socks

True about leadership, LZ. Course Jess's example never permeated the Corps leadership. He kept his own counsel. Craig, Lynn, Wren, those guys who coordinated the WC campuses were all motor mouths. It was peat and repeat with a lot of verbatim recitation and very little processing going on - result: shallow thinking, lack of depth. I never considered them "leaders" in the real sense of the word. Where Jess took time to think and respond and actually carry on conversations with us, those guys shot off quick answers, witty bs and - IMO of course but I'm not alone - simply did not give any impression of putting in the time or effort that what they were saying was any more than what they'd heard - and was not what they'd lived. They were simply too interested in "teaching" and activities to build their businesses. Jess wasn't like that but he didn't influence on a large scale by virtue of how he lived and worked. He was a one on one kind of guy.

A very interesting topic, indeed. There's a lot of religious thought that has the idea that Alabama3 invoke. I highly recommend their song "Power in the Blood", at high volume. They definitely reconstruct the vibe of those people just itching to get The End started. LCM was a deluded stooge. I have to give myself a few minutes to work up a positive image of him just to not go off on a rip on how lame he really was. However - and if the Almighty is reading this I'm on your side, Sir - there is a tone to the OT and some of the NT that if you flip the Creator off too many times you're gonna get it. I suppose there will need to be eyes and ears on the ground to handle it...you know, that thing. Did you take care of that thing He told you about? Yeah, that one. Good. I'm ready. If it's not the way I expect, doesn't matter, I adapt. It's not personal, it's business.

Yeh, that was always the way it seemed Linda. Long standing employees deserve some consideration, some shwag, all of that, sure, I get that and didn't have a problem with it, I mean none of these people were raking in barrels of money every month as you note. Shelby Co. rent, food and utilities were reasonably priced. But as you probably remember we idealized certan people, made them to be "pillars of the church", the core of the core of the corps of the whatever. Like George Jess - I really liked George Jess, "Mr. Jess", thought he was a very interesting and insightful person. But he was, technically and formally, the "Corps Coordinator" for years - and I don't think he ever said more than a 100 words at any one time and that was only when there was a formal event that called for him to address the Way at some level. Sage presence - sure. Deep thinker, I thought so. Yes, I'm sure he prayed long and hard for all of us and I appreciate that. But leader? Hmmmm....dunno. Not so sure that he really did much of that. It was more like a gesture to a very nice man to put him in that position, I thought. I joked once that maybe VP lost a bet and the winner was Jess, to always have a position as "Corps Coordinator". Least till Craigdale got the job. If he did more than I saw it would have been nice to know about it. He was the "sower" guy, the guy of legend, spreading the seed and planting. Ah, yes. With a hat. And a salary. And a job. And a rake. And a bag o' seed. So yeah, funnnnnnnny memory - back in the day when the 1st corps were running to "the stop sign" every morning - which was just under a mile, big whoopdy doo right? - and they were vaunted as being an uber - corps body, followed by the uber-er 2nd corps who could do it twice or something equally under impressive.........back then.......Del D used to use Randall as the example of a guy who was in "great shape" but wasn't "skinny as a rail" - which was great news for all of us who like Del could grow a gut pretty quick - I think his point was something about how being in good health didn't have that much to do with actually being in good health. You'd have to had known Randall - he was a great guy, and I mean that. 100 per cent good dude. But he was as in shape as a box of Snickers candy bars. But he was Del's Poster Man for being healthy - and he promoted that to the Corps with a straight face. Which was....well, it was probably better than Craig's Super Athlete of the Jock Boy syndrome - but he figured out soon enough that the higher you sat in the Way's echelon, the less number of times you had to keep running to that Stop Sign at 5:55 am - you just could THINK you're spirituality into existence by the sheer power of your own beLIEVing! :biglaugh:

