The Growing Home Church Movement

For at least the past decade, there has been an interesting shift in Christianity. While some are flocking to mega churches with flashing lights and large concert-like bands, many people are actually trading in typical churches for home churches. This is exciting and somewhat scary at the same time. It shows that some Christians are taking their faith seriously enough to break the mold and try something new. This is exciting for those who long to break free from an establishment that is often based on money at worst or based upon a structure that was never intended (and in fact preached against) at best, but it is also scary because a radical faith is sometimes a harmful one if not based on sound principles. If someone gets a random belief in their head and makes a cult out of it, you get things like the Kool-Aid massacre of 1978 where 918 people died, or flying planes into our twin towers killing 2996. More likely, however, you get a devoted group of friends sharing in a common desire of intimate friendship and deeper spirituality which does not generally revolve around killing.

For those still within an established church, I do not wish to come off as indicating that it is wrong to do so. There are many benefits to an established church including daycare, special programs, great music, better reach and support of the neighborhood, more connections for friends, more people to help in times of trouble, etc. It does not make one wrong to choose an established church and it does not make one better to choose a home church. The real right or wrong comes down to who or what one is serving. If God be Love, then be sure to follow Love no matter which decision you choose. Sometimes the bad is worth putting up with if the good overshadows it.

While my goal is not to prove anything wrong with the current establishment of churches, I would like to show a contrast between it and home churches to better help comprehend this shift. When we read in the book of Acts, we can see what the early church looked like and compare to what the church of today looks like. The churches were basically home churches or public space churches. They did not purchase buildings or uplift a single leader. In fact, Paul spoke against following any specific leader such as Paul or Apollos and we can see that they took turns sharing their won lessons. Jesus specifically said not to call any other person teacher or father since God himself is supposed to have that title. Jesus put every person in charge of their own understanding of following a God of Love as led by the spirit of Love. He did not want anyone else to rule over anyone else which easily takes advantage of the poor like had occurred with the Sadducees and Pharisees. I dare say that this is common in many churches across America if not the world.

It is a great time to reflect upon the original teachings and to determine what has shifted over the past 2000 years and perhaps shift back as necessary. A lot can happen when the only means of communication is via written papers travelling by donkey. In a world where most leaders ruled by fear of torture and controlled via religion, without something like the internet for fact-checking, it was very easy to mislead people and corrupt or fake what someone had said. This shift to home churches is a great beginning as people question why church is done the way it is done and trying to determine on their own what is the correct course of action. So extreme kudos to those trying out home churches or considering them. For those still within the establishment, kudos for even reading this as it shows you are not simply taking what is given you but are instead considering for yourself what is true as Jesus commended.

The methodology of church, however, is only the beginning of the iceberg. It is what began a degradation of sorts to the original intent of Jesus' good news. Just as Jesus preached, the wheat and the weeds have grown together and I do believe these home churches are the first steps at separating them if they focus on the original intent of loving their neighbors as themselves. Following that rule alone sums up all the other intents of Jesus' message and will help one better understand the true good news he preached. I have done much of this searching myself and have concluded that the rabbit hole goes deeper than we might think. Most of us won't like the answers we find and will attempt to cover our ears and cry out heresy much like the Pharisees did to Jesus. If, despite the warning, you are interested in learning more about the ways Christianity could improve, please check out how "Christians are Revolting". Please forgive the less-than-happy cover-art and title which can easily be misconstrued. The point is merely that the Bride of Christ is in active revolt against Jesus himself, but this could certainly have been depicted with a positive perspective as opposed to the negative one. Reaching toward and understanding the original message of Jesus is amazing compared to what we have today, and that amazingness should have been uplifted over simple stating what is wrong. Live and learn :-).

