It's much more convenient to talk without all the clutter.
My answer: no deception and trickery on God's part... OF COURSE!
Then why did you say there was? You said God hid it because otherwise nobody would move it over the world. Like I said, that's using deception and trickery.
Not to mention, it suggests God doesn't trust us.
Quote
Can we hit a reset button and start over on this?
If so: I simply think a lot more was going on behind the scenes, there was a spiritual war going on. In addition to what initially blessed us in the class were hidden blessings we did not know about.
What I intended to communicate to you on this was not even close to riding the boundary like the actual deception controversy some parents go through on whether to teach the Santa Claus myth to their children.
There's a spiritual war going on? Why wasn't I told? "Soup is soup, apple butter is apple butter" and deception is decption.
Quote
Why do you want to characterize is so? God put more into the class than the benefits listed on the Green Card. That's a good thing. That's what I intended to communicate.
Because I call a spade a spade. The bible says God is not a man, he caannot lie. Yet your claiming he used deception, trickery. and lied--all methods of the devil
Quote
***
I'd like to hit a reset button on a couple of other issues. Are you into it? I'm getting weary of the angst. I've been reading up on some of the active posters' backgrounds and am getting some surprising (to me) reactions. I mentioned the other day that a (major?) reason I've come back after 10 years absence is because of the nostalgia factor.
And where do you think that angst is coming from? And what do you think is causing that angst?
Quote
By putting together 2 plus 2 it has been becoming apparent to me that, try as I might, "lightening" up may be somewhat impossible... at least not at this time. In my nostalgia I am relating more to the recurring pain some posters feel.
My pain was far less, never being in the Corps, and not having that leash. My pain subsided around 1998, after being away from TWI for 10 years.
As I said in the above post, you should look at those times when you cry lighten up. What was it you said about attacking the messanger? Maybe the return message is a little too much for you to handle
Maybe the return message is a little too much for you to handle
No. I developed a thick skin long ago for what others feel about me.
What is new is this past week I've been reading peoples' story threads, and a few other threads that give me a better picture of whom I'm posting with. I remember penworks from way back in the 1970s and her story is fluffing up a lot of my nostalgia feathers.
Someone mentioned Kris S and her radio story. I remember her from my earliest days at Rye. I was probably more aware of her than she of me, but I feel like I knew her.
One of the reasons I post here, instead of going to other clone ministries is the freedom of speech here. That does not exist in any way, shape or form in any other ministry. The slightly proPFAL clone ministries out there are determined to move farther and farther from PFAL, and they tolerate my message FAR LESS than anyone here.
But I’m beginning to see that my message could be causing pain that need not be, and could even hamper some people in their genuine attempts to lighten up.
Freedom of speech is here, but freedom from pain seems a lot farther off than I had anticipated. I really thought that the pain here would be a lot less after 10 years.
That’s what I mean by my desire to hit the big reset button.
No. I developed a thick skin long ago for what others feel about me.
What is new is this past week I've been reading peoples' story threads, and a few other threads that give me a better picture of whom I'm posting with. I remember penworks from way back in the 1970s and her story is fluffing up a lot of my nostalgia feathers.
Someone mentioned Kris S and her radio story. I remember her from my earliest days at Rye. I was probably more aware of her than she of me, but I feel like I knew her.
One of the reasons I post here, instead of going to other clone ministries is the freedom of speech here. That does not exist in any way, shape or form in any other ministry. The slightly proPFAL clone ministries out there are determined to move farther and farther from PFAL, and they tolerate my message FAR LESS than anyone here.
But I’m beginning to see that my message could be causing pain that need not be, and could even hamper some people in their genuine attempts to lighten up.
Freedom of speech is here, but freedom from pain seems a lot farther off than I had anticipated. I really thought that the pain here would be a lot less after 10 years.
That’s what I mean by my desire to hit the big reset button.
So since you can't defend your claim that God decieved us, you want to change the subject.
But, what if it's a "Thus said The Lord." statement?
There could be a hidden message in there that none of us has seen.
I'm seriously re-considering what it is I'm doing here. I think I may have broke So_crates merrygoround. I think similar things are happening with other posters. THAT is not my intention. I thought that BY NOW, after a couple of months of posting, that the shock value of my message would have worn off a little. It seems it is not.
Is there any way I can discuss these things, even answer questions, without provoking such negative emotions?
