Jesse Prince or Marty Rathbun: Which do YOU believe?

[Lurker5]

I like

I like playing with him, said the cat about the mouse

 

[Alanzo]

The only real question about 'thereckoning' is whether he's what he pretends to be; a dedicated Martyologist, or what's not unlikely, just a 'Church' operated 'third-party-bot' out to break (dubious) ARC between ESMB and MartyWorld; or both

Zinj

Either way, he's extremely entertaining.

And he provides endless opportunities to point out why no one would ever want to become a Scientologist like him.

And for those who are Scientologists, he triggers a gag response and makes them think: "Is this really the group I thought I was joining so long ago? Has it really come down to this??"

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

The only real question about 'thereckoning' is whether he's what he pretends to be; a dedicated Martyologist, or what's not unlikely, just a 'Church' operated 'third-party-bot' out to break (dubious) ARC between ESMB and MartyWorld; or both

Zinj

Yes Zinj.

And what Reck, and/or his handler, does not realize is that every attempt to disrupt, inhibit and “divide” only adds to, refines and improves the big “Conversation” that they don’t realize is going on here, there, everywhere.

Face

 

[Lurker5]

THIS \/ \/ \/

Yes Zinj.

And, what Reck or his handlers don’t realize, is that every attempt to disrupt, inhibit and “divide” only adds to, refines and improves the big “Conversation” that they don’t realize is going on here, there, everywhere.

Face

THIS /\ /\ /\ heh heh heh

 

[VaD]

I think that following post by Jeff in his blog is very relevant to the topic being discussed (i.e. Marty's blog, thereckoning's position, and "atcause" comments on Marty's blog. BTW, seems thereckoning=atcause)

http://leavingscientology.wordpress.com/2010/11/03/black-and-white-thinking/

 

[uniquemand]

I think you're making it overly complicated, Vadim. Just enjoy life.

 

[VaD]

I think you're making it overly complicated, Vadim. Just enjoy life.

I will enjoy life better when people around me enjoy life, too.

You seem to tell me that I should just shut up and listen to this conglomerate of those who speak the same thing (just using different words)?

 

[uniquemand]

No, I'm just mocking you.

 

[Good twin]

It looks like thereck's on a roll.

Lurker5, I suggest you get a sexy avatar. It makes your words look smarter!

 

[Vinaire]

It looks like thereck's on a roll.

Lurker5, I suggest you get a sexy avatar. It makes your words look smarter!

Only those who are not stuck with a beingness, can project whatever beingness they want.

I like GTs beingness.

.

 

[Good twin]

Only those who are not stuck with a beingness, can project whatever beingness they want.

I like GTs beingness.

.

Vinny, I lurves you too!!!!

 

[VaD]

Only those who are not stuck with a beingness, can project whatever beingness they want.

I like GTs beingness.

.

Vinaire, I like your views.
But here is the puzzle for you: a girl/boy just born - does he have a "beingness"?
If you say so, is it aware of it? If so, how can it be discovered? If it is discovered, how it can be proven to be true?

Tree/Plant/Cat don't have "beingness". They have only "beingness" that you assign it to be and project your own views on "beingness" it's supposed to be.

They just ARE.

We Just ARE.

Whatever philosophy is used to make them/us look *just right* for that philosophy (the philosophy chosen by one) has nothing to do with what we are. We just ARE. (Independent of ANY kind of philosophy being placed upon us)

Am I clear?

 

[rhill]

The only real question about 'thereckoning' is whether he's what he pretends to be; a dedicated Martyologist, or what's not unlikely, just a 'Church' operated 'third-party-bot' out to break (dubious) ARC between ESMB and MartyWorld; or both

Zinj

My opinion is quite likely a church person, from what I've seen at WWP, his[her] particularly strong stance in support of the Church of Scientology in the Victoria Britton v. Flag Service Org et al. case was interesting.

 

[Ogsonofgroo]

Vinaire, I like your views.
But here is the puzzle for you: a girl/boy just born - does he have a "beingness"?
If you say so, is it aware of it? If so, how can it be discovered? If it is discovered, how it can be proven to be true?

Tree/Plant/Cat don't have "beingness". They have only "beingness" that you assign it to be and project your own views on "beingness" it's supposed to be.

They just ARE.

We Just ARE.

Whatever philosophy is used to make them/us look *just right* for that philosophy (the philosophy chosen by one) has nothing to do with what we are. We just ARE. (Independent of ANY kind of philosophy being placed upon us)

Am I clear?

