Though you wrote this on the Lite Site, I want to respond here, as you are talking about this site.

You wrote:

quote:

---

I think the information you have given about Hutch supports my feeling that Jach is not a "conscious fraud". As you can imagine, I have not been too popular of late by holding this view on the CF site. I have yet to hear a piece of information that indicates that Jach is making this
whole thing up.

---

I hope you can seperate out differences of opinion versus personal issues. This is what Katie has been talking about on another thread. Your opinion may be unpopular - that doesn't mean you are unpopular.

We need to feel free to express ourselves honestly and passionately. If people take things personally, this freedom diminishes.

As for the lack of evidence that Jach is faking, I refer you back to the mother/daughter situation. Why did Lazaris just happen to issue absurd opinions which mirrored Jach's. Why, if Peny believed Lazaris to be real, did she call on Jach for support when she was "being picked on"? Why not call on Lazaris?

I'm sure there is a lot more evidence, but these two pieces come to mind. Also, Jach is responsible for what comes out of his mouth whether it's channelled or not. As Steve pointed out a while back, they took the show on the road within a very short period of time after the alleged chanelling began. Wouldn't it be responsible to thoroughly explore the matter first? To see if it was schizophrenia, whether the entity was good or bad, etc.? To continue to monitor the information, ready to pull the plug at the first sign of desception or usariness? Given the opinions you have of the material and it's inconsistencies, would you continue to channel this entity if you were in Jach's position?

quote:

---

I ask that you re-read the posts between Jade and myself. I think you are getting the wrong impression, as I stated was a risk in many of my postings.

---

I have re-read them several times and have also skimmed through your posts on the Lite site. I do not believe that I am responding to any impressions, but to what you actually wrote regarding Jach's personal culpability for the pain and suffering caused by the Lazaris teachings and the Con:Sin organization.

Also, I did not write this post specifically or exclusively in response to your posts here, but to the concept in general that there is any way Jach is not fully responsible for himself even if he is channeling an orb from some lower realms. I don't see him arriving at workshops in chains.

quote:

---

You opinion seems to coincide closely with Jade's in this area. I would prefer not to re-open the whole discussion because I feel it is simply a matter of differing opinions that has been beaten to death.

---

Like Jade, I believe that the issue of Jach's responsibility is very much germaine to the conversation and beyond that the reasons that many of us continue to participate in this dialogue. It has been expressed here by quite a few that a statement of responsibility and explanation from Jach would be a very welcomed component to our process of understanding here. Beyond that, just like any business person or public figure, who has taken the benefits from his position, he also has no indemnity from addressing the concerns of his customers or followers. Why would you or anyone want to provide excuses for him in his refusal to address the concerns that have been raised?

quote:

---

I think the amount of words I ended up using were not justified given how small a point I was trying to make.

---

Again, I don't see it as a small point at all, but a very significant one. I have no problem at all that you brought it up, just as I would wish you would have no problem hearing the thoughts and responses of others.

quote:

---

I do ask for some slack.

---

You have all the slack in the world to post whatever thoughts you are having, as do we all. I'm not sure what you are requesting here, but if it has to do with requesting that anyone else restrict themselves from expressing their thoughts and feelings as clearly as you have, I would have to say "request denied".

quote:

---

I have neither been hurt by any of the CS dealings (no involvement in the forum, etc) and have only been involved in the discussions for a little over a month.

---

I'm not sure exactly what that has to do with the issue of Jach's responsibility. I think it would be quite possible to have that conversation with someone who never heard of Lazaris.

Trust me, I do understand the process, I've been through it myself, and I know it can have it's painful and confusing moments. However, there you have exactly the kind of issue that Jach needs to be responsible for.

It isn't good enough for him to allege through his silence, or his strategically leaked commentaries that those of us who are experiencing these doubts and concerns are not worthy of his attention or response. That in itself is degrading and demeaning as all hell, and there is no way on earth I'm willing to remain silent if someone suggests that Jach can't help himself because he's under the control of some low life entity.

This may sound harsh to you Craig, but maybe if you and others were more willing to seek responsibility and accountability from a source that could actually provide you with something, you would all be far less concerned and sensitive over being disagreed with. It's astounding to me how much slack some of you are willing to give to Jachzaris et. al. and how little you are to anyone who expresses the slightest disagreement with you.