The Plight of Intelligence

It is not always easy for people to be intelligent. This is especially true in the world of the internet. We all see many posers who think they know things but are clearly unwise in many revealing ways. Such people are quite often ignorant of their own lack of knowledge and arrogant to boot. We see it so often, that we develop patterns around them and assume that no such person is ever what they seem to claim. Of course, if someone who is actually intelligent arrives, few would have any awareness and likely label such people the same as the posing fools. So how does one reveal they are intelligent enough to be given the time of day? Well, as far as I know, one simply does not in our current climate.

The only method I have seen for an intelligent person to be given any acknowledgement is via painstakingly integrating within a group. If such an intellect starts out "knowing" things too soon within such a group, they will likely be ostracized. They must first build rapport, and mostly in a friendly way by acknowledging and participating in what everyone else already holds to be true. Then slowly, over time, they can prove themselves knowledgeable and new ideas might be taken seriously. This is very similar to making a grown person crawl among babies for a few years before the babies will take any kind of advice about walking. It is excruciatingly painful and so backward to an intelligent person that it may take them a while to learn this rule while wondering why they are so very hated everywhere they try to help.

There is only one other way around the integration method of being acknowledged, and it really only applies on a professional level. This method, of course, is ultimately a resume. A document that claims what you have done in the past so that someone of authority will trust you. The problem with this, is that it acts as if intellect and capability are very role-specific. You did X extremely well, but what good are you at Y? And so, the intellectual gets stuck doing X for the rest of his life, when indeed he could have easily transitioned to Y. In short, a person of major capability is stuck in low positions or else stuck doing only one type of task for the rest of his or her life. Unless, of course, that person reaches top levels at a successful business and becomes extremely wealthy. Only then can they branch to new things if they so desire, but few make it that high.

There is a significant difference between intelligence and knowledge, though, and yet our current cultural disposition does not allow for that difference. Knowledgeable people will be put into positions of importance while intelligence plays no major role in it. There is no great way to indicate a person's ability to learn and adapt on a resume in such a way for the recruiter to trust it. A person can claim how superior they are to everyone around them, but this will be taken as mere trolling and arrogance and work against them. One can only appeal to previous works in a precise field and the number of years doing it becomes the most important part. If they wish to switch fields, they must start back at the bottom of the totem pole. While they may pick it up quicker than everyone else, they cannot speed up the number of years of experience that they can place on their resume.

And so, the intellectual finds they are stuck if they took a particular path they are no longer interested in. They are forced to continue what is not their passion or else suffer crawling among babies. It is extremely infuriating to watch people struggle over 2 + 2, knowing the answer is 4, being ostracized if you speak the answer, and instead watching and waiting for the answer to reveal itself to others while keeping quiet. This is especially frustrating when viewing positions of power or partaking in arguments of political ideas. Neither of the two sides of politics are doing what is best in all situations, but to speak up is to be ostracized by both. The only means by which one could have a say is to parrot back all the things they secretly disagree with, get themselves into power, and then gradually spoon-feed new flavors of baby food until people stop spitting it out of their mouths. Of course, if such an intellectual already has a successful career (which is likely since they are intelligent), it is highly unlikely that they would make such a sacrifice for the greater good and to be disliked by many in the process.

Our culture does not value intellect. It values meaningless papers with years of existing around a particular field in a professional capacity, and nothing more than self-appreciation outside the professional arena. And so, if an intellectual, being smart, wishes to remain happy and healthy, he reserves himself from the squabbles of life and allows the babies to rule while hoping nothing too terrible happens within his or her life. Only true ascetics and altruists would sacrifice themselves before the alter of the masses to be hated upon by all for their own good. That, or morons, which is once again difficult to tell apart since both will appear just as strange to the average person. And so, those who speak up are perhaps more often morons than anything else which furthers the plight of the intelligent. We simply can not tell the difference as an average person.

To compound matters even worse, an intelligent person is fairly knowledgeable about the many ways they lack understanding. And so, they know better than to make quick judgments about things they are not an integral part of. And since there is no easy transition to become an integral part without taking huge steps backward and walking about infants, intelligence rarely goes where it is most needed. For those individuals who wish to participate anyway, being intelligently self-aware, it is very difficult for them to determine if indeed they are one of the trolls given the backlash, or if indeed they are doing any amount of good by offering their unwanted opinions.

