Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Unscrambling the pieces

Expand Messages
  • etznab18
    [alt.religion.eckankar repost - 09/04/11] Unscrambling the Pieces Paul loved his privacy. Early in his youth he was involved in a variety of activities, but he
    Message 1 of 21 , Sep 4, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      [alt.religion.eckankar repost - 09/04/11]

      Unscrambling the Pieces

      Paul loved his privacy. Early in his youth he was involved in a
      variety of activities, but he made it a point to obscure any facts
      associated with his life. In so doing, he left a trail so clouded that
      it's going to take our historians years to piece it together. [....]

      http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html

      You don't say? On the same page, the paragraph above read:

      There are several different versions of the date Paul was born into
      this life. One person I talked to said the Twitchell family Bible
      recorded the year as 1910; another person, who also told me he'd seen
      the family Bible, said Paul's birthdate was shown as 1908. It's
      amazing how certain each person was that he knew the truth. Each one
      claimed to have seen it with his own eyes. So by some accounts, he was
      born on October 23, 1908 or 1910, while other accounts give the date
      as October 22.

      http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html

      How about 1909? Based on the Kentucky Census (believed conducted in
      the spring)of 1910 suggesting that Paul was 6 months old?

      OK. Why does this stuff even matter? Perhap's it's all about
      unscrambling the pieces and determining fact from fiction.

      Researching the lineage of Eck Masters, or when Paul Twitchell came to
      contact an Eck Master, one is naturally drawn to the mid 1930's

      "Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in the foothills of the
      Himalayas near Darjeeling. Before that on his first trip to India in
      1935, he met Sudar Singh. We are still looking for information on
      Sudar Singh. We have gotten a lot of reports about an individual named
      Sundar Singh, who is not the same person at all.

      "Somebody asked Paul why he didn't simply look into the ECK-Vidya
      whenever he needed to know something. He said he didn't want to take
      all the surprise and adventure out of life. I feel the same way. It's
      more fun to find out yourself rather than be told. This is why the ECK
      initiates go out and find material about Sudar Singh themselves."

      http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man2.html

      Hey now! 1935. That's the ticket!

      ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic of
      Allahabad, in the summer of 1938, when I visited him with my step-
      sister." [Based on: ECKANKAR-The Key to Secret Worlds, by Paul
      Twitchell, Chap. 10, 3rd paragraph]

      1938 was later edited out. See 1988 version, p. 169-170.

      ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic
      of Allahabad, the summer I visited him with my half sister."

      What is wrong with this picture? Paul Twitchell was apparently NOT a
      teenager in the mid 1930's but, in fact, had already graduated high
      school and been to college already!

      How could Paul Twitchell have been a teenager when he (reportedly)
      went to Paris, France? Or later stayed at Sudar Singh's ashram in
      India for about a year?

      Unscrambling the pieces? For heaven's sake! What pieces?

      "It was upon their return to Paris that Paul met Sudar Singh for the
      first time. The Indian holy man was lecturing in France in an effort
      to gain sincere disciples."

      [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
      51]

      "[...] Sudar Singh was silent for several moments before he spoke. 'Am
      I to understand that you would like to return with me to my spiritual
      retreat in Allahabad?'
      " 'That is my wish,' Kay-Dee said emphatically. 'Paul?' [....] Kay-
      Dee and Paul lived in Sudar Singh's ashram for nearly a year before
      the irate Grands managed to haul them home."

      [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
      52]

      "This year in India was not spent totally in an attitude of holy
      learning. Paul had reached his sixteenth birthday [1925?], and he
      decided that he needed a furlough from the ashram. He traveled to
      Bombay, put up in a hotel, and then set out in search of a holy man
      who Sudar Singh had said was extremely wise in the ways of God."

      [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
      53]

      Nice going Paul / Brad!

      Brad Steiger's book most likely introduced a number of people to Paul
      Twitchell and Eckankar for the first time. However, Paris, Kentucky
      (where Paul Twitchell's sister allegedly DID go to college) is NOT
      Paris, France! And for those who might argue it was an "inner"
      journey, that is NOT how the context reads in the book I quoted from.
      Including the stay in an ashram for nearly a year.

      I have a question. Why didn't Harold Klemp consult the "mahanta
      consciousness" to determine Paul Twitchell's actual D.O.B.? Why didn't
      he do the research and consult the 1910 Kentucky Census? Umm ... or
      why hasn't the latest research about Paul Twitchell's birthdate been
      added to the official Eckankar website instead of Harold Klemp's 1984
      reference to 1908, or 1910? If the 1909 D.O.B. is the correct year,
      then why isn't it there? After a quick scan of pages about Paul
      Twitchell at the official Eckankar website I found the year 1909
      mentioned NADA times!

      Is it really more fun to find out yourself - rather than be told -
      about the life of Paul Twitchell and his contacts with Eckankar
      Masters, etc.? If that were the case then why did Paul Twitchell and
      other Eck Masters write about and tell people already about all these
      things? In order to keep the pieces scrambled and just so people could
      have fun unscrambling them?

      My understanding is that it's incumbent on the leader of Eckankar, the
      Living Eck Master, to update the teachings of Eckankar. Problem is,
      how does one unscramble the pieces of their predecessors? Especially
      the founder? Apparently, it is incumbent upon the members of Eckankar
      too - not to mention anybody reading about Eckankar period - to
      unscramble some of the pieces.

      What has it led to? What the result of people attempting to unscramble
      the pieces?

      http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/topics?hl=en&start=

      http://groups.google.com/group/alt.eckankar/topics?lnk=rgh&pli=1

      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous/

      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/

      http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx

      http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/rsch3.html

      http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/chapters/tmsm1.html

      http://www.littleknownpubs.com/DialogIntro.htm

      Did it really have to take all that? And, Was [AND IS IT STILL] really
      more fun?

      Comments go here :)
    • harrisonferrel
      LIES, LIES and more lies. Such is the eckankar nonsense that is perpetuated by every blind follower of twitchell s cult, including the nutjob Harold Klemp. One
      Message 2 of 21 , Sep 7, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        LIES, LIES and more lies. Such is the eckankar nonsense that is perpetuated by every blind follower of twitchell's cult, including the nutjob Harold Klemp.

        One point struck me among the many good ones herein, regarding Brad Steiger.

        I met Brad Steiger and spent some time with him in the 1980s. At my mention of his twitchell book he shut up like a clam and his face showed me all I needed to know. What he had written was fictional bullshit, a forerunner for all the eck dribble written ever since. Steiger knew he was lying. He was no journalist. He never checked a single fact and was happy to perpetuate twitchell's lies and delusions of grandeur.

        By the time we were meeting, Steiger was already onto his next subject: UFOs and aliens. He's as delusional as twitchell.



        --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@...> wrote:
        >
        > [alt.religion.eckankar repost - 09/04/11]
        >
        > Unscrambling the Pieces
        >
        > Paul loved his privacy. Early in his youth he was involved in a
        > variety of activities, but he made it a point to obscure any facts
        > associated with his life. In so doing, he left a trail so clouded that
        > it's going to take our historians years to piece it together. [....]
        >
        > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
        >
        > You don't say? On the same page, the paragraph above read:
        >
        > There are several different versions of the date Paul was born into
        > this life. One person I talked to said the Twitchell family Bible
        > recorded the year as 1910; another person, who also told me he'd seen
        > the family Bible, said Paul's birthdate was shown as 1908. It's
        > amazing how certain each person was that he knew the truth. Each one
        > claimed to have seen it with his own eyes. So by some accounts, he was
        > born on October 23, 1908 or 1910, while other accounts give the date
        > as October 22.
        >
        > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
        >
        > How about 1909? Based on the Kentucky Census (believed conducted in
        > the spring)of 1910 suggesting that Paul was 6 months old?
        >
        > OK. Why does this stuff even matter? Perhap's it's all about
        > unscrambling the pieces and determining fact from fiction.
        >
        > Researching the lineage of Eck Masters, or when Paul Twitchell came to
        > contact an Eck Master, one is naturally drawn to the mid 1930's
        >
        > "Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in the foothills of the
        > Himalayas near Darjeeling. Before that on his first trip to India in
        > 1935, he met Sudar Singh. We are still looking for information on
        > Sudar Singh. We have gotten a lot of reports about an individual named
        > Sundar Singh, who is not the same person at all.
        >
        > "Somebody asked Paul why he didn't simply look into the ECK-Vidya
        > whenever he needed to know something. He said he didn't want to take
        > all the surprise and adventure out of life. I feel the same way. It's
        > more fun to find out yourself rather than be told. This is why the ECK
        > initiates go out and find material about Sudar Singh themselves."
        >
        > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man2.html
        >
        > Hey now! 1935. That's the ticket!
        >
        > ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic of
        > Allahabad, in the summer of 1938, when I visited him with my step-
        > sister." [Based on: ECKANKAR-The Key to Secret Worlds, by Paul
        > Twitchell, Chap. 10, 3rd paragraph]
        >
        > 1938 was later edited out. See 1988 version, p. 169-170.
        >
        > ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic
        > of Allahabad, the summer I visited him with my half sister."
        >
        > What is wrong with this picture? Paul Twitchell was apparently NOT a
        > teenager in the mid 1930's but, in fact, had already graduated high
        > school and been to college already!
        >
        > How could Paul Twitchell have been a teenager when he (reportedly)
        > went to Paris, France? Or later stayed at Sudar Singh's ashram in
        > India for about a year?
        >
        > Unscrambling the pieces? For heaven's sake! What pieces?
        >
        > "It was upon their return to Paris that Paul met Sudar Singh for the
        > first time. The Indian holy man was lecturing in France in an effort
        > to gain sincere disciples."
        >
        > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
        > 51]
        >
        > "[...] Sudar Singh was silent for several moments before he spoke. 'Am
        > I to understand that you would like to return with me to my spiritual
        > retreat in Allahabad?'
        > " 'That is my wish,' Kay-Dee said emphatically. 'Paul?' [....] Kay-
        > Dee and Paul lived in Sudar Singh's ashram for nearly a year before
        > the irate Grands managed to haul them home."
        >
        > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
        > 52]
        >
        > "This year in India was not spent totally in an attitude of holy
        > learning. Paul had reached his sixteenth birthday [1925?], and he
        > decided that he needed a furlough from the ashram. He traveled to
        > Bombay, put up in a hotel, and then set out in search of a holy man
        > who Sudar Singh had said was extremely wise in the ways of God."
        >
        > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
        > 53]
        >
        > Nice going Paul / Brad!
        >
        > Brad Steiger's book most likely introduced a number of people to Paul
        > Twitchell and Eckankar for the first time. However, Paris, Kentucky
        > (where Paul Twitchell's sister allegedly DID go to college) is NOT
        > Paris, France! And for those who might argue it was an "inner"
        > journey, that is NOT how the context reads in the book I quoted from.
        > Including the stay in an ashram for nearly a year.
        >
        > I have a question. Why didn't Harold Klemp consult the "mahanta
        > consciousness" to determine Paul Twitchell's actual D.O.B.? Why didn't
        > he do the research and consult the 1910 Kentucky Census? Umm ... or
        > why hasn't the latest research about Paul Twitchell's birthdate been
        > added to the official Eckankar website instead of Harold Klemp's 1984
        > reference to 1908, or 1910? If the 1909 D.O.B. is the correct year,
        > then why isn't it there? After a quick scan of pages about Paul
        > Twitchell at the official Eckankar website I found the year 1909
        > mentioned NADA times!
        >
        > Is it really more fun to find out yourself - rather than be told -
        > about the life of Paul Twitchell and his contacts with Eckankar
        > Masters, etc.? If that were the case then why did Paul Twitchell and
        > other Eck Masters write about and tell people already about all these
        > things? In order to keep the pieces scrambled and just so people could
        > have fun unscrambling them?
        >
        > My understanding is that it's incumbent on the leader of Eckankar, the
        > Living Eck Master, to update the teachings of Eckankar. Problem is,
        > how does one unscramble the pieces of their predecessors? Especially
        > the founder? Apparently, it is incumbent upon the members of Eckankar
        > too - not to mention anybody reading about Eckankar period - to
        > unscramble some of the pieces.
        >
        > What has it led to? What the result of people attempting to unscramble
        > the pieces?
        >
        > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/topics?hl=en&start=
        >
        > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.eckankar/topics?lnk=rgh&pli=1
        >
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous/
        >
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/
        >
        > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx
        >
        > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/rsch3.html
        >
        > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/chapters/tmsm1.html
        >
        > http://www.littleknownpubs.com/DialogIntro.htm
        >
        > Did it really have to take all that? And, Was [AND IS IT STILL] really
        > more fun?
        >
        > Comments go here :)
        >
      • al_radzik
        Etznab, You claim to be an Eckist but challenge many of the beliefs. You seem to sit on the fence and bring up the age old a.r.e. arguments regarding Paul s
        Message 3 of 21 , Sep 14, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          Etznab,

          You claim to be an Eckist but challenge many of the beliefs. You seem to sit on the fence and bring up the age old a.r.e. arguments regarding Paul's birthday; his whereabouts as a child; Steiger's book, plagiarism etc. Have you perused the early years or a.r.e? Have you read David Lane's expose'? I would think by now you would have caught on that this so-called spiritual path has been sufficiently debunked and laid to rest for all but the few followers left.
          If you ARE an Eckist, what exactly is in it for you? What kind of spiritual nourishment do you receive in spite of all the overwhelming evidence that Twitchell was a liar?
          I would never deny you the right to believe in whatever you want but of all the religions and cults I have studied over the past several decades, this is the one that is blatantly lacking in any truthful sources or spiritual value...IMHO.

          Alf







          --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@...> wrote:
          >
          > [alt.religion.eckankar repost - 09/04/11]
          >
          > Unscrambling the Pieces
          >
          > Paul loved his privacy. Early in his youth he was involved in a
          > variety of activities, but he made it a point to obscure any facts
          > associated with his life. In so doing, he left a trail so clouded that
          > it's going to take our historians years to piece it together. [....]
          >
          > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
          >
          > You don't say? On the same page, the paragraph above read:
          >
          > There are several different versions of the date Paul was born into
          > this life. One person I talked to said the Twitchell family Bible
          > recorded the year as 1910; another person, who also told me he'd seen
          > the family Bible, said Paul's birthdate was shown as 1908. It's
          > amazing how certain each person was that he knew the truth. Each one
          > claimed to have seen it with his own eyes. So by some accounts, he was
          > born on October 23, 1908 or 1910, while other accounts give the date
          > as October 22.
          >
          > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
          >
          > How about 1909? Based on the Kentucky Census (believed conducted in
          > the spring)of 1910 suggesting that Paul was 6 months old?
          >
          > OK. Why does this stuff even matter? Perhap's it's all about
          > unscrambling the pieces and determining fact from fiction.
          >
          > Researching the lineage of Eck Masters, or when Paul Twitchell came to
          > contact an Eck Master, one is naturally drawn to the mid 1930's
          >
          > "Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in the foothills of the
          > Himalayas near Darjeeling. Before that on his first trip to India in
          > 1935, he met Sudar Singh. We are still looking for information on
          > Sudar Singh. We have gotten a lot of reports about an individual named
          > Sundar Singh, who is not the same person at all.
          >
          > "Somebody asked Paul why he didn't simply look into the ECK-Vidya
          > whenever he needed to know something. He said he didn't want to take
          > all the surprise and adventure out of life. I feel the same way. It's
          > more fun to find out yourself rather than be told. This is why the ECK
          > initiates go out and find material about Sudar Singh themselves."
          >
          > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man2.html
          >
          > Hey now! 1935. That's the ticket!
          >
          > ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic of
          > Allahabad, in the summer of 1938, when I visited him with my step-
          > sister." [Based on: ECKANKAR-The Key to Secret Worlds, by Paul
          > Twitchell, Chap. 10, 3rd paragraph]
          >
          > 1938 was later edited out. See 1988 version, p. 169-170.
          >
          > ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic
          > of Allahabad, the summer I visited him with my half sister."
          >
          > What is wrong with this picture? Paul Twitchell was apparently NOT a
          > teenager in the mid 1930's but, in fact, had already graduated high
          > school and been to college already!
          >
          > How could Paul Twitchell have been a teenager when he (reportedly)
          > went to Paris, France? Or later stayed at Sudar Singh's ashram in
          > India for about a year?
          >
          > Unscrambling the pieces? For heaven's sake! What pieces?
          >
          > "It was upon their return to Paris that Paul met Sudar Singh for the
          > first time. The Indian holy man was lecturing in France in an effort
          > to gain sincere disciples."
          >
          > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
          > 51]
          >
          > "[...] Sudar Singh was silent for several moments before he spoke. 'Am
          > I to understand that you would like to return with me to my spiritual
          > retreat in Allahabad?'
          > " 'That is my wish,' Kay-Dee said emphatically. 'Paul?' [....] Kay-
          > Dee and Paul lived in Sudar Singh's ashram for nearly a year before
          > the irate Grands managed to haul them home."
          >
          > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
          > 52]
          >
          > "This year in India was not spent totally in an attitude of holy
          > learning. Paul had reached his sixteenth birthday [1925?], and he
          > decided that he needed a furlough from the ashram. He traveled to
          > Bombay, put up in a hotel, and then set out in search of a holy man
          > who Sudar Singh had said was extremely wise in the ways of God."
          >
          > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
          > 53]
          >
          > Nice going Paul / Brad!
          >
          > Brad Steiger's book most likely introduced a number of people to Paul
          > Twitchell and Eckankar for the first time. However, Paris, Kentucky
          > (where Paul Twitchell's sister allegedly DID go to college) is NOT
          > Paris, France! And for those who might argue it was an "inner"
          > journey, that is NOT how the context reads in the book I quoted from.
          > Including the stay in an ashram for nearly a year.
          >
          > I have a question. Why didn't Harold Klemp consult the "mahanta
          > consciousness" to determine Paul Twitchell's actual D.O.B.? Why didn't
          > he do the research and consult the 1910 Kentucky Census? Umm ... or
          > why hasn't the latest research about Paul Twitchell's birthdate been
          > added to the official Eckankar website instead of Harold Klemp's 1984
          > reference to 1908, or 1910? If the 1909 D.O.B. is the correct year,
          > then why isn't it there? After a quick scan of pages about Paul
          > Twitchell at the official Eckankar website I found the year 1909
          > mentioned NADA times!
          >
          > Is it really more fun to find out yourself - rather than be told -
          > about the life of Paul Twitchell and his contacts with Eckankar
          > Masters, etc.? If that were the case then why did Paul Twitchell and
          > other Eck Masters write about and tell people already about all these
          > things? In order to keep the pieces scrambled and just so people could
          > have fun unscrambling them?
          >
          > My understanding is that it's incumbent on the leader of Eckankar, the
          > Living Eck Master, to update the teachings of Eckankar. Problem is,
          > how does one unscramble the pieces of their predecessors? Especially
          > the founder? Apparently, it is incumbent upon the members of Eckankar
          > too - not to mention anybody reading about Eckankar period - to
          > unscramble some of the pieces.
          >
          > What has it led to? What the result of people attempting to unscramble
          > the pieces?
          >
          > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/topics?hl=en&start=
          >
          > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.eckankar/topics?lnk=rgh&pli=1
          >
          > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous/
          >
          > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/
          >
          > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx
          >
          > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/rsch3.html
          >
          > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/chapters/tmsm1.html
          >
          > http://www.littleknownpubs.com/DialogIntro.htm
          >
          > Did it really have to take all that? And, Was [AND IS IT STILL] really
          > more fun?
          >
          > Comments go here :)
          >
        • etznab18
          Alf, I wrote a response just today, but shortly afterward learned that it was undeliverable. The reason was that my Yahoo account was bouncing e-mails again! I
          Message 4 of 21 , Sep 16, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            Alf,

            I wrote a response just today, but shortly afterward learned that it was undeliverable. The reason was that my Yahoo account was bouncing e-mails again! I have to admit, I've never seen so much bouncing than I have in this past year. Something is causing this, but I don't know what.