If it hurts and pains so much to be disagreed with on an internet message board, I can only fathom the depths of pain it is causing for some of you to attempt to face the reality of the piles of shame and deception that you have purchased from Jach over the years, and it explains a lot about why there is so much resistance and avoidance about doing so.

I see the problem, but please, don't expect or ask me to become a part of it.

quote:

---

I have not been privy to the stories that you can not share because of confidentiality restrictions.

---

No, but you certainly have been privy to those told here, and there are plenty enough of them to establish that Jach has quite a bit of personal responsibility to own.

quote:

---

My request is for you to let me proceed at my own pace and honor my own emotions. I find statements such as "...but in all honesty, I really find the intense reluctance to be off-putting" tend to discourage differing opinions.

---

Your request to give you some slack could be interpreted as just as discouraging Craig.

You have always had the freedom to proceed at your own pace, and to honor your own emotions, but not at the expense of the same for anyone else.

Toughen it up Craig, that's my suggestion to you, and don't take everything you read here that reflects a different perspective than yours to be a personal attack against you.

If you read something that makes you feel uncomfortable, would you do yourself and all of us the honor of taking the time to uncover the source of your discomfort and should you determine that it is someone else's responsibility other than yours, please specifically state the issue directly?

The comfort level here will always be in direct relation to the amount of weight you give to the opinions of others. There is no way that anyone else can provide a monitor for that. Your emotional responses to the opinions of others are fully of your own choice.

Such is the way of freedom of speech, it is an awesome right which brings with it a serious responsibility to oneself and others to have the strength and character to be able to hear and respond to what others have to say, regardless of how uncomfortable it may be.

I hope you will give some thought to what I'm saying here Craig, because I think it's a good thing that you are posting here.

I do think that you might want to consider what it is exactly that you are seeking in doing so. If it is to win a popularity contest, or to be named "most civil poster",
I will have to disappoint you and tell you that we are running no such contests here. The circus tent has been raised elsewhere though. Paint on your smilie face, and I'm sure you can have a blast.

If you are sincerely looking for the truth of the Con:Scam, some resolution to your doubts and questions, and even possibly some sense of solace and comraderie, I believe that you can function as a significant participant with the rest of us who are here for the same reasons.

I can see though that already you are seeking the solace of the happy friendly people who never call each other on each others bad behavior, so therefore they can set themselves up as the moral superiors to those who do choose to interact a tad more honestly.

It's your choice Craig. There is no way that I'm going to participate in creating any illusions here of peace love and good vibrations amongst a group of relative strangers just so we can all feel really good and proud of ourselves for what nice and gooey lovey big hearted people we are.
Right there we have the foundation for yet another love bombed cult.

We are for the most part here to get to the bottom of a mystery that has impacted all of us in hurtful and negative ways. Everyone posting here has admitted that.

Each of us will approach this in a different way, and I celebrate each expression of that, as well as all responses and commentaries offered in return.

What I don't and won't celebrate is any attempt to restrict that flow of thought and expression, especially through emotional manipululation, and yes, Craig, you have asked several times now, I do think you walk a very fine line when it comes to that. I haven't addressed that to you directly, but you have certainly picked up on my general comments on that topic, so I can only assume that I have touched a nerve. I leave it to you to determine why that is, and who is responsible for any discomfort that has caused.

Katie

I haven't posted much since you have been participating, but I have been trying to keep up with all of the threads. I read with great interest and appreciation your very detailed analysis of the information that has been posted here, and also find your posts to be interesting, well-written, and balanced.

I started reading on this site about a month or two before the deaths of Peny and Michaell. I found those events, and the incredible weird secrecy spin around them to be so ludicrous that it really shook my already cracking beliefs around Lazaris.

I have posted here in the past that I have dealt extensively over many years with the C:S organization, including several contacts with Peny back in the 80s, and on and off contact with Jach over many years. I only have seen Michaell a few times. I have found C:S to be an extraordinarily difficult and arbitrary company to deal with, in many respects. EVERYTHING is their way or no way. And they seem to automatically feel they have the high ground in this regard -- not being martyrs, being self-actualized, we each create our own reality, who knows? (I fear that the bottom line was that if we wanted Lazaris, we just had to put up and shut up.)

Anyway, I never participated in the forum, but did know from time to time about certain threads and trends. I was alarmed and confused by almost everything I heard, and that is one of the reasons I never joined.