Not answering for Vin, Vadim, but you are not clear on the part I bolded. Further more, why the heck do people keep using a hubbardisation like '-ness' on the end of perfectly utile words (arggggggh!), being is being, there is no 'ness' about it unless you are a cult creator trying to create a new manglation of a language to make yourself more 'leet and awshumness'.
Really guys! 'Beingness' is a Hubbard-bastidization, and a frikken irritation personified (ya ya, English is second language, just ranting ~ lovingness and humanityness to all)

Cats, dogs, trees & plants, in fact all living things, have being. Rocks, inanimate objects an' shit~ not so much. My opinion this dark and not-so-stormy night.



Now, where did that chew-toy go?.......

 

[VaD]

Not answering for Vin, Vadim, but you are not clear on the part I bolded. Further more, why the heck do people keep using a hubbardisation like '-ness' on the end of perfectly utile words (arggggggh!), being is being, there is no 'ness' about it unless you are a cult creator trying to create a new manglation of a language to make yourself more 'leet and awshumness'.
Really guys! 'Beingness' is a Hubbard-bastidization, and a frikken irritation personified (ya ya, English is second language, just ranting ~ lovingness and humanityness to all)

Cats, dogs, trees & plants, in fact all living things, have being. Rocks, inanimate objects an' shit~ not so much. My opinion this dark and not-so-stormy night.



Now, where did that chew-toy go?.......

because "-ness" is a good suffix to attach to adjectives and nouns to make new words.
If you have better words, tell me. And I will use them.

(I learned the most of my English thru Hubbard's texts)

 

[Ogsonofgroo]

because "-ness" is a good suffix to attach to adjectives and nouns to make new words.
If you have better words, tell me. And I will use them.

(I learned the most of my English thru Hubbard)

Lolol, 'ness' is usually only used with adjectives and verbs mon, hubbard's 'english' was as screwed as his philosophy (well, almost).



Use just 'being', it is 'be' already modified (suff) by 'ing', just for example. Lordy, there are on-line english courses that'll make some sense of this all me thinks But no, 'ness' is generally NOT used with nouns or pronouns. (cowness? Tree-ness? Her-ness)
Somewhere I have a link to a great article I read on how Lron messed with common language to suit his twisted ways, I'll try ta dig it up for you after my dinner

 

[VaD]

Lolol, 'ness' is usually only used with adjectives and verbs mon, hubbard's 'english' was as screwed as his philosophy (well, almost).



Use just 'being', it is 'be' already modified (suff) by 'ing', just for example. Lordy, there are on-line english courses that'll make some sense of this all me thinks But no, 'ness' is generally NOT used with nouns or pronouns. (cowness? Tree-ness? Her-ness)
Somewhere I have a link to a great article I read on how Lron messed with common language to suit his twisted ways, I'll try ta dig it up for you after my dinner

I try not to fuck with English.
I'm quite fine with " -ness".

I won't "re-learn" it "because Hubbard was wrong everywhere".

You guys, keep fighting.
Your fights are NOT my fights, though.

 

[Ogsonofgroo]

I try not to fuck with English.
I'm quite fine with " -ness".

I won't "re-learn" it "because Hubbard was wrong everywhere".

You guys, keep fighting.
Your fights are NOT my fights, though.

no fight here mon, but to just say 'being' , 'has being', or even using 'substance', is all that needs be said really. 'Being-ness' is improper english, not even slang, and yes, not because 'Hubbard was wrong everywhere..' even though he mostly wasness.

 

[VaD]

no fight here mon, but to just say 'being' , 'has being', or even using 'substance', is all that needs be said really. 'Being-ness' is improper english, not even slang, and yes, not because 'Hubbard was wrong everywhere..' even though he mostly wasness.

We have a saying here in Russia: don't tell me what I should do, and I won't tell you where to go.

No offense but you get into *my* business. I know about -ness and other suffixes.
Please, don't tell me how I should understand (or teach, for that matter) English.
And I won't tell you where you should go.

 

[Vinaire]

Vinaire, I like your views.
But here is the puzzle for you: a girl/boy just born - does he have a "beingness"?
If you say so, is it aware of it? If so, how can it be discovered? If it is discovered, how it can be proven to be true?

Tree/Plant/Cat don't have "beingness". They have only "beingness" that you assign it to be and project your own views on "beingness" it's supposed to be.

They just ARE.

We Just ARE.

Whatever philosophy is used to make them/us look *just right* for that philosophy (the philosophy chosen by one) has nothing to do with what we are. We just ARE. (Independent of ANY kind of philosophy being placed upon us)

Am I clear?

TO BE = TO EXIST

BEING = BE-ING = EXISTING

BEINGNESS = THE FACT OF BEING OR EXISTING = EXISTENCE

Tree/Plant/Cat are all existing, so they are being, and there is beingness (existence).

These are the definitions that make sense to me.

.