R.T.+E.

[fife]

I've given my opinion of Rebazar Tarzs and Eckankar so many damn times on this board over the past three years that there's no reason to challenge me to do so (again) other than to be provocative, annoying, or start an argument. Give it up. :-)

[Henosis Sage]

Post by fife
I've given my opinion of Rebazar Tarzs and Eckankar so many damn times on this board over the past three years that there's no reason to challenge me to do so (again) other than to be provocative, annoying, or start an argument. Give it up. :-)

Not using ontology/epistemology framing you have not that i know of. not that i reas every comment you have made.

you brought it up . it was a very reasonable topical present time query.

iow a quite normal followup query.

and i dont recall your opinion on RT either. not in relation to present commentary just recently.

i am not a computer storage device. i'm only speaking for me.

whatever. be like that, be like whatever you want. not my problem.

[Etznab]

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by fife
I've given my opinion of Rebazar Tarzs and Eckankar so many damn times on this board over the past three years that there's no reason to challenge me to do so (again) other than to be provocative, annoying, or start an argument. Give it up. :-)

Not using ontology/epistemology framing you have not that i know of. not that i reas every comment you have made.
you brought it up . it was a very reasonable topical present time query.
iow a quite normal followup query.
and i dont recall your opinion on RT either. not in relation to present commentary just recently.
i am not a computer storage device. i'm only speaking for me.
whatever. be like that, be like whatever you want. not my problem.

I shared a Fife quote recently where he compared Rebazar Tarzs to a saint.

"So, why keep St. Christopher (or Rebazar Tarzs)? Why not?"

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/kwL1L9jcAAAJ

Fife's answer was Why not?

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by fife
I've given my opinion of Rebazar Tarzs and Eckankar so many damn times on this board over the past three years that there's no reason to challenge me to do so (again) other than to be provocative, annoying, or start an argument. Give it up. :-)

Not using ontology/epistemology framing you have not that i know of. not that i reas every comment you have made.
you brought it up . it was a very reasonable topical present time query.
iow a quite normal followup query.
and i dont recall your opinion on RT either. not in relation to present commentary just recently.
i am not a computer storage device. i'm only speaking for me.
whatever. be like that, be like whatever you want. not my problem.

I shared a Fife quote recently where he compared Rebazar Tarzs to a saint.
"So, why keep St. Christopher (or Rebazar Tarzs)? Why not?"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/kwL1L9jcAAAJ
Fife's answer was Why not?

On that same thread you can find Fife explaining how there never was a real Rebazar Tarzs. I guess that is part of his explanation.

Make Fife can talk some sense into Kinpa? When Kinpa repeats over and over that: You can't prove Rebazar Tarzs doesn't exist.

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by fife
I've given my opinion of Rebazar Tarzs and Eckankar so many damn times on this board over the past three years that there's no reason to challenge me to do so (again) other than to be provocative, annoying, or start an argument. Give it up. :-)

Not using ontology/epistemology framing you have not that i know of. not that i reas every comment you have made.
you brought it up . it was a very reasonable topical present time query.
iow a quite normal followup query.
and i dont recall your opinion on RT either. not in relation to present commentary just recently.
i am not a computer storage device. i'm only speaking for me.
whatever. be like that, be like whatever you want. not my problem.

I shared a Fife quote recently where he compared Rebazar Tarzs to a saint.
"So, why keep St. Christopher (or Rebazar Tarzs)? Why not?"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/kwL1L9jcAAAJ
Fife's answer was Why not?

On that same thread you can find Fife explaining how there never was a real Rebazar Tarzs. I guess that is part of his explanation.
Make Fife can talk some sense into Kinpa? When Kinpa repeats over and over that: You can't prove Rebazar Tarzs doesn't exist.

RE On that same thread you can find Fife explaining how there never was a real Rebazar Tarzs.

I never saw it.

