oldiesman

1 hour ago, JoyfulSoul said:

See you at the Rock!

 

JoyfulSoul, wish you would stay.    

31 minutes ago, WordWolf said:

Right. Lots of claims by non-experts who weren't there and whose accounts contradicted all the official reports.  I'd at least respect if you'd just SAY you thought my friend was a liar rather than the cowardly approach of INSINUATING it.  No airplanes- despite people there managing to get footage of the impacts. No airplanes- despite people actually seeing the planes hit.   People who weren't there say there weren't any, so the eyewitnesses and the actual footage must be wrong.

I used to find that sort of disconnect amazing, but it's always been possible, and now it's even easier to have an echo chamber where all the voices agree with you, and all the dissenting voices never reach you. Facebook alone has a lot to answer for, there.

Might as well share my story; perhaps did years ago here it is again, briefly:

Got off the Metro-North train at Grand Central from Poughkeepsie for my daily grind at 45 Rockefeller Plaza, about 5 miles north of the battery and Ground Zero.   Walking to work about a mile away, nothing unusual.    Arrive at the office and one of the partners of the firm wave me over to the television and says that a plane hit one of the towers.     As we were watching the news report, the second plane hit...and we saw it live on the tv screen.      It was astonishing.

As we were talking about the first plane hit, we thought it was possibly an error.    But after the second hit, we realized it was a planned attack.

After a bit, I looked outside the window and looking south, saw all the black smoke.

After about I think a couple of hours, they closed the building completely and evacuated everyone, and this wasn't the only building that was shut down that day.   And unbeknowst to me at the moment, the city also shut down Metro North for a few hours.

So, everybody outside had nowhere to go and literally were open to aerial attack.

19 hours ago, JoyfulSoul said:

Yes, Thank you.  Stevie Kay, what a voice!   I'll start digging around to see what I can find online.

And Joe, it certainly seems like somebody would have compiled all of the golden oldies- this stuff is 10 or 15 before my time.  If you know of any repositories?  Didn't see much on Spotify.

Christ is Coming, PDSTRO, that's enough to make an angry atheist shout HALLELUJAH!

 

JoyfulSoul, here's another potential jewel for you:

https://www.amazon.com/Stevie-Love-Child-vinyl-record/dp/B00Q525DWC

Looks rare... better snatch it up before I do.  LOL.

You're right that's strange, they were prominent in the early years.

Here's a book by Dorothy Owens:       https://store.theway.org/store/just-the-way-it-was/

I never knew of or met the folks on #9 of the list.

20 hours ago, JoyfulSoul said:

15:40 mark, do any of you haters know who this is, the name of the song or where online I can find it ( besides here)?  TIA

 

 

JoyfulSoul, thx for posting.   Ahhh those memories... coming home from Amarillo Tx my first year of WOW, then onto Emporia for the 6th Corps.    Lots of familiar faces to me here, and important to remember Ed and Marian, believers from the Bronx, at 13:37 carrying the load of toilet paper.

13 hours ago, Joe Maslow said:

"Since the 1970s, The Way International has been engaged in a Biblical study of the Greek word pistis, most often translated “faith” in the King James Version of the Bible, to understand its accurate usage in the New Testament. The words “faith” and “believing” in the King James and other versions of the Bible are used interchangeably; however, they are not synonymous. One concern has been that the current English usage of the word “faith” implies no believing action, which the context of many of the occurrences of pistis shows in the Scriptures. Many on the ministry research team continued working this topic over the years, seeking to understand the different uses and usages of this word pistis and the different Bible kinds of faith"

The Way continues to build on the "Gospel of Faith" movement.... that Victor Paul Wierwille took from Kenyon, Cliffe and many others. 

Hi Joe, I think you're referring to the "Word of Faith" movement?     The link below is a little more narrative about it and exposes it as gravely wrong thinking/believing.    Says it was promoted by E.W. Kenyon...  although there were others.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Word-Faith.html

I have to catch myself doing the "name it and claim it" routine... it's still so ingrained in my head and a very bad habit.    It could have elements of "the sin of presumption" which is a big no-no in the catholic church.     Part of the healing process for me, has been to read and memorize catholic prayers...

   Thx for posting this.
   