            Maybe I'll retrieve copy & paste the original message when there is time, but not going to spend any more time on e-mail right now.

            --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, al_radzik <no_reply@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            > Etznab,
            >
            > You claim to be an Eckist but challenge many of the beliefs. You seem to sit on the fence and bring up the age old a.r.e. arguments regarding Paul's birthday; his whereabouts as a child; Steiger's book, plagiarism etc. Have you perused the early years or a.r.e? Have you read David Lane's expose'? I would think by now you would have caught on that this so-called spiritual path has been sufficiently debunked and laid to rest for all but the few followers left.
            > If you ARE an Eckist, what exactly is in it for you? What kind of spiritual nourishment do you receive in spite of all the overwhelming evidence that Twitchell was a liar?
            > I would never deny you the right to believe in whatever you want but of all the religions and cults I have studied over the past several decades, this is the one that is blatantly lacking in any truthful sources or spiritual value...IMHO.
            >
            > Alf
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
            > >
            > > [alt.religion.eckankar repost - 09/04/11]
            > >
            > > Unscrambling the Pieces
            > >
            > > Paul loved his privacy. Early in his youth he was involved in a
            > > variety of activities, but he made it a point to obscure any facts
            > > associated with his life. In so doing, he left a trail so clouded that
            > > it's going to take our historians years to piece it together. [....]
            > >
            > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
            > >
            > > You don't say? On the same page, the paragraph above read:
            > >
            > > There are several different versions of the date Paul was born into
            > > this life. One person I talked to said the Twitchell family Bible
            > > recorded the year as 1910; another person, who also told me he'd seen
            > > the family Bible, said Paul's birthdate was shown as 1908. It's
            > > amazing how certain each person was that he knew the truth. Each one
            > > claimed to have seen it with his own eyes. So by some accounts, he was
            > > born on October 23, 1908 or 1910, while other accounts give the date
            > > as October 22.
            > >
            > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
            > >
            > > How about 1909? Based on the Kentucky Census (believed conducted in
            > > the spring)of 1910 suggesting that Paul was 6 months old?
            > >
            > > OK. Why does this stuff even matter? Perhap's it's all about
            > > unscrambling the pieces and determining fact from fiction.
            > >
            > > Researching the lineage of Eck Masters, or when Paul Twitchell came to
            > > contact an Eck Master, one is naturally drawn to the mid 1930's
            > >
            > > "Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in the foothills of the
            > > Himalayas near Darjeeling. Before that on his first trip to India in
            > > 1935, he met Sudar Singh. We are still looking for information on
            > > Sudar Singh. We have gotten a lot of reports about an individual named
            > > Sundar Singh, who is not the same person at all.
            > >
            > > "Somebody asked Paul why he didn't simply look into the ECK-Vidya
            > > whenever he needed to know something. He said he didn't want to take
            > > all the surprise and adventure out of life. I feel the same way. It's
            > > more fun to find out yourself rather than be told. This is why the ECK
            > > initiates go out and find material about Sudar Singh themselves."
            > >
            > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man2.html
            > >
            > > Hey now! 1935. That's the ticket!
            > >
            > > ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic of
            > > Allahabad, in the summer of 1938, when I visited him with my step-
            > > sister." [Based on: ECKANKAR-The Key to Secret Worlds, by Paul
            > > Twitchell, Chap. 10, 3rd paragraph]
            > >
            > > 1938 was later edited out. See 1988 version, p. 169-170.
            > >
            > > ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic
            > > of Allahabad, the summer I visited him with my half sister."
            > >
            > > What is wrong with this picture? Paul Twitchell was apparently NOT a
            > > teenager in the mid 1930's but, in fact, had already graduated high
            > > school and been to college already!
            > >
            > > How could Paul Twitchell have been a teenager when he (reportedly)
            > > went to Paris, France? Or later stayed at Sudar Singh's ashram in
            > > India for about a year?
            > >
            > > Unscrambling the pieces? For heaven's sake! What pieces?
            > >
            > > "It was upon their return to Paris that Paul met Sudar Singh for the
            > > first time. The Indian holy man was lecturing in France in an effort
            > > to gain sincere disciples."
            > >
            > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
            > > 51]
            > >
            > > "[...] Sudar Singh was silent for several moments before he spoke. 'Am
            > > I to understand that you would like to return with me to my spiritual
            > > retreat in Allahabad?'
            > > " 'That is my wish,' Kay-Dee said emphatically. 'Paul?' [....] Kay-
            > > Dee and Paul lived in Sudar Singh's ashram for nearly a year before
            > > the irate Grands managed to haul them home."
            > >
            > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
            > > 52]
            > >
            > > "This year in India was not spent totally in an attitude of holy
            > > learning. Paul had reached his sixteenth birthday [1925?], and he
            > > decided that he needed a furlough from the ashram. He traveled to
            > > Bombay, put up in a hotel, and then set out in search of a holy man
            > > who Sudar Singh had said was extremely wise in the ways of God."
            > >
            > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
            > > 53]
            > >
            > > Nice going Paul / Brad!
            > >
            > > Brad Steiger's book most likely introduced a number of people to Paul
            > > Twitchell and Eckankar for the first time. However, Paris, Kentucky
            > > (where Paul Twitchell's sister allegedly DID go to college) is NOT
            > > Paris, France! And for those who might argue it was an "inner"
            > > journey, that is NOT how the context reads in the book I quoted from.
            > > Including the stay in an ashram for nearly a year.
            > >
            > > I have a question. Why didn't Harold Klemp consult the "mahanta
            > > consciousness" to determine Paul Twitchell's actual D.O.B.? Why didn't
            > > he do the research and consult the 1910 Kentucky Census? Umm ... or
            > > why hasn't the latest research about Paul Twitchell's birthdate been
            > > added to the official Eckankar website instead of Harold Klemp's 1984
            > > reference to 1908, or 1910? If the 1909 D.O.B. is the correct year,
            > > then why isn't it there? After a quick scan of pages about Paul
            > > Twitchell at the official Eckankar website I found the year 1909
            > > mentioned NADA times!
            > >
            > > Is it really more fun to find out yourself - rather than be told -
            > > about the life of Paul Twitchell and his contacts with Eckankar
            > > Masters, etc.? If that were the case then why did Paul Twitchell and
            > > other Eck Masters write about and tell people already about all these
            > > things? In order to keep the pieces scrambled and just so people could
            > > have fun unscrambling them?
            > >
            > > My understanding is that it's incumbent on the leader of Eckankar, the
            > > Living Eck Master, to update the teachings of Eckankar. Problem is,
            > > how does one unscramble the pieces of their predecessors? Especially
            > > the founder? Apparently, it is incumbent upon the members of Eckankar
            > > too - not to mention anybody reading about Eckankar period - to
            > > unscramble some of the pieces.
            > >
            > > What has it led to? What the result of people attempting to unscramble
            > > the pieces?
            > >
            > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/topics?hl=en&start=
            > >
            > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.eckankar/topics?lnk=rgh&pli=1
            > >
            > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous/
            > >
            > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/
            > >
            > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx
            > >
            > > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/rsch3.html
            > >
            > > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/chapters/tmsm1.html
            > >
            > > http://www.littleknownpubs.com/DialogIntro.htm
            > >
            > > Did it really have to take all that? And, Was [AND IS IT STILL] really
            > > more fun?
            > >
            > > Comments go here :)
            > >
            >
          • etznab18
            OK. Well, it doesn t take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post. ********* It s a good
            Message 5 of 21 , Sep 16, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.

              *********

              It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.

              Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.

              One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.

              People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.

              For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard.
              --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@...> wrote:
              >
              > Alf,
              >
              > I wrote a response just today, but shortly afterward learned that it was undeliverable. The reason was that my Yahoo account was bouncing e-mails again! I have to admit, I've never seen so much bouncing than I have in this past year. Something is causing this, but I don't know what.
              >
              > Maybe I'll retrieve copy & paste the original message when there is time, but not going to spend any more time on e-mail right now.
              >
              > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, al_radzik <no_reply@> wrote:
              > >
              > >
              > > Etznab,
              > >
              > > You claim to be an Eckist but challenge many of the beliefs. You seem to sit on the fence and bring up the age old a.r.e. arguments regarding Paul's birthday; his whereabouts as a child; Steiger's book, plagiarism etc. Have you perused the early years or a.r.e? Have you read David Lane's expose'? I would think by now you would have caught on that this so-called spiritual path has been sufficiently debunked and laid to rest for all but the few followers left.
              > > If you ARE an Eckist, what exactly is in it for you? What kind of spiritual nourishment do you receive in spite of all the overwhelming evidence that Twitchell was a liar?
              > > I would never deny you the right to believe in whatever you want but of all the religions and cults I have studied over the past several decades, this is the one that is blatantly lacking in any truthful sources or spiritual value...IMHO.
              > >
              > > Alf
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
              > > >
              > > > [alt.religion.eckankar repost - 09/04/11]
              > > >
              > > > Unscrambling the Pieces
              > > >
              > > > Paul loved his privacy. Early in his youth he was involved in a
              > > > variety of activities, but he made it a point to obscure any facts
              > > > associated with his life. In so doing, he left a trail so clouded that
              > > > it's going to take our historians years to piece it together. [....]
              > > >
              > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
              > > >
              > > > You don't say? On the same page, the paragraph above read:
              > > >
              > > > There are several different versions of the date Paul was born into
              > > > this life. One person I talked to said the Twitchell family Bible
              > > > recorded the year as 1910; another person, who also told me he'd seen
              > > > the family Bible, said Paul's birthdate was shown as 1908. It's
              > > > amazing how certain each person was that he knew the truth. Each one
              > > > claimed to have seen it with his own eyes. So by some accounts, he was
              > > > born on October 23, 1908 or 1910, while other accounts give the date
              > > > as October 22.
              > > >
              > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
              > > >
              > > > How about 1909? Based on the Kentucky Census (believed conducted in
              > > > the spring)of 1910 suggesting that Paul was 6 months old?
              > > >
              > > > OK. Why does this stuff even matter? Perhap's it's all about
              > > > unscrambling the pieces and determining fact from fiction.
              > > >
              > > > Researching the lineage of Eck Masters, or when Paul Twitchell came to
              > > > contact an Eck Master, one is naturally drawn to the mid 1930's
              > > >
              > > > "Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in the foothills of the
              > > > Himalayas near Darjeeling. Before that on his first trip to India in
              > > > 1935, he met Sudar Singh. We are still looking for information on
              > > > Sudar Singh. We have gotten a lot of reports about an individual named
              > > > Sundar Singh, who is not the same person at all.
              > > >
              > > > "Somebody asked Paul why he didn't simply look into the ECK-Vidya
              > > > whenever he needed to know something. He said he didn't want to take
              > > > all the surprise and adventure out of life. I feel the same way. It's
              > > > more fun to find out yourself rather than be told. This is why the ECK
              > > > initiates go out and find material about Sudar Singh themselves."
              > > >
              > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man2.html
              > > >
              > > > Hey now! 1935. That's the ticket!
              > > >
              > > > ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic of
              > > > Allahabad, in the summer of 1938, when I visited him with my step-
              > > > sister." [Based on: ECKANKAR-The Key to Secret Worlds, by Paul
              > > > Twitchell, Chap. 10, 3rd paragraph]
              > > >
              > > > 1938 was later edited out. See 1988 version, p. 169-170.
              > > >
              > > > ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic
              > > > of Allahabad, the summer I visited him with my half sister."
              > > >
              > > > What is wrong with this picture? Paul Twitchell was apparently NOT a
              > > > teenager in the mid 1930's but, in fact, had already graduated high
              > > > school and been to college already!
              > > >
              > > > How could Paul Twitchell have been a teenager when he (reportedly)
              > > > went to Paris, France? Or later stayed at Sudar Singh's ashram in
              > > > India for about a year?
              > > >
              > > > Unscrambling the pieces? For heaven's sake! What pieces?
              > > >
              > > > "It was upon their return to Paris that Paul met Sudar Singh for the
              > > > first time. The Indian holy man was lecturing in France in an effort
              > > > to gain sincere disciples."
              > > >
              > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
              > > > 51]
              > > >
              > > > "[...] Sudar Singh was silent for several moments before he spoke. 'Am
              > > > I to understand that you would like to return with me to my spiritual
              > > > retreat in Allahabad?'
              > > > " 'That is my wish,' Kay-Dee said emphatically. 'Paul?' [....] Kay-
              > > > Dee and Paul lived in Sudar Singh's ashram for nearly a year before
              > > > the irate Grands managed to haul them home."
              > > >
              > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
              > > > 52]
              > > >
              > > > "This year in India was not spent totally in an attitude of holy
              > > > learning. Paul had reached his sixteenth birthday [1925?], and he
              > > > decided that he needed a furlough from the ashram. He traveled to
              > > > Bombay, put up in a hotel, and then set out in search of a holy man
              > > > who Sudar Singh had said was extremely wise in the ways of God."
              > > >
              > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
              > > > 53]
              > > >
              > > > Nice going Paul / Brad!
              > > >
              > > > Brad Steiger's book most likely introduced a number of people to Paul
              > > > Twitchell and Eckankar for the first time. However, Paris, Kentucky
              > > > (where Paul Twitchell's sister allegedly DID go to college) is NOT
              > > > Paris, France! And for those who might argue it was an "inner"
              > > > journey, that is NOT how the context reads in the book I quoted from.
              > > > Including the stay in an ashram for nearly a year.
              > > >
              > > > I have a question. Why didn't Harold Klemp consult the "mahanta
              > > > consciousness" to determine Paul Twitchell's actual D.O.B.? Why didn't
              > > > he do the research and consult the 1910 Kentucky Census? Umm ... or
              > > > why hasn't the latest research about Paul Twitchell's birthdate been
              > > > added to the official Eckankar website instead of Harold Klemp's 1984
              > > > reference to 1908, or 1910? If the 1909 D.O.B. is the correct year,
              > > > then why isn't it there? After a quick scan of pages about Paul
              > > > Twitchell at the official Eckankar website I found the year 1909
              > > > mentioned NADA times!
              > > >
              > > > Is it really more fun to find out yourself - rather than be told -
              > > > about the life of Paul Twitchell and his contacts with Eckankar
              > > > Masters, etc.? If that were the case then why did Paul Twitchell and
              > > > other Eck Masters write about and tell people already about all these
              > > > things? In order to keep the pieces scrambled and just so people could
              > > > have fun unscrambling them?
              > > >
              > > > My understanding is that it's incumbent on the leader of Eckankar, the
              > > > Living Eck Master, to update the teachings of Eckankar. Problem is,
              > > > how does one unscramble the pieces of their predecessors? Especially
              > > > the founder? Apparently, it is incumbent upon the members of Eckankar
              > > > too - not to mention anybody reading about Eckankar period - to
              > > > unscramble some of the pieces.
              > > >
              > > > What has it led to? What the result of people attempting to unscramble
              > > > the pieces?
              > > >
              > > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/topics?hl=en&start=
              > > >
              > > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.eckankar/topics?lnk=rgh&pli=1
              > > >
              > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous/
              > > >
              > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/
              > > >
              > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx
              > > >
              > > > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/rsch3.html
              > > >
              > > > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/chapters/tmsm1.html
              > > >
              > > > http://www.littleknownpubs.com/DialogIntro.htm
              > > >
              > > > Did it really have to take all that? And, Was [AND IS IT STILL] really
              > > > more fun?
              > > >
              > > > Comments go here :)
              > > >
              > >
              >
            • etznab18
              http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68 http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
              Message 6 of 21 , Sep 16, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68