RE I shared a Fife quote recently where he compared Rebazar Tarzs to a saint.

I never saw it either.

But you mentioned something recently to me along those lines.

I don't read every comment on a.r.e. or every comment by fife.

To assume I or anyone else here does is plain presumptuous (and stupid) imho.

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by fife
I've given my opinion of Rebazar Tarzs and Eckankar so many damn times on this board over the past three years that there's no reason to challenge me to do so (again) other than to be provocative, annoying, or start an argument. Give it up. :-)

Not using ontology/epistemology framing you have not that i know of. not that i reas every comment you have made.
you brought it up . it was a very reasonable topical present time query.
iow a quite normal followup query.
and i dont recall your opinion on RT either. not in relation to present commentary just recently.
i am not a computer storage device. i'm only speaking for me.
whatever. be like that, be like whatever you want. not my problem.

I shared a Fife quote recently where he compared Rebazar Tarzs to a saint.
"So, why keep St. Christopher (or Rebazar Tarzs)? Why not?"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/kwL1L9jcAAAJ
Fife's answer was Why not?

My thread was titled: Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs?

Fife's explanation about Rebazar Tarzs (even though he later claimed R.T. was never a real person) was:

Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs?

Hi Etz.
I think I'd answer that question by making a comparison with all the saints that my friends learned about in catechism.
Take St. Christopher. First he was a saint then he wasn't now he is again.
I liked St. Christopher. But was he even a real person at one time?
There were people who made a few pennies acting like human ferries to carry people and goods across streams and fordable rivers.
But St. Christopher and the Christ child? But the point is, that the story is an opportunity to expand on the ideas of charity, love, kindness and other qualities.
So, why keep St. Christopher (or Rebazar Tarzs)?
Why not?

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/kwL1L9jcAAAJ

And my question was not Why keep Rebazar Tarzs. The question was Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? And I qualified that in my first two posts on the thread before Fife responded. The second post read: "Why keep up the charade?"

So even before Fife responded, the thread had: Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? and Why keep up the charade?

Fife wrote "Why not?" And then later goes on to explain how there never was a real Rebazar Tarzs and that Eckankar (in so many words) couldn't afford to get rid of Rebazar Tarzs.

WHY KEEP ...? And if I read the responses right it was "Why not?"

It wasn't Fife's issue.

Me: You did see the word pseudo didn't you? Why keep the pseudo R.T.?

Fife: Because there is no real one and never was? But whether Eckankar keeps or doesn't keep isn't my issue. There is no real one so its either what they've got or none isn't it?

And when I wrote about the "other" R.T's, it seems Fife likes the Eckankar R.T. better.

"What I can say for myself about Rebezar Tarzs elsewhere than Eckankar is this. I (personally) don't like NU Wave or Vardankar and I don't know why Eckankar doesn't sue. If they win one suit against one of these, they could go against any and all."

Several posts down the thread I said it again: "The question wasn't about keeping Rebazar Tarzs, or not. It was about keeping the PSEUDO Rebazar Tarzs."

Fife responded: There's no real one Etz.

Do you mean, keeping Rebazar Tarzs as the fake figure that he is, or eliminating him entirely from Eckankar because he's an imaginary creation?

Evidently, Fife still isn't sure I meant the former.

Me: I guess you can't understand my meaning.

Fife: Not at all. Not a problem. Just say what you mean.

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/AJsqD9WsCAAJ

Umm. I said What I meant in the title, and in the first couple posts. Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? and Why keep up the charade?

Maybe I should clarify this here. I'll put it another way.

Why make out that Rebazar Tarzs was / is a real person? Why keep doing that?

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by fife
I've given my opinion of Rebazar Tarzs and Eckankar so many damn times on this board over the past three years that there's no reason to challenge me to do so (again) other than to be provocative, annoying, or start an argument. Give it up. :-)

Not using ontology/epistemology framing you have not that i know of. not that i reas every comment you have made.
you brought it up . it was a very reasonable topical present time query.
iow a quite normal followup query.
and i dont recall your opinion on RT either. not in relation to present commentary just recently.
i am not a computer storage device. i'm only speaking for me.
whatever. be like that, be like whatever you want. not my problem.