Moral of the story: intelligence is not always what it is cracked up to be if one desire to be happy, and a great deal of wisdom must accompany the intellect to keep such a person sane. Wisdom, unfortunately, is something else entirely and may not even come with intelligence, so there are a lot of insane and unhappy intelligent people in a world run by less capable children who refuse to acknowledge the wisdom and experience of their elders. It is not at all easy to be intelligent and may in fact be harder than being a moron.

Of course, this could entirely be the perspective of an ignorant moron who simply wishes the world would cater to him more and everything is truly fine the way it is. Never know what you don't know...

Imperfect and Trashy

I'm feeling rather imperfect today. Not that I generally feel perfect, of course, but that I feel especially sub-par today. It's a fairly common feeling often going along with "Impostor Syndrome," and I have learned to overcome it for the most part. But lately, I've had a lot of struggles with my neighbors who apparently think I'm just a downright terrible person, and this makes it harder for me to believe in myself. If it were just one neighbor, fine, but this is 4 neighbors right now and I was already on bad ground with the other neighbors. So if all the neighbors around me hate me, how good can I really be? With this, every little mistake and bad habit of mine make me feel like a complete failure of a person. Like I'm trash whom everybody hates and simply puts up with. I'm that annoying guy that nobody likes and who doesn't realize that's the case. Have I ever been liked? Am I really just trash? I could never really know since asking is kinda of a dumb thing to do. Of course people would lie to my face about it. It's a jerk question to ask in the first place to put someone on the spot like that.

In the end, I'm pretty sure I'm not just a terrible person and the fact that I'm concerned with being a terrible person, if anything, means I'm not terrible but unskilled at worst. Still, wouldn't hurt to get some reinforcement ;-).

I've detailed the story below, but it is quite long and likely quite boring. I don't expect anyone to really read it. Still, there it is in all its unrefined and unedited glory. I just wanted to write it out, get it off my chest, and kind of document the whole thing from my perspective.

It all started with some trash talk. Like, literally, talk about trash. Our neighbors had mentioned that they cancelled their service with the God-awful company Duncan Disposal who was later bought by Rizzo who was later bought by Green For Life and to this day still remains awful. It seemed that despite cancelling their services, they were still getting their trash picked up anyway. They had mentioned that they just kept putting it out, and it just kept getting picked up. And so, they never intended to start buying from the other company Dougies since they had free trash service already. Or, if ever they needed to switch, they planned to share service with the neighbors which, I presume, is also not allowed per any sensible contract lest we all just share throughout the whole neighborhood.

While I couldn't care less since it was their own business, my wife didn't care much for this. She saw it as stealing and gloating about the theft from people who purport to be Christian. She kept this to herself, of course, except when complaining to me. One day, I get a call from our neighbor who was irate about getting back-charged for their trash service. In an accusatory tone, he asked if I had ratted him out. I replied that I had not and expressed my condolences for the situation. I later found out that my wife indeed had told on them. She had called the trash company to inform them that once again they forgot our trash and yet managed to continually pick up our neighbors trash when they're not paying and we are. A fair argument to be sure, but one that certainly rats out the neighbors for their [mis]deeds.

Again, I am confronted by the neighbor who is confident that we ratted him out. In theory, there is no way he could know this for sure since the trash company certainly should have kept that confidential, so I decided to "protect" my wife and keep with the statement that we did not. I had to make a choice either to betray my wife or to be dishonest about the situation. I chose the latter hoping for the better outcome. Boy was that probably wrong...

Time passed and I had forgotten about the entire situation. I don't recall if the neighbors became more distant after this point in time or if they had already distanced themselves. I feel as if they were already declining our invitations and showing no desire to get together, but it could very well have been due to this incident that they stopped. I believed they simply didn't much care for our presence and left it at that. We had some fun in the past, but they weren't particularly my kind of people either so I wasn't entirely hurt by it. We just kept to ourselves, they kept to themselves, and our kids still played together on occasion.