                http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67


                --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                >
                > *********
                >
                > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                >
                > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                >
                > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                >
                > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                >
                > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard.
                > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                > >
                > > Alf,
                > >
                > > I wrote a response just today, but shortly afterward learned that it was undeliverable. The reason was that my Yahoo account was bouncing e-mails again! I have to admit, I've never seen so much bouncing than I have in this past year. Something is causing this, but I don't know what.
                > >
                > > Maybe I'll retrieve copy & paste the original message when there is time, but not going to spend any more time on e-mail right now.
                > >
                > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, al_radzik <no_reply@> wrote:
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > Etznab,
                > > >
                > > > You claim to be an Eckist but challenge many of the beliefs. You seem to sit on the fence and bring up the age old a.r.e. arguments regarding Paul's birthday; his whereabouts as a child; Steiger's book, plagiarism etc. Have you perused the early years or a.r.e? Have you read David Lane's expose'? I would think by now you would have caught on that this so-called spiritual path has been sufficiently debunked and laid to rest for all but the few followers left.
                > > > If you ARE an Eckist, what exactly is in it for you? What kind of spiritual nourishment do you receive in spite of all the overwhelming evidence that Twitchell was a liar?
                > > > I would never deny you the right to believe in whatever you want but of all the religions and cults I have studied over the past several decades, this is the one that is blatantly lacking in any truthful sources or spiritual value...IMHO.
                > > >
                > > > Alf
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > > [alt.religion.eckankar repost - 09/04/11]
                > > > >
                > > > > Unscrambling the Pieces
                > > > >
                > > > > Paul loved his privacy. Early in his youth he was involved in a
                > > > > variety of activities, but he made it a point to obscure any facts
                > > > > associated with his life. In so doing, he left a trail so clouded that
                > > > > it's going to take our historians years to piece it together. [....]
                > > > >
                > > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
                > > > >
                > > > > You don't say? On the same page, the paragraph above read:
                > > > >
                > > > > There are several different versions of the date Paul was born into
                > > > > this life. One person I talked to said the Twitchell family Bible
                > > > > recorded the year as 1910; another person, who also told me he'd seen
                > > > > the family Bible, said Paul's birthdate was shown as 1908. It's
                > > > > amazing how certain each person was that he knew the truth. Each one
                > > > > claimed to have seen it with his own eyes. So by some accounts, he was
                > > > > born on October 23, 1908 or 1910, while other accounts give the date
                > > > > as October 22.
                > > > >
                > > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
                > > > >
                > > > > How about 1909? Based on the Kentucky Census (believed conducted in
                > > > > the spring)of 1910 suggesting that Paul was 6 months old?
                > > > >
                > > > > OK. Why does this stuff even matter? Perhap's it's all about
                > > > > unscrambling the pieces and determining fact from fiction.
                > > > >
                > > > > Researching the lineage of Eck Masters, or when Paul Twitchell came to
                > > > > contact an Eck Master, one is naturally drawn to the mid 1930's
                > > > >
                > > > > "Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in the foothills of the
                > > > > Himalayas near Darjeeling. Before that on his first trip to India in
                > > > > 1935, he met Sudar Singh. We are still looking for information on
                > > > > Sudar Singh. We have gotten a lot of reports about an individual named
                > > > > Sundar Singh, who is not the same person at all.
                > > > >
                > > > > "Somebody asked Paul why he didn't simply look into the ECK-Vidya
                > > > > whenever he needed to know something. He said he didn't want to take
                > > > > all the surprise and adventure out of life. I feel the same way. It's
                > > > > more fun to find out yourself rather than be told. This is why the ECK
                > > > > initiates go out and find material about Sudar Singh themselves."
                > > > >
                > > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man2.html
                > > > >
                > > > > Hey now! 1935. That's the ticket!
                > > > >
                > > > > ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic of
                > > > > Allahabad, in the summer of 1938, when I visited him with my step-
                > > > > sister." [Based on: ECKANKAR-The Key to Secret Worlds, by Paul
                > > > > Twitchell, Chap. 10, 3rd paragraph]
                > > > >
                > > > > 1938 was later edited out. See 1988 version, p. 169-170.
                > > > >
                > > > > ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic
                > > > > of Allahabad, the summer I visited him with my half sister."
                > > > >
                > > > > What is wrong with this picture? Paul Twitchell was apparently NOT a
                > > > > teenager in the mid 1930's but, in fact, had already graduated high
                > > > > school and been to college already!
                > > > >
                > > > > How could Paul Twitchell have been a teenager when he (reportedly)
                > > > > went to Paris, France? Or later stayed at Sudar Singh's ashram in
                > > > > India for about a year?
                > > > >
                > > > > Unscrambling the pieces? For heaven's sake! What pieces?
                > > > >
                > > > > "It was upon their return to Paris that Paul met Sudar Singh for the
                > > > > first time. The Indian holy man was lecturing in France in an effort
                > > > > to gain sincere disciples."
                > > > >
                > > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
                > > > > 51]
                > > > >
                > > > > "[...] Sudar Singh was silent for several moments before he spoke. 'Am
                > > > > I to understand that you would like to return with me to my spiritual
                > > > > retreat in Allahabad?'
                > > > > " 'That is my wish,' Kay-Dee said emphatically. 'Paul?' [....] Kay-
                > > > > Dee and Paul lived in Sudar Singh's ashram for nearly a year before
                > > > > the irate Grands managed to haul them home."
                > > > >
                > > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
                > > > > 52]
                > > > >
                > > > > "This year in India was not spent totally in an attitude of holy
                > > > > learning. Paul had reached his sixteenth birthday [1925?], and he
                > > > > decided that he needed a furlough from the ashram. He traveled to
                > > > > Bombay, put up in a hotel, and then set out in search of a holy man
                > > > > who Sudar Singh had said was extremely wise in the ways of God."
                > > > >
                > > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
                > > > > 53]
                > > > >
                > > > > Nice going Paul / Brad!
                > > > >
                > > > > Brad Steiger's book most likely introduced a number of people to Paul
                > > > > Twitchell and Eckankar for the first time. However, Paris, Kentucky
                > > > > (where Paul Twitchell's sister allegedly DID go to college) is NOT
                > > > > Paris, France! And for those who might argue it was an "inner"
                > > > > journey, that is NOT how the context reads in the book I quoted from.
                > > > > Including the stay in an ashram for nearly a year.
                > > > >
                > > > > I have a question. Why didn't Harold Klemp consult the "mahanta
                > > > > consciousness" to determine Paul Twitchell's actual D.O.B.? Why didn't
                > > > > he do the research and consult the 1910 Kentucky Census? Umm ... or
                > > > > why hasn't the latest research about Paul Twitchell's birthdate been
                > > > > added to the official Eckankar website instead of Harold Klemp's 1984
                > > > > reference to 1908, or 1910? If the 1909 D.O.B. is the correct year,
                > > > > then why isn't it there? After a quick scan of pages about Paul
                > > > > Twitchell at the official Eckankar website I found the year 1909
                > > > > mentioned NADA times!
                > > > >
                > > > > Is it really more fun to find out yourself - rather than be told -
                > > > > about the life of Paul Twitchell and his contacts with Eckankar
                > > > > Masters, etc.? If that were the case then why did Paul Twitchell and
                > > > > other Eck Masters write about and tell people already about all these
                > > > > things? In order to keep the pieces scrambled and just so people could
                > > > > have fun unscrambling them?
                > > > >
                > > > > My understanding is that it's incumbent on the leader of Eckankar, the
                > > > > Living Eck Master, to update the teachings of Eckankar. Problem is,
                > > > > how does one unscramble the pieces of their predecessors? Especially
                > > > > the founder? Apparently, it is incumbent upon the members of Eckankar
                > > > > too - not to mention anybody reading about Eckankar period - to
                > > > > unscramble some of the pieces.
                > > > >
                > > > > What has it led to? What the result of people attempting to unscramble
                > > > > the pieces?
                > > > >
                > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/topics?hl=en&start=
                > > > >
                > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.eckankar/topics?lnk=rgh&pli=1
                > > > >
                > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous/
                > > > >
                > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/
                > > > >
                > > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx
                > > > >
                > > > > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/rsch3.html
                > > > >
                > > > > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/chapters/tmsm1.html
                > > > >
                > > > > http://www.littleknownpubs.com/DialogIntro.htm
                > > > >
                > > > > Did it really have to take all that? And, Was [AND IS IT STILL] really
                > > > > more fun?
                > > > >
                > > > > Comments go here :)
                > > > >
                > > >
                > >
                >
              • harrisonferrel
                I remain absolutely amazed how truth has no effect on people. With a family member still in this cult, and despite all of the lies, treachery, debunking,
                Message 7 of 21 , Sep 17, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  I remain absolutely amazed how truth has no effect on people. With a family member still in this cult, and despite all of the lies, treachery, debunking, slander, and deceit that is provably attributable to eckankar and its cult leaders, nothing makes a bit of difference to some people.

                  It's the same in politics. You can point out that Rick Perry is invested in the porn industry (which he is) or that there were no weapons of mass destruction, but people will follow the lie rather than having the guts and good sense to get out and begin anew.

                  I have no idea exactly why good people stay in eckankar when it is obvious that it's a scam, but that's the way some people are. Facts just don't mean shit to them.



                  --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                  >
                  > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                  >
                  >
                  > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                  > >
                  > > *********
                  > >
                  > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                  > >
                  > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                  > >
                  > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                  > >
                  > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                  > >
                  > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard.
                  > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > Alf,
                  > > >
                  > > > I wrote a response just today, but shortly afterward learned that it was undeliverable. The reason was that my Yahoo account was bouncing e-mails again! I have to admit, I've never seen so much bouncing than I have in this past year. Something is causing this, but I don't know what.
                  > > >
                  > > > Maybe I'll retrieve copy & paste the original message when there is time, but not going to spend any more time on e-mail right now.
                  > > >
                  > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, al_radzik <no_reply@> wrote:
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Etznab,
                  > > > >
                  > > > > You claim to be an Eckist but challenge many of the beliefs. You seem to sit on the fence and bring up the age old a.r.e. arguments regarding Paul's birthday; his whereabouts as a child; Steiger's book, plagiarism etc. Have you perused the early years or a.r.e? Have you read David Lane's expose'? I would think by now you would have caught on that this so-called spiritual path has been sufficiently debunked and laid to rest for all but the few followers left.
                  > > > > If you ARE an Eckist, what exactly is in it for you? What kind of spiritual nourishment do you receive in spite of all the overwhelming evidence that Twitchell was a liar?
                  > > > > I would never deny you the right to believe in whatever you want but of all the religions and cults I have studied over the past several decades, this is the one that is blatantly lacking in any truthful sources or spiritual value...IMHO.
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Alf
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > [alt.religion.eckankar repost - 09/04/11]
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Unscrambling the Pieces
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Paul loved his privacy. Early in his youth he was involved in a
                  > > > > > variety of activities, but he made it a point to obscure any facts
                  > > > > > associated with his life. In so doing, he left a trail so clouded that
                  > > > > > it's going to take our historians years to piece it together. [....]
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > You don't say? On the same page, the paragraph above read:
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > There are several different versions of the date Paul was born into
                  > > > > > this life. One person I talked to said the Twitchell family Bible
                  > > > > > recorded the year as 1910; another person, who also told me he'd seen
                  > > > > > the family Bible, said Paul's birthdate was shown as 1908. It's
                  > > > > > amazing how certain each person was that he knew the truth. Each one
                  > > > > > claimed to have seen it with his own eyes. So by some accounts, he was
                  > > > > > born on October 23, 1908 or 1910, while other accounts give the date
                  > > > > > as October 22.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > How about 1909? Based on the Kentucky Census (believed conducted in
                  > > > > > the spring)of 1910 suggesting that Paul was 6 months old?
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > OK. Why does this stuff even matter? Perhap's it's all about
                  > > > > > unscrambling the pieces and determining fact from fiction.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Researching the lineage of Eck Masters, or when Paul Twitchell came to
                  > > > > > contact an Eck Master, one is naturally drawn to the mid 1930's
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > "Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in the foothills of the
                  > > > > > Himalayas near Darjeeling. Before that on his first trip to India in
                  > > > > > 1935, he met Sudar Singh. We are still looking for information on
                  > > > > > Sudar Singh. We have gotten a lot of reports about an individual named
                  > > > > > Sundar Singh, who is not the same person at all.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > "Somebody asked Paul why he didn't simply look into the ECK-Vidya
                  > > > > > whenever he needed to know something. He said he didn't want to take
                  > > > > > all the surprise and adventure out of life. I feel the same way. It's
                  > > > > > more fun to find out yourself rather than be told. This is why the ECK
                  > > > > > initiates go out and find material about Sudar Singh themselves."
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man2.html
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Hey now! 1935. That's the ticket!
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic of
                  > > > > > Allahabad, in the summer of 1938, when I visited him with my step-
                  > > > > > sister." [Based on: ECKANKAR-The Key to Secret Worlds, by Paul
                  > > > > > Twitchell, Chap. 10, 3rd paragraph]
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > 1938 was later edited out. See 1988 version, p. 169-170.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic
                  > > > > > of Allahabad, the summer I visited him with my half sister."
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > What is wrong with this picture? Paul Twitchell was apparently NOT a
                  > > > > > teenager in the mid 1930's but, in fact, had already graduated high
                  > > > > > school and been to college already!
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > How could Paul Twitchell have been a teenager when he (reportedly)
                  > > > > > went to Paris, France? Or later stayed at Sudar Singh's ashram in
                  > > > > > India for about a year?
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Unscrambling the pieces? For heaven's sake! What pieces?
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > "It was upon their return to Paris that Paul met Sudar Singh for the
                  > > > > > first time. The Indian holy man was lecturing in France in an effort
                  > > > > > to gain sincere disciples."
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
                  > > > > > 51]
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > "[...] Sudar Singh was silent for several moments before he spoke. 'Am
                  > > > > > I to understand that you would like to return with me to my spiritual
                  > > > > > retreat in Allahabad?'
                  > > > > > " 'That is my wish,' Kay-Dee said emphatically. 'Paul?' [....] Kay-
                  > > > > > Dee and Paul lived in Sudar Singh's ashram for nearly a year before
                  > > > > > the irate Grands managed to haul them home."
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
                  > > > > > 52]
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > "This year in India was not spent totally in an attitude of holy
                  > > > > > learning. Paul had reached his sixteenth birthday [1925?], and he
                  > > > > > decided that he needed a furlough from the ashram. He traveled to
                  > > > > > Bombay, put up in a hotel, and then set out in search of a holy man
                  > > > > > who Sudar Singh had said was extremely wise in the ways of God."
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
                  > > > > > 53]
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Nice going Paul / Brad!
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Brad Steiger's book most likely introduced a number of people to Paul
                  > > > > > Twitchell and Eckankar for the first time. However, Paris, Kentucky
                  > > > > > (where Paul Twitchell's sister allegedly DID go to college) is NOT
                  > > > > > Paris, France! And for those who might argue it was an "inner"
                  > > > > > journey, that is NOT how the context reads in the book I quoted from.
                  > > > > > Including the stay in an ashram for nearly a year.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > I have a question. Why didn't Harold Klemp consult the "mahanta
                  > > > > > consciousness" to determine Paul Twitchell's actual D.O.B.? Why didn't
                  > > > > > he do the research and consult the 1910 Kentucky Census? Umm ... or
                  > > > > > why hasn't the latest research about Paul Twitchell's birthdate been
                  > > > > > added to the official Eckankar website instead of Harold Klemp's 1984
                  > > > > > reference to 1908, or 1910? If the 1909 D.O.B. is the correct year,
                  > > > > > then why isn't it there? After a quick scan of pages about Paul
                  > > > > > Twitchell at the official Eckankar website I found the year 1909
                  > > > > > mentioned NADA times!
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Is it really more fun to find out yourself - rather than be told -
                  > > > > > about the life of Paul Twitchell and his contacts with Eckankar
                  > > > > > Masters, etc.? If that were the case then why did Paul Twitchell and
                  > > > > > other Eck Masters write about and tell people already about all these
                  > > > > > things? In order to keep the pieces scrambled and just so people could
                  > > > > > have fun unscrambling them?
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > My understanding is that it's incumbent on the leader of Eckankar, the
                  > > > > > Living Eck Master, to update the teachings of Eckankar. Problem is,
                  > > > > > how does one unscramble the pieces of their predecessors? Especially
                  > > > > > the founder? Apparently, it is incumbent upon the members of Eckankar
                  > > > > > too - not to mention anybody reading about Eckankar period - to
                  > > > > > unscramble some of the pieces.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > What has it led to? What the result of people attempting to unscramble
                  > > > > > the pieces?
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/topics?hl=en&start=
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.eckankar/topics?lnk=rgh&pli=1
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous/
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/rsch3.html
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/chapters/tmsm1.html
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > http://www.littleknownpubs.com/DialogIntro.htm
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Did it really have to take all that? And, Was [AND IS IT STILL] really
                  > > > > > more fun?
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Comments go here :)
                  > > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > >
                  > >
                  >
                • David Osborn
                  But - but - but...  How can Rick Perry loudly proclaim his Christian faith, and be the featured speaker at all these evangelical Christian rallies if he is
                  Message 8 of 21 , Sep 17, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    But - but - but...  How can Rick Perry loudly proclaim his Christian faith, and be the featured speaker at all these evangelical Christian rallies if he is heavily invested in the porn industry?! 

                    (How am I doing at feigning naivete?  Or is my facetiousness showing through?)

                    And how did you come across this juicy little tidbit about Rick Perry?  It would be nice, if he became the Republican nominee, for the Democrats to save it, and drop it like a bombshell as an October surprise right before the election.

                    It would be nice if the Democrats had the guts and the integrity to drop Obama and move on, and get behind someone who is a real progressive.  Or will this coming presidential election be the greatest case of "the lesser of two evils" that the country - or even the world - has ever seen?

                    In US politics, if the two major parties and their candidates leave too much to be desired, then someone forms a third party, whose candidate never wins, but merely siphons off voters from the major party candidate who most closely resembles him.  In the world of light and sound cults, a new "Eckspawn" group simply splinters off and forms.

                    David

                    --- On Sat, 9/17/11, harrisonferrel <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                    From: harrisonferrel <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                    Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                    To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                    Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 4:59 PM

                    I remain absolutely amazed how truth has no effect on people. With a family member still in this cult, and despite all of the lies, treachery, debunking, slander, and deceit that is provably attributable to eckankar and its cult leaders, nothing makes a bit of difference to some people.

                    It's the same in politics. You can point out that Rick Perry is invested in the porn industry (which he is) or that there were no weapons of mass destruction, but people will follow the lie rather than having the guts and good sense to get out and begin anew.

                    I have no idea exactly why good people stay in eckankar when it is obvious that it's a scam, but that's the way some people are. Facts just don't mean shit to them.



