| Author |
Message |
    
greg_s
Intermediate Member
Username: greg_s
Post Number: 331
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 205.188.117.202
| | Posted on Saturday, January 05, 2008 - 12:59 pm: | 
|
TITLE: “An ‘Holy Kiss’ Primer” (Drafted 11/24/06) (On 1/5/2008 Ex’r Staff et al was changed to a ‘new’ title throughout this article to make it more generic and less offensive to who it is teaching. In other words this ‘new’ title is even more ‘code’ like.)
THIS IS NOT A MKLO POST/ARTICLE: We know the below labeled ‘THE FIFTH PARAGRAPH…IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT YOUR DEFINITION OF ‘IS’ IS’ sounds like part of an mklo post but don’t laugh, it is not. mklo et al do ask a lot of great simplistic questions (maybe they are seekers)…they just don’t usually provide many (any) definitive/incontrovertible answers. Logically, it would be incumbent upon those among us who posit that God’s New Testament Law contains a Command to greet each other with an ‘holy kiss’ to, at a minimum, definitively/inocntrovertibly define ‘kiss’ and ‘holy’ and ‘greet’ in addition to practicing themselves what they preach to us and others. Also logically, we are once again willing to stand in yet another void left be the Hater’s lack of definitive/incontrovertible support for their Hater doctrines. On FACTNet, victorjohanson (et al) can’t even bring himself to use the word Commandment but instead opts for the more Hater/antinomian ‘commend.’ victorjohanson is so cool, so with it; this [hopefully reformed] serial speech suppressor; a High Priest of the ‘Good Enough Church of the Great Outdoors’ and public advocate/example for a Christian’s use of alcohol and drugs. But, this is FACTNet, so logic is optional for the Hater and not always the order du jour among the Haters. For those of us that feel no compulsion to add this ostensible Holy ‘kiss’ greeting to God’s New Testament Command(s) we can just relax and enjoy any response or the usual lack or relevant definitive/incontrovertible response…i.e. enjoy the show. Although, we are providing a response gratis because, to do so is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. Can you dig it?
EX’RGESIS: Let’s try some ex’rgesis. Romans 16:1-16 (KJV) tells the Body of Christ…”I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea: That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also. Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus: Who have for my life laid down their own necks: unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles. Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my wellbeloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ. Greet Mary, who bestowed much labour on us. Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me. Greet Amplias my beloved in the Lord. Salute Urbane, our helper in Christ, and Stachys my beloved. Salute Apelles approved in Christ. Salute them which are of Aristobulus' household. Salute Herodion my kinsman. Greet them that be of the household of Narcissus, which are in the Lord. Salute Tryphena and Tryphosa, who labour in the Lord. Salute the beloved Persis, which laboured much in the Lord. Salute Rufus chosen in the Lord, and his mother and mine. Salute Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermas, Patrobas, Hermes, and the brethren which are with them. Salute Philologus, and Julia, Nereus, and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints which are with them. Salute one another with an holy kiss. The churches of Christ salute you.” The Hater method of ex’rgesis tells us this portion of scripture ‘commands’ us to ‘receive’ or ‘greet’ or ‘salute’ saints that are long dead; in addition to the Hater’s ostensible ‘holy kiss’ New Testament commandment.