Staff positions/jobs at the Way in the 60's were much different than they evolved into later - Families like the Randalls, the Allens, Owens - they weren't running down to the Lima Mall every night to witness to people and sign 'em up for PFAL. They lived on the farm there or near by and came in every morning. It was a job, with hours, weekdays and weekends. There was a larger commitment of time than a 40 hour work week yes but they had a a private life and a "work life". They worked there, lived there in most cases and came and went on the property 24/7. Late 60's and most of the 70's that was still true - the "Staff" didn't go to meetings every night, all weekend. As the size of the operation expanded people lived locally and had private and work lives. You didn't hire on at the Way unless you wanted to be involved in the effort more than a punch in and out 40 hour week. You wouldn't work there unless you actually wanted to do other things - help with classes, events, etc. However, you lived and worked and had your family with some distinctions between the two. That obviously changed over time, VPW intended to develop the mish mash of "Corps/Staff" employees he eventually assembled - which really got to be a commitment of all of one's time and resources, all the time. He had a way of separating out the long tenured staffers from the flow of those coming in and out in the Way Corps, if you went to work there in residence or after, fine if not you probably weren't going to have much contact with them. Frankly I think it was to keep the oldies happy, he liked them and didn't want to upset the apple cart, at least for a few years there, but it was a very small group of staffers that met that criteria. Only a certain kind of person is going to do that for their whole lives. Oldsters, like Joe and Linda C maintain a lifestyle that's blended but that revolves around ministry activities. That's what they want to do, that's their lifestyle. (or was - just as example - for decades). It's possible to be committed to goals and ideals without being in the same place, doing the same things with the same people, everyday of the week. Some people will have to do that, some of the time but for an entire lifetime? I believe it's healthier for everyone involved to have change and diversity. I'd assume that anyone who's gone there and been there for any length of time is someone who wants that lifestyle of total immersion. It's not for everyone, under the best of circumstances let alone those of the Way's.

"There is power in the blood".... a3

Yeh, I doubt I'd classify John's tendencies as "mental illness" or even that a mental illness is anything other than something that requires treatment. I was in a hospital the other day and notice as I walked through how many people that were there were walking slowly, seemed in pain, had difficulty standing and sitting and some who were out right grouchy and ill tempered. Go figure. It's a hospital. There's sick people there going for help, treatment, their families. A wonderful opportunity to celebrate any ability to do anything and to share it - open a door for someone, let someone else go first, ask if they need help, being courteous and as helpful and positive as I myself can be, if I can at all. I don't know what John's problem really is, mine is arm chair advice from afar. He just seems misguided and his efforts moderately confused. I suppose he does well at things that can be measured, like his SAT prep stuff. Counting the number of people who giggle when you speak or the number of healthy people who say they feel great afterwards isn't exactly a measurement of success. When the Gospel is preached it is a divine message that's being referenced - a lot can happen under any circumstance. I don't doubt there are "results" for people, however powerful or tepid. It sounds like so much of a scam he's running I can only hope there's some benefit from it. Avoid it? Yes, that's best advice to counterfeiting I could give.

That's the idea - don't remember when I started using that, but it was here or WayDoyle, one or the other. (See? WayDale could = WayDeal, or WayDoyle or WayDial or WeighDoll). My mind is an odd place.

Yes, I do johniam. If memory serves, Skip wrote that song. I don't recall that arrangement changing specifically, or how it might have changed, there was a riff yes. Skip's arrangement didn't change that much though as I recall - I remember when we got back together later in '84/Sound Out I tried to work an F to F/9 chord sequence into the turnaround on that tune - tried to 'sneak it in' and of course Skip heard it immediately and we discussed it and kept it to the major F to G. :) How I remember that, don't ask me. That's not meant as a criticism of Skip though at all - Skip wrote great music and was a great collaborator. Chord changes have purpose, changing them changes the sound which addresses the purpose differently when you do. An F to a G is different than resolving to an F/9 - just mention it here to illustrate arrangements. Skip was amazing at learning styles of music and adapting his craft to create music - really unique in his skills. The New Bremen studio lacked the equipment to capture sound without a certain amount of noise, low head room, so some of the reasons for the sound quality is wrapped in that. Mike W did miracles with the board and deck, and the mic'ing we used there. (He was really a talented guy if you knew him, you know). It had a great atmosphere - as I recall we did some of those songs for God's Team in that upstairs studio on the Stevenson board, so that probably had an effect. I don't recall the riff figure being changed though - we may have done something different on the road. Sometimes we did some thicker arrangements than others in performance. Nothing got 'sanitized' though, not in that era. It was recorded pretty much to attain a clean arrangement with the instrumentation we were using.

