "the accused" – and as if I wanted to bring some "criminal action" against someone for their doctrinal offence. Perhaps you've noticed the quote at the bottom of all my posts – but I will bring it up into the body of this post: "The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside." [from Closing of the American Mind by Allan Bloom] I'm not interested in bringing anyone to my way of thinking – that's anyone – whether in or out or on the way out or on the way in to TWI. I really just want to draw their attention to the fact that there are options…other possibilities…other ideas and perspectives that have merit besides the typical thought process of the TWI mindset. My viewpoint is just one among a myriad of viewpoints at Grease Spot. My intent is just to get people to think outside the box – whether it's the TWI "box" or some other box – or even their own unique perspective. Heck, intellectually I am even challenged by other posters here – to think outside the little comfortable box I've carved out for myself. I would also like to add a few more points: usually when I post something I have a very wide target audience. It's not just for the benefit of the poster I'm responding to on a particular point, or even the other Grease Spotters. It goes beyond that; for example I'm sure lots of Grease Spotter are sick and tired of me referring to the pajama party incident from my family corps days. Besides being a good incident to highlight certain questionable practices of VP there's something else; I actually do care about people whether they are in or out or on the way out or on the way in to TWI. I have this small hope that someone who was there that day – someone who was in Family Corps 11 or 10; and it triggers some kind of response that will get them to re-evaluate that experience. And there's always something on Grease Spot that can inspire one to re-think their perspective anyway. Of late, I draw a lot of….inspiration….maybe even some direction….guidance from two posts on the Decorum and discussion tones thread – the first is Wordwolf's post # 1 and the other one is Raf's post # 5; I'm not going to give a detailed list of the things that really inspired me – but overall let's just say it helped remind me of the purpose of Grease Spot and to hash things out peacefully when viewpoints collide. I know i am not perfect and don't always come across as one motivated by those two great posts - but that's what i'm shooting for. (uhm - that's shooting for the appropriate motivation - not shooting for perfection) Note post # 1 and #5 on Decorum thread

If you're referring to my silly Star Wars / Raiders of the Lost Ark mash-up in post # 72 with the idol and the Force – then yes – in the context of TWI followers perhaps one of the common bonds may be the high regard some folks have for VP and how that lends "credibility" to the law of believing. Yeah – I know movie references are a dumb way to express my thoughts – but I was trying to bring some levity to the discussion. I was hoping to channel something funny while I bowed before the miniature commemorative statue of Steve Martin (in his stand-up comic days) that I have on a shelf; oh yeah, it's got the white suit – appropriate accessories - matching snap-on white hair, snap-on banjo, and snap-on arrow thru the head. As a side note – I became a little disillusioned with my Steve Martin idol when one day I spotted a similar looking figurine in a window display – it was a miniature commemorative statue of Saturday Night Fever. This little John Travolta had the same white suit but had a snap-on "styled" dark hair accessory and an even smaller statue of L. Ron Hubbard that clips to Travolta's shoulder….but don't laugh and you might think I'm a horrible person for saying this - but I'm thinking of buying it….I mean…I can't dance for $hi_t and I'm thinking with a little inspiration from a dance idol maybe I'll be able to bust a move.

Well I'll be!!!!...Maybe there is something to that saying birds of a feather will flock together – I'm also inclined to asking others to clarify their statements. Yeah you're probably right…I do tend to get verbose. I do apologize for that…alright…. I'll try to curb all the fluff and doo-doo and shoot for brevity – starting with this post….not promising anything though…sometimes the bs just wells up inside me…maybe I should apologize in advance...is there such a thing as writing a blank check for apologies? oh i don't mind the work - i'm keen on the socratic method, citical thinking and all that jazz anyway. mmmmm....no thanks – while that might be interesting – I think we've got enough on the plate already discussing magical thinking.