When people ask you simple questions that require simple answers, answer them in an appropriate fashion.
I rarely see simple questions. They are usually loaded.
I see them as set-ups for ending a discussion. I can handle that to my satisfaction, but if it's ALWAYS at the expense of other people, then I need to re-think.
When people ask you simple questions that require simple answers, answer them in an appropriate fashion.
The "Christ formed" issue is one that I want to research on. I don't have the answers there; just some hints that intrigue me. I feel it's the frontier of research. It needs some positive brainstorming, not contentious debate.
I'm seriously re-considering what it is I'm doing here. I think I may have broke So_crates merrygoround.
**Broke my merry-go-round? Really, you give yourself way too much credit.
I think similar things are happening with other posters.
**Old Yiddish proverb: When the first man calls you a donkey, laugh at him. When the second man calls you a donkey, punch his lights. When the third man calls you a donkey, buy a saddle.
If you find yourself having trouble with a lot of posters, perhaps you should look at what YOUR doing.
THAT is not my intention. I thought that BY NOW, after a couple of months of posting, that the shock value of my message would have worn off a little. It seems it is not.
**Please, quit blaming it on the shock value of your message. It about as shocking as finding out water is wet or fall follows summer.
5 minutes ago, Mike said:
Is there any way I can discuss these things, even answer questions, without provoking such negative emotions?
Like errors in PLAF and the fact Saint Vic couldn't recieve revelation, you can't defend it so let's sweep it under the rug.
What I'd like to do is sweep all the angst under the rug. There is more of it than I had imagined would be, so I want to back off from my hard hitting style. Is there any way you and I can do that?
I was only kidding about the merrygoround because I thought you were into the animation scene.
I did not mean to be THIS annoying to you or to a few others here. I just want to discuss things. I use that hard hitting style when people come after me with their hard hitting style. I just don't want to hurt anyone, and that possibility has come to my attention in the last week more and more as I read peoples' TWI stories.
What I'd like to do is sweep all the angst under the rug. There is more of it than I had imagined would be, so I want to back off from my hard hitting style. Is there any way you and I can do that?
I was only kidding about the merrygoround because I thought you were into the animation scene.
I did not mean to be THIS annoying to you or to a few others here. I just want to discuss things. I use that hard hitting style when people come after me with their hard hitting style. I just don't want to hurt anyone, and that possibility has come to my attention in the last week more and more as I read peoples' TWI stories.
First off, I don't have a "hard hitting style" I calls 'em as I sees 'em.
Second of all, you seem to forget, we've danced to this song before.
The answer questions with a question. The I know the truth better than you do. The I can judge you but you can't judge me. The don't do as I do, do as I say.
Anybody who's dealt with PLAF and has been in The Way for any period of time finds these last 24 pages all too familiar.
And now that you've painted yourself into a corner your crying, "Mulligan."
Anybody who's dealt with PLAF and has been in The Way for any period of time finds these last 24 pages all too familiar.
Back in the 70s, 80s, and 90s I was familiar with all those statements also. But then someone showed me details that I had either forgotten or had never absorbed.
Yes, I think I have details that everyone else also had either forgotten or had never absorbed.
As far as mastering these details and applying them with perfection, I fall far short.
I'd like to find a way of discussing these things peacefully, but it may not be possible.
Back in the 70s, 80s, and 90s I was familiar with all those statements also. But then someone showed me details that I had either forgotten or had never absorbed.
Yes, I think I have details that everyone else also had either forgotten or had never absorbed.
As far as mastering these details and applying them with perfection, I fall far short.
I'd like to find a way of discussing these things peacefully, but it may not be possible.
I meant all too familiar in the negative sense:
The game playing. The refusal to give straight answers
The promises
The statement: The only way to know if its true is to do it
The game playing. The refusal to give straight answers
The promises
The statement: The only way to know if its true is to do it
I need to get to work.
I hear you on old associations.
This intrigues me: "The only way to know if its true is to do it"
All through the 70s 80s 90s I applied that idea to the traditional Bible, and even more specifically to the Canon.
There are ways to know a little, like hinting, but the only way to REALLY know is to believe it and live it. I did not start applying "The only way to know if its true is to do it" to PFAL until 1998.
May I ask you how you developed enough confidence in the traditional Canon to bet your life on it?
I rarely see simple questions. They are usually loaded.