“AN ‘HOLY KISS’ PRIMER” CONTINUED BELOW… |
pelfdaddy
Senior Member
Username: pelfdaddy
Post Number: 1002
Registered: 12-2006
Posted From: 166.214.221.30
| | Posted on Saturday, January 05, 2008 - 11:01 pm: |
|
Greg,
Kiss my Davis. |
greg_s
Intermediate Member
Username: greg_s
Post Number: 342
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 64.12.117.202
| | Posted on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 1:58 pm: |
|
CONTINUING “AN ‘HOLY KISS’ PRIMER”…
EX’RGESIS CONTINUED: Additionally, ex’rgesis teaches us that 1 Corinthians 16:19-20 commands us that the Churches in Asia and Aquila and Priscilla and all the ‘holy’ brethren are somehow still saluting the Body of Christ in addition to the Hater’s ostensible ‘holy kiss’ New Testament commandment. Ex’rgesis also teaches us that 2 Corinthians 13:12-13 commands us that all the long dead saints still somehow salute the Body of Christ in addition to the Hater’s ostensible ‘holy kiss’ New Testament commandment. Ex’rgesis also teaches us that 1 Thessalonians 5:25-27 commands the Body of Christ to still be praying for Brother Paul and company in addition to ‘kissing’ each other ‘holily’ and that the Church in Thessalonica should still be reading 1 Thessalonians to the ‘holy’ brethren. As you all can see ex’rgesis sure is fun once a person quickly gets the hang of it. Once again, all can see the Body of Christ is not the one picking and choosing what to believe/misapply from God’s New Testament Law. At this point we have totally disproved the Hater’s ‘holy kiss’ non-doctrine/assertion. But, as is our custom, we will continue with still more relevant response that totally disproves the Hater’s ‘holy kiss’ non-doctrine/assertion…
“AN ‘HOLY KISS’ PRIMER” CONTINUED BELOW… |
greg_s
Intermediate Member
Username: greg_s
Post Number: 355
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 64.12.117.202
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 09, 2008 - 7:22 pm: |
|
CONTINUING “AN ‘HOLY KISS’ PRIMER”…
EX’RGESIS IS NEWS TO PAUL AND ALL: Continuing, unimpeded by any relevant refutation from the Haters…Brother Paul closing an Epistle with the admonition for recipients of the Epistle to greet one another with an ‘holy kiss’ happens four times (1 Peter 5:14 is a ‘kiss’ of love) in the New Testament (Romans 16:16; 1 Corinthians 16:20; 2 Corinthians 13:12; 1 Thessalonians 5:26). We have heard of people establishing who an Epistle was from and for by looking at the salutation of an Epistle…But, getting/establishing a Commandment for the Body of Christ from the closing/conclusion of an Epistle is a new one on us. (Please say hi to everyone for us, will you? Give your wife a hug for us, will you? Give them our love? Please, greet everyone with an ‘holy kiss’ for us; thanks in advance.) Based on our cursory research of only what is actually written in God’s New Testament Law there is no ‘kiss’ Commandment, as the Hater are seemingly defining ‘kiss,’ to be followed by the Body of Christ. After reading the above and elsewhere it seems the Hater define a ‘kiss’ as being with the lips on the lips only and possibly preferably accompanied by the ‘kiss’ sound. This is much too narrow as you will see below. Then, there is still the matter of definitively/incontrovertibly defining ‘holy’ and ‘salute/greet.’ One thing we may learn from Brother Paul in Romans 16:16; 1 Corinthians 16:20; 2 Corinthians 13:12 and 1 Thessalonians 5:26 by way of any ‘Commandment’ is to close our official letters to other Christians/Churches in an appropriate spiritual/affectionate way; appropriate to the circumstances…e.g. In His Service, et al. The Body of Christ does what God Commands just not more than God Commands. If the Hater would allow that a ‘kiss’ doesn’t only ever entail with the lips on the lips, then they would have to admit our Christian Church already observes the ‘Spirit’ of Paul’s ‘commendation.’ The Hater’s have once again placed themselves in one accord with yet another untenable position. Yet, these are the same folks that so blithely recognise and eschew cognitive dissonance in others? They routinely bring charges against the Body of Christ…apparently without studying and/or even reasonably thinking things through. This is the reason for the observable persistent Hater behavior of ignoring a response from within our Christian Church or changing the subject. Would anyone care to begin to reasonably discus ‘What’s The Book For You?’ Or ‘Curt’s Story, Part 1 (Expounded),’ tithe, cults, the tongue, pet ownership, undiluted fermented wine use, works, pants or hair? Still no takers? Predictable. We will easily and gladly publicly back down from any greg_s position that is definitively/incontrovertibly shown to be wrong/error.
“AN ‘HOLY KISS’ PRIMER” CONTINUED BELOW… |
victorjohanson
Junior Member
Username: victorjohanson
Post Number: 45
Registered: 12-2007
Posted From: 66.223.233.130
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 09, 2008 - 8:06 pm: |
|
"...recognise and eschew cognitive dissonance in others?"