Several friends and I would discuss our concerns, as we were very attentive to the material, and the Lazaris "lifestyle," going to many workshops, working seriously with the tapes, buying crystals and other items at workshops, etc. These friends too had very intimate dealings with C:S, and also had a lot of problems with how they were treated, including very cavalier and unkind treatment that nobody ever took any responsibility for. The only responsibility we have ever heard of from any of these people is the continuous challenge to us to take it ourselves.

We repeatedly came to the conclusion that we
just needed to separate our feelings for and belief in Lazaris from the hard-to-ignore behavior of C:S and P.M.J. These behaviors ranged from indifference to nastiness to intense "limitsetting" to just plain arrogance. Then, one day, we began asking WHY? Why on earth would we separate all those things out? Why on earth would Lazaris have the organization that supposedly exists entirely for the purpose of supporting him and his teachings be run by nasty people with no concern for their impact on others? There was this weird sense that this kind of behavior went with becoming independent of the concensus reality, and also being more advanced in the spiritual and metaphysical world. Well, I say HOGWASH!! They are just a bunch or rude. entitled, better-than people who don't deserve my attention any more.

Craig, I have been in the position repeatedly on this board to say that I reserve the right to proceed at my own pace, as I just saw you do. I have expressed that I still am thinking about how I want to think and feel about Lazaris. And this is still true, even after what I have just written. I have more than "worked with" the Lazaris materials. I have embraced them as a total lifestyle for about 20 years. So I am still grappling with what I really believe, what I want to do, and why. And btw, I have expressed this here, and found nothing but support from others. Now, I did get some nudging to look at how hard it is to totally consider that I have been duped, used, and even brainwashed, along with a lot of understanding of how painful this is for any human. Being one who likes to see myself as a very intelligent, knowledgable and discerning person, this really is a challenge. But one I have taken on. And I have still not reached any hard and fast conlusions about Lazaris. About C:S, yes. (see above) About Jach, still working on that. About Michaell, not really enough info, and don't care that much. About Peny, YEEEEEEEEEEEEECCCCCCCCCCCCCCHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. And that is not a new opinion. I actually have felt that way since I first met her in the 80s. I found her to be rude, eccentric in extremely unpleasant ways, self-centered beyond comprehension, nasty, self-absorbed, dishonest and arrogant. On way more than one occasion. Including two different times (and I've heard there were more) where it was announced that she would be making an appearance, and many people planned travel and time around that because it was supposed to be such a big deal to get to be with Peny. Except she just decided in a most cavalier way not to come both times that I am personally and directly aware of. No explanation, no responsibility, no apology. Except that basically she changed her mind, or didn't feel like it, and wasn't a martyr, so she doesn't do anything she doesn't feel like doing.

That was actually the beginning of a big "Emporer has no clothes" realization for me, but it did not extend to Lazaris, or Jach. Also, I was too much of a wimp to discuss much with others, or do any research, or let these concerns affect me as deeply as they should have. Of course, it took me awhile to realize that Peny was touted by Lazaris as being the most evolved being on the planet. One of the first times I realized that sometimes I would have to disagree with Lazaris. Although of course that quickly deteriorated into self-questioning and self-doubt -- I must be competitive, or jealous, etc., etc. Better clean up MY act. I just couldn't stand it that it wasn't me that Lazaris really came to be with, although he claimed to love me more than I could even know.

You are indeed fortunate that you haven't had much to do with C:S, and the triumverate that has grown incredibly wealthy over thses many years purveying this stuff. Because I can guarantee you it would not have been pleasant or empowering.

You could even try an experiment. Call C:S and say that you have been working with Lazaris for awhile, and didn't really know much about Peny, Michaell, etc. But express condolence and also concern about the deaths. Try to imagine wanting some reassurance or information, as Lazaris is supposedly our friend and teacher in the most important matters of our lives, and these people were closest to him. See what kind of a reception you get, no less answers.

As a matter of fact, since you say you haven't had much dealings with C:S, why not start now, and see for yourself? Call them about tapes, or workshops on a regular basis, and feel free to ask the kinds of questions consumers normally might ask of a company they are buying from. Ask them questions about things. Join the Forum. Of course, with Peny gone, you'll never be able to get a dose of the real deal, but just see what you can see. Keep your intelligent, reasoned wits about you. (Now, don't get me wrong. The person answering the phone will be nice at first. And will probably always be nice if not asked anything that she has been trained to believe should not be answered, and certainly not asked! Try returning a tape because you changed your mind, or made a mistake when ordering. Or one that is defective, even. (That you can do, if you ship it back at your expense.)