:) "My Funny Valentine" is a pop/jazz standard that lends itself to that analysis ways'. http://www.jazzstand...nyvalentine.htm (great site too). Marvin Hamlisch, who just died earlier this month, had a thing for that tune - his earliest accomplishments included playing it in any key - he was a bit of a prodigy. It's one of many American standards worth doing some study on. MFV starts in minor, goes to the relative major, and has interesting changes throughout. That's a very standard form, minor to major, or major to minor in the song structure. Years ago after "The Way We Were" was such a hit for Streisand, Hamlisch was quoted in Songwriter magazine as saying his goal with TWWW was to write My Funny Valentine - in a major key. So it was a bit of an exercise for him around certain parameters, plus he said the urge to not be the guy to write a bomb for Streisand. It was definitely a hit. (Still have that magazine, with his photo on the cover, it has stuff I used in lessons over the years but it's dated now). The Way We Were was in a major key and had that melancholic "minor" feel, some tasty melody, but doesn't hit the minor third in the opening lines to establish a characteristic "minor" feel - in fact it only flirts at the minor 7th briefly as a "blue note" for one note on the "memory" - a very subtle use of tone. The whole minor/major thing, the "dark" versus upbeat - it's basic music theory. And the earliest musics of the bible cultures relied heavily on linear monophonic music that used flatted and sharped notes a-go-go. Still do. Minor implies a more serious tone in Western music but does not in all world music by any means. There are similarities that run through different culture's musics though but they don't all mean the same thing to those outside of them. In fact when David and his gang celebrated in song and dance I doubt it sounded like "Father Along" or anything like it. But it reads like they definitely knew how to get down. "Off the Word" is an unwieldy euphemism that is difficult to use meaningfully anyway. Interesting topic though!

Here here, way's, I'm your huckleberry.... But only cuz I love ya man! I have to address this as it's something I've held forth on recently to some folks, in incredible scintillating dynamic. Wish you could have heard the original but alas this will have to do. In the interest of letting the Bible's message speak, such as it is and for better or worse, I hold to a basic premise - let each thing, each part, idea, verse, story, record, passage - stand "as is". With the benefit of investigation, study, illumination and effort yea. And ultimately to present itself as-is, as best I can understand it at the time. That time, and there will be more time to come one hopes but if not, at any given point I know what I know, don't what I don't and get on with it from there. Out of respect for Kit's guidance here I won't address the specific issue you note here but - it is a good example of the method I'm describing. I wouldn't take a single thing that I read about "angels" - they're "spirit" - And then take another thing that I read, like they're encounters with humans in the Bible, or the possibility of being able to encounter them in our lives and "see them" and interact with them - And deduce there's a conflict, that these two pieces of information don't "add up" or make sense when compared to each other. Rather - I would deduce that I now know - Two things about "angels", and that those two things comprise a partial but more complete impression of "angels". Considering that I didn't know anything about angels - at all - before I read about them in the Bible which is the source material you are addressing here. In much the same way that someone might say it's 7:00 pm. And someone else might say it's 10:00 pm. And someone else might say they're an hour late. And someone else they overslept and got up REALLY late. And someone else that they feel sleepy. And all of that as pieces of information to answer the question "what time is it?" Yes, anyone really DOES know what time it is, to answer Chicago's question. We just have to be willing to look at our watches and respond. For anyone who hasn't met an angle though and would like to, I'm available. I'm a real right angle, no fooling!