                    --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                    >
                    > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                    >
                    >
                    > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                    > >
                    > > *********
                    > >
                    > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                    > > 
                    > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                    > > 
                    > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                    > > 
                    > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                    > > 
                    > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard. 
                    > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > Alf,
                    > > >
                    > > > I wrote a response just today, but shortly afterward learned that it was undeliverable. The reason was that my Yahoo account was bouncing e-mails again! I have to admit, I've never seen so much bouncing than I have in this past year. Something is causing this, but I don't know what.
                    > > >
                    > > > Maybe I'll retrieve copy & paste the original message when there is time, but not going to spend any more time on e-mail right now.
                    > > >
                    > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, al_radzik <no_reply@> wrote:
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Etznab,
                    > > > >
                    > > > >   You claim to be an Eckist but challenge many of the beliefs. You seem to sit on the fence and bring up the age old a.r.e. arguments regarding Paul's birthday; his whereabouts as a child; Steiger's book, plagiarism etc. Have you perused the early years or a.r.e? Have you read David Lane's expose'? I would think by now you would have caught on that this so-called spiritual path has been sufficiently debunked and laid to rest for all but the few followers left.
                    > > > > If you ARE an Eckist, what exactly is in it for you? What kind of spiritual nourishment do you receive in spite of all the overwhelming evidence that Twitchell was a liar?
                    > > > > I would never deny you the right to believe in whatever you want but of all the religions and cults I have studied over the past several decades, this is the one that is blatantly lacking in any truthful sources or spiritual value...IMHO.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Alf
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > [alt.religion.eckankar repost - 09/04/11]
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Unscrambling the Pieces
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Paul loved his privacy. Early in his youth he was involved in a
                    > > > > > variety of activities, but he made it a point to obscure any facts
                    > > > > > associated with his life. In so doing, he left a trail so clouded that
                    > > > > > it's going to take our historians years to piece it together. [....]
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > You don't say? On the same page, the paragraph above read:
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > There are several different versions of the date Paul was born into
                    > > > > > this life. One person I talked to said the Twitchell family Bible
                    > > > > > recorded the year as 1910; another person, who also told me he'd seen
                    > > > > > the family Bible, said Paul's birthdate was shown as 1908. It's
                    > > > > > amazing how certain each person was that he knew the truth. Each one
                    > > > > > claimed to have seen it with his own eyes. So by some accounts, he was
                    > > > > > born on October 23, 1908 or 1910, while other accounts give the date
                    > > > > > as October 22.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > How about 1909? Based on the Kentucky Census (believed conducted in
                    > > > > > the spring)of 1910 suggesting that Paul was 6 months old?
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > OK. Why does this stuff even matter? Perhap's it's all about
                    > > > > > unscrambling the pieces and determining fact from fiction.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Researching the lineage of Eck Masters, or when Paul Twitchell came to
                    > > > > > contact an Eck Master, one is naturally drawn to the mid 1930's
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > "Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in the foothills of the
                    > > > > > Himalayas near Darjeeling. Before that on his first trip to India in
                    > > > > > 1935, he met Sudar Singh. We are still looking for information on
                    > > > > > Sudar Singh. We have gotten a lot of reports about an individual named
                    > > > > > Sundar Singh, who is not the same person at all.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > "Somebody asked Paul why he didn't simply look into the ECK-Vidya
                    > > > > > whenever he needed to know something. He said he didn't want to take
                    > > > > > all the surprise and adventure out of life. I feel the same way. It's
                    > > > > > more fun to find out yourself rather than be told. This is why the ECK
                    > > > > > initiates go out and find material about Sudar Singh themselves."
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man2.html
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Hey now! 1935. That's the ticket!
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >  ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic of
                    > > > > > Allahabad, in the summer of 1938, when I visited him with my step-
                    > > > > > sister." [Based on: ECKANKAR-The Key to Secret Worlds, by Paul
                    > > > > > Twitchell, Chap. 10, 3rd paragraph]
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > 1938 was later edited out. See 1988 version, p. 169-170.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >    ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic
                    > > > > > of Allahabad, the summer I visited him with my half sister."
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > What is wrong with this picture? Paul Twitchell was apparently NOT a
                    > > > > > teenager in the mid 1930's but, in fact, had already graduated high
                    > > > > > school and been to college already!
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > How could Paul Twitchell have been a teenager when he (reportedly)
                    > > > > > went to Paris, France? Or later stayed at Sudar Singh's ashram in
                    > > > > > India for about a year?
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Unscrambling the pieces? For heaven's sake! What pieces?
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > "It was upon their return to Paris that Paul met Sudar Singh for the
                    > > > > > first time. The Indian holy man was lecturing in France in an effort
                    > > > > > to gain sincere disciples."
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
                    > > > > > 51]
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > "[...] Sudar Singh was silent for several moments before he spoke. 'Am
                    > > > > > I to understand that you would like to return with me to my spiritual
                    > > > > > retreat in Allahabad?'
                    > > > > >    " 'That is my wish,' Kay-Dee said emphatically. 'Paul?' [....] Kay-
                    > > > > > Dee and Paul lived in Sudar Singh's ashram for nearly a year before
                    > > > > > the irate Grands managed to haul them home."
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
                    > > > > > 52]
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > "This year in India was not spent totally in an attitude of holy
                    > > > > > learning. Paul had reached his sixteenth birthday [1925?], and he
                    > > > > > decided that he needed a furlough from the ashram. He traveled to
                    > > > > > Bombay, put up in a hotel, and then set out in search of a   holy man
                    > > > > > who Sudar Singh had said was extremely wise in the ways of God."
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
                    > > > > > 53]
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Nice going Paul / Brad!
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Brad Steiger's book most likely introduced a number of people to Paul
                    > > > > > Twitchell and Eckankar for the first time. However, Paris, Kentucky
                    > > > > > (where Paul Twitchell's sister allegedly DID go to college) is NOT
                    > > > > > Paris, France! And for those who might argue it was an "inner"
                    > > > > > journey, that is NOT how the context reads in the book I quoted from.
                    > > > > > Including the stay in an ashram for nearly a year.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > I have a question. Why didn't Harold Klemp consult the "mahanta
                    > > > > > consciousness" to determine Paul Twitchell's actual D.O.B.? Why didn't
                    > > > > > he do the research and consult the 1910 Kentucky Census? Umm ... or
                    > > > > > why hasn't the latest research about Paul Twitchell's birthdate been
                    > > > > > added to the official Eckankar website instead of Harold Klemp's 1984
                    > > > > > reference to 1908, or 1910? If the 1909 D.O.B. is the correct year,
                    > > > > > then why isn't it there? After a quick scan of pages about Paul
                    > > > > > Twitchell at the official Eckankar website I found the year 1909
                    > > > > > mentioned NADA times!
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Is it really more fun to find out yourself - rather than be told -
                    > > > > > about the life of Paul Twitchell and his contacts with Eckankar
                    > > > > > Masters, etc.? If that were the case then why did Paul Twitchell and
                    > > > > > other Eck Masters write about and tell people already about all these
                    > > > > > things? In order to keep the pieces scrambled and just so people could
                    > > > > > have fun unscrambling them?
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > My understanding is that it's incumbent on the leader of Eckankar, the
                    > > > > > Living Eck Master, to update the teachings of Eckankar. Problem is,
                    > > > > > how does one unscramble the pieces of their predecessors? Especially
                    > > > > > the founder? Apparently, it is incumbent upon the members of Eckankar
                    > > > > > too - not to mention anybody reading about Eckankar period - to
                    > > > > > unscramble some of the pieces.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > What has it led to? What the result of people attempting to unscramble
                    > > > > > the pieces?
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/topics?hl=en&start=
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.eckankar/topics?lnk=rgh&pli=1
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous/
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/rsch3.html
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/chapters/tmsm1.html
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > http://www.littleknownpubs.com/DialogIntro.htm
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Did it really have to take all that? And, Was [AND IS IT STILL] really
                    > > > > > more fun?
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Comments go here :)
                    > > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > >
                    > >
                    >




                    ------------------------------------

                    Yahoo! Groups Links

                    <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/

                    <*> Your email settings:
                        Individual Email | Traditional

                    <*> To change settings online go to:
                        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/join
                        (Yahoo! ID required)

                    <*> To change settings via email:
                        eckankartruth-digest@yahoogroups.com
                        eckankartruth-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

                    <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                        eckankartruth-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                    <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                        http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

                  • al_radzik
                    Etznab, I don t see how Paul s birthday argument plays out in the big picture. Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what he did
                    Message 9 of 21 , Sep 17, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Etznab,

                      I don't see how Paul's birthday argument plays out in the big picture. Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what he did for 30 years. All I know is that in the last three years of his life he had managed to vibrate his teachings to epic proportions into what is now known as Christianity.
                      If you step back and look at Twitch's record, he was more of a charlatan than a messenger from God. There exists NO proof of Eckankar nor its 900 + masters before 1965. Eckankar purports to be the primary uplink of all religions but has no historical proof to make itself known in sacred texts from anywhere in the world. If Eckists don't like to talk about the facts it is because there are none. Eckankar is a self-absorbing religion where you make up your own private Idaho out of a thin framework they provide. For example, God (or sugmad) is taught to be impersonal and you are a part of that Divine spark. If that's the case, why do they come to "WORSHIP" at the temple in Chanhassen? Worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage. Eckankar is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. The plagiarisms are enough (unto themselves) to turn anyone with common sense away and look elsewhere.
                      I was always stunned by the fierce anger and resentment they had towards naysayers back in the old a.r.e. days. IF they were truly enlightened, they should not have been so vindictive and condescending towards non-believers. By virtue of their own belief system, it would make sense that they would detach themselves from such confrontations and simply chant HU and be God loving soul travelers but many chose to express themselves as bratty, undisciplined little children.
                      My intention is to not rain on your parade but I have seen you as a tireless poster both in a.r.e. and here in eckankartruth. You seem to be welcome in both because I detect a sincerity in you to know the truth. It just makes me wonder why it's taking so long for you to make up your mind. That's all.

                      Alf



                      --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@...> wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                      >
                      > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                      >
                      >
                      > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                      > >
                      > > *********
                      > >
                      > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                      > >
                      > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                      > >
                      > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                      > >
                      > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                      > >
                      > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard.
                    • David Osborn
                      Dear Alf, Call Twitch a charlatan or what you will, but I feel that he had more integrity than Klemp.  That worship temple in Chanhassen, MN - that was
                      Message 10 of 21 , Sep 17, 2011
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Dear Alf,

                        Call Twitch a charlatan or what you will, but I feel that he had more integrity than Klemp.  That worship temple in Chanhassen, MN - that was Harold's idea, NOT Twitch's!  Twitch would have never gone for it.  In fact, he never even called Eckankar a religion, because he didn't want to fall into all the trappings and stereotypes about religion, anyway.  He also wanted Eckankar to be self supporting, and not hide under the non profit tax umbrella.  This whole idea of bowing down and worshipping that Harold was into, I feel was basically foreign to him.  You see, I got into Eckankar right before Paul's passing, and was involved in it when Darwin was the LEM.  I was really wierded out by the whole Darwin - Harold two masters thing, which soon generated into a feud and a debacle, and instinctively didn't like the changes that I saw Harold put into place, so I left.  I was not really an Eckist, or at least not for very long, anyway, under Harold, so, I haven't really experienced what you all have been through.  I suppose that I was from a totally different era when it came to ECK.

                        My the Eckless Blessings Be!
                        David

                        --- On Sat, 9/17/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                        From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                        Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                        To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                        Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 7:58 PM

                        Etznab,

                        I don't see how Paul's birthday argument plays out in the big picture. Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what he did for 30 years. All I know is that in the last three years of his life he had managed to vibrate his teachings to epic proportions into what is now known as Christianity.
                        If you step back and look at Twitch's record, he was more of a charlatan than a messenger from God. There exists NO proof of Eckankar nor its 900 + masters before 1965. Eckankar purports to be the primary uplink of all religions but has no historical proof to make itself known in sacred texts from anywhere in the world. If Eckists don't like to talk about the facts it is because there are none. Eckankar is a self-absorbing religion where you make up your own private Idaho out of a thin framework they provide. For example, God (or sugmad) is taught to be impersonal and you are a part of that Divine spark. If that's the case, why do they come to "WORSHIP" at the temple in Chanhassen? Worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage. Eckankar is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. The plagiarisms are enough (unto themselves) to turn anyone with common sense away and look elsewhere.
                        I was always stunned by the fierce anger and resentment they had towards naysayers back in the old a.r.e. days. IF they were truly enlightened, they should not have been so vindictive and condescending towards non-believers. By virtue of their own belief system, it would make sense that they would detach themselves from such confrontations and simply chant HU and be God loving soul travelers but many chose to express themselves as bratty, undisciplined little children. 
                        My intention is to not rain on your parade but I have seen you as a tireless poster both in a.r.e. and here in eckankartruth. You seem to be welcome in both because I detect a sincerity in you to know the truth. It just makes me wonder why it's taking so long for you to make up your mind. That's all.

                        Alf

                         

                        --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@...> wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                        >
                        > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                        >
                        >
                        > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                        > >
                        > > *********
                        > >
                        > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                        > > 
                        > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                        > > 
                        > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                        > > 
                        > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                        > > 
                        > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard. 




                        ------------------------------------

                        Yahoo! Groups Links

                        <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/

                        <*> Your email settings:
                            Individual Email | Traditional

                        <*> To change settings online go to:
                            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/join
                            (Yahoo! ID required)

                        <*> To change settings via email:
                            eckankartruth-digest@yahoogroups.com
                            eckankartruth-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

                        <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                            eckankartruth-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                        <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                            http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

                      • al_radzik
                        Interesting. So you are from the old school ? Do you retain a belief in the basic tenets of Eckankar as taught by Paul? I agree that Harold is a miserable
                        Message 11 of 21 , Sep 18, 2011
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Interesting. So you are from the "old school"? Do you retain a belief in the basic tenets of Eckankar as taught by Paul? I agree that Harold is a miserable mahanta and would agree that Paul did have some integrity but I believe when Darwin came on board, that's where the path started falling apart. He was like one of those cheating televangelists from what I recall. He also fancied himself as a musician. I can tell you from a professional standpoint, he was absolutely horrible.<GG>
                          I don't believe Eckankar is a dangerous cult because we are all responsible for what we believe and the psychic karma they threaten you with if you leave is the same bunk that got you there in the first place. If you are an old time Eckist, doesn't it follow that there should always be a mahanta on the Earth? What is it about the Darwin/Klemp transition that bothers you? Show me where the unbroken lineage of Eck masters exists throughout the ages as Paul proposed. How do you handle the plagiarism? This was all during Twitchell's reign as you know.
                          alf

                          --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Dear Alf,
                          >
                          > Call Twitch a charlatan or what you will, but I feel that he had more integrity than Klemp.  That worship temple in Chanhassen, MN - that was Harold's idea, NOT Twitch's!  Twitch would have never gone for it.  In fact, he never even called Eckankar a religion, because he didn't want to fall into all the trappings and stereotypes about religion, anyway.  He also wanted Eckankar to be self supporting, and not hide under the non profit tax umbrella.  This whole idea of bowing down and worshipping that Harold was into, I feel was basically foreign to him.  You see, I got into Eckankar right before Paul's passing, and was involved in it when Darwin was the LEM.  I was really wierded out by the whole Darwin - Harold two masters thing, which soon generated into a feud and a debacle, and instinctively didn't like the changes that I saw Harold put into place, so I left.  I was not really an Eckist, or at least not for very long, anyway, under Harold, so,
                          > I haven't really experienced what you all have been through.  I suppose that I was from a totally different era when it came to ECK.
                          >
                          > My the Eckless Blessings Be!
                          > David
                          >
                          > --- On Sat, 9/17/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                          >
                          > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                          > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                          > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                          > Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 7:58 PM
                          >
                          > Etznab,
                          >
                          > I don't see how Paul's birthday argument plays out in the big picture. Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what he did for 30 years. All I know is that in the last three years of his life he had managed to vibrate his teachings to epic proportions into what is now known as Christianity.
                          > If you step back and look at Twitch's record, he was more of a charlatan than a messenger from God. There exists NO proof of Eckankar nor its 900 + masters before 1965. Eckankar purports to be the primary uplink of all religions but has no historical proof to make itself known in sacred texts from anywhere in the world. If Eckists don't like to talk about the facts it is because there are none. Eckankar is a self-absorbing religion where you make up your own private Idaho out of a thin framework they provide. For example, God (or sugmad) is taught to be impersonal and you are a part of that Divine spark. If that's the case, why do they come to "WORSHIP" at the temple in Chanhassen? Worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage. Eckankar is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. The plagiarisms are enough (unto themselves) to turn anyone with common sense away and look elsewhere.
                          > I was always stunned by the fierce anger and resentment they had towards naysayers back in the old a.r.e. days. IF they were truly enlightened, they should not have been so vindictive and condescending towards non-believers. By virtue of their own belief system, it would make sense that they would detach themselves from such confrontations and simply chant HU and be God loving soul travelers but many chose to express themselves as bratty, undisciplined little children. 
                          > My intention is to not rain on your parade but I have seen you as a tireless poster both in a.r.e. and here in eckankartruth. You seem to be welcome in both because I detect a sincerity in you to know the truth. It just makes me wonder why it's taking so long for you to make up your mind. That's all.
                          >
                          > Alf
                          >
                          >  
                          >
                          > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                          > >
                          > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                          > > >
                          > > > *********
                          > > >
                          > > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                          > > > 
                          > > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                          > > > 
                          > > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                          > > > 
                          > > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                          > > > 
                          > > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard. 
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > ------------------------------------
                          >
                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >
                        • etznab@aol.com
                          Since you mentioned Jesus I would like to comment. How does anybody know there was a person who matches the story told about Jesus? There is a section in Ford
                          Message 12 of 21 , Sep 18, 2011
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Since you mentioned Jesus I would like to comment. How does anybody
                            know there was a person who matches the story told about Jesus? There
                            is a section in Ford Johnson's book about the story of Jesus and how
                            similar to stories from other cultures.

                            It was over 2,000 years ago, the story of Jesus. How do I, or anybody,
                            know for sure the story about Jesus is true in all its details? Just
                            because so many people say so? So many people who were not even born
                            until centuries after the fact?

                            When I hear people talking about how they lived during the time of
                            Jesus and they comment about his life, it usually always matches with
                            popular belief. Then sometimes people change the details a bit, saying
                            Jesus lived for a time in their country (India, etc.). Well, I don't
                            believe beyond a doubt all of those stories either because, Why should
                            I?