Anyway, I am writing a long letter, and kind of rambling, for which I apologize, but I do need to express a concern to you.
I saw where Ted quoted you from the LL forum, stating that naturally your views were not popular on this forum, I guess regarding your stance on questioning Jach's possible innocence even if Lazaris is about trickery. I have to tell you, I really wonder why you would post that. Honestly Craig, you have come across as an honest and straightforward person, but that seems underhanded and calculated. Are you trying to curry favor? Or win followers and constituents? This is a forum, we write and express, and agree and disagree, and learn and teach, etc.

I have followed your remarks with interest, as I said, because I am still weighing what I believe about ALL of this stuff. I don't care if 100 people write and disagree with you -- and btw, that doesn't make you "unpopular" -- it just means that 100 people have a different opinion. If I agree with some or all of what you say, I will reserve my right to do so. If I agree with some or all of what Katie, or Steve, or anyone has to say, I reserve my right to do so. If I change my mind next week or next month, I reserve my right to do so. But I still learned from and appreciated what you wrote.

It left a really bad taste in my mouth that you would go to another board and act wronged. Why?

Sky Voice, in answering your question I hope to respond to the posts of Ted and Katie also. I started writing this post only to yourself, which explains why Katie is referred to in the third person. I do not mean any type of slight by this. I don't have the energy to rewrite the post.

You said: It left a really bad taste in my mouth that you would go to another board and act wronged. Why?

The reason why? I am human and make mistakes. I apologize for making that comment. In retrospect, I see the mistake. It was absolutely bad form to have written such a comment on a different board.

I will give you some of the whys and wherefores so you know where I was coming from.

As a result of a trigger in Katie's posts yesterday (8/27), I found myself doing some intense processing around issues that I had with verbal abuse with my dead father. Although I was aware of this before, it wasn't until yesterday that I "felt" it. As even Lazaris has told me, I tend not to feel. Well, I made up for a lot of lost time yesterday and felt it in a grand way.

Given that I was in a very emotional state (and suffering from physical exhaustion from getting little sleep the night before), I said things carelessly and was not in a clean enough state to properly review what I wrote before I hit the "submit" button. In retrospect, I wish I had stayed off of both sites yesterday.

It is clear that I created a lot of misconceptions. Please allow me to try to set the record straight.

1) The emotions I was expressing were genuine. I was not trying to manipulate. If I came off that way, I apologize. This and LL are the first sites I have ever posted to. I am learning new lessons on the difference between internet communication and face-to-face or even email communication.

2) While Katie's post indirectly triggered the emotions, I did not mean in any way to imply that the reaction I felt was "because of" her post. Even yesterday in the midst of my emotions, I think I recognized this partially.

3) I think Katie and I have been intermixing two different conversations on two different topics. The other conversation can be found on the "Is there any such thing as a good manipulation?" topic.

4) In the other topic, I made the statement [[As such, if you object to the way I communicate and would like me to stop posting at anytime, I will respect your request immediately.]] In re-reading this today, I realize how shitty that sounds. It was a reaction to Katie saying: [[Please seek your wisdom and insights there, instead of coming here and punishing anyone for serving up our opinions without having diced, sliced, chopped and pureed them into some unrecognizable pink pablum first for the benefit of your ease of digestion.]] I had no idea how to take that statement. I was attempting to make it clear that if she did not indeed want me to continue posting, I would honor that request. Without me making the reference that I just made, it sounded like it was coming out of left field.

5) I still disagree with how Katie worded some of her 8/27 post in this topic. In parts of the post, she said that what I wrote:
A) bristles the hell out of her
B) totally offends her sense of rationality
C) insults her
D) cause her to find what I say to be off-putting
E) is interpreted as dangerous
F) diminishes her intelligence
G) diminishes her vulnerability
It was this wording, plus the statement I quoted in point 4 above, that was at the root of my statement about "not being too popular" on this site about a particular opinion.

6) Speaking of popularity, I am not trying to win any type of contests here. The main motivation for posting is to help me in my evaluation of Lazaris. If I can have an impact (one way or the other) on others in the process, great. I have nothing to sell and doubt, due to geographical reasons, that I would become friends with any of you. Why do I even right this post? To hopefully clear the air so we can continue to have fruitful discussions.

7) While I agree with much of what Katie says in her "Is there such a thing as good manipulation?" post, we do have some fundamental differences of opinions in this area. So be it. We also have differences of opinion on what I consider one small part of Jach's culpability. So be it also.

