Continuing my regular reporting to c/Conspiracies, OP made a new statement about Christians being "welcome" which I initially read as welcoming me to operate within the rules. However, a brief exchange by modmail indicates this is not the intent, and that there's a disconnect between the idea that Christians are (all) welcome and the continuing idea that Christians can be permabanned at mod discretion without recourse. I see these as essentially contradictory, but Seeker is not aware of how the perception of contradiction hurts his cause.
On the ban modmail "You can no longer post in TheNarrowWay." I wrote: "Thank you for your new rules comment. Any chance you can unban me from c/TheNarrowWay, so that I can seek to ask supportive questions about The Way and Original Christianity, please?"
Seeker wrote from his own account "TheNarrowWay Ban Appeal Inquiry": "I didn't make any new rules comment(s). Ban remains as is. Appeal denied. No further or future appeals please." (Incidentally, Seeker, if you wish to keep the reply as coming from the same modmail account instead of from your personal account, just reply from the individual message page in the modmail tool.)
So it appears that I, and any others who have been banned by this account, will remain so even as Christians are "welcome".
TLDR: How long can Seeker practice all the extremist, absolutist, censorian, manipulative control tropes while pretending also that he is fighting them? When will he realize what everyone else does, that he is being just as abusive as those who have abused him, or more so, and that he has need of external assistance for reconciliation, not just feeling good about Self, but also having right relations with Other, as determined by Other and not just by Self? Omphaloskeptics become ouroboroi.
So it appears that I, and any others who have been banned by this account, will remain so even as Christians are "welcome".
Yep. Suck it up and deal with it.
You and u/Thisisnotanexit are not welcome there. Other Christians are. In the Welcome message I stated: "Appeals that are attacks on the mod will not be reconsidered.". u/Thisisnnotanexit made an appeal on your behalf and stated: "Would you be willing not to perma ban so quickly? This is getting pretty power trippy to me. There are a few boards on power trips and I just don't understand it, these are discussion boards right?". Like I had said, appeals that are attacks on the mod will not be reconsidered.
Please also consider the paragraph: "Rule 1 above is designed to maintain the spirit of the forum and keep bad faith users away. If you agree or disagree and want to ask questions, make comments, post, discuss, and the like with what's posted here, that is fine. Please remember that comments/posts here are subject to removal at mod discretion and bans issued at mod discretion, and egregious behavior like targeted harassment, manipulation, spam, and etc. will be subject to comment/post removal, and possible ban (depending upon severity and intent of mod discernment). Appeals can be made if you disagree with a ban and "no appeal" is not stated in the message. Appeals that are attacks on the mod will not be reconsidered.".
u/Thisisnotanexit was banned because she came to the forum to publicly attack me as power tripping for banning you after I had told her my issues with you chronically harassing me. You keep trying to provoke me and publicly humiliate me in order to manipulate my behavior. You're engaging in DARVO tactics as you slander me saying: "How long can Seeker practice all the extremist, absolutist, censorian, manipulative control tropes while pretending also that he is fighting them?".
You and u/Thisisnotanexit have been acting in bad faith towards. me, and you're behavior is targeting me to try and cause me distress while playing the victim. You know I have brain damage, and you delight in targeting me to try and cause me psychological distress. It's sadistic behavior. I'm not repealing your ban when you slander me and continue to target me for harassment.
u/Paleo, can you please tell u/SwampRangers to stop harassing me and consider banning him from the platform. I'm trying to do my own thing and Swamp's stalking me and trying to provoke me so he can claim victim and slander me.
I was trying to communicate rationally with you, I would like to keep trying. Auto perma bans are to be used sparingly from what I understand but we have quite a few communties going out of their way to ban people they don't like, it's weird and it's petty. Just ignore who you don't like. You aren't the gatekeeper of 'the narrow way' or 'seekers of the way' and alternative views should be allowed for discourse even if the discourse isn't with you.
You don't have the authority to get to decide, control, or micromanage how I run any forum I mod.
I don't want you to keep trying to help me. Stop it please. I don't like talking to you.
I am allowing for others to come on that forum and have discourse with me and others in good faith. That means people coming to have actual discourse and not attacking me about stuff not regarding what's on the forum like you did, and someone like Swamp who treats me as a conversion target and harasses me.
They're all on the same side, Paleo is no exception. There's no neutral ground with them, it's their way or the highway. TINAE likes to act like she's got power when she doesn't.
