Rocky

I hope that was satisfactory, Oldiesman.

LOL... seeing the word live there was a simple case of cognitive dissonance.

And easier to steal undetected.

Let's face it. The technology has arrived. Don't blame the government. It's far more secure for retail establishments to transact with cards. The hassles of dealing with cash make financial institution fees a simple cost of doing business, and less expensive to the business establishments. So, yes, we are moving in that direction. However, I don't see cash as being outlawed any time soon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry

Speaking of LOVE... this seems to illustrated it well.

Should we check the history of Xerox? Oh, and btw, here's an intriguing YT short about LOVE. Do you think the best way to love this puppy is to love his words?

Sounds like you are still trying to rationalize/justify your apparent bibliolatry. Which means you (again) seem to completely miss Charity's point. Though others apparently DID get it. So, to you, walking in love equates to what the Pharisees did? Knowing scriptures (and collaterals) better than anyone else and self-righteously flaunting that knowledge?

Is that where you want to leave this? If YOU believe Charity did not receive the message you intended to send, what's your responsibility? Are you content with blaming her? Or, do you seek excellence in communication and figure out how to make your intended message more clear to your readers?

And a legend in his own mind?

And as per usual, he had a lame rationalization for it.

Of course!

Which he went and actually did.

Isn't that circular "reasoning?"

Alas... Mike's "reasoning?"

If only!

Those are intriguing words to use. But are they the same as worshiping the book(s) (anthology)?

So what you're fishing for is exterior validation, which you're not getting yet? Why would you need to have anyone agree with you? Leaders don't generally need to beg for it.

Do you really expect Mike to be able to cogently answer your question? Even if he tried, how would/could Mike credibly do so?

Looks to me like lashing out in frustration.

Other than my brain/mind immediately going to "we can only love others as much as we live ourselves," to "as much as we love ourselves..." which happens because I apparently heard and repeated the "love ourselves" enough times when quoted/expounded from Matthew 22:38 to have it indelibly imprinted in my mind... I am disinclined to parse any of the words in that quote. I take it as an organic whole. As such I think it's brilliant and a wonderful basis for living life. In that sense, I see it as aspirational, rather than cause for judging either myself or others (i.e. Mike). Nevertheless, it doesn't preclude measuring people like Mike and his words/actions, against what I've learned over the course of three decades since I started exploring psychosocial matters with a view to understanding myself... and hence others too. IOW, I can accept Mike as a "seeker who decided" and separate that from his advocacy for all things Wierwille.

Further discussion, exposition of love is taking place on the new thread Charity has started.

What a wonderful idea you had, Charity, for this discussion topic. Thanks for this.

Do you really think there's any question about Mike's credibility? I mean, REALLY???????