---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sundur@...> wrote:
Anne, you are saying, "Trust me, because I know what is going on. I'm not
going to tell you anything about it, but I'm in the know"
No I'm not. I am saying the post you retrieved from the archives has nothing
to do with your memory of what Robin said. It is just that I know who he is
talking about in that post and what his relationship is to that person. There
is no mystery or "in the know". Just read what he wrote to see the discrepancy
then simply read what I wrote and put one and one together and you have the
fact that you were mistaken.
Well, I don't operate that way, and I don't know many who do. So as they say,
and I don't mean this in an impolite way, but put up, or shut up. There is
really no other way to say it.
There is nothing to "put up". I said it all. Any more details about any of it
is up to Robin to give you, not me. But you have the basic facts: he doesn't go
to Starbucks to make confessions to strangers. He has a friend who he talks to
and has helped him for a very long time, a friend who knows him well. Simple,
straightforward.
As for being willing to admit a mistake. I need to be shown where I was
mistaken, other than, "You are mistaken"
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <awoelflebater@...> wrote:
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sundur@...> wrote:
Anne,
This post was over a year old. In the body of the post at some point by one
of the participants is mentioned "Starbucks". Now if you wish to fault me over
this detail, or any other detail, no problem. But I stand by the my overall
point that Robin had a friend that appeared to call him out on his "stuff". My
apologies that I indicated the setting was at Starbucks, or that I called it a
confessional. But I feel my recollection was close enough to what I originally
indicated.
Like I said, I don't really care one way or another. I know more about Robin
past and present than anyone here and I know of whom he speaks when you
mistakenly thought he meant some guy at Starbucks. It's fine, but why is it so
hard for some of you here at FFL to admit you made a mistake? I, frankly, don't
give a crap because I know who and what he was referring to that you got so
badly wrong. But what is the deal with not being able to admit you made a
mistake about this? This is a rhetorical question, BTW, I don't really need to
know the answer to this but you might.
Now if others wish to make a federal case out of it,be my guest. But you may
have to try me in absentia.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <awoelflebater@...> wrote:
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sundur@...> wrote:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672
Interesting to read this again, I don't ever go back and search and re-read
stuff here. But I don't see anything about any confessionals at Starbucks.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sundur@...> wrote:
Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it
will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty
good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to
predate his participation here.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfriend@...> wrote:
You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about
email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no "daily
confessional."
My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with
most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts,
feelings.
I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfriend@...> wrote:
emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams
of quotes notwithstanding.
"Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's"?? Robin never said anything
remotely like that.
Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated
the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans.
However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about
Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I
attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly
espousing a pseudo-humility.
Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the "missing"
years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility
column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at
Starbucks. Do I have that right?