waysider

Never buy generic caviar! OK--- I'm just goofin' In theory, the generic version should be the same as the name brand, especially with drugs. In reality, though, that is not always the case. I do not take anti-depression drugs but I know people who do. They all tell me that the effects of the generic versions are not the same as the name brand. I'm not a pharmacist. I don't know why that should be. I just know that, that is what they relate to me. That's especially significant because these drugs are not like aspirin wherein you take some and experience the effects shortly after. You might have to take a particular drug for a month or two before it becomes evident if it is going to work for your situation. That's a lot of time to invest in something that may or may not work.

Jonny I just posted behind you on another thread. I'm not stalking you, honest. With all due respect, I think what you are talking about in your post is having faith in God and believing in His ability to delivery what He promised. I think there are probably a lot of folks who share that belief with you, myself included. That is quite different from the "law" of believing that was promoted in The Way. I don't disagree with you. I simply think we are confusing two different things as being the same. TWI's version wasn't about the goodness of God, it was about one's ability to manipulate a formula.

Jonny I see your point, I really do. For the record, I, too, have stated many times that I had lots of good experiences in TWI#1. What I have difficulty understanding is why there are people who insist that, because they saw good things during their involvement, anyone who had contrary experiences must be mistaken. I personally saw some very sweet times and also saw things that were blatantly wrong. I am thankful for the good things I saw yet I'm not so naive and oblivious as to obscure the memories I have of events that were clearly not in alignment with what I understand to be God's Word. I, for one, have no problem with someone cherishing their fond memories. I know I cherish mine. I think it is wrong, however, to insist that their experiences must represent the true nature of the organization. Well, that's just my opinion.

Ever wonder why people who extol the virtues of cliches such as "it's the word, the word and nothing but the word" and "the integrity of the word is at stake" and "having done all, STAND!." seem to have a stubborn reluctance to look at information that is readily available here at GSC? Could it be because one of the "big things they learned in PFAL" was to never allow themselves to question or doubt? I mean, hey--------That's how the devil was able to trick Eve,right? (Or so we were told in PFAL.) Man, that was one powerful lesson!

It was a dark and dreary night and the Captain said to Pedro"---------------------------------------- No offense, D. , but what does any of that have to do with the fact that what was represented in PFAL as being "The Word, etc." was , in many places, inaccurate and exemplified Private Interpretation? It was a catchy phrase, no doubt. But, is was designed to rally the sales force to go out and push the product(ie: PFAL). Go back and read the information on "actual errors in PFAL" and the tell me why it is you think it (PFAL) represented "The Word, The Word and nothing but The Word".

I peeked, too, Mr. Strange. I can't believe I missed it. This is a really good one!

When I was a kid, I had a nasty accident and fractured my arm in multiple places. But, HEY!----- It was worth it because I got some really good ice cream in the hospital. -----IT'S THE WORD, ETC. ETC.------------ Geeze, Deciderater, have you even taken the time to review some of the information here regarding the PFAL class? Do you not realize that, not only was it lifted from other sources, some of it was downright inaccurate? I mean, if you really believe that stuff about how it's "The Word And Nothing But The Word" it seems like it would have you outraged that the PFAL class(and VPW) fell embarrassingly short of delivering just that. Maybe you could review the article that deals with "actual errors in PFAL" and then comment on specific points that you agree or disagree with. That might be a good starting point for a discussion of the subject. Of course, that's assuming you actually want to discuss it and not insist people accept your opinion blindly.

100% stumped!

Hi there, Deciderator. Welcome to GSC.

Sister Rosetta Tharpe

VPW was a con man. That statement has nothing to do with whether "this" scripture or "that" is true. It has nothing to do with whether one person had good times and another had bad. Its a simple statement of the obvious. Now, it's understandable that some will try to rationalize their involvement. No one likes to think they invested in a losing proposition. I remember when there was a popular phrase going around the religious groups that went something like this: "God said it, I believe it, that settles it." A group of "believers" got together and had a plaque made with that on it and gave it to VP. They thought it would "bless" him. He then proceeded to publicly chop them to pieces (I think it was at an SNS) and ridicule their knowledge of "The Word". He said (and this is pretty close to the quote as I remember it) " God said it, that settles it, it doesn't matter what you believe." Now I suppose someone will come back and say "Oh, yeah?, then what SNS tape is it on?" Know what? Don't care. Like Dottsie said at his funeral; "He was a mean, mean man".

Sounds more like "The Rise And Fall Of Mankind".

Well, there are some here who will assure you they WERE the good 'ol days.

Catcup Yea, you are probably right. Must have been Lima. Weird, though, isn't it? Seems like a million years ago and yesterday at the same darn time.