                            Suppose there wasn't an Internet and information sharing like we have
                            today where people can research information to verify whether true. And
                            suppose that all people had to know about history of Eckankar were the
                            new and updated Eckankar books. Fast forward 2,000 years from now and
                            what do you suppose the books would say? Would they match the ones
                            being printed today? or would they contain (if allowed to do so) even
                            more embellishments, etc. etc.?

                            If I were living in a world 2,000 years from now I could be skeptical
                            about the stories just the same as then from now. In such a world,
                            however, How could I find the truth?

                            Just because people say it's so, that doesn't mean its true. IMHO.

                            Now I suppose there WERE people living during and after the time period
                            attributed to Jesus. What are their versions about the time period and
                            do any of their writings survive in original form? So many people
                            probably claim that they do, but how can this be proved?

                            If you ask me, Catholicism became an arm of the Holy Roman Empire that
                            was used to conquer and subjugate peoples from many countries at a time
                            when the Pope chose the Emperors, Kings and leaders of those same
                            countries. Those countries and their Kings could be later "ordered" to
                            go on Crusades and do just what the armies in the Old Testament
                            reportedly did by the command of Jehovah; Kill every man, woman and
                            child. The same God that reportedly told Moses: Thou shalt not kill,
                            etc." And what were all those people fighting about in the first place?
                            Some said holy regions in the Middle East. Places that had to do with
                            Jesus and Mohammad. And still today, centuries later, people are still
                            fighting over those same areas. It's not to say that Catholicism, or
                            any religion is total malware, badware. It's only to say that if the
                            truth be known, I suspect there would be less reasons to kill innocent
                            people in the name of religion.

                            When I consider the scope and repercussions today for even challenging
                            the stories about Jesus and Mohammad I realize how powerful are the
                            forces of belief, whether what people believe in has any correlation
                            with actual fact. When I entered a.r.e. (alternative.
                            religion.eckankar) many years after it began and looked at the
                            discussions, eventually I decided to sift fiction from fact for myself.
                            And even there, as an Eckist, I received some of the same insults and
                            childish banter thrown by Eckists at Non-Eckists. I would have loved to
                            continue laying out all the facts, having discussion and dialogue about
                            them, and learning from them, etc. Even teaching others a truer version
                            of the actual events. But you know what happened at a.r.e.? Even though
                            at times I quit for a short time and later came back, in the long run I
                            didn't leave. And today a.r.e. is like the cartoon Casper the Friendly
                            Ghost where somebody yelled GHOST! and everybody fled. I didn't,
                            because I'm not afraid of no ghosts :) I'm not afraid of looking at
                            earlier versions of Eckankar - even if they include things that
                            contradict contemporary belief. What I'm interested in about this
                            religion is the truth. Whether that truth appears ghostly, haunting, or
                            scares people doesn't concern me. I think it's better to preserve the
                            truth now before we all "give up the ghost". Future generations might
                            be grateful that we did.

                            So long story short. It's not over. Just because David Lane, Ford
                            Johnson, Doug Marman and others wrote some books, in my book it doesn't
                            mean all the puzzle pieces have been put back together, let alone
                            found. And just because there are groups like a.r.e. ESA, eckankrtruth,
                            etc. that does not mean to me that all has been said and done.

                            Perhaps the truth about a particular time period is like a landscape.
                            One that changes over time. A lot of the old jungles and forests in
                            South America held pyramids and ruins centuries old that most of the
                            world hadn't a clue about. They were there all the time, but when
                            people abandoned those places - for whatever reason - the WEEDS were
                            allowed to grow. And grow they did! Lack of care, or concern allowed
                            the truth to be covered up so that generations of people the world over
                            had no idea.

                            The following is "poetry".

                            I don't think one can call a weed-eater a weed. Just because it moves
                            within and gets covered by so many weeds. That is just the nature of
                            the job. Calling it a weed is only an attempt to destroy the weed-eater
                            so all people can Hail and Worship the God (and Gods) of WEEDS!

                            Etznab



                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                            To: eckankartruth <eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com>
                            Sent: Sat, Sep 17, 2011 9:58 pm
                            Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces

                             
                            Etznab,

                            I don't see how Paul's birthday argument plays out in the big picture.
                            Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what
                            he did for 30 years. All I know is that in the last three years of his
                            life he had managed to vibrate his teachings to epic proportions into
                            what is now known as Christianity.
                            If you step back and look at Twitch's record, he was more of a
                            charlatan than a messenger from God. There exists NO proof of Eckankar
                            nor its 900 + masters before 1965. Eckankar purports to be the primary
                            uplink of all religions but has no historical proof to make itself
                            known in sacred texts from anywhere in the world. If Eckists don't like
                            to talk about the facts it is because there are none. Eckankar is a
                            self-absorbing religion where you make up your own private Idaho out of
                            a thin framework they provide. For example, God (or sugmad) is taught
                            to be impersonal and you are a part of that Divine spark. If that's the
                            case, why do they come to "WORSHIP" at the temple in Chanhassen?
                            Worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred
                            personage. Eckankar is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. The
                            plagiarisms are enough (unto themselves) to turn anyone with common
                            sense away and look elsewhere.
                            I was always stunned by the fierce anger and resentment they had
                            towards naysayers back in the old a.r.e. days. IF they were truly
                            enlightened, they should not have been so vindictive and condescending
                            towards non-believers. By virtue of their own belief system, it would
                            make sense that they would detach themselves from such confrontations
                            and simply chant HU and be God loving soul travelers but many chose to
                            express themselves as bratty, undisciplined little children.
                            My intention is to not rain on your parade but I have seen you as a
                            tireless poster both in a.r.e. and here in eckankartruth. You seem to
                            be welcome in both because I detect a sincerity in you to know the
                            truth. It just makes me wonder why it's taking so long for you to make
                            up your mind. That's all.

                            Alf

                            --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@...>
                            wrote:
                            >
                            >
                            > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                            >
                            > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                            >
                            >
                            > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@>
                            wrote:
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the
                            message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your
                            post.
                            > >
                            > > *********
                            > >
                            > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not
                            what it used to be.
                            > >
                            > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of
                            David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one
                            thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing
                            what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and
                            evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my
                            back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to
                            research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                            > >
                            > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to
                            Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                            > >
                            > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in
                            the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I
                            think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists
                            generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I
                            think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include
                            those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                            > >
                            > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell
                            used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one
                            (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census.
                            Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded
                            about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one
                            tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the
                            things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to
                            all the other stories I've heard.
                          • David Osborn
                            Dear Alf, I suppose that I would call myself of the old school if I had to say one way or the other; definitely, I am NOT of the Harold Klemp new school . 
                            Message 13 of 21 , Sep 18, 2011
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Dear Alf,

                              I suppose that I would call myself of the "old school" if I had to say one way or the other; definitely, I am NOT of the Harold Klemp "new school". 

                              You say that Darwin was like a televangelist, and that is an interesting analogy.  And how he ascended to the Mahantaship, and what he did when he got there, as I understand it, had its own share of hush-hush scandals.  And you are probably right about him not being such a great musician, and I should know.  I was one of the flute players in the orchestra, backing up Darwin as he sang his ECK songs.  Although the songs themselves are great, Darwin had a notoriously bad sense of timing when it came to performing them onstage.  We would always be looking up at Darwin to try to get our clues from him as to where he was going with a phrase, and when, in order to synch our playing with his delivery.  Being relatively young and naive then, I just figured that he must just be so ecstatically blissed out, and lost in the Ocean of Love and Mercy that such mundane matters as musical timing were irrelevant, or not important to him from his lofty, exalted perspective. 

                              What confused and bugged me about the two masters period was that these two supposedly God Realized beings, or co-Mahantas, were demonstrating that they were obviously NOT free of certain human foibles like egotism and attachment.  Darwin did not want to let go of his captive audience, especially as a musician, so he tried to hog as much time as he could at Eckankar seminars playing to his adoring crowd of Eckfans.  This caused friction and problems with the Harold Klemp faction, who I believe were trying to look for a way, an opportune moment, to oust Darwin from the organization anyway.  And they finally did.

                              I never said that Twitch had absolute, or a hundred percent, integrity.  The whole plagiarism thing came as a big shock to me, too as I found Path of the Masters, and started comparing it with Eckankar: Key to Secret Worlds.  But, relatively speaking, Twitch had more integrity than Klemp. 

                              I hope that this explains things better.

                              David

                              --- On Sun, 9/18/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                              From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                              Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                              To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                              Date: Sunday, September 18, 2011, 7:20 AM

                              Interesting. So you are from the "old school"? Do you retain a belief in the basic tenets of Eckankar as taught by Paul? I agree that Harold is a miserable mahanta and would agree that Paul did have some integrity but I believe when Darwin came on board, that's where the path started falling apart. He was like one of those cheating televangelists from what I recall. He also fancied himself as a musician. I can tell you from a professional standpoint, he was absolutely horrible.<GG>
                              I don't believe Eckankar is a dangerous cult because we are all responsible for what we believe and the psychic karma they threaten you with if you leave is the same bunk that got you there in the first place. If you are an old time Eckist, doesn't it follow that there should always be a mahanta on the Earth? What is it about the Darwin/Klemp transition that bothers you? Show me where the unbroken lineage of Eck masters exists throughout the ages as Paul proposed. How do you handle the plagiarism? This was all during Twitchell's reign as you know.
                              alf

                              --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Dear Alf,
                              >
                              > Call Twitch a charlatan or what you will, but I feel that he had more integrity than Klemp.  That worship temple in Chanhassen, MN - that was Harold's idea, NOT Twitch's!  Twitch would have never gone for it.  In fact, he never even called Eckankar a religion, because he didn't want to fall into all the trappings and stereotypes about religion, anyway.  He also wanted Eckankar to be self supporting, and not hide under the non profit tax umbrella.  This whole idea of bowing down and worshipping that Harold was into, I feel was basically foreign to him.  You see, I got into Eckankar right before Paul's passing, and was involved in it when Darwin was the LEM.  I was really wierded out by the whole Darwin - Harold two masters thing, which soon generated into a feud and a debacle, and instinctively didn't like the changes that I saw Harold put into place, so I left.  I was not really an Eckist, or at least not for very long, anyway, under Harold, so,
                              >  I haven't really experienced what you all have been through.  I suppose that I was from a totally different era when it came to ECK.
                              >
                              > My the Eckless Blessings Be!
                              > David
                              >
                              > --- On Sat, 9/17/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                              >
                              > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                              > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                              > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                              > Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 7:58 PM
                              >
                              > Etznab,
                              >
                              > I don't see how Paul's birthday argument plays out in the big picture. Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what he did for 30 years. All I know is that in the last three years of his life he had managed to vibrate his teachings to epic proportions into what is now known as Christianity.
                              > If you step back and look at Twitch's record, he was more of a charlatan than a messenger from God. There exists NO proof of Eckankar nor its 900 + masters before 1965. Eckankar purports to be the primary uplink of all religions but has no historical proof to make itself known in sacred texts from anywhere in the world. If Eckists don't like to talk about the facts it is because there are none. Eckankar is a self-absorbing religion where you make up your own private Idaho out of a thin framework they provide. For example, God (or sugmad) is taught to be impersonal and you are a part of that Divine spark. If that's the case, why do they come to "WORSHIP" at the temple in Chanhassen? Worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage. Eckankar is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. The plagiarisms are enough (unto themselves) to turn anyone with common sense away and look elsewhere.
                              > I was always stunned by the fierce anger and resentment they had towards naysayers back in the old a.r.e. days. IF they were truly enlightened, they should not have been so vindictive and condescending towards non-believers. By virtue of their own belief system, it would make sense that they would detach themselves from such confrontations and simply chant HU and be God loving soul travelers but many chose to express themselves as bratty, undisciplined little children. 
                              > My intention is to not rain on your parade but I have seen you as a tireless poster both in a.r.e. and here in eckankartruth. You seem to be welcome in both because I detect a sincerity in you to know the truth. It just makes me wonder why it's taking so long for you to make up your mind. That's all.
                              >
                              > Alf
                              >
                              >  
                              >
                              > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                              > >
                              > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                              > > >
                              > > > *********
                              > > >
                              > > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                              > > > 
                              > > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                              > > > 
                              > > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                              > > > 
                              > > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                              > > > 
                              > > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard. 
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > ------------------------------------
                              >
                              > Yahoo! Groups Links
                              >




                              ------------------------------------

                              Yahoo! Groups Links

                              <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/

                              <*> Your email settings:
                                  Individual Email | Traditional

                              <*> To change settings online go to:
                                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/join
                                  (Yahoo! ID required)

                              <*> To change settings via email:
                                  eckankartruth-digest@yahoogroups.com
                                  eckankartruth-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

                              <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  eckankartruth-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                              <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                                  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

                            • al_radzik
                              Very interesting! So you actually played along with Darji!I too am a musician and you re so right about timing. Our old drummer had a tendency to slow down in
                              Message 14 of 21 , Sep 18, 2011
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Very interesting! So you actually played along with Darji!I too am a musician and you're so right about timing. Our old drummer had a tendency to slow down in mid-song and it drove me crazy!That's why he's our old drummer.
                                Did you happen to catch the debate with Darwin and some Christian evangelist on You Tube? Darwin comes off as a complete fool. Sometimes the Christian guy does too but in comparison, Darji just sits there like a hog staring at a wristwatch.
                                I can see how Paul was attracting people to his Soul Travel. You've got to remember that timing is everything. It was 1965 and Paul had already been well read on Eastern matters with the likes of the famous 50's yogi Premananda. The Beatles went to India and the subculture of the mid 60's was in full swing. (All You Need Is Love). We were protesting everything and tearing down our parent's values and ethics. Whatever they were all about, we were going to do the opposite.
                                Paul, Guru Maharaji, Baba Ram Dass, ISKCON and a host of westernized Easterners were proliferating and we were clamoring for the exotic teachings of Krishna and the Vedic Scriptures. In lieu of Christianity, we were finding refuge and "knowledge" in ashrams and communes. Unfortunately, we all grew up and became capitalists which put us square in the mess we are in today. Woodstock sucked. Free love was bullshit. Drugs destroyed our roots and we became "free spirits" with no absolutes. We are all older now but we never grew up.
                                Good to hear from someone who's been there from the beginning. Keep postin' pardner!

                                Alf

                                --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > Dear Alf,
                                >
                                > I suppose that I would call myself of the "old school" if I had to say one way or the other; definitely, I am NOT of the Harold Klemp "new school". 
                                >
                                > You say that Darwin was like a televangelist, and that is an interesting analogy.  And how he ascended to the Mahantaship, and what he did when he got there, as I understand it, had its own share of hush-hush scandals.  And you are probably right about him not being such a great musician, and I should know.  I was one of the flute players in the orchestra, backing up Darwin as he sang his ECK songs.  Although the songs themselves are great, Darwin had a notoriously bad sense of timing when it came to performing them onstage.  We would always be looking up at Darwin to try to get our clues from him as to where he was going with a phrase, and when, in order to synch our playing with his delivery.  Being relatively young and naive then, I just figured that he must just be so ecstatically blissed out, and lost in the Ocean of Love and Mercy that such mundane matters as musical timing were irrelevant, or not important to him from his lofty, exalted
                                > perspective. 
                                >
                                > What confused and bugged me about the two masters period was that these two supposedly God Realized beings, or co-Mahantas, were demonstrating that they were obviously NOT free of certain human foibles like egotism and attachment.  Darwin did not want to let go of his captive audience, especially as a musician, so he tried to hog as much time as he could at Eckankar seminars playing to his adoring crowd of Eckfans.  This caused friction and problems with the Harold Klemp faction, who I believe were trying to look for a way, an opportune moment, to oust Darwin from the organization anyway.  And they finally did.
                                >
                                > I never said that Twitch had absolute, or a hundred percent, integrity.  The whole plagiarism thing came as a big shock to me, too as I found Path of the Masters, and started comparing it with Eckankar: Key to Secret Worlds.  But, relatively speaking, Twitch had more integrity than Klemp. 
                                >
                                > I hope that this explains things better.
                                >
                                > David
                                >
                                > --- On Sun, 9/18/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                >
                                > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                                > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                > Date: Sunday, September 18, 2011, 7:20 AM
                                >
                                > Interesting. So you are from the "old school"? Do you retain a belief in the basic tenets of Eckankar as taught by Paul? I agree that Harold is a miserable mahanta and would agree that Paul did have some integrity but I believe when Darwin came on board, that's where the path started falling apart. He was like one of those cheating televangelists from what I recall. He also fancied himself as a musician. I can tell you from a professional standpoint, he was absolutely horrible.<GG>
                                > I don't believe Eckankar is a dangerous cult because we are all responsible for what we believe and the psychic karma they threaten you with if you leave is the same bunk that got you there in the first place. If you are an old time Eckist, doesn't it follow that there should always be a mahanta on the Earth? What is it about the Darwin/Klemp transition that bothers you? Show me where the unbroken lineage of Eck masters exists throughout the ages as Paul proposed. How do you handle the plagiarism? This was all during Twitchell's reign as you know.
                                > alf
                                >
                                > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@> wrote:
                                > >
                                > > Dear Alf,
                                > >
                                > > Call Twitch a charlatan or what you will, but I feel that he had more integrity than Klemp.  That worship temple in Chanhassen, MN - that was Harold's idea, NOT Twitch's!  Twitch would have never gone for it.  In fact, he never even called Eckankar a religion, because he didn't want to fall into all the trappings and stereotypes about religion, anyway.  He also wanted Eckankar to be self supporting, and not hide under the non profit tax umbrella.  This whole idea of bowing down and worshipping that Harold was into, I feel was basically foreign to him.  You see, I got into Eckankar right before Paul's passing, and was involved in it when Darwin was the LEM.  I was really wierded out by the whole Darwin - Harold two masters thing, which soon generated into a feud and a debacle, and instinctively didn't like the changes that I saw Harold put into place, so I left.  I was not really an Eckist, or at least not for very long, anyway, under Harold,
                                > so,
                                > >  I haven't really experienced what you all have been through.  I suppose that I was from a totally different era when it came to ECK.
                                > >
                                > > My the Eckless Blessings Be!
                                > > David
                                > >
                                > > --- On Sat, 9/17/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                > >
                                > > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                                > > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                > > Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 7:58 PM
                                > >
                                > > Etznab,
                                > >
                                > > I don't see how Paul's birthday argument plays out in the big picture. Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what he did for 30 years. All I know is that in the last three years of his life he had managed to vibrate his teachings to epic proportions into what is now known as Christianity.
                                > > If you step back and look at Twitch's record, he was more of a charlatan than a messenger from God. There exists NO proof of Eckankar nor its 900 + masters before 1965. Eckankar purports to be the primary uplink of all religions but has no historical proof to make itself known in sacred texts from anywhere in the world. If Eckists don't like to talk about the facts it is because there are none. Eckankar is a self-absorbing religion where you make up your own private Idaho out of a thin framework they provide. For example, God (or sugmad) is taught to be impersonal and you are a part of that Divine spark. If that's the case, why do they come to "WORSHIP" at the temple in Chanhassen? Worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage. Eckankar is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. The plagiarisms are enough (unto themselves) to turn anyone with common sense away and look elsewhere.
                                > > I was always stunned by the fierce anger and resentment they had towards naysayers back in the old a.r.e. days. IF they were truly enlightened, they should not have been so vindictive and condescending towards non-believers. By virtue of their own belief system, it would make sense that they would detach themselves from such confrontations and simply chant HU and be God loving soul travelers but many chose to express themselves as bratty, undisciplined little children. 
                                > > My intention is to not rain on your parade but I have seen you as a tireless poster both in a.r.e. and here in eckankartruth. You seem to be welcome in both because I detect a sincerity in you to know the truth. It just makes me wonder why it's taking so long for you to make up your mind. That's all.
                                > >
                                > > Alf
                                > >
                                > >  
                                > >
                                > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                                > > >
                                > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                > > > >
                                > > > >
                                > > > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                                > > > >
                                > > > > *********
                                > > > >
                                > > > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                                > > > > 
                                > > > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                                > > > > 
                                > > > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                                > > > > 
                                > > > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                                > > > > 
                                > > > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard. 
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > ------------------------------------
                                > >
                                > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                > >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > ------------------------------------
                                >
                                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                >
                              • al_radzik
                                Yes, Etznab, I read the Jesus Mysteries too. There is no actual proof of Jesus existence. All we have is the esoterica, some vague accounts by others and the
                                Message 15 of 21 , Sep 18, 2011
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Yes, Etznab, I read the Jesus Mysteries too. There is no actual "proof" of Jesus existence. All we have is the esoterica, some vague accounts by others and the writings of Josephus. I do believe that most scholars now believe that there probably was a person like Jesus around the time he lived. No one can pinpoint the exact date but this begs the question as to why the teachings of Christianity have evolved into the largest denominations on Earth. They had to have had a source. That being said, I seriously doubt if the teachings of Twitchell will ever evolve. His path had been bastardized by two successors and Eckankar is by no means catching on fire in the world. I would even suspect that membership is stagnant or waning because Paul stole some great ideas from the "heavyweight" paths but never followed through on his claims. Like an amateur, he simply took buzz phrases from all religions and created a "quick fix" religion called Soul Travel. To me, (and I've said it before), it is the MacDonald's of all religions. Fast and tasty but of little nutritional value.