I'm not familiar with Paleo. We'll see what he says I guess if/when he responds. I have doubt that Swamp and TINAE would really like my two forums to be kicked down the highway lol. Yea, had TINAE simply asked me why I banned Swamp instead of trying to assert a power she didn't have I think it would've gone over a lot better. I find dumb when she says she tried to communicate rationally with me, and she obviously tried to communicate emotionally.
Since you're talking about what I'd like, I'd like for you to be absolutely committed to The Way. The person who is absolutely committed deals with his lapses on others' terms instead of trying to cover them up on his own terms. When you are absolutely committed, we won't have trouble communicating.
Wow. It's crazy how like she goes on needing rules and regulations so that someone without self control won't overrun the community, yet she doesn't realize that's what I'm doing as well with mine and I'm getting called an extremist over it.
u/Thisisnotanexit was banned because she came to the forum to publicly attack me as power tripping for banning you after I had told her my issues with you chronically harassing me.
I appreciate your sharing your thoughts! By pinging Paleo you're expressing your desire again for a third party to step in between us, a desire which I've pointed out can be resolved instantly by your simply saying "Agreed" to this draft proposal on voluntary interaction ban. The fact that you don't, so far, suggests that you're not comfortable with your own terms and so the best approach for that is your continuing to define those terms in ways that I or a third party can affirm.
You logically have two options. Bilateral: We agree on terms (which you can currently do with as little as a single word). Unilateral: We continue each doing whatever we believe right (which is the default and which was the note on which the Soul account left matters):
You don't have the option of remaining logical while you accuse me of continuously harassing and stalking you and while also you refuse agreement by which all the actions you categorize as harassing and stalking would end. You either act like a person who cares that they end, or you act like a person who doesn't care that they end, but not both and remain logical.
If you agree on voluntary interaction ban, then I can leave you to consider the next trap (your playing the victim card) in silence, rather than to encourage you to rise above it. If you don't agree, then status quo continues.
Add: I was just reading Teresa's Interior Castle last night just as you were today, so we are on the same wavelength and it would be nice to talk about. It would be a pity for this opportunity for better understanding to be bypassed.
I'm really appreciative that you took the time to write this theory of emanations, and to affirm your oneness with Bartholomew. Given your depth of study, I hope you don't mind my asking questions to see where such realization takes us.
I'm interested in knowing, is anyone else on earth right now "one from which the name of the disciple of Yeshua known as Bartholomew was derived from"? Obviously if there's only one we should pay great attention to the phenomenon, and if there's more than one we should aspire to match the phenomenon, so I'd like to know which.
stop embracing division and start embracing unity
Excellent!
We could live in peace and harmony, even in our differences if only we would give up the conflict and embrace living in peace and harmony, rejecting those who say it's not possible; those who seek to keep us divided and want us divided.
Great; how, without conflict or division, does one distance from and create boundaries against and reject those who say peace is impossible? Healthy boundaries without division, I'll need to think about what that could mean.
To succeed in something and give birth to life, wholeness, and harmony we must first believe such a state is possible and direct our entire Body, Mind, and Soul towards achieving such a state, never looking back and embracing the old ways that bring death and division.
Those who claim to believe in God and promote the concept of the importance of having faith, saying that with God all things are possible will often say that being perfect is impossible for people to achieve and thus display their lack of faith in the basic implications of the common beliefs they hold on to, even though their sacred text calls them to such a state.
God doesn't dwell in man's reason that man builds up claiming that it's God's truth and that salvation is found through their institutions by believing this or that thing, or by having faith in this or that event.
Affirmed!
Jesus is an allegorical symbolic portrayal of what we are to become ourselves
So, does that mean that this "Christ" we are to become was also modeled uniquely by the paradigm of whatever living person contributed the most to getting the Jesus narrative transmitted, whether that person was Yeshua or Bartholomew or someone else?
It is so that one stuck in a negative cycle that leads to death will see death as life, and view life as death being convinced they see the truth
Does that mean that if a person claims that the spectrum measures only units of death and that there are no units of life, this is less true and life-affirming than the one who claims units of life and no units of death, such that there's a qualitative difference that can be agreed on regardless of whether one values life (connection to Source) or values death (disconnection from Source)?
a true non-existent type of annihilation cannot happen.
Insightful.
There exists, realities which we are unable to know
Then how do you know to say that, unless you mean we are unable to know perfectly what we can know partially?
