Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Oakspear last won the day on April 15

Oakspear had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

93 Excellent

About Oakspear

  • Rank
    The Way? Who're They?

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

9,344 profile views
  1. Pretty interesting stuff. Great context from the journalistic and medical folks. While I do not discount out of hand claims of miraculous events, I am a skeptic and my mind usually scans the horizon for mundane explanations. A believer will often scan for supernatural explanations. And the nature of that supernatural explanation will usually depend on the predetermined mindset. A Christian might interpret a certain event as God's intervention, a new-age type might credit Reiki, a guy I once knew would almost certainly point to aliens! That voice that you think you hear, or that feeling you have? Jesus, Allah, Krishna, HAL from 2001, too much of your favorite recreational drug?
  2. Great example of Wierwille completely misconstruing, misunderstanding or possibly misrepresenting what Bullinger wrote in order to bolster a completely different position. Bullinger wrote that "idios" meant to "unloose" (or loosen) and the other occurrences of similar words confirms this (context, right?). Bullinger used the example of hounds being loosed upon the game, with the emphasis on loosed, where Wierwille emphasized the "upon the game" part, inventing the part about the dogs being somehow frenzied and wild. After a while both Bullinger and what the Bible actually said were ignored and Wierwille's dubious explanation elevated to the status of "the meaning of the word"
  3. Oakspear

    Got a Life!

    "Drive-By Posters"...ah, those were the days! Greasespot Cafe is one of the things that helped me to get a post-TWI life. From the early days, when I was still an innie, venting about various nonsensical Way things, to being an almost daily poster and moderator; commiserating with other posters who were getting divorced from hard-core Way cultists to eventually moving on to other things. I've had the privilege to meet 30 or 35 of you over the years at the Jack Daniels Weinie Roasts, a wedding, my Oakspear 2002 North American Tour and some of you stopping in Lincoln for a cup of coffee or a beer on your way to somewhere else. A few of you I stay in touch via Facebook or Twitter. Since I got out I've changed careers, started a small business as a wedding officiant, as well as developed a photography hobby into a (money-losing, alas, I get paid in CDs and band t-shirts!) side gig. I'm coming up on 15 years of marriage in a few months - best decision I've ever made! Life is good!
  4. Just got involved in The Way Corporation in March 1978
  5. I don't come here that often any more...is this 'Revival & Restoration' group another splinter group? New as of 2017? Just another bunch of 'enlightened' knuckleheads
  6. I never lived at any of the so-called root locales, but out in "the world" we did everything that non-Way people did, we just called it "Household Holiday". They talked a good game about not being observers of days & seasons, but didn't have the balls to walk the walk
  7. I took the PFAL class in Flushing in '76 and lived in Kew Gardens through '80 before moving to Nebraska
  8. The subject of whether or not someone is a Christian and how to determine that was not meant to be a major part of this discussion. My fault for including that one sentence at the end of my initial post. My point in starting this topic was to discuss the lengths some people go to in order to harmonize biblical contradictions. The criteria that the writers of the bible set down about what makes someone a Christian might be an interesting topic, but I ask that a separate thread be started if discussion on that topic continues. I'm sure the mods could move any relevant posts if asked. Again, my fault for leaving an opening by including that one sentence.
  9. I expect that it's a given that anyone posting on this thread knows that we don't have the originals and have no access to them. However, despite this, we (on this thread and in other places) discuss "the bible", what it says, what's in it and what its meaning is all the time. We have a collection of books that some time around 1600 years ago (referring to what we call the New Testament) were collected into a canon of scripture. Understanding that what we have are versions and translations of various manuscripts that underwent copyists' errors and do not all agree with each other, we can still manage to ahve a discussion about the bible. Resorting to "you don't know that, we don't have the originals" leaves us in the place where any discussion is pointless. We don't have the originals and no one knows precisely what was in them or what was changed before some of the earliest manuscripts that we have appeared, but we have what we have, and what we have contains contradictions.
  10. There are many definitions, back in TWI we supported Romans 10:9 & 10 as the confession that got us Christianized, some denominations rely on "repent and be baptized (Acts 2) as the gold standard. I've heard some say it's "accept Jesus into your heart". Still others require water baptism. Many just claim to "believe in Jesus". And of course there's those who emphasize the outside, the works, maintaining that reciting a formula is worthless without acting like Jesus. Most, if not all of these different groups can point to and interpret some section of the bible to support their view, and if they can't, so what? Who am I, or you, or anyone else to decide whether anyone else is a Christian?
  11. I've said it before on this thread...in any category or "rung on the ladder" it depended on the individual the degree to which they could be a victim or oppressor or somewhere in between. Surely there was enough variety to demonstrate that there is no one-size-fits all description. The degree to which a person who was inclined to be an "oppressor" actually was able tp act oppressively depended on the degree of authority that they had within the TWI structure. As a WOW, we could all be jackasses to one another, but it was only the WOW coordinator who could do it "officially". In a twig setting anyone could be judgemental and nosy about the details of others' lives, but only the limb coordinator could mark and avoid you...etc, etc.
  12. Or, as I believe, Paul and the writers of the gospels simply had differing opinions; later church leaders and theologians had to find a way to make them fit together, a late example is dispensationalism.
  13. I presume nothing in my observation that there are contradictions in the bible, they're all over the place, some major, some minor. There are different conclusions one can derive from that observation: one is that there are only apparent contradictions that need harmonizing, another is that the bible is a book wherein you would expect contradictions, because it was written at different times by different people with different agendas. Other conclusions are possible. I hold to the definition that if one self-identifies as a Christian, then one is a Christian. I do not believe that any one person can make that determination for anyone else.
  • Create New...