                                  --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, etznab@... wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Since you mentioned Jesus I would like to comment. How does anybody
                                  > know there was a person who matches the story told about Jesus? There
                                  > is a section in Ford Johnson's book about the story of Jesus and how
                                  > similar to stories from other cultures.
                                  >
                                  > It was over 2,000 years ago, the story of Jesus. How do I, or anybody,
                                  > know for sure the story about Jesus is true in all its details? Just
                                  > because so many people say so? So many people who were not even born
                                  > until centuries after the fact?
                                  >
                                  > When I hear people talking about how they lived during the time of
                                  > Jesus and they comment about his life, it usually always matches with
                                  > popular belief. Then sometimes people change the details a bit, saying
                                  > Jesus lived for a time in their country (India, etc.). Well, I don't
                                  > believe beyond a doubt all of those stories either because, Why should
                                  > I?
                                  >
                                  > Suppose there wasn't an Internet and information sharing like we have
                                  > today where people can research information to verify whether true. And
                                  > suppose that all people had to know about history of Eckankar were the
                                  > new and updated Eckankar books. Fast forward 2,000 years from now and
                                  > what do you suppose the books would say? Would they match the ones
                                  > being printed today? or would they contain (if allowed to do so) even
                                  > more embellishments, etc. etc.?
                                  >
                                  > If I were living in a world 2,000 years from now I could be skeptical
                                  > about the stories just the same as then from now. In such a world,
                                  > however, How could I find the truth?
                                  >
                                  > Just because people say it's so, that doesn't mean its true. IMHO.
                                  >
                                  > Now I suppose there WERE people living during and after the time period
                                  > attributed to Jesus. What are their versions about the time period and
                                  > do any of their writings survive in original form? So many people
                                  > probably claim that they do, but how can this be proved?
                                  >
                                  > If you ask me, Catholicism became an arm of the Holy Roman Empire that
                                  > was used to conquer and subjugate peoples from many countries at a time
                                  > when the Pope chose the Emperors, Kings and leaders of those same
                                  > countries. Those countries and their Kings could be later "ordered" to
                                  > go on Crusades and do just what the armies in the Old Testament
                                  > reportedly did by the command of Jehovah; Kill every man, woman and
                                  > child. The same God that reportedly told Moses: Thou shalt not kill,
                                  > etc." And what were all those people fighting about in the first place?
                                  > Some said holy regions in the Middle East. Places that had to do with
                                  > Jesus and Mohammad. And still today, centuries later, people are still
                                  > fighting over those same areas. It's not to say that Catholicism, or
                                  > any religion is total malware, badware. It's only to say that if the
                                  > truth be known, I suspect there would be less reasons to kill innocent
                                  > people in the name of religion.
                                  >
                                  > When I consider the scope and repercussions today for even challenging
                                  > the stories about Jesus and Mohammad I realize how powerful are the
                                  > forces of belief, whether what people believe in has any correlation
                                  > with actual fact. When I entered a.r.e. (alternative.
                                  > religion.eckankar) many years after it began and looked at the
                                  > discussions, eventually I decided to sift fiction from fact for myself.
                                  > And even there, as an Eckist, I received some of the same insults and
                                  > childish banter thrown by Eckists at Non-Eckists. I would have loved to
                                  > continue laying out all the facts, having discussion and dialogue about
                                  > them, and learning from them, etc. Even teaching others a truer version
                                  > of the actual events. But you know what happened at a.r.e.? Even though
                                  > at times I quit for a short time and later came back, in the long run I
                                  > didn't leave. And today a.r.e. is like the cartoon Casper the Friendly
                                  > Ghost where somebody yelled GHOST! and everybody fled. I didn't,
                                  > because I'm not afraid of no ghosts :) I'm not afraid of looking at
                                  > earlier versions of Eckankar - even if they include things that
                                  > contradict contemporary belief. What I'm interested in about this
                                  > religion is the truth. Whether that truth appears ghostly, haunting, or
                                  > scares people doesn't concern me. I think it's better to preserve the
                                  > truth now before we all "give up the ghost". Future generations might
                                  > be grateful that we did.
                                  >
                                  > So long story short. It's not over. Just because David Lane, Ford
                                  > Johnson, Doug Marman and others wrote some books, in my book it doesn't
                                  > mean all the puzzle pieces have been put back together, let alone
                                  > found. And just because there are groups like a.r.e. ESA, eckankrtruth,
                                  > etc. that does not mean to me that all has been said and done.
                                  >
                                  > Perhaps the truth about a particular time period is like a landscape.
                                  > One that changes over time. A lot of the old jungles and forests in
                                  > South America held pyramids and ruins centuries old that most of the
                                  > world hadn't a clue about. They were there all the time, but when
                                  > people abandoned those places - for whatever reason - the WEEDS were
                                  > allowed to grow. And grow they did! Lack of care, or concern allowed
                                  > the truth to be covered up so that generations of people the world over
                                  > had no idea.
                                  >
                                  > The following is "poetry".
                                  >
                                  > I don't think one can call a weed-eater a weed. Just because it moves
                                  > within and gets covered by so many weeds. That is just the nature of
                                  > the job. Calling it a weed is only an attempt to destroy the weed-eater
                                  > so all people can Hail and Worship the God (and Gods) of WEEDS!
                                  >
                                  > Etznab
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > -----Original Message-----
                                  > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                  > To: eckankartruth <eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com>
                                  > Sent: Sat, Sep 17, 2011 9:58 pm
                                  > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                                  >
                                  >  
                                  > Etznab,
                                  >
                                  > I don't see how Paul's birthday argument plays out in the big picture.
                                  > Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what
                                  > he did for 30 years. All I know is that in the last three years of his
                                  > life he had managed to vibrate his teachings to epic proportions into
                                  > what is now known as Christianity.
                                  > If you step back and look at Twitch's record, he was more of a
                                  > charlatan than a messenger from God. There exists NO proof of Eckankar
                                  > nor its 900 + masters before 1965. Eckankar purports to be the primary
                                  > uplink of all religions but has no historical proof to make itself
                                  > known in sacred texts from anywhere in the world. If Eckists don't like
                                  > to talk about the facts it is because there are none. Eckankar is a
                                  > self-absorbing religion where you make up your own private Idaho out of
                                  > a thin framework they provide. For example, God (or sugmad) is taught
                                  > to be impersonal and you are a part of that Divine spark. If that's the
                                  > case, why do they come to "WORSHIP" at the temple in Chanhassen?
                                  > Worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred
                                  > personage. Eckankar is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. The
                                  > plagiarisms are enough (unto themselves) to turn anyone with common
                                  > sense away and look elsewhere.
                                  > I was always stunned by the fierce anger and resentment they had
                                  > towards naysayers back in the old a.r.e. days. IF they were truly
                                  > enlightened, they should not have been so vindictive and condescending
                                  > towards non-believers. By virtue of their own belief system, it would
                                  > make sense that they would detach themselves from such confrontations
                                  > and simply chant HU and be God loving soul travelers but many chose to
                                  > express themselves as bratty, undisciplined little children.
                                  > My intention is to not rain on your parade but I have seen you as a
                                  > tireless poster both in a.r.e. and here in eckankartruth. You seem to
                                  > be welcome in both because I detect a sincerity in you to know the
                                  > truth. It just makes me wonder why it's taking so long for you to make
                                  > up your mind. That's all.
                                  >
                                  > Alf
                                  >
                                  > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" etznab@
                                  > wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                                  > >
                                  > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@>
                                  > wrote:
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the
                                  > message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your
                                  > post.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > *********
                                  > > >
                                  > > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not
                                  > what it used to be.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of
                                  > David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one
                                  > thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing
                                  > what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and
                                  > evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my
                                  > back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to
                                  > research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to
                                  > Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in
                                  > the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I
                                  > think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists
                                  > generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I
                                  > think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include
                                  > those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell
                                  > used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one
                                  > (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census.
                                  > Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded
                                  > about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one
                                  > tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the
                                  > things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to
                                  > all the other stories I've heard.
                                  >
                                • etznab18
                                  You say that Darwin was like a televangelist, and that is an interesting analogy. And how he ascended to the Mahantaship, and what he did when he got there,
                                  Message 16 of 21 , Sep 18, 2011
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    "You say that Darwin was like a televangelist, and that is an interesting analogy. And how he ascended to the Mahantaship, and what he did when he got there, as I understand it, had its own share of hush-hush scandals."

                                    "[....] Darwin Gross issued a worldwide memo on December 27, 1979 which states that there was NO plagiarism in Paul Twitchell's THE FAR COUNTY. Saying instead that it was dictated to Paul by Rebazar. In addition, the memo states that 'the book claimed to be plagiarized by Paul was not copyrighted.' [....]"

                                    http://vclass.mtsac.edu:930/phil/kirpaltheory.htm

                                    It's an expired link now so I can't confirm the source, however, I do suspect that Eckankar during the time of Darwin gross was not inclined to admit to plagiarism. Doug Marman included a quote from an August 1979 Mystic World article by Darwin's secretary which included the following:

                                    "[...] Prominent will be the claim that many of Paul's writings prior to his advent as the Living ECK Master and Mahanta are found in other works or written by other people... [....]"

                                    http://www.littleknownpubs.com/DialogPreface.htm

                                    Oddly enough, it's not a full quote that Doug illustrated, but part of it was clipped off. In any case, Darwin's worldwide memo was dated December 1979 and would have appeared after Bernadine's Mystic World article.

                                    From Ford Johnson's book there is more about the subject.

                                    "Sensing the damage that the publication of David Lane's research would have on Eckankar, its lawyer, Alan Nichols, attempted to refute the charge that Paul [Paul Twitchell] had plagiarized the works of Julian Johnson. He wrote in a letter to Lane in 1977:
                                    With a wide background of study you will find many similarities both approximate and exact in many religious statements, history and mythology. [....] How did you know Johnson didn't obtain his information from Twitchell or Rebazar Tarzs [sic] or some other common source? Don't be surprised that many people find the same truths and even in the same words, commandments, etc., whether they are concepts, stories of events, or levels of God Worlds or consciousness."

                                    [See: Ford Johnson, Confessions of a God Seeker, A Journey to Higher Consciousness, p. 124] 

                                    Let me know if someone finds a current link to that first quote about no plagiarism in The Far Country and the book not copyrighted. I know that Kirpal Singh didn't copyright a lot of his work but, as far as I know, Julian Johnson's work (the book claimed to be plagiarized) was.

                                    --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > Dear Alf,
                                    >
                                    > I suppose that I would call myself of the "old school" if I had to say one way or the other; definitely, I am NOT of the Harold Klemp "new school". 
                                    >
                                    > You say that Darwin was like a televangelist, and that is an interesting analogy.  And how he ascended to the Mahantaship, and what he did when he got there, as I understand it, had its own share of hush-hush scandals.  And you are probably right about him not being such a great musician, and I should know.  I was one of the flute players in the orchestra, backing up Darwin as he sang his ECK songs.  Although the songs themselves are great, Darwin had a notoriously bad sense of timing when it came to performing them onstage.  We would always be looking up at Darwin to try to get our clues from him as to where he was going with a phrase, and when, in order to synch our playing with his delivery.  Being relatively young and naive then, I just figured that he must just be so ecstatically blissed out, and lost in the Ocean of Love and Mercy that such mundane matters as musical timing were irrelevant, or not important to him from his lofty, exalted
                                    > perspective. 
                                    >
                                    > What confused and bugged me about the two masters period was that these two supposedly God Realized beings, or co-Mahantas, were demonstrating that they were obviously NOT free of certain human foibles like egotism and attachment.  Darwin did not want to let go of his captive audience, especially as a musician, so he tried to hog as much time as he could at Eckankar seminars playing to his adoring crowd of Eckfans.  This caused friction and problems with the Harold Klemp faction, who I believe were trying to look for a way, an opportune moment, to oust Darwin from the organization anyway.  And they finally did.
                                    >
                                    > I never said that Twitch had absolute, or a hundred percent, integrity.  The whole plagiarism thing came as a big shock to me, too as I found Path of the Masters, and started comparing it with Eckankar: Key to Secret Worlds.  But, relatively speaking, Twitch had more integrity than Klemp. 
                                    >
                                    > I hope that this explains things better.
                                    >
                                    > David
                                    >
                                    > --- On Sun, 9/18/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                    > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                                    > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                    > Date: Sunday, September 18, 2011, 7:20 AM
                                    >
                                    > Interesting. So you are from the "old school"? Do you retain a belief in the basic tenets of Eckankar as taught by Paul? I agree that Harold is a miserable mahanta and would agree that Paul did have some integrity but I believe when Darwin came on board, that's where the path started falling apart. He was like one of those cheating televangelists from what I recall. He also fancied himself as a musician. I can tell you from a professional standpoint, he was absolutely horrible.<GG>
                                    > I don't believe Eckankar is a dangerous cult because we are all responsible for what we believe and the psychic karma they threaten you with if you leave is the same bunk that got you there in the first place. If you are an old time Eckist, doesn't it follow that there should always be a mahanta on the Earth? What is it about the Darwin/Klemp transition that bothers you? Show me where the unbroken lineage of Eck masters exists throughout the ages as Paul proposed. How do you handle the plagiarism? This was all during Twitchell's reign as you know.
                                    > alf
                                    >
                                    > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@> wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > Dear Alf,
                                    > >
                                    > > Call Twitch a charlatan or what you will, but I feel that he had more integrity than Klemp.  That worship temple in Chanhassen, MN - that was Harold's idea, NOT Twitch's!  Twitch would have never gone for it.  In fact, he never even called Eckankar a religion, because he didn't want to fall into all the trappings and stereotypes about religion, anyway.  He also wanted Eckankar to be self supporting, and not hide under the non profit tax umbrella.  This whole idea of bowing down and worshipping that Harold was into, I feel was basically foreign to him.  You see, I got into Eckankar right before Paul's passing, and was involved in it when Darwin was the LEM.  I was really wierded out by the whole Darwin - Harold two masters thing, which soon generated into a feud and a debacle, and instinctively didn't like the changes that I saw Harold put into place, so I left.  I was not really an Eckist, or at least not for very long, anyway, under Harold,
                                    > so,
                                    > >  I haven't really experienced what you all have been through.  I suppose that I was from a totally different era when it came to ECK.
                                    > >
                                    > > My the Eckless Blessings Be!
                                    > > David
                                    > >
                                    > > --- On Sat, 9/17/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                    > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                                    > > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                    > > Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 7:58 PM
                                    > >
                                    > > Etznab,
                                    > >
                                    > > I don't see how Paul's birthday argument plays out in the big picture. Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what he did for 30 years. All I know is that in the last three years of his life he had managed to vibrate his teachings to epic proportions into what is now known as Christianity.
                                    > > If you step back and look at Twitch's record, he was more of a charlatan than a messenger from God. There exists NO proof of Eckankar nor its 900 + masters before 1965. Eckankar purports to be the primary uplink of all religions but has no historical proof to make itself known in sacred texts from anywhere in the world. If Eckists don't like to talk about the facts it is because there are none. Eckankar is a self-absorbing religion where you make up your own private Idaho out of a thin framework they provide. For example, God (or sugmad) is taught to be impersonal and you are a part of that Divine spark. If that's the case, why do they come to "WORSHIP" at the temple in Chanhassen? Worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage. Eckankar is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. The plagiarisms are enough (unto themselves) to turn anyone with common sense away and look elsewhere.
                                    > > I was always stunned by the fierce anger and resentment they had towards naysayers back in the old a.r.e. days. IF they were truly enlightened, they should not have been so vindictive and condescending towards non-believers. By virtue of their own belief system, it would make sense that they would detach themselves from such confrontations and simply chant HU and be God loving soul travelers but many chose to express themselves as bratty, undisciplined little children. 
                                    > > My intention is to not rain on your parade but I have seen you as a tireless poster both in a.r.e. and here in eckankartruth. You seem to be welcome in both because I detect a sincerity in you to know the truth. It just makes me wonder why it's taking so long for you to make up your mind. That's all.
                                    > >
                                    > > Alf
                                    > >
                                    > >  
                                    > >
                                    > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                                    > > >
                                    > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > *********
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                                    > > > > 
                                    > > > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                                    > > > > 
                                    > > > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                                    > > > > 
                                    > > > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                                    > > > > 
                                    > > > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard. 
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > ------------------------------------
                                    > >
                                    > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                    > >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > ------------------------------------
                                    >
                                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                    >
                                  • Paul Olson
                                    I agree with assesment. Except for the declarition that we never grew up. I grew up and that required me leaving the illusions of the past. Eckankar. Joined
                                    Message 17 of 21 , Sep 18, 2011
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      I agree with assesment.  Except for the declarition that we never grew up.
                                      I grew up and that required me leaving the illusions of the past.  Eckankar.
                                      Joined in 1970.  Yep, met Paul and the gang.  Worked hard for this bullshit until I saw a reL light in a out 1998.  6th initiate by then and quit to embrace reality.  I don't post often now.  Too tired of the subject.  I do support your helping others to see the truth of the fraud that is called e kankar.