Fast forward some long period of time (a couple years maybe??). New neighbors roll in and replace the ones I had not yet mentioned. We did not note when they moved in nor when the old ones moved out, so we weren't even sure how long it had been since they got there once we realized they were there. We had determined we should go visit a few times, but my wife isn't particularly fond of socializing and the "right" time never seemed to show itself. Around this time, I had a survey done so that I could know which trees belong to me so that I can clear out space for things and maybe get a larger grassy yard. I marked it off with twine and solar lights. The original neighbors that we no longer hung out with, neighbors A, expressed concern about mowing around the lights and asked that we replace it with something else. I obliged, replaced it with rebar, and all was well.

While discussing the rebar and lot lines, I had mentioned our contemplation about putting a shed between some trees near the shared driveway. I asked if they had a problem with it since it was near their property and driveway and almost in what they might consider their own yard (even though some of it was technically ours). The exact response I received from neighbors A was that "it wasn't their favorite idea, but do what you need to do." I did not for a second imagine that was meant to be interpreted as, "Eegads, that would be terrible, please don't do that!" Seeing it as a minor inconvenience as any shed might be to a neighbor in visual range, I decided it was okay to proceed.

At this time, neighbors A had mentioned that they met neighbors B and enlightened them to some portion of an easement agreement which I had never seen. I knew I had to allow passage to their properties through my own via the shared driveway, but that was as much as I knew. They informed me that, supposedly, there was a 2/3 majority vote thing on what happens with our driveway and that everything is then a three-way split in cost. Having previously contemplated the idea of splitting the cost of paving the driveway, I joked that this was great because it only took the two of us to agree to pave and we'd only have to pay a third whether the other neighbors wanted it or not. They laughed a somewhat accusatory but perhaps friendly laugh and jeered that this was the kind of person I was, but I then assured them it was merely a joke. I wouldn't have expected to force something on the new neighbors. I hadn't even met them yet and I am not keen on making my neighbors angry even if within my legal "right" to do so.

Neighbors B later came to our house to inquire about the lot lines that were marked out. We met, discussed ourselves as new people do, explained our intentions, and expected all was fine. They struck us as being nice enough despite a strange feeling we had about them, and decided that they'll probably be much like the original neighbors that we never really talked to. My wife thought they were rude for having been over at such a late time while our kids were clearly in the process of going to bed, but we took it in stride that some people simply do not have such common sense or courtesy (myself included).

I shortly thereafter began construction on the brick pad for our shed. I manually dug out the hole, had gravel dumped in, manually spread it, shoveled in sand, manually spread that and leveled it, then began placing bricks on top. About halfway through the brick-laying, the new neighbors B sent a text asking that I hold off on construction because we need to discuss the easement (containing the shared driveway) on which it was built. He said he found a document which seems to indicate I cannot build there. I asked for a copy of this document and he simply said I should get it online. I obliged out of respect, but did not particularly imagine I would have to cease construction entirely. I looked online for the document but could not find it. He arranged a meeting for us and neighbors A to discuss the land so I waited until then to do more research.

At the meeting, neighbors B indicated that some maintenance was needed and that the land was controlled by a 2/3 majority vote as I was previously informed by them. They then took a vote and mutually agreed that I may not build my shed there. Many words were had regarding why they would not allow it--the main reason being setback ordinances which I was not yet familiar with. I had mentioned that such ordinances are usually more of a case by case concept where it is only a problem if people complained and thus it would not be a problem if they were to permit me. Still, they would not permit me. They then asked what I would be putting in the shed to which I replied our kids bikes would be going in it. Aghast, they seemed to have a new reason not to allow the shed due to the dangers of the kids getting hit in the driveway. Since they had already denied me my shed, I saw this as an entirely BS maneuver to try to convince me that I should do it. I mentioned that I could indeed put other things in it if they were concerned, but nothing I could say or do would convince them to allow me to put up the shed including the fact that I had spent many hours and around $600 during the construction of this shed (much of which was tools including a pressure washer for the used bricks that I washed one by one). They were steadfast in their decision to waste my time and money. All four of them.