Do you mean like when someone comes on and tries to explain away something (like the holy kiss) which has at least as much (and arguably more) justification than other doctrines they insist upon (like mandatory tithing)? That kind of cognitive dissonance? |
pelfdaddy
Senior Member
Username: pelfdaddy
Post Number: 1027
Registered: 12-2006
Posted From: 166.128.81.63
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 09, 2008 - 8:09 pm: |
|
You still fail to answer the illustrative point greg, which is that fact this admonition is more clear than anything said about hair and pants.
IF you could prove that Paul wanted women to have long hair, you would still have all your work still to accomplish because you cannot come close to showing that to cut the hair AT ALL is A SIN. Yet a much more straighforward imperative statement is used to describe the intended manner of greeting, and you set it aside with another galaxy of alphabet soup. |
victorjohanson
Junior Member
Username: victorjohanson
Post Number: 47
Registered: 12-2007
Posted From: 66.223.233.130
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 09, 2008 - 8:23 pm: |
|
"You still fail to answer the illustrative point greg, which is that fact this admonition is more clear than anything said about hair and pants."
Stop recognizing and eschewing Greg's cognitive dissonance. He hates when people do that (especially when they are as blithe about it as you are). |
kobegone
Junior Member
Username: kobegone
Post Number: 49
Registered: 11-2007
Posted From: 138.162.140.52
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 12:42 pm: |
|
I have a great idea!!! How about Master Vic, Marc to the G, and Peldaddy go on tour. Hey let's protest against NTCC outside their churches. If you are really trying to help people escape the tyranny of Mr.
Davis; don't you think it would be better for you to protest outside their churches rather go back and forth on this site; pass out flyers etc, which do you think will be more effective! Oh bring along bro derrick also, let's bring down the regime I tell ya. |
victorjohanson
Member
Username: victorjohanson
Post Number: 52
Registered: 12-2007
Posted From: 66.223.233.130
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 1:14 pm: |
|
"How about Master Vic, Marc to the G, and Peldaddy go on tour."
Well, we don't have motorhomes and suckers in every city to pay all the bills for us, so send me a big check and I'll think about it. |
pelfdaddy
Senior Member
Username: pelfdaddy
Post Number: 1035
Registered: 12-2006
Posted From: 166.128.97.87
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 1:35 pm: |
|
ko,
You are too late. Do you actually think we say the things we say without certain knowledge?
Have you really NOT figured out how we know what these guys are up to all the time?
If we did not have individual church members in ntcc outposts throughout the country informing us as to their outrageous behavior, do you think we would 'report' it?
Do you really think we just make stuff up?
Does this not make sense to you, to have operatives funnelling information to us while simultaneously discouraging others from attending?
Does it not occur to you, that it's very possible, and in fact quite likely, that there are disillusioned people everywhere who contact us regularly for help, encouragement, and to tell us what is happening?
When we say, "Hey, we know what goes on--we get the emails", w-w-what do you think we are talking about? Where have you been?
Man, get with it! |
pelfdaddy
Senior Member
Username: pelfdaddy
Post Number: 1037
Registered: 12-2006
Posted From: 166.128.97.87
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 1:58 pm: |
|
One of the smartest things ever done on factnet was mklo's original positing of the Holy Kiss argument, which has occupied greg on a topic about which no one cares. |
greg_s
Intermediate Member
Username: greg_s
Post Number: 358
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 64.12.117.202
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 2:02 pm: |
|
CONTINUING “AN ‘HOLY KISS’ PRIMER”…
NEW TESTAMENT LETTER STRUCTURE: As most non-Haters know letters written in the ancient world (Rome) followed a standard format, but one which is slightly different from today. The letters contained in God’s New Testament Law that were written by and/or attributed to Brother Paul and the other Apostles usually follow the standard format/conventions of their day. Although there are some variations in individual letters (especially in the body and conclusion), the basic structure of ancient letters can be outlined as follows: The letter’s beginning i.e. sender(s) or from whom. Then, the recipient(s) i.e. to whom. Then, the formulaic greeting and thanksgiving (or blessing). Then, the letter’s body; consisting of initial exhortation, thesis statement, theological discussions and ethical admonitions. Then, the letter’s conclusion consisting of practical matters, individual greetings, personal postscript and doxology (or Prayer).