I shared a Fife quote recently where he compared Rebazar Tarzs to a saint.
"So, why keep St. Christopher (or Rebazar Tarzs)? Why not?"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/kwL1L9jcAAAJ
Fife's answer was Why not?

My thread was titled: Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs?
Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs?
Hi Etz.
I think I'd answer that question by making a comparison with all the saints that my friends learned about in catechism.
Take St. Christopher. First he was a saint then he wasn't now he is again.
I liked St. Christopher. But was he even a real person at one time?
There were people who made a few pennies acting like human ferries to carry people and goods across streams and fordable rivers.
But St. Christopher and the Christ child? But the point is, that the story is an opportunity to expand on the ideas of charity, love, kindness and other qualities.
So, why keep St. Christopher (or Rebazar Tarzs)?
Why not?
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/kwL1L9jcAAAJ
And my question was not Why keep Rebazar Tarzs. The question was Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? And I qualified that in my first two posts on the thread before Fife responded. The second post read: "Why keep up the charade?"
So even before Fife responded, the thread had: Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? and Why keep up the charade?
Fife wrote "Why not?" And then later goes on to explain how there never was a real Rebazar Tarzs and that Eckankar (in so many words) couldn't afford to get rid of Rebazar Tarzs.
WHY KEEP ...? And if I read the responses right it was "Why not?"
It wasn't Fife's issue.
Me: You did see the word pseudo didn't you? Why keep the pseudo R.T.?
Fife: Because there is no real one and never was? But whether Eckankar keeps or doesn't keep isn't my issue. There is no real one so its either what they've got or none isn't it?
And when I wrote about the "other" R.T's, it seems Fife likes the Eckankar R.T. better.
"What I can say for myself about Rebezar Tarzs elsewhere than Eckankar is this. I (personally) don't like NU Wave or Vardankar and I don't know why Eckankar doesn't sue. If they win one suit against one of these, they could go against any and all."
Several posts down the thread I said it again: "The question wasn't about keeping Rebazar Tarzs, or not. It was about keeping the PSEUDO Rebazar Tarzs."
Fife responded: There's no real one Etz.
Do you mean, keeping Rebazar Tarzs as the fake figure that he is, or eliminating him entirely from Eckankar because he's an imaginary creation?
Evidently, Fife still isn't sure I meant the former.
Me: I guess you can't understand my meaning.
Fife: Not at all. Not a problem. Just say what you mean.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/AJsqD9WsCAAJ
Umm. I said What I meant in the title, and in the first couple posts. Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? and Why keep up the charade?
Maybe I should clarify this here. I'll put it another way.
Why make out that Rebazar Tarzs was / is a real person? Why keep doing that?

[Etznab]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by fife
I've given my opinion of Rebazar Tarzs and Eckankar so many damn times on this board over the past three years that there's no reason to challenge me to do so (again) other than to be provocative, annoying, or start an argument. Give it up. :-)

Not using ontology/epistemology framing you have not that i know of. not that i reas every comment you have made.
you brought it up . it was a very reasonable topical present time query.
iow a quite normal followup query.
and i dont recall your opinion on RT either. not in relation to present commentary just recently.
i am not a computer storage device. i'm only speaking for me.
whatever. be like that, be like whatever you want. not my problem.

I shared a Fife quote recently where he compared Rebazar Tarzs to a saint.
"So, why keep St. Christopher (or Rebazar Tarzs)? Why not?"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/kwL1L9jcAAAJ
Fife's answer was Why not?