A bit skeptical of this entire voting concept, I asked if I could make a copy of the agreement he had in hand so that I could look it over myself. They were not interested in allowing me to bring it into my house to copy. They claimed they would send me a copy instead. I was not particularly enthralled with this because I now had reason to distrust them due to their shifting of "reasons" for not allowing the shed and for not listening to any amount of reason that would make it okay. Now I was being disallowed a copy upon the promise that they'll send me one. This did not fly with me since I no longer trusted any of them, but luckily neighbors A suggested I take pictures with my phone which neighbors B then permitted.

I read through the document and initially believed they indeed had this right to deny me. I was confused since it made little to no sense that the document could really say that. I read it again and realized I was initially making an error in my interpretation having already been primed with the neighbors' understanding of it. The document only decreed their rights to the land and did not disclude any other use for it. I really could use the land so long as I did not infringe on their rights, and the whole 2/3 voting thing was merely for maintenance and repair, not for use of the land entirely.

Being frustrated with all of the neighbors' lack of willingness to reason and for what appeared to me as deceit and lies, I decided to begin working on the patio once again without saying anything. I had the right and there was indeed nothing to be discussed. They were mean and I was going to finish what I started.

While I finished up the patio, neighbor A stopped by confused and asked what I was doing. I non-nonchalantly explained that I was finishing the patio. He contended that he thought we'd agreed that I would not. I clarified that they all agreed, but that they actually did not have a say in the matter like they thought they did. And since I had already started this project with what I thought was their blessing, I was going to now finish it. I asked if he read the document to confirm neighbor B's assessment of it and he indicated that he did not and that his wife perhaps had but he was not sure. Still, he was convinced of neighbor B's interpretation. I assured him that it was incorrect and that I was quite sure of it myself. He asked if I spoke to a lawyer and I said no. He asked how I could be sure I was right, and I responded that I believed myself educated enough to read and understand the document. Taking this as an insult, he proclaimed that all four of them were educated too. From a technical standpoint, I informed him that I indeed had more education having a college degree, but that was neither here nor there since I was merely indicating that I trusted in my own ability. He snapped that neighbors B had college degrees. Having just discussed with my wife how crazy it was that they both got jobs where they did without college degrees, I informed him that I did not believe they did have college degrees.

After a bit more arguing, neighbor A suddenly shouted, "You know what? We DID read that document and it says you can't build this without a 2/3 majority vote." At this point, I chuckled at the idiocy of such a statement since it was only five minutes ago that he had said that he did not read it. I mentioned that he was now blatantly lying to my face. Neighbors B pulled up at this time wondering what was going on as well. Neighbor A quickly piped up that maybe I should explain why I'm calling him a liar. So I obliged and explained how he had just lied to me. The same discussion happened yet again regarding the legality of me building on this site and I assured them that I was perfectly allowed to despite their clear wishes. No offense intended, but since I had already started it, and because I legally could, I would continue it. I also mentioned that I did not feel particularly compelled to explain the situation to them because I felt they were being quite rude to begin with and I did not need their permission anymore. I had tried to be friendly and nice in the past with neighbors A and they always rejected everything. This is when the trash situation came back up. He claimed to have stopped hanging out because he believed we ratted them out. Back in the same predicament, and believe he possibly couldn't know for a fact, I reiterated that we had nothing to do with it.