8) I do not mind any type of disagreement with my opinion. In fact, I seek it as I find that out of such challenges I am forced to refine my opinions. I hope my postings on the other site give evidence to this. While I do have an issue sometimes with how that disagreement is stated (see point 7), that generally has not happened to me either here or on the other site, although it has happened on both sites. While that causes me some discomfort, it is mild. No one should alter their communication style in an attempt to please me, especially since it is such a minor annoyance. Again, do not confuse my reaction yesterday with how I react 99.99% of the time to such communication.

I hope this has helped clear up some issues and I apologize for yesterday.

Cheers, Craig

Please GET THIS -- I began this thread to point out the IMO very real likelyhood of Lazaris being twisted and eventually: IMO completely "hijacked" by Jach Purcel.

The fact that some have attempted to turn this and Jach's likely use of LSD into AN EXCUSE for his CONTINUING TO PRESENT LAZARIS -- is just massively toxic.

Craig -- I hate to say this man -- but due to your admitted lack of willingness to feel -- and lack of direct personal damage from Con:Sin -- you may need to be hit harder by Jachzaris / Con:Sin -- in order to really understand IMO what The Cosmicfool is here to expose and heal.

I know that I could never write with the conviction I do without the personal social violence I experienced from Jachzaris and Con:Sin.

I honestly encourage you to go back to Jachzaris (as you do IMO appear to want to do) and then only depart when (and if) you have absolutely had enough.

I'm not kidding, here -- IMO you need to feel how IMO profoundly dangerous and socially toxic they are now before you commit to honestly leaving.

IMO until we know where we want to be, we can never feel inside that we really belong somewhere.

And in the end, I think so much of this is about the inescapable need for social belonging we all feel, lifelong.

Abraham Maslow...

Steve

quote:

---

I still disagree with how Katie worded some of her 8/27 post in this topic. In parts of the post, she said that what I wrote:
A) bristles the hell out of her
B) totally offends her sense of rationality
C) insults her
D) cause her to find what I say to be off-putting
E) is interpreted as dangerous
F) diminishes her intelligence
G) diminishes her vulnerability
It was this wording, plus the statement I quoted in point 4 above, that was at the root of my statement about "not being too popular" on this site about a particular opinion.

---

I can't even find a post that was addressed soley to you from 8/27. You have taken comments out of context and attributed them as comments I made specifically to you, evidently in an attempt to make my words look like a personal assault.

I can't say that I appreciate that, I think it's foul play.

Rather than have this conversation in public I think we should take it into privacy because I see very clearly where it is going, and I'm sure no one else is interested.

quote:

---

Rather than have this conversation in public I think we should take it into privacy because I see very clearly where it is going, and I'm sure no one else is interested.

---

I second that 100%.

Steve

That's an interesting post!

Here's a crazy thought. Do you think that some people come here and start these big emotional scenes so they can paint us as the bad guys, and then have justification for running back to the shelter of Lazaris?

You know kind of like we are the "anti-Lazaris" so if we're bad, then Lazaris must be good. So they just come here to find ways to show how bad and wrong we are to make themselves feel better about their cult addiction?

Something nuts like that?

Could it be possible?

Katie

quote:

---

Do you think that some people come here and start these big emotional scenes so they can paint us as the bad guys, and then have justification for running back to the shelter of Lazaris?

You know kind of like we are the "anti-Lazaris" so if we're bad, then Lazaris must be good. So they just come here to find ways to show how bad and wrong we are to make themselves feel better about their cult addiction?

Something nuts like that?

Could it be possible?

---

In a word?

Yep.

But hey -- I'm not worried.

I'm in heavy training -- as we speak -- to become an especially politically difficult African American Lesbian.

Look out God Damnit.

Steve

At Katie's request, I will not be responding any further about this issue on this site. If anyone would like to discuss it offline, I can be reached at "DOUBLECHECKCS at COMCAST dot NET".

Cheers, Craig

You wrote:

quote:

---

You know kind of like we are the "anti-Lazaris" so if we're bad, then Lazaris must be good.

---

Yes, I do think this thought process occurs. I can think of one person who until recently expressed a disbelief in Lazaris, only to start praising L after being pissed off at us.

It's as if believing in Lazaris and liking us are mutually exclusive. And vice-versa. I guess we need to be really nice to people so they will like us and leave the cult.