Poor John as he's called has been through so many doctrinal shifts and shafts I would wonder how anyone who's followed him on even a couple of his digressions can do anything but pray for him at this point. He and his gaggle of followers have promoted such bizarre doctrinal positions that it would seem he and they should be very capable at recognizing the smell of counterfeits - they seem to be champs at finding them and trying them out. And still it amazes me that he tries to get away with his invocation of the past associations with Dr. Weirwille, as if VP would today be excited and pleased as punch over what he's doing. He knows - he absolutely knows - that VP would be hacking up paste knowing the JAL has changed his initial doctrinal platform of PFAL. The drill was - change one word, your whole bible falls to pieces. PFAL was the basic primer and nothing - not a word of it - was ever to be changed as far as VP went. JAL knows that. He knows that he can today invoke the name of VPW for those who miss VPW, never knew him or only know what they've heard, and get away with it. Except for those of us who know otherwise. I do believe some things differently than were held forth in PFAL. Not everything but some things, yes. I won't lie about what that means though. Lie is a harsh accusation - but ol' JAL has earned it. He knows better. God only knows how he talked himself into this self promoting machine he is today - well, it is obvious in some ways but yikes. It's a trip, man.

Oh! Yea, the Way InterNASHional. Just an abbreviation I use.

Interesting side note - at some point earlier in the Way, after the earth began cooling but before animals developed wings, the term "ex officio" was used in the language describing twigs being self governing, financing and propogatin'. The cooperation was described in the relationship between each of the next "ex officio:" levels. I'm sure I wasn't the only one to ask what that meant. I recall it referred to those levels - twig leaders, branch leaders, limb leaders, bark leaders, forest leaders etc. and their non-employee status. In other words the Way was saying that the person designated at that next "level" up or down (or over, if you prefer) was a person who held certain rights and responsibilities without having been actually or formally hired, elected or appointed to that position. I understood their position on this as explained by JT and VP to be that it was to recognize the functionality of the position without potentially binding the Way Internationale Carnivale Inc. to the actions and decisions of that individual who was the ex o fish io. Person. Dude. Woman. In many ways that makes sense and could be a correct way to describe the relationship so as not to make the Way Nash legally responsible for everything a person in that position might do. However - And when we start talking legal ese that's like unloading a bag of tics on a pig - I think any thoughtful person - like someone actually interested in hosting an informal home, family style fellowship - will realize that the entire relationship with the supporting church, ministry or other entities they're involved with - it's completely by choice, non-obligatory and non binding by or to anyone other than the person hosting the fellowship and those who participate. Thus - IMO - the position the Way developed of the "twig coordinator" who was a Way Corps person or "WOW" or someone otherwise representing different and additional non-ex-officio responsibilities to the Way - and "official" responsibilities to the Way - was a hybrid position that was essentially untenable. You can't have an official position holding ex officio responsibilities and completely segregate the accountability and responsibilities of the parent/host/supporting levels. Or at least there's a bundle of tics that would bite that way, IMO. The cooperative effort would have to be without a lot of built in standards, regulations, requirements, rules, etc. etc. - or else that ex officio person/status would be in fact performing duties that were of an official nature, binding between them and the host organization, company, ministry, church, gaggle. Which could actually be the case for a true "ex officio" position. However it would be very difficult to disconnect the two from each other but still impose specific burdens of requirements on that person. Like with the $$$ - all of that. The Way's structure didn't really support a self-govern/finance/propogate unit, staffed by an ex officio position and a person who would be required to YES, HAVE accountability to collect money, donations, fees, registrations, etc. for the host company while NOT having any accountability to the host co. for their actions if either part was proven illegal, damaging, etc. Not sure if I'm expressing this clearly but - For a group that had the vibe of being nothing more than a family style hang at people's homes - They completely went the other direction, formalizing a business relationship - That they didn't recognize officially - since if and when they did, they'd be liable up the yung yung. As with LCM - I'm sure if the right legal entities had smelled his blood in the air that year a case could have been made for the exposure to risk being damaging at all levels of the Way Treigh. As time went on they may have dropped all of it out of sheer ego - why bother? But it was always a system built on trust and honor - anything else would be rife with the potentials for uh, abuse. Humans being what we are, there's no "their mileage may vary" - it will only succeed until it fails and it will fail, eventually. Case closed.