The first incompleteness theorem states that no consistent system of axioms whose theorems can be listed by an effective procedure (i.e. an algorithm) is capable of proving all truths about the arithmetic of natural numbers.
Wouldn't we conclude then that whatever is capable of proving all truths must not be algorithmically listable (i.e. it must be infinite), a logos that transcends systematic logic? It seems to me the logos must transcend both logic and illogic (though there is a difference) for it to be monality.
Continuing my regular reporting to c/Conspiracies, OP made a new statement about Christians being "welcome" which I initially read as welcoming me to operate within the rules. However, a brief exchange by modmail indicates this is not the intent, and that there's a disconnect between the idea that Christians are (all) welcome and the continuing idea that Christians can be permabanned at mod discretion without recourse. I see these as essentially contradictory, but Seeker is not aware of how the perception of contradiction hurts his cause.
On the ban modmail "You can no longer post in TheNarrowWay." I wrote: "Thank you for your new rules comment. Any chance you can unban me from c/TheNarrowWay, so that I can seek to ask supportive questions about The Way and Original Christianity, please?"
Seeker wrote from his own account "TheNarrowWay Ban Appeal Inquiry": "I didn't make any new rules comment(s). Ban remains as is. Appeal denied. No further or future appeals please." (Incidentally, Seeker, if you wish to keep the reply as coming from the same modmail account instead of from your personal account, just reply from the individual message page in the modmail tool.)
So it appears that I, and any others who have been banned by this account, will remain so even as Christians are "welcome".
TLDR: How long can Seeker practice all the extremist, absolutist, censorian, manipulative control tropes while pretending also that he is fighting them? When will he realize what everyone else does, that he is being just as abusive as those who have abused him, or more so, and that he has need of external assistance for reconciliation, not just feeling good about Self, but also having right relations with Other, as determined by Other and not just by Self? Omphaloskeptics become ouroboroi.
Yep. Suck it up and deal with it.
You and u/Thisisnotanexit are not welcome there. Other Christians are. In the Welcome message I stated: "Appeals that are attacks on the mod will not be reconsidered.". u/Thisisnnotanexit made an appeal on your behalf and stated: "Would you be willing not to perma ban so quickly? This is getting pretty power trippy to me. There are a few boards on power trips and I just don't understand it, these are discussion boards right?". Like I had said, appeals that are attacks on the mod will not be reconsidered.
Please also consider the paragraph: "Rule 1 above is designed to maintain the spirit of the forum and keep bad faith users away. If you agree or disagree and want to ask questions, make comments, post, discuss, and the like with what's posted here, that is fine. Please remember that comments/posts here are subject to removal at mod discretion and bans issued at mod discretion, and egregious behavior like targeted harassment, manipulation, spam, and etc. will be subject to comment/post removal, and possible ban (depending upon severity and intent of mod discernment). Appeals can be made if you disagree with a ban and "no appeal" is not stated in the message. Appeals that are attacks on the mod will not be reconsidered.".
u/Thisisnotanexit was banned because she came to the forum to publicly attack me as power tripping for banning you after I had told her my issues with you chronically harassing me. You keep trying to provoke me and publicly humiliate me in order to manipulate my behavior. You're engaging in DARVO tactics as you slander me saying: "How long can Seeker practice all the extremist, absolutist, censorian, manipulative control tropes while pretending also that he is fighting them?".
You and u/Thisisnotanexit have been acting in bad faith towards. me, and you're behavior is targeting me to try and cause me distress while playing the victim. You know I have brain damage, and you delight in targeting me to try and cause me psychological distress. It's sadistic behavior. I'm not repealing your ban when you slander me and continue to target me for harassment.
u/Paleo, can you please tell u/SwampRangers to stop harassing me and consider banning him from the platform. I'm trying to do my own thing and Swamp's stalking me and trying to provoke me so he can claim victim and slander me.
I was trying to communicate rationally with you, I would like to keep trying. Auto perma bans are to be used sparingly from what I understand but we have quite a few communties going out of their way to ban people they don't like, it's weird and it's petty. Just ignore who you don't like. You aren't the gatekeeper of 'the narrow way' or 'seekers of the way' and alternative views should be allowed for discourse even if the discourse isn't with you.
They're all on the same side, Paleo is no exception. There's no neutral ground with them, it's their way or the highway. TINAE likes to act like she's got power when she doesn't.