                                      Paul Olson

                                      Sent from my iPhone

                                      On Sep 18, 2011, at 2:58 PM, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                       

                                      Very interesting! So you actually played along with Darji!I too am a musician and you're so right about timing. Our old drummer had a tendency to slow down in mid-song and it drove me crazy!That's why he's our old drummer.
                                      Did you happen to catch the debate with Darwin and some Christian evangelist on You Tube? Darwin comes off as a complete fool. Sometimes the Christian guy does too but in comparison, Darji just sits there like a hog staring at a wristwatch.
                                      I can see how Paul was attracting people to his Soul Travel. You've got to remember that timing is everything. It was 1965 and Paul had already been well read on Eastern matters with the likes of the famous 50's yogi Premananda. The Beatles went to India and the subculture of the mid 60's was in full swing. (All You Need Is Love). We were protesting everything and tearing down our parent's values and ethics. Whatever they were all about, we were going to do the opposite.
                                      Paul, Guru Maharaji, Baba Ram Dass, ISKCON and a host of westernized Easterners were proliferating and we were clamoring for the exotic teachings of Krishna and the Vedic Scriptures. In lieu of Christianity, we were finding refuge and "knowledge" in ashrams and communes. Unfortunately, we all grew up and became capitalists which put us square in the mess we are in today. Woodstock sucked. Free love was bullshit. Drugs destroyed our roots and we became "free spirits" with no absolutes. We are all older now but we never grew up.
                                      Good to hear from someone who's been there from the beginning. Keep postin' pardner!

                                      Alf

                                      --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > Dear Alf,
                                      >
                                      > I suppose that I would call myself of the "old school" if I had to say one way or the other; definitely, I am NOT of the Harold Klemp "new school". 
                                      >
                                      > You say that Darwin was like a televangelist, and that is an interesting analogy.  And how he ascended to the Mahantaship, and what he did when he got there, as I understand it, had its own share of hush-hush scandals.  And you are probably right about him not being such a great musician, and I should know.  I was one of the flute players in the orchestra, backing up Darwin as he sang his ECK songs.  Although the songs themselves are great, Darwin had a notoriously bad sense of timing when it came to performing them onstage.  We would always be looking up at Darwin to try to get our clues from him as to where he was going with a phrase, and when, in order to synch our playing with his delivery.  Being relatively young and naive then, I just figured that he must just be so ecstatically blissed out, and lost in the Ocean of Love and Mercy that such mundane matters as musical timing were irrelevant, or not important to him from his lofty, exalted
                                      > perspective. 
                                      >
                                      > What confused and bugged me about the two masters period was that these two supposedly God Realized beings, or co-Mahantas, were demonstrating that they were obviously NOT free of certain human foibles like egotism and attachment.  Darwin did not want to let go of his captive audience, especially as a musician, so he tried to hog as much time as he could at Eckankar seminars playing to his adoring crowd of Eckfans.  This caused friction and problems with the Harold Klemp faction, who I believe were trying to look for a way, an opportune moment, to oust Darwin from the organization anyway.  And they finally did.
                                      >
                                      > I never said that Twitch had absolute, or a hundred percent, integrity.  The whole plagiarism thing came as a big shock to me, too as I found Path of the Masters, and started comparing it with Eckankar: Key to Secret Worlds.  But, relatively speaking, Twitch had more integrity than Klemp. 
                                      >
                                      > I hope that this explains things better.
                                      >
                                      > David
                                      >
                                      > --- On Sun, 9/18/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                      > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                                      > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                      > Date: Sunday, September 18, 2011, 7:20 AM
                                      >
                                      > Interesting. So you are from the "old school"? Do you retain a belief in the basic tenets of Eckankar as taught by Paul? I agree that Harold is a miserable mahanta and would agree that Paul did have some integrity but I believe when Darwin came on board, that's where the path started falling apart. He was like one of those cheating televangelists from what I recall. He also fancied himself as a musician. I can tell you from a professional standpoint, he was absolutely horrible.<GG>
                                      > I don't believe Eckankar is a dangerous cult because we are all responsible for what we believe and the psychic karma they threaten you with if you leave is the same bunk that got you there in the first place. If you are an old time Eckist, doesn't it follow that there should always be a mahanta on the Earth? What is it about the Darwin/Klemp transition that bothers you? Show me where the unbroken lineage of Eck masters exists throughout the ages as Paul proposed. How do you handle the plagiarism? This was all during Twitchell's reign as you know.
                                      > alf
                                      >
                                      > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@> wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > > Dear Alf,
                                      > >
                                      > > Call Twitch a charlatan or what you will, but I feel that he had more integrity than Klemp.  That worship temple in Chanhassen, MN - that was Harold's idea, NOT Twitch's!  Twitch would have never gone for it.  In fact, he never even called Eckankar a religion, because he didn't want to fall into all the trappings and stereotypes about religion, anyway.  He also wanted Eckankar to be self supporting, and not hide under the non profit tax umbrella.  This whole idea of bowing down and worshipping that Harold was into, I feel was basically foreign to him.  You see, I got into Eckankar right before Paul's passing, and was involved in it when Darwin was the LEM.  I was really wierded out by the whole Darwin - Harold two masters thing, which soon generated into a feud and a debacle, and instinctively didn't like the changes that I saw Harold put into place, so I left.  I was not really an Eckist, or at least not for very long, anyway, under Harold,
                                      > so,
                                      > >  I haven't really experienced what you all have been through.  I suppose that I was from a totally different era when it came to ECK.
                                      > >
                                      > > My the Eckless Blessings Be!
                                      > > David
                                      > >
                                      > > --- On Sat, 9/17/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                      > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                                      > > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                      > > Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 7:58 PM
                                      > >
                                      > > Etznab,
                                      > >
                                      > > I don't see how Paul's birthday argument plays out in the big picture. Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what he did for 30 years. All I know is that in the last three years of his life he had managed to vibrate his teachings to epic proportions into what is now known as Christianity.
                                      > > If you step back and look at Twitch's record, he was more of a charlatan than a messenger from God. There exists NO proof of Eckankar nor its 900 + masters before 1965. Eckankar purports to be the primary uplink of all religions but has no historical proof to make itself known in sacred texts from anywhere in the world. If Eckists don't like to talk about the facts it is because there are none. Eckankar is a self-absorbing religion where you make up your own private Idaho out of a thin framework they provide. For example, God (or sugmad) is taught to be impersonal and you are a part of that Divine spark. If that's the case, why do they come to "WORSHIP" at the temple in Chanhassen? Worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage. Eckankar is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. The plagiarisms are enough (unto themselves) to turn anyone with common sense away and look elsewhere.
                                      > > I was always stunned by the fierce anger and resentment they had towards naysayers back in the old a.r.e. days. IF they were truly enlightened, they should not have been so vindictive and condescending towards non-believers. By virtue of their own belief system, it would make sense that they would detach themselves from such confrontations and simply chant HU and be God loving soul travelers but many chose to express themselves as bratty, undisciplined little children. 
                                      > > My intention is to not rain on your parade but I have seen you as a tireless poster both in a.r.e. and here in eckankartruth. You seem to be welcome in both because I detect a sincerity in you to know the truth. It just makes me wonder why it's taking so long for you to make up your mind. That's all.
                                      > >
                                      > > Alf
                                      > >
                                      > >  
                                      > >
                                      > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                      > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                                      > > >
                                      > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                                      > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > *********
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                                      > > > > 
                                      > > > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                                      > > > > 
                                      > > > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                                      > > > > 
                                      > > > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                                      > > > > 
                                      > > > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard. 
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > ------------------------------------
                                      > >
                                      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                      > >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > ------------------------------------
                                      >
                                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                      >

                                    • al_radzik
                                      Oh, I didn t mean all of us....just liberals.
                                      Message 18 of 21 , Sep 18, 2011
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Oh, I didn't mean all of us....just liberals.

                                        --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, Paul Olson <Paul@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > I agree with assesment. Except for the declarition that we never grew up.
                                        > I grew up and that required me leaving the illusions of the past. Eckankar.
                                        > Joined in 1970. Yep, met Paul and the gang. Worked hard for this bullshit until I saw a reL light in a out 1998. 6th initiate by then and quit to embrace reality. I don't post often now. Too tired of the subject. I do support your helping others to see the truth of the fraud that is called e kankar.
                                        >
                                        > Paul Olson
                                        >
                                        > Sent from my iPhone
                                        >
                                        > On Sep 18, 2011, at 2:58 PM, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > > Very interesting! So you actually played along with Darji!I too am a musician and you're so right about timing. Our old drummer had a tendency to slow down in mid-song and it drove me crazy!That's why he's our old drummer.
                                        > > Did you happen to catch the debate with Darwin and some Christian evangelist on You Tube? Darwin comes off as a complete fool. Sometimes the Christian guy does too but in comparison, Darji just sits there like a hog staring at a wristwatch.
                                        > > I can see how Paul was attracting people to his Soul Travel. You've got to remember that timing is everything. It was 1965 and Paul had already been well read on Eastern matters with the likes of the famous 50's yogi Premananda. The Beatles went to India and the subculture of the mid 60's was in full swing. (All You Need Is Love). We were protesting everything and tearing down our parent's values and ethics. Whatever they were all about, we were going to do the opposite.
                                        > > Paul, Guru Maharaji, Baba Ram Dass, ISKCON and a host of westernized Easterners were proliferating and we were clamoring for the exotic teachings of Krishna and the Vedic Scriptures. In lieu of Christianity, we were finding refuge and "knowledge" in ashrams and communes. Unfortunately, we all grew up and became capitalists which put us square in the mess we are in today. Woodstock sucked. Free love was bullshit. Drugs destroyed our roots and we became "free spirits" with no absolutes. We are all older now but we never grew up.
                                        > > Good to hear from someone who's been there from the beginning. Keep postin' pardner!
                                        > >
                                        > > Alf
                                        > >
                                        > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@> wrote:
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Dear Alf,
                                        > > >
                                        > > > I suppose that I would call myself of the "old school" if I had to say one way or the other; definitely, I am NOT of the Harold Klemp "new school".
                                        > > >
                                        > > > You say that Darwin was like a televangelist, and that is an interesting analogy. And how he ascended to the Mahantaship, and what he did when he got there, as I understand it, had its own share of hush-hush scandals. And you are probably right about him not being such a great musician, and I should know. I was one of the flute players in the orchestra, backing up Darwin as he sang his ECK songs. Although the songs themselves are great, Darwin had a notoriously bad sense of timing when it came to performing them onstage. We would always be looking up at Darwin to try to get our clues from him as to where he was going with a phrase, and when, in order to synch our playing with his delivery. Being relatively young and naive then, I just figured that he must just be so ecstatically blissed out, and lost in the Ocean of Love and Mercy that such mundane matters as musical timing were irrelevant, or not important to him from his lofty, exalted
                                        > > > perspective.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > What confused and bugged me about the two masters period was that these two supposedly God Realized beings, or co-Mahantas, were demonstrating that they were obviously NOT free of certain human foibles like egotism and attachment. Darwin did not want to let go of his captive audience, especially as a musician, so he tried to hog as much time as he could at Eckankar seminars playing to his adoring crowd of Eckfans. This caused friction and problems with the Harold Klemp faction, who I believe were trying to look for a way, an opportune moment, to oust Darwin from the organization anyway. And they finally did.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > I never said that Twitch had absolute, or a hundred percent, integrity. The whole plagiarism thing came as a big shock to me, too as I found Path of the Masters, and started comparing it with Eckankar: Key to Secret Worlds. But, relatively speaking, Twitch had more integrity than Klemp.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > I hope that this explains things better.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > David
                                        > > >
                                        > > > --- On Sun, 9/18/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                        > > >
                                        > > > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                        > > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                                        > > > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                        > > > Date: Sunday, September 18, 2011, 7:20 AM
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Interesting. So you are from the "old school"? Do you retain a belief in the basic tenets of Eckankar as taught by Paul? I agree that Harold is a miserable mahanta and would agree that Paul did have some integrity but I believe when Darwin came on board, that's where the path started falling apart. He was like one of those cheating televangelists from what I recall. He also fancied himself as a musician. I can tell you from a professional standpoint, he was absolutely horrible.<GG>
                                        > > > I don't believe Eckankar is a dangerous cult because we are all responsible for what we believe and the psychic karma they threaten you with if you leave is the same bunk that got you there in the first place. If you are an old time Eckist, doesn't it follow that there should always be a mahanta on the Earth? What is it about the Darwin/Klemp transition that bothers you? Show me where the unbroken lineage of Eck masters exists throughout the ages as Paul proposed. How do you handle the plagiarism? This was all during Twitchell's reign as you know.
                                        > > > alf
                                        > > >
                                        > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@> wrote:
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > Dear Alf,
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > Call Twitch a charlatan or what you will, but I feel that he had more integrity than Klemp. That worship temple in Chanhassen, MN - that was Harold's idea, NOT Twitch's! Twitch would have never gone for it. In fact, he never even called Eckankar a religion, because he didn't want to fall into all the trappings and stereotypes about religion, anyway. He also wanted Eckankar to be self supporting, and not hide under the non profit tax umbrella. This whole idea of bowing down and worshipping that Harold was into, I feel was basically foreign to him. You see, I got into Eckankar right before Paul's passing, and was involved in it when Darwin was the LEM. I was really wierded out by the whole Darwin - Harold two masters thing, which soon generated into a feud and a debacle, and instinctively didn't like the changes that I saw Harold put into place, so I left. I was not really an Eckist, or at least not for very long, anyway, under Harold,
                                        > > > so,
                                        > > > > I haven't really experienced what you all have been through. I suppose that I was from a totally different era when it came to ECK.
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > My the Eckless Blessings Be!
                                        > > > > David
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > --- On Sat, 9/17/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                        > > > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                                        > > > > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                        > > > > Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 7:58 PM
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > Etznab,
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > I don't see how Paul's birthday argument plays out in the big picture. Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what he did for 30 years. All I know is that in the last three years of his life he had managed to vibrate his teachings to epic proportions into what is now known as Christianity.
                                        > > > > If you step back and look at Twitch's record, he was more of a charlatan than a messenger from God. There exists NO proof of Eckankar nor its 900 + masters before 1965. Eckankar purports to be the primary uplink of all religions but has no historical proof to make itself known in sacred texts from anywhere in the world. If Eckists don't like to talk about the facts it is because there are none. Eckankar is a self-absorbing religion where you make up your own private Idaho out of a thin framework they provide. For example, God (or sugmad) is taught to be impersonal and you are a part of that Divine spark. If that's the case, why do they come to "WORSHIP" at the temple in Chanhassen? Worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage. Eckankar is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. The plagiarisms are enough (unto themselves) to turn anyone with common sense away and look elsewhere.
                                        > > > > I was always stunned by the fierce anger and resentment they had towards naysayers back in the old a.r.e. days. IF they were truly enlightened, they should not have been so vindictive and condescending towards non-believers. By virtue of their own belief system, it would make sense that they would detach themselves from such confrontations and simply chant HU and be God loving soul travelers but many chose to express themselves as bratty, undisciplined little children.
                                        > > > > My intention is to not rain on your parade but I have seen you as a tireless poster both in a.r.e. and here in eckankartruth. You seem to be welcome in both because I detect a sincerity in you to know the truth. It just makes me wonder why it's taking so long for you to make up your mind. That's all.
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > Alf
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > *********
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard.
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > ------------------------------------
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                        > > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > > ------------------------------------
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                        > > >
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        >
                                      • harrisonferrel
                                        The Rick Perry porn picture (how s that for alliteration?) is one of those items that are there for the public to see if they d only do a little homework. It s
                                        Message 19 of 21 , Sep 19, 2011
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          The Rick Perry porn picture (how's that for alliteration?) is one of those items that are there for the public to see if they'd only do a little homework. It's like all the dirt on Sarah Palin, Bush and the rest of these criminals.

                                          Here's a link http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/18/1008220/-Rick-Perry-Has-A-BIG-PORN-Problem!