4 hours ago, Charity said:

I really find your point that man has not changed (I assume you mean mankind and since the beginning of time) interesting and open to various explanations as to why this might be.  One would be the theory based on evolution and another would be the doctrine found in the bible. 

Since we cannot erase the millennia of years where religious beliefs have dominated cultures, looking forward with progressively less religious doctrine to "guide" us would include letting go of the following.

Gal 5:19 Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: sexual immorality, impurity, indecent behavior, 20idolatry, witchcraft, hostilities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions, 21envy, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.

The issue I have with verses 22 and 23 is that non-religious people are quite capable of experiencing what the bible calls “fruit of the spirit.”  This is so obvious, and yet the bible claims they are derived from the spirit.  (I’ve been told that the fruit of the spirit is of a higher quality, a greater degree of excellence, more supernatural than what humans can experience on their own, but there is no scientific evidence which supports this – only subjective reporting.) 

So why does Paul call them spiritual fruit when they’re not?  I think it is to reinforce his belief stated in Romans 7.

Rom 7:14For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am fleshly, sold into bondage to sin. 15For I do not understand what I am doing; for I am not practicing what I want to do, but I do the very thing I hate. 16However, if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, that the Law is good. 17But now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin that dwells in me. 18For I know that good does not dwell in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. 19For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want. 20But if I do the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin that dwells in me.

In Galatians 5, Paul gives a long list of actions associated with the flesh, actions that mankind has been a slave to since the fall of Adam, if you believe Romans 7, and actions that will prevent one from inheriting the kingdom of God (with the unfortunate alternative being cast into the lake of fire according to Revelation 21:8).

Paul is representing man as being evil within, again since the fall of Adam, and upgrading the positive aspects of mankind as being spiritual - originating from a god.  The intended purpose is for people to want to follow his teachings to accept Christ as their lord. 

What would life be like without accepting the above as truth?  I think it would mean accepting mankind for simply what it is - made up of human beings capable of change.  I think endeavoring to understand why human beings can be so full of greed, pride, envy, hatred, etc., beginning with an evolutionary POV, would be more advantageous. 

I think I see what you mean and the issue is complex for sure.   (Bold print above.)   I had a good friend who is now deceased, Al, who believed that every person is born with God's will in their heart, irrespective of whether they're born again or not.   The conscience to do good works, if you will.     The bible teaches this too, in Romans.   Charity I'm going to shorten my response here and ask that you listen to the link below a couple of times and see if it makes sense to you relating to this discussion. 

https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/how-is-the-law-written-on-every-heart

12 hours ago, Charity said:

I think evolving is a good choice of words especially in progressing away from Christian/religious beliefs being imposed and enforced on others.  The "others" here would not only be non-religious folks but also the people within a religious institution who are required to obey its expectations, rules and regulations in order to be accepted and avoid abusive consequences.  

GSC has been good, especially with posts from Rocky, Penworks and others, about the rights and ways one has to stand against the control of authoritarian leaders.

The reality, though, is that all churches and "spiritual" institutions have expectations, rules and regulations.  Most of all, Yahweh and Christ have mandates that must be followed in order to avoid the consequence of hell (however it is defined).  This is why I think atheism (which is simply a non-belief in the existence of god/gods) is not a very bad, difficult or unpleasant thing.

 

Agree in part.   Assuming that death is the natural end of one's existence, eternal nothingness cannot be unpleasant.    But is it very bad?    Well, I would say that to the believer it's very tragic and sad, if there's a whole world of souls living eternally with God while simultaneously there's a whole world that is not.   But perhaps we may agree on one thing: that universal salvation (the belief that everyone will eventually be saved no matter what they believe and/or do) is not the truth?    

Today:  May 10, 2025 melt values are as follows:

Gold:   $3,323.30 per oz.

Silver:   $32.69 per oz.

Some say this 100-1 ratio will not last and that silver is the best buy right now.   Some are advocating trading your gold for silver right now.   For example, one ounce of gold will get you 100 ounces of silver.    But there are others who say that gold still is in upswing mode so wait a bit.    I think that's more likely.

7 hours ago, Stayed Too Long said:

If I was inclined to be involved in a group that believed in God I would have absolutely no problem joining TWI. How can anyone claim that TWI’s doctrines are not based on the bible?
There are over 2,000 other groups who also claim their doctrines are based on the bible. 
How can anyone say their Christian group, out of the over 2,000 in the world, make the claim their group is right?
Why on earth do you believe your group has the a wrap on the truth?