This began all the more finger-pointing. Neighbors B said I was rude because I never even asked their input to begin with. I said I had no reason to since it did not affect them and that voting was not truly necessary and I had not even heard of it when I started. He pointed out that I had simply disappeared while we were doing tree work together that same day without so much as explaining myself. I informed him that I was overheating in the safety clothes and getting light-headed so I had to change but to which I came back out. His wife then claimed that I was rude for saying her husband did a terrible job fixing the driveway. I chuckled in confusion having never said anything of the sort and the ludicrousness of these wild claims. She vehemently disagreed and said that I did. Still confused, I asked him if he had simply told her this lie to make me look bad since I knew I had said no such thing and clearly they were out to accuse me of anything and everything at this point. He then approached me to my face in a threatening manner questioning if I was calling him a liar. Neighbor A then intervened by holding him back with a few reassuring "whoas." The wife then clarified that she was referring to my saying that the water came back on the driveway indicating that he did it wrong. This, of course, I did mention. The water had come back. This was no slight to his work, but a statement of fact. She concluded this was rude because he spent hours on it and I reminded her that I assured them both that I had already tried such things and that the water always came back anyway. I tried to help them avoid the wasted effort which is a kind thing to do, but still allowed them to give it a shot which was also the kind thing to do.

Things went nowhere as we all pointed out all the ways we thought each other was mean. A week or two later, I had expected that things cooled down and everything was fine, but I received a letter in the mail signed by all four of the neighbors indicating that I could not have the patio and that they warned me about my wife parking on the side of the driveway once. I quickly surmised this was not at all sanctioned by a lawyer since it was poorly written and included unusual complaints. I later found an image on Facebook of the four of them clanking beers at a dinner table over the letter as they celebrated being such good friends united in their efforts to undermine my rights. Since they were clearly trying to be all legal about it given the signatures and the $5 certified mail stamp, I decided to get some legal advice just in case. I called up a lawyer who quickly assured me I was right and that any self-respecting lawyer would laugh anyone out of their office who tried to file a suit against me for using my property in the way I had.

Full of newfound confidence that I had not misstepped, I wrote a reply explaining exactly how the document should be interpreted, the fact that they can't vote to "upgrade" the driveway, along with my dismay at how rude they had been to me. I explained that it is always better to be kind to neighbors and especially to me since they had to drive through my property. I pointed out the things they had clearly done to me while explaining that I truly had done nothing wrong to them. I alluded that I was a better Christian than them despite being an atheist myself. I would hope such an obvious contrast would make them realize that the God they believe in would not be pleased with how they are treating their neighbor, I heard nothing back for quite some time, and so I assumed perhaps they stopped trying to fight against me having realized that I was indeed correct.

We later got a letter in the mail from the town hall about an ordinance violation of my wife's sign for her quilt store. I called to verify what needed to be done which was merely moving it back from the road a bit. We weren't sure if this was a random thing or if our neighbors called it in on us. Around this time, we began putting the kids bikes on the brick patio which lacked a shed. The original intent was to get the kids' bikes out of the garage and now that we knew of ordinance preventing the shed (but not the patio) we decided to go ahead and use it as a parking space instead. We needed the room to begin work on garage cleanup.

Some time later, we get a cordial invite to discuss paving the driveway and to "vote" on who we go with. Ignoring the fact that he said "vote" in a way as to indicate he still things voting is a thing for upgrading the driveway, I agreed to meet and discuss since indeed I still wanted the driveway paved if we could manage to do it peaceably.

We met and neighbors B gave the quotes on the different driveway installations at 17' wide. The current driveway was only 12' wide. I immediately suspected that this was in attempt to have my patio be in the way but continued listening. Only one of the companies would use recycled millings and they were far cheaper than the others at only $8500 total, so neighbor B offered us a pen to sign off on having it done. Being careful, I looked at the road and the patio that sat maybe 6 or 7 feet off the driveway. I read the document and noted that it said specifically to extend east which is the side that my patio was on. I then asked what it meant by "including the patio" wondering if that meant he was going to tie it in which would have been awesome. At this point, the truth was then revealed that the patio "had to go" in neighbor B's words. Strange that this wasn't mentioned before offering me to sign the document. I surmised that he clearly tried to trick me.