Treated like children? Oh, stop being a baby!

exchaskell, "secular" music - defining secular as being worldly, non-religious, something that is not specifically from or for spiritual concerns - yeah, I've never really found a use for the term, although I admit that the designation does have a purpose. music isn't secular / non-secular in it's basic intrinsic values of tone and rhythm. some would say just the opposite on both sides of the issue, that music is by nature a higher form of communication, expression and revelation. a musician doesn't have a spiritual set of scales versus a secular set. in the same way, a writer doesn't have a spiritual pen and a secular pen they use. but there are songs about cars and songs about God and songs about love and songs about boo-ya! or whatever so.... I suppose there's a position that could refute that but what is plain and obvious about music lends itself to the simplest definition intent, purpose, content - use, is what defines it. so yeah, there's value in having the genre to categorize i guess, but alphabetical and numeric ordering works too. at any rate it's always struck me as an odd term. it may be because music has a deep(er) effect or meaning to some than others, and so doesn't rely on specific lyric content to have specific meaning. music is personal for many people. not all but for many.

I first saw that song in the old Way Song book, the "yellow" one, first copy I had. I sat and read the lyrics one night, before I'd heard the original. It seemed such an inspired song, sent me to another place, I worked out an arrangement of my own for it, different melody to the words. The song ends with these lyrics: There the sun is always shining There no tear will dim my eye At the ending of the rainbow Where the mountains touch the sky. Many things about tomorrow I don't seem to understand. But I know who holds tomorrow And I know who holds my hand.

Hmmm, I guess, "fun times" yeah. I had fun times before the Way and since. I have come to realize that some of the values that many had during their years in the Way weren't that high on my list. Something like "fun times" and comaraderie and such like, I've always had that with people, some people, anywhere anytime. I guess it's my background, maybe being a musician, dunno. Fun times weren't why I got involved in the way or why I left. Frankly I could have had funner times working with others in other situations. Nothing fun about working in Ohio back then - sweaty in the summer, freezing but in the winter. Interesting experience I'm glad I got it but not always all that much fun unless you're making your own. I get the maturity thing though. You have to move on and out or over or whatever direction you take, staying in the Way wasn't going to work long term for me. Would have been nice but not to be.

I'm always the 5th wheel, I guess - I lOVed the kid's tunes. They were fun First time I sat in Mill Valley, CA with Jim and Steve's gang and sang "Camping in Canaan's Land" with all the hootie "ohhhhh I'm CAMPing - CAMPing! - " I practically fell over laughing. Not so much "at" them - well, maybe a little but - mostly because it just sounded so weird. Camping - in Canann's Land - every day....the mind pictures, images....it was just funny. To me and the wif'. As early as them days, in the East Bay, Oakland, Alameda - we weren't singing that many of those kinds of things although we did more as time went on buuuut hey - to each their own. Same with the others - Roll Away, all those. In the Way Corps and at the Way Nash, it was like another planet, a dip into the culture of the east-kinda-mid-west mentalities. "Like a great organ now!".....I think LOL could have been invented as a specific reaction to the phrase "like a great organ now!"..............I mean, really. They were funny. I just sang 'em and moved on or ignored them and didn't if I was in a pis sy mood which was semi some of the time anyway. I was fun to sing most of the time though, didn't matter what the songs were to me, if they were fun. A lot of those tunes that everyone gaggled on as being so great were always a little tweezed to me anyway - personal taste. But along those lines, one of my personal fav's I sang many times over the years, did my own arrangement for and really loved was "I Know Who Holds Tomorrow". That song was really nice, just wonderful lyrics. I'm sure to others it's hokey. That's fine too. Personal taste always tastes...personal.

Well, I can't speak for everyone/anyone else but me self and those I knew took all that to mean what it said - in cooperation with. That there was a process to apply to achieve the result. And it varied in application around the country and the essence was that the fellowships were self governing - a very significant term. For me the intent was to never do anything or everything that I and I alone wanted to do, otherwise I wouldn't have hooked up with the Way to begin with or would have left to do other things immediately after my initial efforts and had a different relationship with them. The idea for me was, in fact, to work in cooperation with and have the benefits of that relationship as a contributor and recipient. Most of the "Twig" coordinators, leaders basically became order takes as time went on though, they were required to be. It's not an "it was this and then suddenly it became that" kind of thing. There were goals, intents, interests that developed over time and became more evident. For me many of the original ideas I understood that were being discussed happened, others simply didn't or were dropped. Things did change and as sky notes, everyone's lives would have brought other things to the top for them to manage. Chang e was going to happen however it came down the pike. The Way wasn't built to truly change through growth however, imo - not very well, at least.