I see them as set-ups for ending a discussion. I can handle that to my satisfaction, but if it's ALWAYS at the expense of other people, then I need to re-think.
This right here, Mike. I asked you a perfectly simple question. ("The ancient city of Nicaea was located in what modern country?") The correct answer is Turkey. One simple word. Your answer? "That depends, yada,yada, blah, blah blah, ad infinitum". There is nothing to "rethink". You dodged the question because you know it reveals an error in PFAL. You can't change facts simply because they don't agree with your "thesis".
May I ask you how you developed enough confidence in the traditional Canon to bet your life on it?
The same criteria anybody uses: It states thing simply and it works in the real world.
Here's the nature of my problem:
I walk onto a car dealership and I'm looking at a '72 Pinto. I've owned a '72 Pinto, so I know about them.
The salesman comes and starts telling me about how great a '72 Pinto is.
I relate may experiences and he tries to tell me, "Well, that was that specific '72 Pinto, you know nothing about Pintos, because you've never drove this Pinto."
The salesman insists on going over his talking points (What was it you said happens when someone insists something from you, Mike?)
So, I ask him what a '72 Pinto has done for him personally.
He hems and haws and insists on getting back to his talking points.
Every time I inquire into the condition of the car, the salesman accuses me of asking loaded questions or wanting to pounce.
Finally, he says, "When they're hit from the back end, the have a tendancy to explode."
I challange him on that point.
When he can't get around it, he starts saying we should start the sale all over.
Now, what do you think the odds are that anyone's going to buy that car from that salesman?
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
63
252
68
130
Popular Days
Jan 25
114
Jan 6
58
Jan 9
51
Jan 3
45
Top Posters In This Topic
Rocky 63 posts
Mike 252 posts
waysider 68 posts
So_crates 130 posts
Popular Days
Jan 25 2018
114 posts
Jan 6 2018
58 posts
Jan 9 2018
51 posts
Jan 3 2018
45 posts
Popular Posts
DontWorryBeHappy
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead."........Thomas Paine.
penworks
Here's an idea: we each drop out of this topic and go read a book.
DontWorryBeHappy
Can anyone tell me dictor paul's scriptural position on the word "Covfefe"? What is the true meaning of that word?? Mike's textual criticism, and use of the basic dictor "keys to research", is as made
Posted Images
So_crates
Then why did you say there was? You said God hid it because otherwise nobody would move it over the world. Like I said, that's using deception and trickery.
Not to mention, it suggests God doesn't trust us.
There's a spiritual war going on? Why wasn't I told? "Soup is soup, apple butter is apple butter" and deception is decption.
Because I call a spade a spade. The bible says God is not a man, he caannot lie. Yet your claiming he used deception, trickery. and lied--all methods of the devil
And where do you think that angst is coming from? And what do you think is causing that angst?
As I said in the above post, you should look at those times when you cry lighten up. What was it you said about attacking the messanger? Maybe the return message is a little too much for you to handle
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Who knew answering a yes or no question could be so complicated?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
No. I developed a thick skin long ago for what others feel about me.
What is new is this past week I've been reading peoples' story threads, and a few other threads that give me a better picture of whom I'm posting with. I remember penworks from way back in the 1970s and her story is fluffing up a lot of my nostalgia feathers.
Someone mentioned Kris S and her radio story. I remember her from my earliest days at
One of the reasons I post here, instead of going to other clone ministries is the freedom of speech here. That does not exist in any way, shape or form in any other ministry. The slightly proPFAL clone ministries out there are determined to move farther and farther from PFAL, and they tolerate my message FAR LESS than anyone here.
But I’m beginning to see that my message could be causing pain that need not be, and could even hamper some people in their genuine attempts to lighten up.
Freedom of speech is here, but freedom from pain seems a lot farther off than I had anticipated. I really thought that the pain here would be a lot less after 10 years.
That’s what I mean by my desire to hit the big reset button.Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
So since you can't defend your claim that God decieved us, you want to change the subject.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
You're spinning off in the wrong direction. This is too tangled to sort out. I give up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
No! You can't give up. What about that session where Wierwille tells us we have to "STAND!" no matter what?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
It's not as tangled as you claim. "Soup is soup, apple butter is apple butter" and deception is deception.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
context
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
But, what if it's a "Thus said The Lord." statement?