I blatantly refused to sign. They then accused me of valuing the patio over kind relations with them. I explained that they were ruining such hope of kind relationships by prioritizing its removal over friendship with me. Neighbor B claimed the patio was an issue with runoff and that it would damage the driveway to which I disagreed. He claimed this came straight from the mouth of Atlas Asphalt, not their own and he could have him come back out to explain it. I said sure, that this would be acceptable. They asked if this would change my mind if he said it had to go, and I said quite honestly that it would depend on whether or not I could understand or trust the guy. Not all contractors are equally competent and I would have to judge this guy when I met him. To this they accused me of ridiculing a guy I never met which is absurd since I had not yet judged anything and I pointed out that they themselves already informed me that their first asphalt contact seemed to be quite incompetent. As such, I need to determine it myself.

Conversation continued after this and it almost seemed like neighbors A and I were making progress--even after neighbor A stepped forward in an aggressive display because I "called him a thief" by indicating that getting services you're not paying for is stealing. Mrs B was worried and told MR B to step between us, but Mr B seemed not to care. Neighbors B also seemed to think that my "threat" in my letter via stating the wisdom behind being kind to neighbors and especially keeping me kind since they drive through my property every day somehow indicated that I might harm their kid to which I was threatened with blatant murder by Mrs B. In the end, apologies were made, clarifications were revealed, and my offenses were found to be nothing more than coincidences. For example, they had thought a large boulder I had near the driveway was intentionally placed to annoy them, but truly it had just lied where it fell and it was too large for me to move. Had I known it was in the way, I likely could have mustered the strength to move it a few feet away. They thought the bikes we put on the patio were fighting back against the ordinance letter to which I only just then determined was indeed their doing, but this was mere coincidence of timing since we needed to clean the garage.

Most things seemed to be cleared up except that we still did not agree on the proper interpretation of the easement agreement. To which, I said we should get a mediator. Neighbors B, of course, offered their own lawyer, but I declined having already known that he supposedly disagrees with the lawyer I contacted who was in my favor. We would likely need a court ruling from a judge to come to a legal agreement that we could both accept. Still, I thought we made great progress and I looked forward to being friends with at least neighbors A again. Neighbors B still seemed to be entirely out for my patio in a sneaky manner, they continued to lie as they "called my bluff" about what Carol said from the township (except that I wasn't bluffing so I know they're lying), and they did not seem particularly pleased that things seemed to be getting better with Neighbors A. I concluded they likely had nothing but malice to offer, but just maybe if I remained polite and calm and stood my ground they would eventually stop harassing me at the very least.

Before the day that Atlas Asphalt would return to explain the runoff situation while also providing a quote for neighbor A's personal driveway, I thought I would give them a call myself just to make sure that there wouldn't be some underhanded communications the day he came and so that I could ask the tough questions in private. Underhandedness likely would have already occurred, but I thought I'd get a feel for it before the event. I asked him about the situation and he indeed continued to indicate the patio was in the way. He seemed entirely uninterested in any potential option and responded in ways that seemed to ridicule me such as indicating he could do a poor job if that's what I "really" want, and he seemed bent on giving the advice of lowering the patio 4 inches as if that was an option. In the end, it did not seem like a productive call and I could not comprehend what he meant over the phone. I began wondering, however, if this was truly just a crazy, sucky coincidence that the patio was indeed in the way. If it was, I was ready to concede, but I needed to understand when he could explain in person.

The day Atlas was to come out, I decided I would get a second opinion from one of the other contractors from whom we got a quote: Jet Asphalt. I asked if he remembered the patio and he said no. I asked if he could imagine a patio near the driveway causing any kind of interference due to its height. He said no. After a few more quizzical texts back and forth, he offered to come out and take a look. He said no, that it's absolutely 100% not in the way. He further informed me that when he was requested to quote the job, he was initially told 800 feet when our driveway was only 400 feet. He said neighbor B seemed to not expect he would come out and measure and that he was simply "quoting off a document" so it was "weird" that it was so far off. Well, I have that document and it says it's only 400 feet. So I concluded that neighbor B was intentionally trying to get higher quotes from other companies so that he could logically choose Atlas who, for whatever reason, wanted to remove my patio.