Then throw in all the other religions of the world, how you say your groups belief’s are the correct ones? Somehow, apparently, you have been able to wade through thousands of religions, and pickout the correct ones.
Please assist me in picking the winning lottery numbers! 

 

Agree.    I think we'd have to try each one to understand each... and understanding only one may take up to a year or even more.    I'm still trying to understand the traditional latin mass.     One thing I do believe:  each religion has some truth and biblical principle, and even atheism has some too, as in loving and kindness to your fellow man.   

2 hours ago, Charity said:

JoyfulSoul wrote the following in the "I had a very interesting stop at HQ" thread in the "About the Way" forum:

"I began as a college atheist 45 years ago.  I'm long gone.  Over the edge gone.  Unreachable.  Forever lost.

If we ever enforce a complete atheist, anti-supernatural society, take me first, drag me around back and shoot me."

What would such a world be like without all the supernatural beliefs in a heaven and hell be like?  Or without the concept of a chosen people and a promised land?  Or with the concept of humanism being our motive to love and care for one another?  There are many other "Or" examples that could be given from either side of a supernatural vs atheism POV. 

If ad hominem attacks can be avoided, this could be an interesting discussion.

Agree.   I've read some definitions of it and appears quite "spiritual" in the sense of doing good for your friends and neighbors as a duty.

25 minutes ago, JoyfulSoul said:

I just read this.  All true.  All true.  Except, does that reflect the Way today?  If so, they don't want me there, and I wouldn't want to be there.

 

All love.  Im not on a mission to mess with anything they are doing. 

Your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to (softly) challenge them on belief(s) you hold that challenges their narrative.   LOL...

10 hours ago, JoyfulSoul said:

 

I'm the one saying the Way incorporated a lot of insights into this dysfunction, perhaps the chief of which is that we the laypersons should be studying the Bible FOR OURSELVES.  The Way does that.  They teach that.

 

 

VPW suggested that.   VPW said of PFAL "try it.. if it works for you, you have an answer, if not, kick it."     But like ALL other religions, TWI has and have inviolate positions and interpretations that make it difficult if not impossible to believe something contrary.   Stray from the narrative and you will be out quicker than a fly on s....      They aren't open to change, LIKE ANY OTHER RELIGION.  I personally experienced this in TWI through the tithing teaching when I questioned them up and down on it, they were unmovable, and ready to defend the VPW narrative to the end. 

I really and truly wish I can say they wanted us to read, study and interpret the bible for ourselves but my experience differs.

And don't think for a minute that the Catholic Church doesn't do likewise.   How long do you think I'd last there if I preach PFAL there?  LOL x 2   ...      

10 hours ago, WordWolf said:

If you're so motivated, please send $20 via the donate button.   If you're not, no one is going to bust any part of you over it.  But, yes, it costs money, and donations are cheerfully accepted and rarely solicited.

 

BTW,

I've been to groups where I was never pushed for donations.  Of all things, I was involved for a time with a Catholic church group that never hit me up for donations....although we once did a project to feed homeless, and we did it out-of-pocket. Nobody asked me to, but I opened my pocket.... and in that instance, it actually made a big difference.

 

 

This has been my experience as well, the last few years attending mass.   No legalism.   No compulsion.   Haven't heard a peep about "tithing", "abundant sharing".... although it's always "available" when folks come around.    Nobody watches you to see if you're giving.   Nobody cares.

1 hour ago, JoyfulSoul said:

Thank you.  Thought maybe it was the guy who wanted me to know Chuck Baldwin is a verboten political figure.

I think we may be able to discuss him and his message if we keep it about biblical matters and not political.    Biblical would be 'old covenant' vs. 'new covenant'.   etc. etc.    Admittedly, Baldwin does talk politics a lot during his sermons.. so it will have to be the moderator call to allow it or not.   Whatever Raf decides is ok with me.  Thx.

28 minutes ago, JoyfulSoul said:

Thank you.  Thought maybe it was the guy who wanted me to know Chuck Baldwin is a verboten political figure.

So, who here is Christian?  Anyone wanna get saved?

I do.   And my rebound into Catholicism helps me to examine and critique my steps all the more.