There could be a hidden message in there that none of us has seen.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I'm seriously re-considering what it is I'm doing here. I think I may have broke So_crates merrygoround. I think similar things are happening with other posters. THAT is not my intention. I thought that BY NOW, after a couple of months of posting, that the shock value of my message would have worn off a little. It seems it is not.
Is there any way I can discuss these things, even answer questions, without provoking such negative emotions?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Certainly.
When people ask you simple questions that require simple answers, answer them in an appropriate fashion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I rarely see simple questions. They are usually loaded.
I see them as set-ups for ending a discussion. I can handle that to my satisfaction, but if it's ALWAYS at the expense of other people, then I need to re-think.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
The "Christ formed" issue is one that I want to research on. I don't have the answers there; just some hints that intrigue me. I feel it's the frontier of research. It needs some positive brainstorming, not contentious debate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
**Please, quit blaming it on the shock value of your message. It about as shocking as finding out water is wet or fall follows summer.
**Yah, stop playing head games.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I want to drop that subject.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
ok
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Of course you want to drop it.
Like errors in PLAF and the fact Saint Vic couldn't recieve revelation, you can't defend it so let's sweep it under the rug.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
What I'd like to do is sweep all the angst under the rug. There is more of it than I had imagined would be, so I want to back off from my hard hitting style. Is there any way you and I can do that?
I was only kidding about the merrygoround because I thought you were into the animation scene.
I did not mean to be THIS annoying to you or to a few others here. I just want to discuss things. I use that hard hitting style when people come after me with their hard hitting style. I just don't want to hurt anyone, and that possibility has come to my attention in the last week more and more as I read peoples' TWI stories.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
First off, I don't have a "hard hitting style" I calls 'em as I sees 'em.
Second of all, you seem to forget, we've danced to this song before.
The answer questions with a question. The I know the truth better than you do. The I can judge you but you can't judge me. The don't do as I do, do as I say.
Anybody who's dealt with PLAF and has been in The Way for any period of time finds these last 24 pages all too familiar.
And now that you've painted yourself into a corner your crying, "Mulligan."
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Back in the 70s, 80s, and 90s I was familiar with all those statements also. But then someone showed me details that I had either forgotten or had never absorbed.
Yes, I think I have details that everyone else also had either forgotten or had never absorbed.
As far as mastering these details and applying them with perfection, I fall far short.
I'd like to find a way of discussing these things peacefully, but it may not be possible.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
I meant all too familiar in the negative sense:
The game playing. The refusal to give straight answers
The promises
The statement: The only way to know if its true is to do it
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I need to get to work.
I hear you on old associations.
This intrigues me: "The only way to know if its true is to do it"
All through the 70s 80s 90s I applied that idea to the traditional Bible, and even more specifically to the Canon.
There are ways to know a little, like hinting, but the only way to REALLY know is to believe it and live it. I did not start applying "The only way to know if its true is to do it" to PFAL until 1998.
May I ask you how you developed enough confidence in the traditional Canon to bet your life on it?
***
I'm off to work for a few hours.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
This right here, Mike. I asked you a perfectly simple question. ("The ancient city of Nicaea was located in what modern country?") The correct answer is Turkey. One simple word. Your answer? "That depends, yada,yada, blah, blah blah, ad infinitum". There is nothing to "rethink". You dodged the question because you know it reveals an error in PFAL. You can't change facts simply because they don't agree with your "thesis".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
The same criteria anybody uses: It states thing simply and it works in the real world.
Here's the nature of my problem:
I walk onto a car dealership and I'm looking at a '72 Pinto. I've owned a '72 Pinto, so I know about them.
The salesman comes and starts telling me about how great a '72 Pinto is.
I relate may experiences and he tries to tell me, "Well, that was that specific '72 Pinto, you know nothing about Pintos, because you've never drove this Pinto."
The salesman insists on going over his talking points (What was it you said happens when someone insists something from you, Mike?)
So, I ask him what a '72 Pinto has done for him personally.
He hems and haws and insists on getting back to his talking points.
Every time I inquire into the condition of the car, the salesman accuses me of asking loaded questions or wanting to pounce.
Finally, he says, "When they're hit from the back end, the have a tendancy to explode."
I challange him on that point.
When he can't get around it, he starts saying we should start the sale all over.
Now, what do you think the odds are that anyone's going to buy that car from that salesman?
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.