I remember bless patrol at one of the early ROA's. I think it was 1973. It was that one that was at a fairground that was only used for one Rock.( Allen Co., maybe?) I was not on bless patrol but some of the people in my twig were. It seems they told me their prime objective was to stop unauthorized visitors(ie: gate crashers) from entering without paying for a ticket. There were other ones who were assigned to helping people set up tents and some who emptied trash cans and so forth. How it evolved into a security force, I don't know.

Oldies No, I do not think the verse in Matthew is literally true in a word-for-word sense. If one takes it to be literally true, it clashes with other sections of scripture such as God not being a respecter of persons. It also puts a real damper on the concepts of grace, mercy and forgiveness. If it were literally true, God would have to show favoritism to those who "believe" the biggest. What about a person with autism who does not connect with the world around them? Does God preclude that person from receiving his blessings? What about a person with severe mental retardation? Are they spiritually excluded from God's goodness? I don't pretend to know the absolute meaning of that verse but somehow I think that maybe there is more to it than appears on the surface. "Believing" is a real entity. I don't discount its existence. I don't, however, think you can change the physical world around you one iota simply by using some mental process called "believing". You can not think something into or out of existence by thought alone. You have to take some form of physical action. HEY!, levitate a table. What? Not relevant to God's word? Why, sure it is. It could help you prove your assertion that there is a "Law Of Believing". The real heart of what is being discussed here(IMO) is not the "law" of believing but the fact that TWI took scriptures and, rather than actually try to see how they could be applied to life, perverted them and used them to suit their own purpose. And that, my friend, is why a discussion of "love" and "adultery" is appropriate in this thread.

More like Hank III.

Thanks, DWW Will we hear more detail regarding your time as a WOW?

Hi. Jonny '67 Wildcat! That was one beeyotchin' ride! See, here's the thing, Jonny, you didn't go to God and demand.(and you were thankful.) There's really a big difference between what you posted and what was pushed on people as The Law Of Believing. It's not unique to The Way. Now we have "The Secret". There have been lots of others. And, a lot of non-TWI groups expound the theory of "What you confess, you possess". I heard a lady on the news the other day make the comment that she would not suggest her missing daughter might have met foul play because to do so would be to accept it as a reality. I'm quite sure she was basing her statement on her particular religious beliefs. What this really involves is the idea that you can make things happen in the physical world by directing them with your thoughts.(ie: if I say I am concerned she may have met foul play, that increases the chances she did.) That is very different than humbly going to God in prayer and thanking him for his blessings. I still believe God can answer prayer. I no longer believe it has anything to do with how strongly I "believe". That's just my opinion.

McArthur's Park is melting in the dark All the sweet green icing's flowing down Someone left the cake out in the rain I don't think that I can take it 'Cause it took so long to bake it. We may never have that recipe again.------------Jimmy Webb

I specifically remember hearing VPW brag about how assignments were done by revelation. He bragged because he said it contrasted with the way that mainstream religion assigned missionaries. (basing them on "sense knowledge" information.) He even did a little smug, mocking imitation of them. Anybody remember that? It wouldn't be so ridiculous if he didn't turn around and do the very thing he mocked. What a crock!

Technically, everyone is born with cataracts. When you were still a fetus, the lenses in your eyes were connected to and nourished by the hyaloid arteries. Shortly before birth, these arteries dissolved because their purpose had been served. Small pieces of them remain in your eyes(in the fluid part) and float around for the rest of your life like "space junk". You can't see the pieces but sometimes you will see shadows of them being cast on the back of your eye. These are commonly called"floaters". The point at which these arteries were attached to the lenses is called Mitendorf's Dot.( Named for the person who discovered it). It is actually a cataract. However, this is not the type of cataract that generally causes problems. Cataracts, other than Mitendorf's Dot, are caused by an interruption of the metabolism of the lens. (The lens never stops growing, much like your hair and finger nails. At some point in time, it gets so big and thick, it can no longer flex back and forth to focus so you wind up with bifocals.) So, if the growth process is interrupted by drugs or disease or trauma, such as blow to the eye from a car wreck or sporting injury, there will be an inconsistent growth pattern in the lens.( Ever see this type of thing in a finger nail?) Trauma from the use of forceps at birth can even cause an interruption in the growth pattern. Some cataracts advance very rapidly. Some grow very slowly. I don't think anyone really knows why. Well, that's way off topic from LASIK but I hope it shed some light on your question.

Me 3.

Ahhh! Parenthood. It's that time in life when you really begin to understand the meaning of the word"dilemma". If you get them their shots, it might have an adverse effect. If you DON'T get them their shots, they can't go to school. Hang in there Mrs. B., we're all pulling for you . And speaking of pulling, before you know it, they will be asking to borrow the car and you'll be "pulling" your hair out. You'll look back and smile and reflect on how big our God really is.