I'm not familiar with Paleo. We'll see what he says I guess if/when he responds. I have doubt that Swamp and TINAE would really like my two forums to be kicked down the highway lol. Yea, had TINAE simply asked me why I banned Swamp instead of trying to assert a power she didn't have I think it would've gone over a lot better. I find dumb when she says she tried to communicate rationally with me, and she obviously tried to communicate emotionally.
Since you're talking about what I'd like, I'd like for you to be absolutely committed to The Way. The person who is absolutely committed deals with his lapses on others' terms instead of trying to cover them up on his own terms. When you are absolutely committed, we won't have trouble communicating.
She's a typical reddit mod Karen. She hates her own medicine.
Wow. It's crazy how like she goes on needing rules and regulations so that someone without self control won't overrun the community, yet she doesn't realize that's what I'm doing as well with mine and I'm getting called an extremist over it.
Get this, look at her profile. She just pinged Paleo to deal with someone at https://communities.win/c/Memes/p/1ARdaYgoFw/oh-baby-baby/c. She tells me to just ignore someone I don't like, and then she immediately does that.
Inconceivably based 😎
🤣
I appreciate your sharing your thoughts! By pinging Paleo you're expressing your desire again for a third party to step in between us, a desire which I've pointed out can be resolved instantly by your simply saying "Agreed" to this draft proposal on voluntary interaction ban. The fact that you don't, so far, suggests that you're not comfortable with your own terms and so the best approach for that is your continuing to define those terms in ways that I or a third party can affirm.
You logically have two options. Bilateral: We agree on terms (which you can currently do with as little as a single word). Unilateral: We continue each doing whatever we believe right (which is the default and which was the note on which the Soul account left matters):
You don't have the option of remaining logical while you accuse me of continuously harassing and stalking you and while also you refuse agreement by which all the actions you categorize as harassing and stalking would end. You either act like a person who cares that they end, or you act like a person who doesn't care that they end, but not both and remain logical.
If you agree on voluntary interaction ban, then I can leave you to consider the next trap (your playing the victim card) in silence, rather than to encourage you to rise above it. If you don't agree, then status quo continues.
Add: I was just reading Teresa's Interior Castle last night just as you were today, so we are on the same wavelength and it would be nice to talk about. It would be a pity for this opportunity for better understanding to be bypassed.
Fuck off
u/Paleo, in re u/SeekerOfTheWay pinging you, his admitted prior account wrote, "It's two-ways free range. Swamp .... can do what he wants in regards to me, say anything on here to me or about me, and I can respond however I want and vice versa", 7:24:08 PM CST 2025-12-26.
I continue to "reserve such rights as (1) to comment at a distance in response to contributions that involve me, (2) to interact with any comments in forums where both the commenter and myself are contributors with equal rights, (3) to invite others to interact with other accounts as fitting, and (4) to continue in my prayers for account holders here that they grow in absolute dedication to The Way." Obviously, while an offered agreement on voluntary interaction ban remains unconfirmed, I also retain such rights as commenting at a distance on other contributions.
I'm blocking you now. Bye.
Inconceivably based 😎
I'm really appreciative that you took the time to write this theory of emanations, and to affirm your oneness with Bartholomew. Given your depth of study, I hope you don't mind my asking questions to see where such realization takes us.
I'm interested in knowing, is anyone else on earth right now "one from which the name of the disciple of Yeshua known as Bartholomew was derived from"? Obviously if there's only one we should pay great attention to the phenomenon, and if there's more than one we should aspire to match the phenomenon, so I'd like to know which.
Excellent!
Great; how, without conflict or division, does one distance from and create boundaries against and reject those who say peace is impossible? Healthy boundaries without division, I'll need to think about what that could mean.
Affirmed!
So, does that mean that this "Christ" we are to become was also modeled uniquely by the paradigm of whatever living person contributed the most to getting the Jesus narrative transmitted, whether that person was Yeshua or Bartholomew or someone else?
Does that mean that if a person claims that the spectrum measures only units of death and that there are no units of life, this is less true and life-affirming than the one who claims units of life and no units of death, such that there's a qualitative difference that can be agreed on regardless of whether one values life (connection to Source) or values death (disconnection from Source)?
Insightful.
Then how do you know to say that, unless you mean we are unable to know perfectly what we can know partially?
Wouldn't we conclude then that whatever is capable of proving all truths must not be algorithmically listable (i.e. it must be infinite), a logos that transcends systematic logic? It seems to me the logos must transcend both logic and illogic (though there is a difference) for it to be monality.
Looking forward to your continued thoughts.