CHRISTIANS DO WHAT GOD COMMANDS: We did/do greet the brethren with, what is considered by the less gnat straining and camel gulping and more precisely accurate among us, an ‘holy kiss’. This would include our time as a part of our current Christian Church and have since we first became a Christian. Although, many may not realize it because it is/was not necessarily a ‘kiss’ on the lips and is/was not always accompanied by the western perception of what constitutes a ‘kiss’ sound. Many/most peoples understanding/perception of the Webster’s definition of the word ‘kiss’ and the underlying Greek word for ‘kiss’ is much more narrow than the word’s actual meaning (definition). Think of the Hater vail/veil non-argument for another example of this. For the Body of Christ it’s as God’s New Testament Law defines ‘holy kiss’ not as the Hater’s narrowly define ‘holy kiss.’ We ‘kiss’/greet; just not because of Romans 16:16, 1 Corinthians 16:20, 2 Corinthians 13:12 or 1 Thessalonians 5:26. ASIDE: We also did the same thing (‘kiss’ as a greeting) in AA when we were involved in that. We did the same thing (‘kiss’ as a greeting) during our time among bikers, as a hippy and as a convict in prison when we were involved with that. We did the same thing (‘kiss’ as a greeting) during our time in the US Army when we were involved in that. Yes, sometimes even the mouth to mouth garden variety male to male heterosexual ‘kiss’…especially among bikers. END ASIDE. For the ‘kiss’-on-the-lips-as-a-Commandment’ crowd would a verbal greeting and handshake or hug accompanying this heretofore undefined by Hater greeting via ‘holy kiss’ be adding to God’s New Testament Law?
“AN ‘HOLY KISS’ PRIMER” CONTINUED BELOW… |
victorjohanson
Member
Username: victorjohanson
Post Number: 53
Registered: 12-2007
Posted From: 66.223.233.130
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 2:03 pm: |
|
Greg, in case you haven't figured this out, no one is advocating "kiss-on-the-lips-as-a-Commandment." The subject only arose to highlight the inconsistency of NTCC for insisting on other-things-as-Commandments which have as little or less support than the "holy Kiss."
So you are wasting your time, as usual. |
kobegone
Junior Member
Username: kobegone
Post Number: 50
Registered: 11-2007
Posted From: 138.162.140.55
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 2:41 pm: |
|
When we say, "Hey, we know what goes on--we get the emails", w-w-what do you think we are talking about? Where have you been?
Man, get with it!"
I'm not talking about your former preachers in crime friends who left; I'm talking about people that's never been man! We must stop the madness, let's bring down the regime, let's spread democracy throughout the church world; c-c-c-can ya dig?
Sending spies to NTCC isn't helping enough; the servicemens homes are still full, we must completely bring down the regime; let's get the ACLU involved, let's get Vic his check. Let's get em peldaddy and Vic. By the way, are you a PIMP? Pelfdaddy seems like a pimp name, or a rapper. |
kobegone
Member
Username: kobegone
Post Number: 51
Registered: 11-2007
Posted From: 138.162.140.52
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 3:33 pm: |
|
The results have come in from the factnet presidential elections. Governor Vic has just won a close race against Senator Pelfdaddy 51% to 49%. Winning Florida is what gave Vic the edge. However, he plans on making the Senator his Vice Prez.
He will take over office as Marc G's term has ended with an approval rating of 0%, can Vic do better? Will he promote democracy throughout the church? Will he finally bring Down R.W. Davis Hussein and the NTCC (Baath party?), over in the Middle East, I mean the Northwest?
Sources say he is planning to invade NTCC's Graham headquaters using his Factnet soldiers, and Marines, and also plans on attacking from the puget sound using his naval vessels.
President Vic, and Vice President Pelfdaddy says it's time for reformation. They will send leaflets to all NTCC members and encourage them to leave or face serious consequences. R.W says Vic, you have 48 hours to leave Iraq, I mean Graham.