So far, not much of what shiftthis has posted is true to fact. It's not even good drive-by trolling - "he and the co-pilot never witnessed anything that you say VP did. "........... "obviously you wernt around when VP was alive. ".......... "everybody that was around back them knew who blond haired slim built John Race was"......... "i talked with him about what you accuse VP of and he was quite shocked. he was close to lcm and vp and said he never heard of such. " Uh yeah. "close to lcm and vp"....what's that mean? How close? And when? the closeness? Just wonder but not much to be honest because this who-he and what they said may be like the guy who said VP may have had some free love back in the 70's before he became a minister.....I mean, any one who did know VP or LCM or was in the Way and at the Way Nash at that time wouldn't take that statement seriously. I guess it's worth point out though if only because it's so ridiculous. None of which has anything to do with the original topic anyway.

I said I avoid public discussions of certain kinds of things - and specifically on "facebook", which is the part of this thread I'm taking as context. I don't consider thrash and burn on facebook useful. Political involvement and participation in the process - yes. I prefer to engage under different conditions with people, where my time, money, intellect and influence can be felt and have some sort of measurable impact. Facebook - or fookback as I sometimes call it - is fun and has it's uses. It does have an influence, and it can be measured by things such as "likes" and numbers of "friends" but it's not a serious tool or platform for business, financials, research, stuff like that. You can get just about anything going on twitter and facebook but they tend to serve communication where analysis and validation aren't required. Politics is unethical as it's conducted today and largely serves the LCD in the population. We need to lift all discussions to higher levels, at the leadership level, to make significant progress. Something like facebook can be part of that. I avoid the crap-fests for the most part, although when I get a bee in my brisket buzzing I may burn a screed or two.

Definitly, lots of action on important topics, issues and ideas. Biggest Summer Surprise for me is that I never thought crappy fast food fried chicken could ever get more popular than it already was! What throws a wrench in discussion, more like a cloud of dust, is how easily people label others as "haters". This isn't a political discussion going on here, of course (Thor forbid!) so consider this just for purposes of illustration: I personally believe that the Bible, communicating a divine intent, does not support "same sex" orientations, relationships or marriages. I also don't believe that one's "orientation" - such a strange term to describe a basic part of our natures - is always or entirely a matter of choice. (Simply because I didn't or don't choose mine - it's what I was born as. To try and change it by choice would be like choosing to put Canola oil in my coffee - I'm just not going to like the way that tastes. Someone else might. But a case can be made that while Canola oil isn't suppposed to be in coffee, it can be put in coffee if you like it, and only someone who does like it would........not a great example but bottom line - I don't choose my orientation and neither do many others, as I understand it). ] So I don't think that the issues in and around that topic are served well by being polarized around the label "hater" if you hold a position that supports one or the other of any number of different positions on that topic. But - to many I would be a "hater" if I participated in the discusson from an opposing view - just a big ol' hater. Some people are, and have been and will be - I recognize that. I don't feel like a hater, don't think I think like one, don't even dress like one - but yeah. Hater dude, just a big ol' hater. :o So I do avoid public discussions of certain kinds of things because there's an element of people that try to smother the discussion and exchange of ideas with labels and constrictions and push everyone into a corner. Unfortunately they're often the loudes and gaudiest and get the most air time - I am one of what I think is a growing majority of people who simply aren't going to participate in that, are tired of all the effort and money that's wasted in counter productive methods and efforts, and is looking for leadership that will be intelligent, open, honest and consistent to our country's constitutional foundations that set direction and guidance for our personal and collective freedoms. Labelling everyone who differs as a big ol' Hater isn't going to work and is only going to allow actual hate and aggression to be fostered and churn more IMO.