My thread was titled: Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs?
Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs?
Hi Etz.
I think I'd answer that question by making a comparison with all the saints that my friends learned about in catechism.
Take St. Christopher. First he was a saint then he wasn't now he is again.
I liked St. Christopher. But was he even a real person at one time?
There were people who made a few pennies acting like human ferries to carry people and goods across streams and fordable rivers.
But St. Christopher and the Christ child? But the point is, that the story is an opportunity to expand on the ideas of charity, love, kindness and other qualities.
So, why keep St. Christopher (or Rebazar Tarzs)?
Why not?
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/kwL1L9jcAAAJ
And my question was not Why keep Rebazar Tarzs. The question was Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? And I qualified that in my first two posts on the thread before Fife responded. The second post read: "Why keep up the charade?"
So even before Fife responded, the thread had: Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? and Why keep up the charade?
Fife wrote "Why not?" And then later goes on to explain how there never was a real Rebazar Tarzs and that Eckankar (in so many words) couldn't afford to get rid of Rebazar Tarzs.
WHY KEEP ...? And if I read the responses right it was "Why not?"
It wasn't Fife's issue.
Me: You did see the word pseudo didn't you? Why keep the pseudo R.T.?
Fife: Because there is no real one and never was? But whether Eckankar keeps or doesn't keep isn't my issue. There is no real one so its either what they've got or none isn't it?
And when I wrote about the "other" R.T's, it seems Fife likes the Eckankar R.T. better.
"What I can say for myself about Rebezar Tarzs elsewhere than Eckankar is this. I (personally) don't like NU Wave or Vardankar and I don't know why Eckankar doesn't sue. If they win one suit against one of these, they could go against any and all."
Several posts down the thread I said it again: "The question wasn't about keeping Rebazar Tarzs, or not. It was about keeping the PSEUDO Rebazar Tarzs."
Fife responded: There's no real one Etz.
Do you mean, keeping Rebazar Tarzs as the fake figure that he is, or eliminating him entirely from Eckankar because he's an imaginary creation?
Evidently, Fife still isn't sure I meant the former.
Me: I guess you can't understand my meaning.
Fife: Not at all. Not a problem. Just say what you mean.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/AJsqD9WsCAAJ
Umm. I said What I meant in the title, and in the first couple posts. Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? and Why keep up the charade?
Maybe I should clarify this here. I'll put it another way.
Why make out that Rebazar Tarzs was / is a real person? Why keep doing that?

I could ask the same thing about Kinpa making up things that aren't true. Why keep doing that?

I could ask Fife, Why (like Kinpa) do you misrepresent people by changing the meaning of what they meant and inserting your gobble-di-gook?

Why keep doing that?

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by fife
I've given my opinion of Rebazar Tarzs and Eckankar so many damn times on this board over the past three years that there's no reason to challenge me to do so (again) other than to be provocative, annoying, or start an argument. Give it up. :-)

Not using ontology/epistemology framing you have not that i know of. not that i reas every comment you have made.
you brought it up . it was a very reasonable topical present time query.
iow a quite normal followup query.
and i dont recall your opinion on RT either. not in relation to present commentary just recently.
i am not a computer storage device. i'm only speaking for me.
whatever. be like that, be like whatever you want. not my problem.

I shared a Fife quote recently where he compared Rebazar Tarzs to a saint.
"So, why keep St. Christopher (or Rebazar Tarzs)? Why not?"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/kwL1L9jcAAAJ
Fife's answer was Why not?