I noticed someone on the Lite Site complaining that you want to take away his pleasure without offering anything in return.
Well, first of all, we can't take your pleasure - we don't have that much power - all we do is write words on a computer. I suppose it's wrong to suggest people give up their drug addictions, lest we "take away their pleasure".

Do you think you could refrain from using this site to advertise your angst?

You don't like my communication style, you have made that very clear. So, now what?

Do you want to make a game out of picking apart my every word to see which one might be interpretable as abusive toward you? Do you want to form a panel?

Trust me Craig, you aren't going to change me, not even if you form a posse.

Please give up your mission here.

This board is for people who want to discuss the Con:Sin and the Lazaris material.

Katie

quote:

---

I guess we need to be really nice to people so they will like us and leave the cult.

I noticed someone on the Lite Site complaining that you want to take away his pleasure without offering anything in return.
Well, first of all, we can't take your pleasure - we don't have that much power - all we do is write words on a computer. I suppose it's wrong to suggest people give up their drug addictions, lest we "take away their pleasure".

---

I am reminded here, again of A Course In Miracles.

IMO there is tremendous appeal in The Course for those seeking wholesale "see no evil" peer group mental novicane (ex-drug addicts, acid-damaged folks, alcoholics, etc).

Unfortunately -- as with the Lazaris Material -- IMO the unspoken price is our social and spiritual backbone.

Steve

I have been asked by Katie to take this discussion offline. I would be happy to discuss it with you at "DOUBLECHECKCS at COMCAST dot NET".

Cheers, Craig

Please do me a favor and let this issue die.
There really isn't any point in feeding it.

Do as you wish, of course, but it would be my preference to not give it any further energy.

I'm not quite sure that it's accurate to say that anyone here is on the same side as anyone else. I don't really think that is an accurate way to measure our varied participations here.

Since each one of us had/s a unique relationship and experience with Con:Sin and the Jachzaris materials, I think we each have just as unique a position, and those positions might change in any given moment.

I would like to think that we are all on the same side as far as wanting to know the truth goes, but I wouldn't even lay any odds on that.

I see it as quite reasonable that even people who are in agreement about some aspect of the Lazaris puzzle could be in disagreement on another.

However, my disagreement with Craig has nothing to do with Con:Sin or the Lazaris materials, therefore I don't see that it is appropriate to get into it here. It's actually personal between the two of us, so I don't know why Craig is attempting to involve other people.

Anyway, do as you like, but I've expressed my preference, and would very much like to not be involved in any further discussions with or about Craig.

To ye so disirous of letting so many issues die.

Though you hate me right now,

I LOVE YOU.

(after all you were my sister once)

I'll be in Mexico for a while sis.

I promise, we'll "be" in dreams until I return.

I love you,

Tim

(btw, check out Dar Williams -- 'The Honesty Room')

Back to the original post...Is Lazaris evil? When I drop to center I feel there is an evilness there amongst other qualities. 'Good' and not so good. The point that angers me is that 'Lazaris' (who ever they are and where ever they come from) is not who they claim to be. They have not given us a complete picture. They have not been honest with us. Be they something that is purely drummed up by Jach's conscious/unconscious states or something that has possessed him beyond his control...there is still a darkness at the core. Jach must be held accountable. There is no pleading insanity or possession in this one. I think we have all been there at some point (in some lifetime) and have gone on to pay the price. That's what happens when you make a deal with the devil...whether it is your own private demon or the capital 'D' Devil....it all comes from the same source. The fact that Lazaris/Jach has dark qualities does not bother me. That they are attempting to hide it and hold themselves above others, now that fucken pisses me off.

By the way Audrey ... It was my friend who asked me what Lazaris did with all of our pain, quilt, etc. when we gave it to him. "What does he do? Eat it or something?!" She was the one who started me thinking the sacrilegious thought..."Is Lazaris evil?" ...way back, years ago.

You are right, there is evil there, and no matter what it is, Jach took it on the road...so the buck stops at his fat belly if ya ask me.

I want to tie up a loose end. As you know, Katie and I have been engaging in a disagreement that we agreed to take offline.

That argument has come to a conclusion with the two of us realizing that we are coming from different worldviews and will therefore never reach agreement in this area.

In retrospect, I wish the argument had been taken offline much earlier.

I apologize for wasting space on the board in my incessant need to clarify misunderstandings. I also apologize to anyone, especially Katie, who may have suffered as a result. That was not my intention, but I will take responsibility for the outcome. I am sorry.