Our understanding of the doctrine of salvation is always the basis for understanding sin - Christ redeems from the 'curse of the law', the consequences of sin, death. Christianity believes the death of the physical life is not the death of our life, but we are 'new' people, in Christ, through Him. Both the natural state of man and the actions that come from it are 'redeemed'. There should be a fundamental understanding of who we are in that mix - anyone who considers it will realize that 1. they didn't decide to be born and 2. given the decision they might not actually decide to have 'sin', to be sinful or to have an 'enmity' between them and God. One might also say that of course they're not going to always be perfect or do the right thing and that it's unrealistic for anyone, particularly their Creator, to expect that. We find in Jesus Christ however that it is. So, mankind finds themselves in this situation of separation from God. The Christian doctrine is of Jesus Christ, the 'logos of God, a redeemer and perfect expression of God's heart and intent. Love factors into that - in a big way and a new way, that we see in Jesus Christ. Less now the 'letter' of a law but rather the heart of the intent of a person. That then leads to the correct - call them 'behaviors' - not the incorrect ones. The love of God leads us to repentance, the love of God leads us to believe and accept His salvation, the love of God leads and inspires us to live 'godly' in our lives. Not ungodly. We learn, yes. We will do those things that Jesus Christ redeemed us from - before we know and 'believe' - and after. All of it, our whole lives. This assurance of our salvation is basic - grace and mercy, all of that. It is not sound Christian thought - to accept that our sin is of no consequence however - we do have to recognize that our calling is to a 'walk' that represents our faith. We're going to do those things, that's a gimme, we know that. But there has to be - call it a consistent - recognition of the who/what/when of all this. If we don't we risk ending up thinking 'so what?' - all men are sinners, that's no big deal, it doesn't matter what I do. But it does, the N.T. speaks to that extensively - that to survive and thrive in this life we must consistently come back to God for our salvation, our fulfillment. I think it's basic to building a strong Christian community to understand those basic things and then to understand that not all, not everyone, and not everyone all the time anytime, are going to be best suited to taking additional 'responsibility' within that community. All can help, all can give, all will have needs. A community works together around their fellowship in Christ. Not all are going to be 'leaders' or 'teacher's - not all should be. But everyone can serve and be served. I have great respect for the Bible and anyone who wants to study it and teach it. And all the basics of Christian faith apply to all. Paul is the iconic example form the N.T. - we don't know what all he did - he seems to have been a very human character - but we do know from the information in the N.T. that he painted a clear picture of how to behave in the church, that community and what was required of a pastor, a person who served. There's no question about that and no one, including Paul himself, rises above that.

Sorry, I hadn't read this entire thread until today. Much of what I've posted is peat and repeat, so I'll try to move to another of the sub topics. I noticed this statement from an earlier post of shiftthis, restating something that another person he understood to have a close relationship with the Way had told him: " he did say that maybe VP had some sex back in the free love of the 70's before he became a minister and so what "if" vp did." Amongst all the rest of the discussion on this thread I think this highlights a reality - and that is, people can indeed say anything they want now, and there are probably 100's, 1000's of versions of the Way, VPW and the history involved. VPW was a denominational minister long before the 70's. He didn't use the ministerial designation after he went on his own, no "Rev." used at all by the time he firmed up PFAL on film. "Dr.", yes. The "free love" era is the 60's - by the 70's, I think they were charging for it. If VPW maybe had some sex in the 60's or the 70's with women that weren't his wife, that's not good. That would be considered a problem that he would need to work out. There might be situations and circumstances, fine - doesn't make it right and long term - that's a no go in God's Word, that disqualifies a man from ministry in the body of Christ if they can't get their minds right - and even the laws of the land frown on it. Shiftthis's friend is wrong. But hopefully VPW had more than some maybe-sex back in the 70's - he was married and had children. I'd think - well, that's really more of a private area of one's life, usually. If shiftthis's buddy meant that maybe VP had some sex in the 70's - that was long after he'd completed the process to form the Way International, Inc. and would have been right in the middle of a period in the Way when he was most active in travel and site building (Emporia, Gunnison, Rome City). The Way Corps program was fully realized, WOW Ambassador program, etc. etc. VPW was in Christian ministry for decades before the 70's. As those years and later ones fade into the mist of time, decades from now it may be that no one's going to care one way or the other. It behooves us today to get our hearts and minds right however and in our best interests, as God has set them out for us to live.