                                          --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@...> wrote:
                                          >
                                          > But - but - but...  How can Rick Perry loudly proclaim his Christian faith, and be the featured speaker at all these evangelical Christian rallies if he is heavily invested in the porn industry?! 
                                          >
                                          > (How am I doing at feigning naivete?  Or is my facetiousness showing through?)
                                          >
                                          > And how did you come across this juicy little tidbit about Rick Perry?  It would be nice, if he became the Republican nominee, for the Democrats to save it, and drop it like a bombshell as an October surprise right before the election.
                                          >
                                          > It would be nice if the Democrats had the guts and the integrity to drop Obama and move on, and get behind someone who is a real progressive.  Or will this coming presidential election be the greatest case of "the lesser of two evils" that the country - or even the world - has ever seen?
                                          >
                                          > In US politics, if the two major parties and their candidates leave too much to be desired, then someone forms a third party, whose candidate never wins, but merely siphons off voters from the major party candidate who most closely resembles him.  In the world of light and sound cults, a new "Eckspawn" group simply splinters off and forms.
                                          >
                                          > David
                                          >
                                          > --- On Sat, 9/17/11, harrisonferrel <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                          >
                                          > From: harrisonferrel <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                          > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                                          > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                          > Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 4:59 PM
                                          >
                                          > I remain absolutely amazed how truth has no effect on people. With a family member still in this cult, and despite all of the lies, treachery, debunking, slander, and deceit that is provably attributable to eckankar and its cult leaders, nothing makes a bit of difference to some people.
                                          >
                                          > It's the same in politics. You can point out that Rick Perry is invested in the porn industry (which he is) or that there were no weapons of mass destruction, but people will follow the lie rather than having the guts and good sense to get out and begin anew.
                                          >
                                          > I have no idea exactly why good people stay in eckankar when it is obvious that it's a scam, but that's the way some people are. Facts just don't mean shit to them.
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                                          > >
                                          > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > *********
                                          > > >
                                          > > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                                          > > > 
                                          > > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                                          > > > 
                                          > > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                                          > > > 
                                          > > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                                          > > > 
                                          > > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard. 
                                          > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > Alf,
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > I wrote a response just today, but shortly afterward learned that it was undeliverable. The reason was that my Yahoo account was bouncing e-mails again! I have to admit, I've never seen so much bouncing than I have in this past year. Something is causing this, but I don't know what.
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > Maybe I'll retrieve copy & paste the original message when there is time, but not going to spend any more time on e-mail right now.
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, al_radzik <no_reply@> wrote:
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > Etznab,
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > >   You claim to be an Eckist but challenge many of the beliefs. You seem to sit on the fence and bring up the age old a.r.e. arguments regarding Paul's birthday; his whereabouts as a child; Steiger's book, plagiarism etc. Have you perused the early years or a.r.e? Have you read David Lane's expose'? I would think by now you would have caught on that this so-called spiritual path has been sufficiently debunked and laid to rest for all but the few followers left.
                                          > > > > > If you ARE an Eckist, what exactly is in it for you? What kind of spiritual nourishment do you receive in spite of all the overwhelming evidence that Twitchell was a liar?
                                          > > > > > I would never deny you the right to believe in whatever you want but of all the religions and cults I have studied over the past several decades, this is the one that is blatantly lacking in any truthful sources or spiritual value...IMHO.
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > Alf
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > [alt.religion.eckankar repost - 09/04/11]
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Unscrambling the Pieces
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Paul loved his privacy. Early in his youth he was involved in a
                                          > > > > > > variety of activities, but he made it a point to obscure any facts
                                          > > > > > > associated with his life. In so doing, he left a trail so clouded that
                                          > > > > > > it's going to take our historians years to piece it together. [....]
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > You don't say? On the same page, the paragraph above read:
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > There are several different versions of the date Paul was born into
                                          > > > > > > this life. One person I talked to said the Twitchell family Bible
                                          > > > > > > recorded the year as 1910; another person, who also told me he'd seen
                                          > > > > > > the family Bible, said Paul's birthdate was shown as 1908. It's
                                          > > > > > > amazing how certain each person was that he knew the truth. Each one
                                          > > > > > > claimed to have seen it with his own eyes. So by some accounts, he was
                                          > > > > > > born on October 23, 1908 or 1910, while other accounts give the date
                                          > > > > > > as October 22.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > How about 1909? Based on the Kentucky Census (believed conducted in
                                          > > > > > > the spring)of 1910 suggesting that Paul was 6 months old?
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > OK. Why does this stuff even matter? Perhap's it's all about
                                          > > > > > > unscrambling the pieces and determining fact from fiction.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Researching the lineage of Eck Masters, or when Paul Twitchell came to
                                          > > > > > > contact an Eck Master, one is naturally drawn to the mid 1930's
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > "Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in the foothills of the
                                          > > > > > > Himalayas near Darjeeling. Before that on his first trip to India in
                                          > > > > > > 1935, he met Sudar Singh. We are still looking for information on
                                          > > > > > > Sudar Singh. We have gotten a lot of reports about an individual named
                                          > > > > > > Sundar Singh, who is not the same person at all.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > "Somebody asked Paul why he didn't simply look into the ECK-Vidya
                                          > > > > > > whenever he needed to know something. He said he didn't want to take
                                          > > > > > > all the surprise and adventure out of life. I feel the same way. It's
                                          > > > > > > more fun to find out yourself rather than be told. This is why the ECK
                                          > > > > > > initiates go out and find material about Sudar Singh themselves."
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man2.html
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Hey now! 1935. That's the ticket!
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > >  ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic of
                                          > > > > > > Allahabad, in the summer of 1938, when I visited him with my step-
                                          > > > > > > sister." [Based on: ECKANKAR-The Key to Secret Worlds, by Paul
                                          > > > > > > Twitchell, Chap. 10, 3rd paragraph]
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > 1938 was later edited out. See 1988 version, p. 169-170.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > >    ". . . I found this to be true of Sudar Singh, the strange mystic
                                          > > > > > > of Allahabad, the summer I visited him with my half sister."
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > What is wrong with this picture? Paul Twitchell was apparently NOT a
                                          > > > > > > teenager in the mid 1930's but, in fact, had already graduated high
                                          > > > > > > school and been to college already!
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > How could Paul Twitchell have been a teenager when he (reportedly)
                                          > > > > > > went to Paris, France? Or later stayed at Sudar Singh's ashram in
                                          > > > > > > India for about a year?
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Unscrambling the pieces? For heaven's sake! What pieces?
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > "It was upon their return to Paris that Paul met Sudar Singh for the
                                          > > > > > > first time. The Indian holy man was lecturing in France in an effort
                                          > > > > > > to gain sincere disciples."
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
                                          > > > > > > 51]
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > "[...] Sudar Singh was silent for several moments before he spoke. 'Am
                                          > > > > > > I to understand that you would like to return with me to my spiritual
                                          > > > > > > retreat in Allahabad?'
                                          > > > > > >    " 'That is my wish,' Kay-Dee said emphatically. 'Paul?' [....] Kay-
                                          > > > > > > Dee and Paul lived in Sudar Singh's ashram for nearly a year before
                                          > > > > > > the irate Grands managed to haul them home."
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
                                          > > > > > > 52]
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > "This year in India was not spent totally in an attitude of holy
                                          > > > > > > learning. Paul had reached his sixteenth birthday [1925?], and he
                                          > > > > > > decided that he needed a furlough from the ashram. He traveled to
                                          > > > > > > Bombay, put up in a hotel, and then set out in search of a   holy man
                                          > > > > > > who Sudar Singh had said was extremely wise in the ways of God."
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > [Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE, by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p.
                                          > > > > > > 53]
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Nice going Paul / Brad!
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Brad Steiger's book most likely introduced a number of people to Paul
                                          > > > > > > Twitchell and Eckankar for the first time. However, Paris, Kentucky
                                          > > > > > > (where Paul Twitchell's sister allegedly DID go to college) is NOT
                                          > > > > > > Paris, France! And for those who might argue it was an "inner"
                                          > > > > > > journey, that is NOT how the context reads in the book I quoted from.
                                          > > > > > > Including the stay in an ashram for nearly a year.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > I have a question. Why didn't Harold Klemp consult the "mahanta
                                          > > > > > > consciousness" to determine Paul Twitchell's actual D.O.B.? Why didn't
                                          > > > > > > he do the research and consult the 1910 Kentucky Census? Umm ... or
                                          > > > > > > why hasn't the latest research about Paul Twitchell's birthdate been
                                          > > > > > > added to the official Eckankar website instead of Harold Klemp's 1984
                                          > > > > > > reference to 1908, or 1910? If the 1909 D.O.B. is the correct year,
                                          > > > > > > then why isn't it there? After a quick scan of pages about Paul
                                          > > > > > > Twitchell at the official Eckankar website I found the year 1909
                                          > > > > > > mentioned NADA times!
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Is it really more fun to find out yourself - rather than be told -
                                          > > > > > > about the life of Paul Twitchell and his contacts with Eckankar
                                          > > > > > > Masters, etc.? If that were the case then why did Paul Twitchell and
                                          > > > > > > other Eck Masters write about and tell people already about all these
                                          > > > > > > things? In order to keep the pieces scrambled and just so people could
                                          > > > > > > have fun unscrambling them?
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > My understanding is that it's incumbent on the leader of Eckankar, the
                                          > > > > > > Living Eck Master, to update the teachings of Eckankar. Problem is,
                                          > > > > > > how does one unscramble the pieces of their predecessors? Especially
                                          > > > > > > the founder? Apparently, it is incumbent upon the members of Eckankar
                                          > > > > > > too - not to mention anybody reading about Eckankar period - to
                                          > > > > > > unscramble some of the pieces.
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > What has it led to? What the result of people attempting to unscramble
                                          > > > > > > the pieces?
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/topics?hl=en&start=
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.eckankar/topics?lnk=rgh&pli=1
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous/
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eckankartruth/
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/dispBB.aspx
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/rsch3.html
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > http://webspace.webring.com/people/de/eckcult/chapters/tmsm1.html
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > http://www.littleknownpubs.com/DialogIntro.htm
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Did it really have to take all that? And, Was [AND IS IT STILL] really
                                          > > > > > > more fun?
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > > > Comments go here :)
                                          > > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > ------------------------------------
                                          >
                                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                          >
                                        • harrisonferrel
                                          Wow, suggesting that Twitchell was better than Klemp is like saying AIDS is better than cancer. Twitchell was a conman, liar, thief and perhaps even sociopath.
                                          Message 20 of 21 , Sep 19, 2011
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Wow, suggesting that Twitchell was better than Klemp is like saying AIDS is better than cancer.


                                            Twitchell was a conman, liar, thief and perhaps even sociopath. He started a cult, lied about its beginnings and his experiences, plagiarized most of his books (and for those who may be fuzzy on this topic, plagiarism means STEALING), etc. He was no kind of example of ethics. That makes him a rotten son of a bitch. Klemp is no better for all the nonsense he's done over the years.


                                            ---------------------------
                                            --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@...> wrote:
                                            >
                                            > Dear Alf,
                                            >
                                            > Call Twitch a charlatan or what you will, but I feel that he had more integrity than Klemp.  That worship temple in Chanhassen, MN - that was Harold's idea, NOT Twitch's!  Twitch would have never gone for it.  In fact, he never even called Eckankar a religion, because he didn't want to fall into all the trappings and stereotypes about religion, anyway.  He also wanted Eckankar to be self supporting, and not hide under the non profit tax umbrella.  This whole idea of bowing down and worshipping that Harold was into, I feel was basically foreign to him.  You see, I got into Eckankar right before Paul's passing, and was involved in it when Darwin was the LEM.  I was really wierded out by the whole Darwin - Harold two masters thing, which soon generated into a feud and a debacle, and instinctively didn't like the changes that I saw Harold put into place, so I left.  I was not really an Eckist, or at least not for very long, anyway, under Harold, so,
                                            > I haven't really experienced what you all have been through.  I suppose that I was from a totally different era when it came to ECK.
                                            >
                                            > My the Eckless Blessings Be!
                                            > David
                                            >
                                            > --- On Sat, 9/17/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                            >
                                            > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                            > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                                            > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                            > Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 7:58 PM
                                            >
                                            > Etznab,
                                            >
                                            > I don't see how Paul's birthday argument plays out in the big picture. Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what he did for 30 years. All I know is that in the last three years of his life he had managed to vibrate his teachings to epic proportions into what is now known as Christianity.
                                            > If you step back and look at Twitch's record, he was more of a charlatan than a messenger from God. There exists NO proof of Eckankar nor its 900 + masters before 1965. Eckankar purports to be the primary uplink of all religions but has no historical proof to make itself known in sacred texts from anywhere in the world. If Eckists don't like to talk about the facts it is because there are none. Eckankar is a self-absorbing religion where you make up your own private Idaho out of a thin framework they provide. For example, God (or sugmad) is taught to be impersonal and you are a part of that Divine spark. If that's the case, why do they come to "WORSHIP" at the temple in Chanhassen? Worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage. Eckankar is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. The plagiarisms are enough (unto themselves) to turn anyone with common sense away and look elsewhere.
                                            > I was always stunned by the fierce anger and resentment they had towards naysayers back in the old a.r.e. days. IF they were truly enlightened, they should not have been so vindictive and condescending towards non-believers. By virtue of their own belief system, it would make sense that they would detach themselves from such confrontations and simply chant HU and be God loving soul travelers but many chose to express themselves as bratty, undisciplined little children. 
                                            > My intention is to not rain on your parade but I have seen you as a tireless poster both in a.r.e. and here in eckankartruth. You seem to be welcome in both because I detect a sincerity in you to know the truth. It just makes me wonder why it's taking so long for you to make up your mind. That's all.
                                            >
                                            > Alf
                                            >
                                            >  
                                            >
                                            > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                                            > >
                                            > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                                            > > >
                                            > > > *********
                                            > > >
                                            > > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                                            > > > 
                                            > > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                                            > > > 
                                            > > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                                            > > > 
                                            > > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                                            > > > 
                                            > > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard. 
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > ------------------------------------
                                            >
                                            > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                            >
                                          • al_radzik
                                            Is there anyone alive who can give any account of Twitchell s life? Is his ex -wife still breathing? I d be curious to hear from any of his closest circle who
                                            Message 21 of 21 , Sep 20, 2011
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Is there anyone alive who can give any account of Twitchell's life? Is his ex -wife still breathing? I'd be curious to hear from any of his closest circle who may have fallen from the path who could comment on the veracity of his motives and his well-cloaked biography.
                                              This may be old news, but didn't Kirpal Singh reject one of Paul's books so Twitch revised his name to Sudar Singh only to become Rebazar Tarzs later on? When you step back and look at the whole picture and all the sources, it really doesn't look good for Twitch but then again, Casey Anthony was found not guilty.

                                              --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, harrisonferrel <no_reply@...> wrote:
                                              >
                                              > Wow, suggesting that Twitchell was better than Klemp is like saying AIDS is better than cancer.
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > Twitchell was a conman, liar, thief and perhaps even sociopath. He started a cult, lied about its beginnings and his experiences, plagiarized most of his books (and for those who may be fuzzy on this topic, plagiarism means STEALING), etc. He was no kind of example of ethics. That makes him a rotten son of a bitch. Klemp is no better for all the nonsense he's done over the years.
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > ---------------------------
                                              > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@> wrote:
                                              > >
                                              > > Dear Alf,
                                              > >
                                              > > Call Twitch a charlatan or what you will, but I feel that he had more integrity than Klemp.  That worship temple in Chanhassen, MN - that was Harold's idea, NOT Twitch's!  Twitch would have never gone for it.  In fact, he never even called Eckankar a religion, because he didn't want to fall into all the trappings and stereotypes about religion, anyway.  He also wanted Eckankar to be self supporting, and not hide under the non profit tax umbrella.  This whole idea of bowing down and worshipping that Harold was into, I feel was basically foreign to him.  You see, I got into Eckankar right before Paul's passing, and was involved in it when Darwin was the LEM.  I was really wierded out by the whole Darwin - Harold two masters thing, which soon generated into a feud and a debacle, and instinctively didn't like the changes that I saw Harold put into place, so I left.  I was not really an Eckist, or at least not for very long, anyway, under Harold, so,
                                              > > I haven't really experienced what you all have been through.  I suppose that I was from a totally different era when it came to ECK.
                                              > >
                                              > > My the Eckless Blessings Be!
                                              > > David
                                              > >
                                              > > --- On Sat, 9/17/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                              > >
                                              > > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                                              > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
                                              > > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
                                              > > Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 7:58 PM
                                              > >
                                              > > Etznab,
                                              > >
                                              > > I don't see how Paul's birthday argument plays out in the big picture. Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what he did for 30 years. All I know is that in the last three years of his life he had managed to vibrate his teachings to epic proportions into what is now known as Christianity.
                                              > > If you step back and look at Twitch's record, he was more of a charlatan than a messenger from God. There exists NO proof of Eckankar nor its 900 + masters before 1965. Eckankar purports to be the primary uplink of all religions but has no historical proof to make itself known in sacred texts from anywhere in the world. If Eckists don't like to talk about the facts it is because there are none. Eckankar is a self-absorbing religion where you make up your own private Idaho out of a thin framework they provide. For example, God (or sugmad) is taught to be impersonal and you are a part of that Divine spark. If that's the case, why do they come to "WORSHIP" at the temple in Chanhassen? Worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage. Eckankar is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. The plagiarisms are enough (unto themselves) to turn anyone with common sense away and look elsewhere.
                                              > > I was always stunned by the fierce anger and resentment they had towards naysayers back in the old a.r.e. days. IF they were truly enlightened, they should not have been so vindictive and condescending towards non-believers. By virtue of their own belief system, it would make sense that they would detach themselves from such confrontations and simply chant HU and be God loving soul travelers but many chose to express themselves as bratty, undisciplined little children. 
                                              > > My intention is to not rain on your parade but I have seen you as a tireless poster both in a.r.e. and here in eckankartruth. You seem to be welcome in both because I detect a sincerity in you to know the truth. It just makes me wonder why it's taking so long for you to make up your mind. That's all.
                                              > >
                                              > > Alf
                                              > >
                                              > >  
                                              > >
                                              > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                              > > >
                                              > > >
                                              > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
                                              > > >
                                              > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
                                              > > >
                                              > > >
                                              > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > *********
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
                                              > > > > 
                                              > > > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
                                              > > > > 
                                              > > > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
                                              > > > > 
                                              > > > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
                                              > > > > 
                                              > > > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard. 
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > > ------------------------------------
                                              > >
                                              > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                              > >
                                              >
                                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.