-kobegone, editor of factnet magazine |
victorjohanson
Member
Username: victorjohanson
Post Number: 55
Registered: 12-2007
Posted From: 66.223.233.130
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 4:31 pm: |
|
"Sources say he is planning to invade NTCC's Graham headquaters using his Factnet soldiers, and Marines, and also plans on attacking from the puget sound using his naval vessels. "
This is incorrect. We expect a natural implosion, similar to last century's Soviet disintegration. Evil empires can only sustain themselves for a limited time; the natural human love for freedom eventually does them in. Our strategy is to hasten that demise by furnishing the oppressed proletariat with previously suppressed information, thereby neutralizing org propaganda and mind control.
It seems to be working. |
pelfdaddy
Senior Member
Username: pelfdaddy
Post Number: 1038
Registered: 12-2006
Posted From: 166.128.99.70
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 4:45 pm: |
|
Vic,
Startling, is it not...that those who imbibe the authoritarian leadership culture of this rapacious sect always assume the the "enemies of God" are engaged in a power play, are jockeying for position, and are attempting to seize authority? |
victorjohanson
Member
Username: victorjohanson
Post Number: 56
Registered: 12-2007
Posted From: 66.223.233.130
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 5:01 pm: |
|
"Startling, is it not...that those who imbibe the authoritarian leadership culture of this rapacious sect always assume the the "enemies of God" are engaged in a power play, are jockeying for position, and are attempting to seize authority?"
It's all part of the culture of paranoia created and sustained by RWD. He's a sick man. |
greg_s
Intermediate Member
Username: greg_s
Post Number: 360
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 205.188.117.202
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 8:51 pm: |
|
CONTINUING “AN ‘HOLY KISS’ PRIMER”…
THE FIFTH PARAGRAPH…IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT YOUR DEFINITION OF ‘IS’ IS: What is the/an ‘holy kiss’? How do you define this ‘holy kiss?’ How do you know since none of our research thus far shows anyone else definitively/incontrovertibly defining ‘holy kiss’? Some of our research tells us during the first century a.d. it was illegal to ‘kiss’ anyone in greeting as the ‘kiss’ ritual greeting was becoming to ponderous/involved/time wasting. Additionally, Paul elsewhere tells us to obey laws and rulers (another Hater gripe). In Paul’s closing in Romans 16 he greets the women but salutes the men. Why the difference? What is the difference? Is there a difference? How exactly does a person greet/salute someone with a ‘kiss’ that is ‘holy?’ Should Christians practice it today? Do Christians practice it today? How do you know since a ‘kiss’ has not been definitively/incontrovertibly defined? Again, what exactly is an ‘holy kiss?’ First, what makes it ‘holy’…the attitude of the body or the attitude of the heart? If ‘holy’ is an attitude of the heart is there a corresponding outward action that would/should show it. If ‘holy’ is an attitude of the body then again, is there an attitude of the body that would demonstrate this? What makes it a ‘kiss’…the attitude of the body or the attitude of the heart? If it is the attitude of the body is it lip to lip; eye to eye; lip to eye; forehead to forehead; lip to forehead; nose to nose; lip to nose; cheek to cheek; lip to cheek; ear to ear; lip to ear; neck to neck; lip to neck; shoulder to shoulder; lip to shoulder; chest to chest; forehead to chest; forearm to forearm; lip to forearm; hand to hand; hand to forehead; lip to hand; finger to finger; lip to finger; finger tips to finger tips; lip to finger tip(s); hip to hip; lip to hip; knee to knee; lip to knee; foot to foot; lip to foot? These are some of the ‘kiss’ greetings or a part of a ‘kiss’ greeting from different cultures, ancient and modern, throughout the world. Can a punch on the arm or the squeezing of a pressure point ever be an ‘holy kiss?’ This could be an ‘holy’ greeting just not necessarily a ‘kiss’ as is shown below. If lips are used is making a ‘kissing’ sound required? We assume it would be inarguable that lips open and tongue in play would invalidate a ‘kiss’ being ‘holy;’ even among spouses. Would a sniff ‘kiss’ count? Again, if what makes a ‘kiss’ ‘holy’ is the attitude of the heart then is a corresponding action required (this would be works, another Hater gripe)? Since a ‘kiss’ is just a gentle or light touch could the voice be used? Does blowing a ‘kiss’ count? Does an air ‘kiss’ count? Would a butterfly ‘kiss’ count? A ‘kiss’ with the lips can be un-‘holy;’ could a ‘kiss’ rendered without the lips be ‘holy?’ What about a caterpillar ‘kiss’, would this count? Would anyone care for a Hershey ‘kiss’ with almonds? Would throwing a ‘kiss’ count? Since the command is to greet how many times should this undefined/indefinable ‘holy kiss’ be used as a greeting? The cheek ‘kiss’ is pretty involved in some cultures; alternating cheeks from one to four times or more. Sometimes the cheek ‘kiss’ involved/involves ‘kissing’ the hand first then placing the persons hand to your forehead then the cheek ‘kiss.’ If someone tells you to greet someone for them (as Paul does in the four ostensible ‘holy kiss’ as Commandment verses)…is this an injunction to greet those specific persons/people on your behalf in perpetuity? Would this ostensible ‘Commandment’ be passed on to their descendants in perpetuity? Is this what mklo believes? This is what Paul is inarguably expressing…greet them for us; greet each other; nothing more, nothing less. (e.g. Please say hi to everyone for us, will you. Give your wife a hug for us, will you. Give them our love. Greet each other with an ‘holy kiss’…thanks.)
“AN ‘HOLY KISS’ PRIMER” CONTINUED BELOW… |
chief
New member
Username: chief
Post Number: 8
Registered: 1-2008
Posted From: 75.104.192.39
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 9:32 pm: |
|
I don't understand why anyone with good sense even responds to Greg. He is obviously someone who plain and simply wants attention. In addition to that I am sure that he receives enjoyment reading his own writing because I highly doubt that anyone else here does.
Greg you are at the very best an extremely poor example of a minister and this is evidenced by your endless words that serve to edify no one what so ever. Assuming that your identity is in fact Greg Shunk, it is a sad thing to imagine that anyone has ever been Pastored by you sir. I base this statement upon the conduct that you have displayed here on this site. This may actually be your intent, but you bring reproach to the NTCC posting on its behalf. The NTCC leadership seems to accomplish this quite well enough without you adding to it. |
victorjohanson
Member
Username: victorjohanson
Post Number: 61
Registered: 12-2007
Posted From: 66.223.233.130
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 9:39 pm: |
|
"...but you bring reproach to the NTCC posting on its behalf.
That's why I think Greg is really a secret agent, proclaiming the outrageous doctrines of NTCC so loudly and obnoxiously that no sane person would subscribe to them. Real loyalists try to keep the public in the dark about these kooky beliefs, because they are only for those who have been carefully conditioned to receive them.
He's a genius. |
chief
New member
Username: chief
Post Number: 9
Registered: 1-2008
Posted From: 75.104.192.59
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 10:04 pm: |
|
Your assumption might actually be accurate; however, this does not negate the fact that this guy should have never pastored a church in my opinion. Most people have better things to do with their time than to combine tens of thousands of words resulting in virtually no substance whatsoever. He may be better off serving as some sort of strange poet rather than a current or former minister of the Gospel.
(Message edited by chief on January 11, 2008) |
victorjohanson
Member
Username: victorjohanson
Post Number: 63
Registered: 12-2007
Posted From: 66.230.101.251
| | Posted on Saturday, January 12, 2008 - 2:58 am: |
|
"...some sort of strange poet..."
I can see that: the repetitive stream-of-consciousness beatnik phrasing; the zen-like hypnosis engendered by vast grey blocks of sterile text. Many artistic types are somewhat overwrought and out of touch with their peers, subject to bouts of paranoia and delusions of grandeur, obsessive and compulsive. Shoe seems to fit pretty well.
Still, I think he's done as much as anyone, in or out, to alienate people from NTCC. Maybe he's crazy like a fox. |
|