I'm not exactly sure what you are suggesting the "law" is in Romans 3:27 - maybe you could clarify or specify what effects one should expect, and for that matter what issues (problems) in the effects of believing are you addressing - ....perhaps you could define what "believing" is and how it is taught (if you want to break it up by group (group A taught to TWI general public and group B taught secretly to a select group who know of a different version) is ok too or you could just share YOUR version and/or the unauthorized version - - or any way you want to address my questions. i am wondering if you hold to a different meaning of "law" that goes beyond the natural sense of the passage. The reason i say this is because in preceding posts you have been discussing the official TWI doctrine of believing and the "unofficial" doctrine of believing (known to research staff and others with whom they have shared it with)....not trying to start anything here - it's just that given my track record for misunderstanding />- i'm doing my best to get on the same page as you. guess what i'm saying is that TWI's official doctrine on believing is NOT what's being addressed in Romans 3:27 - (once again - that's the official TWI doctrine on believing proclaimed to the masses - i'm not aware of the other version that you've been talking about) -. I think the natural sense of Romans 3:27 does NOT refer to TWI's doctrine of "the law of believing" even by any stretch of the imagination. Going on the context of Romans 3 verses 27 to 31 (see below) it looks to me that it's stressing proper fulfillment of the law is no longer based on works but on faith; faith being "the new rule" – or maybe the means of compliance in the "process" of justification; whereas the deeds of the law was "the old rule" and meant strict adherence in following the Old Testament laws - even the ceremonial laws in order to be justified. 27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law. 29 Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, 30 since there is one God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law. KJV If one chooses to immigrate to our country and become a citizen they must follow the laws of our land, meeting the requirements to become a US citizen; these would be listed under immigration law which refers to the rules established by our government for determining who is allowed to enter our country - for how long - as well as the naturalization process for those who want to become citizens. once citizens they are afforded rights and privileges. perhaps the kingdom of God works in a similar fashion; in order to be justified in the Old Testament you had to satisfy all the law - moral and ceremonial laws; now in one sense it seems God cut all that legal red tape - it's just by faith now....i said in one sense because i'm thinking about James 2:17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead, NIV ... so whatever "faith" is it seems there's more to it than meets the eye - is it a belief a confidence, or acceptance of something as true plus being accompanied by appropriate action - - and that sort of sounds like works and makes me think of Matthew 3:8 John the Baptist's words Produce fruit in keeping with repentance, NIV. but you know fruit is a product of work - one has to prep the soil, all that gardening type stuff that i know nothing about - water and prune yada yada yada - and voila the fruit of your labors! to qualify this "faith-works" (if there is such a thing) as opposed to the works of the law - is perhaps like seeing a difference between going thru the motions versus putting your heart into it. I could act nice to my neighbor do neighborly things for them - but i could do all that without my heart being into it - just doing that with an ulterior motive in mind....or i could truly love my neighbor as myself - that would definitely put my heart into my actions - then it would be genuine acts of kindness towards my neighbor. ...enough digressing from discussing what is the "law" of Romans 3:27. Another thing that has me leaning toward "law" being a ruling or governing principle in the above passages rather than a scientific principle is that God is portrayed as the one doing the justifying – so he has an active role in the process - - perhaps as one who not only wrote the law he is also the one to enforce the law since he is the controlling authority. There doesn't appear to be any allusion to God being over here – and some independent law over there as though it were separate from Almighty God - functioning autonomously as it were Even thinking about just the definition of "law" I feel strongly enough that some "magical" law of believing that works for saint and sinner alike is NOT what Romans 3:27-31 is talking about; an online definition of "law" that I found states there are two basic usages: 1. The system of rules that a particular country or community recognizes as regulating the actions of its members and may enforce by the imposition of penalties. 2. A statement of fact, deduced from observation, to the effect that a particular natural or scientific phenomenon always occurs if certain conditions are present. an online definition of law TWI's doctrine on the "law of believing" supposedly refers to the 2nd usage – that it is a statement of fact, deduced from observation that a particular natural or scientific phenomenon always occurs if certain conditions are present; wasn't it in PFAL that VP suggested the law of believing works just as consistently as in the realm of science – when you mix 2 parts of hydrogen with 1 part oxygen – you get water; the hitch with this idea is that one cannot observe if certain conditions were met for it to be true believing (maybe a somewhat simplified version of the conditions is presented in Bolshevik's post # 64). But noting usage 1 of the online definition – "law" as a system of rules to regulate actions seems like a better fit for understanding what "the law" refers to in Romans 3:27…..that's just what i make of Romans 3:27 - I could be wrong. ooops ! almost forgot to point out - in the above definition of "law" that i found online - grammatically both are classified as a noun - which is a word used to identify a person, place, thing, idea.......whereas "believing" is a verb.....and i do remember the Way's follow up phrase to that - a verb connotes action....obviously the "law" used in Romans 3:27 is a noun and so is the word "faith" - so that it draws a contrast to the other noun "works" - in stating how we are justified it asks By what law?of works? No but by the law of faith. (edited for clarity)

It will "appear to "work" if you believe it will…please note: in the absence of Wierwille Worship your perception of it "working" may become impaired. This may explain why Han Solo did not really believe in the Force; in another "life" he threw away the idol...you may recall that as Indiana Jones he found a precious idol in a cave - and was needing his bullwhip to escape by using it to swing across a chasm; Satipo was on the other side of that chasm holding Indiana's whip; Satipo says "throw me idol" and Indiana responds "throw me the whip"; Indiana throws Satipo the idol, but then Satipo just drops the whip, runs off, and turns over the idol to Belloq; when he unwraps the idol – voila – it's one of those miniature commemorative statues of VP. Perhaps that is why Han Solo did not really believe in the Force; now you know the rest of the story. ok - i apologize for that misunderstanding