My thread was titled: Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs?
Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs?
Hi Etz.
I think I'd answer that question by making a comparison with all the saints that my friends learned about in catechism.
Take St. Christopher. First he was a saint then he wasn't now he is again.
I liked St. Christopher. But was he even a real person at one time?
There were people who made a few pennies acting like human ferries to carry people and goods across streams and fordable rivers.
But St. Christopher and the Christ child? But the point is, that the story is an opportunity to expand on the ideas of charity, love, kindness and other qualities.
So, why keep St. Christopher (or Rebazar Tarzs)?
Why not?
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/kwL1L9jcAAAJ
And my question was not Why keep Rebazar Tarzs. The question was Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? And I qualified that in my first two posts on the thread before Fife responded. The second post read: "Why keep up the charade?"
So even before Fife responded, the thread had: Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? and Why keep up the charade?
Fife wrote "Why not?" And then later goes on to explain how there never was a real Rebazar Tarzs and that Eckankar (in so many words) couldn't afford to get rid of Rebazar Tarzs.
WHY KEEP ...? And if I read the responses right it was "Why not?"
It wasn't Fife's issue.
Me: You did see the word pseudo didn't you? Why keep the pseudo R.T.?
Fife: Because there is no real one and never was? But whether Eckankar keeps or doesn't keep isn't my issue. There is no real one so its either what they've got or none isn't it?
And when I wrote about the "other" R.T's, it seems Fife likes the Eckankar R.T. better.
"What I can say for myself about Rebezar Tarzs elsewhere than Eckankar is this. I (personally) don't like NU Wave or Vardankar and I don't know why Eckankar doesn't sue. If they win one suit against one of these, they could go against any and all."
Several posts down the thread I said it again: "The question wasn't about keeping Rebazar Tarzs, or not. It was about keeping the PSEUDO Rebazar Tarzs."
Fife responded: There's no real one Etz.
Do you mean, keeping Rebazar Tarzs as the fake figure that he is, or eliminating him entirely from Eckankar because he's an imaginary creation?
Evidently, Fife still isn't sure I meant the former.
Me: I guess you can't understand my meaning.
Fife: Not at all. Not a problem. Just say what you mean.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/AJsqD9WsCAAJ
Umm. I said What I meant in the title, and in the first couple posts. Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? and Why keep up the charade?
Maybe I should clarify this here. I'll put it another way.
Why make out that Rebazar Tarzs was / is a real person? Why keep doing that?

I could ask the same thing about Kinpa making up things that aren't true. Why keep doing that?

RE ... I could ask Fife, Why (like Kinpa) do you misrepresent people by changing the meaning of what they meant and inserting your gobble-di-gook? Why keep doing that?

SEAN: Because just like kinpa, he is an immature disingenuous dick head. A smart arse, a manipulator and a judgemental prick also fits. :-)

omg i am so " judgemental" aren't I?

just my personal opinion, YMMV

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Etznab

Post by Etznab

Post by Henosis Sage

Post by fife
I've given my opinion of Rebazar Tarzs and Eckankar so many damn times on this board over the past three years that there's no reason to challenge me to do so (again) other than to be provocative, annoying, or start an argument. Give it up. :-)

Not using ontology/epistemology framing you have not that i know of. not that i reas every comment you have made.
you brought it up . it was a very reasonable topical present time query.
iow a quite normal followup query.
and i dont recall your opinion on RT either. not in relation to present commentary just recently.
i am not a computer storage device. i'm only speaking for me.
whatever. be like that, be like whatever you want. not my problem.

I shared a Fife quote recently where he compared Rebazar Tarzs to a saint.
"So, why keep St. Christopher (or Rebazar Tarzs)? Why not?"
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/kwL1L9jcAAAJ
Fife's answer was Why not?