Atlas came over and tried to explain the situation. I still was not understanding so I kept asking questions. The slope of the driveway was downhill yet he kept indicating I'd get a puddle at the end of my personal driveway despite the fact that the shared driveway would continue in a downward direction thus preventing any buildup. Without so much as getting 5 minutes into the conversation, neighbor B threw his hands up and said he was out and made me look like a terrible bad guy to neighbors A because I just had to be so mean as to ask so many questions. I later understood that Atlas wanted to pitch the entire driveway eastward on top of it sloping downward as it traveled south, but it seemed a bit overkill to me as far as runoff goes. Since the other contractor said there was no issue, and since I could not logically comprehend this guys intent while knowing that our neighbor seemed to have ulterior motives to selecting Atlas, I decided I needed to do further investigation. Not that it mattered since neighbors B claimed they were backing out already anyway, but I certainly chose to do nothing with my own driveway portion. Still, I wanted to better understand since maybe Jet Asphalt was simply mistaken and maybe they suck with grading. If I was wrong, I could simply admit it and maybe mend relationships.

I researched more about grading driveways as well as the material of recycled asphalt millings. It seemed pitch only needed to be about a quarter to half an inch and yet Atlas wanted an entire two inches for some reason, and the sites only ever indicated the importance of getting water away from the house. The water would do that naturally without any pitch for our driveway (until the low spot, of course). Some sites said that recycled millings was fine but Jet kept telling me it was hardly any better than a simple gravel driveway. Of course, he could be biased since he did not work with millings. I found a website www.allaboutdriveways.com with a guy who seemed to know what he was talking about, who alerted people to many ways of being scammed, and who obviously would have no bias one way or another toward our situation. So I sent him an email with my questions. He responded with no hesitation that Atlas was either a liar or didn't know what he was talking about. He further indicated it is a complete scam to claim one can "seal" recycled asphalt and that the material is terrible for many reasons. So this seemed to solidify my perspective. The patio did not need to be removed and both the widening of the driveway and the choice of Atlas was 100% just to get me to remove my patio. Neighbors B were certainly up to no good and they were constantly pitting neighbors A against me. Lucky for me, it seemed, things were mending with neighbors A at the previous meeting even though it took a backward slide with the Atlas meeting.

Now believing that all of this nonsense was due to the new neighbors B mucking with our relationships, and having gotten so much out of the way, I thought maybe I could get with neighbors A in person and discuss things civilly and hopefully point out how neighbors B were indeed intentionally trying to thwart me even if they themselves were not. They didn't want to meet, however. So I tried conversing with text which seemed only to make things worse since they can read any old inflections they want into anything I write. I spent over three hours trying to determine just the right thing to say, and I wrote them one final message indicating just how much I'm trying to make this work but that I feel it would require personal interaction. I warned them that it would continue the way it has for the past few months if they refuse while apologizing that it may sound like an ultimatum. I simply wanted them to meet with me quite sure that in person we could work this out. They said no, that they have no desire to work it out with us and that they've made up their minds that we are terrible and deceitful people. And that's where it ends. No chance of forgiveness from the one error that seemingly spawned from one small, poor decision on my wife's part.

No amount of kindness or logic can fix anything at this point. Maybe, just maybe, the sacrifice of my patio would, but I'm just not sure enough and I'm just not sure it's worth it anymore. With the way they've written me off and handled the situation, I'm just not sure I want to sacrifice anything more for them. I've spent enough time and frustration trying to make things work and as far as I can tell, I did nothing wrong on my end apart from a few poorly communicated or rudely communicated remarks. Certainly nothing worth eternal condemnation from self-proclaimed Christians. It riles my blood that this is all just out of my control. I hate being cornered with no choices to make things right. I've been wrongly accused, wrongly labeled, and wrongly written off. The best thing to do is ignore it at this point, but it will perhaps always be a source of contention since we share the driveway and repairs. A rather unfortunate situation.