My thread was titled: Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs?
Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs?
Hi Etz.
I think I'd answer that question by making a comparison with all the saints that my friends learned about in catechism.
Take St. Christopher. First he was a saint then he wasn't now he is again.
I liked St. Christopher. But was he even a real person at one time?
There were people who made a few pennies acting like human ferries to carry people and goods across streams and fordable rivers.
But St. Christopher and the Christ child? But the point is, that the story is an opportunity to expand on the ideas of charity, love, kindness and other qualities.
So, why keep St. Christopher (or Rebazar Tarzs)?
Why not?
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/kwL1L9jcAAAJ
And my question was not Why keep Rebazar Tarzs. The question was Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? And I qualified that in my first two posts on the thread before Fife responded. The second post read: "Why keep up the charade?"
So even before Fife responded, the thread had: Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? and Why keep up the charade?
Fife wrote "Why not?" And then later goes on to explain how there never was a real Rebazar Tarzs and that Eckankar (in so many words) couldn't afford to get rid of Rebazar Tarzs.
WHY KEEP ...? And if I read the responses right it was "Why not?"
It wasn't Fife's issue.
Me: You did see the word pseudo didn't you? Why keep the pseudo R.T.?
Fife: Because there is no real one and never was? But whether Eckankar keeps or doesn't keep isn't my issue. There is no real one so its either what they've got or none isn't it?
And when I wrote about the "other" R.T's, it seems Fife likes the Eckankar R.T. better.
"What I can say for myself about Rebezar Tarzs elsewhere than Eckankar is this. I (personally) don't like NU Wave or Vardankar and I don't know why Eckankar doesn't sue. If they win one suit against one of these, they could go against any and all."
Several posts down the thread I said it again: "The question wasn't about keeping Rebazar Tarzs, or not. It was about keeping the PSEUDO Rebazar Tarzs."
Fife responded: There's no real one Etz.
Do you mean, keeping Rebazar Tarzs as the fake figure that he is, or eliminating him entirely from Eckankar because he's an imaginary creation?
Evidently, Fife still isn't sure I meant the former.
Me: I guess you can't understand my meaning.
Fife: Not at all. Not a problem. Just say what you mean.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.religion.eckankar/c/cBZWdVOSXco/m/AJsqD9WsCAAJ
Umm. I said What I meant in the title, and in the first couple posts. Why keep the pseudo Rebazar Tarzs? and Why keep up the charade?
Maybe I should clarify this here. I'll put it another way.
Why make out that Rebazar Tarzs was / is a real person? Why keep doing that?

Why keep doing that?

Because eckankar is caught in a bind of the historical lies/distortions that have come before.

so HK and everyone else is " forced" to speak out of both sides of their mouths.

including patti, marman, resa's , fife and of course matt sharpe kimpoop himself as well.

kinpa knows RT is faked. he simply refuses to tell the truth about it.

Liars and diseemblerss walk the earth. Fife is another .... no different really than kinpa ... same issues same state of consciousness same degrees of self-serving self-righteous arrogance and judgemental-ism .... can't believe a word either (?) of them say here.

it is always bullshit talking ... no different than Marman's spin and his "pseudo-poetic" meanderings ..... everyone copies Twitchell. I assume they think they are being clever. But they can't lie straight in bed. :-)

[Henosis Sage]

On Wednesday, 20 April 2022 at 12:33:30 UTC+10, Etznab wrote:

PS REGARDING

Fife: Because there is no real one and never was? But whether Eckankar keeps or doesn't keep (RT) isn't my issue. There is no real one so its either what they've got or none isn't it?

And
"What I can say for myself about Rebezar Tarzs elsewhere than Eckankar is this. I (personally) don't like NU Wave or Vardankar and I don't know why Eckankar doesn't sue. If they win one suit against one of these, they could go against any and all."

Fife responded: There's no real one Etz.
Do you mean, keeping Rebazar Tarzs as the fake figure that he is, or eliminating him entirely from Eckankar because he's an imaginary creation?
--------------------------------------

Word games?

A Pissing contest?

or just a twat?

[Henosis Sage]

Post by fife
I've given my opinion of Rebazar Tarzs and Eckankar so many damn times on this board over the past three years that there's no reason to challenge me to do so (again) other than to be provocative, annoying, or start an argument. Give it up. :-)

You're the one who is provocative ... all the time.

You're the one undermining others and repeatedly sabotaging what they say by twisting it beyond recognition.

you're the one who keeps referring to me using my name Sean, as if we're old mates, a dead give away that is ....

you've been lying since the day you first showed up.

you're lying today again.