Tom Strange

Dave... you've been watching too much X-Files...

OK then... what's a "resonator"? Is it a guitar made out of metal so that it has a different sound?

Thie Rock and The Rabbi opens here today. Has anyone seen it or heard of it? It's supposed to be about the relationship between Jesus and Peter.

awww Mr. Lantern, that's OK... the way I remember the year is by remembering the first line of "Ballad of the Alamo"... "Back in 1836, Houston said to Travis..." I'm glad they changed it... it was a dumb name for a sports team!

pretty dave... very pretty... (oh... that guitar my bro in law got real cheap is a Fannin, he likes it and I guess that's all that matters) ANOTHER question: What's a dreadnought? I see them called that... doest it denote your "basic acoustic guitar"

happening day young hopper! happening day...

Something with James Bond? ...Robin Leach?

Dooj, IF they're his OPINIONS, then it doesn't matter... And I guess it really doesn't matter either if he thinks they're "God's Truth"... but it would be nice: 1) to know where he's coming from and 2) if Mike would quit treating us like dirt because we don't believe the way he does. Bottom line Dooj, Mike is right on everrthing and IF you would only take the time to "Master PFAL" (of course "master" by his definition) you would come to the same conclusions. By the very fact that we haven't come to the same conclusions as Mike means we have not "Mastered PFAL". That's his premise. There is no convincing him otherwise. He wants to share his message here. I have no problem with that, I just want people to be sure they know where he's coming from. He's not always real clear about that.

Cents and Centsability?

I have no use for "a lot of essay information" nor did I ask you to write any. All I'm asking you to type is one word for each statement listed: OPINION or TRUTH. Heck, if you want just type "O" or "T". Because there's a credibility issue with you Mike. IF you claim these statements are "God's Truth" there's really no more need for discussion. If you calim they're your OPINION, well then maybe there's room for discussion. Mike, what happened to your attempt to be polite? Oh... and for the record... I have been asking you about these items since the first time I saw you claim them... but then you already know that don't you? Mike, why do you insist on giving PFAL the glory instead of God?

Mike, RE: The so called REALITY of the revelations God gave to Dr, etc, etc That it's REALITY is YOUR OPINION. And that's fine.But it's not MY OPINION that it's reality. For any of your conclusions to "hold water" we would have to first accept your opinions as fact and there's a little problem there. You're welcome to your opinions, and without them, your theses hold no merit... but they're your opinions and you're entitled to them. You're welcome to disagree... but PFAL was not the author of the signs, miracles and wonders. Why are you insistent on giving PFAL the glory over God?

Mike... Shirley you're not serious...

hee hee

Hey Dave... what a coincidence! I'm the "ideal" weight for someone who is 6'5"! (unfortunately I'm only 6'0") You can have some of mine!

I too thought Jon Stewart did a great job. Lot's of funny stuff there. And I'm a big fan of 'Crash' and have always liked Phillip Seymour Hoffman (a great character actor). Thought George Clooney was a great guy as he usually is. Glad 'Walk the Line' got some nods... great perforances there... and the joy and elation shown by the cast and folks of 'Crash' when they won was nice... I TIVO'd and watched it starting about 45 minutes behind and got to speed through some of the earlier 'speeches'... I loved the opening sequence with the former hosts. I loved the 'campaign commercials'. I hope they have Stewart back. One of the funniest lines of the night IMO: "Bjork couldn't be here tonight, she was trying on her dress and Cheney shot her!"

very clever... I guess I'll wait as well...

Here's your little statue Raf... (somehow I knew you'd beat me to the thread)... I'm very glad it won as well... best picture and original screenplay... a quality movie. In case you didn't know... our boy Mark Cuban's Lions Gate Films helped this thing get made. They also did the documentary about Enron and helped Clooney do "Good Night and Good Luck". I'm glad to see they're doing some quality films...

As usual, Mike is in quotes: Mike, Others claim to have mastered PFAL and not come to the same conclusions as you have nor have they seen these truths that you have seen. Your response to them is that they have in fact not mastered PFAL or they would have seen them. With all due respect, this is all just one long continuous circle jerk. I mean, one post you say they're conclusions you've reached, one post you say they're truths you've proven, other posts you say they're opinions based on truths that only you see because only you have mastered PFAL to the degree it takes to "see" these truths. Yes I am. I've watched you do it for years concerning PFAL. All I have done Mike is take a few simple statements that you have made, that stand on their own and express the context they were taken from, and ask you whether or not they are TRUTH or OPINION. There's no need to muddy the argument with "can't they be both", no one disputes that indeed they can, by TRUTH or OPINION I am asking you to differentiate between TRUTH = God's Word and OPINION = Mike's word. And I contend that the only way you have come up with these "truths" and conclusions is because you have immersed yourself in PFAL and ignored REALITY. Why did God give you five senses if he didn't want you to be aware of what happened around you? You cannot ignore the character of the man who is delivering the message. For us to believe all of the things you want us to believe, we have to believe that all of the things that veepee said were true. And that's just something I'm not going to do nor do I think will others. Just like ex10 and so many others have pointed out. PFAL was a nice little Bible class. Many signs, miracles and wonders occurred because of the love of God operating in people's hearts, not because of PFAL. Finally, Mike, please, just so we all know where you're coming from, which of these statements are your OPINION and which are GOD'S TRUTH? If it's God's Truth and also happens to be your opinion, please categorize it as God's Truth. I'm not trying to "bully" or "smear" you (to use your words). I'm simply trying to clarify your stance on these statements that you've made in the past regarding PFAL, God and Christ. Each statement accurately reflects the context of the passage it was taken from… and besides that, how could context change any of them? They're pretty simple, forthright statements. Please categorize them for me (us) and please try to do so by just typing the words "opinion" or "God's truth" next to them instead of trying to lay a bunch of double speak and verbiage on us. Thank you.

Mike, why on earth would anyone want to invest the time and energy to 'master PFAL' if they didn't think that?

Because that's a lot different than "PFAL is God's Word reissued". Nowhere in that statement does it say that PFAL replaces the Bible and is God's Word reissued. That statement is a simple deal that God allegedly made with veepee. No, you're not. How can I "smear" you if all I'm doing is quoting your words? Asking you to explain them? How is that a "smear". No, it is simply a "where/how did you come up with that?" type of thing. These things (the few that I keep asking you about) are things you have presented as "truth that I [Mike] have verified myself." That's why I keep asking you about them. If they're just your opinions how hard is it to just answer "that's just my opinion"? And these are your OPINIONS right? And regarding your post addressed to Dooj... Mike, what you have 'proved' is that you have come to different conclusions/opinions than the rest of us here. Yet you accept that as a fact, the truth, and expect us to as well. It is very apparent that you believe the former while I am convinced of the latter. Mike, but you have claimed many times before that it was, in fact 'correct' and the truth. You have often presented the "thus saith the Lord" statements as the 'backup' for one of your stances. Look at that post to dooj. It's filled with you claiming that you 'know' things... and that the ONLY reason we don't know them is because we haven't studied and mastered PFAL... and that if we had, we would know them... Of course, that's just your OPINION, even though it was stated as FACT. Dooj said: That's the crux of the biscuit. Have a nice afternoon...maybe spend some time watching the "Andy Griffith Show" marathon on TVLand. It'll do your heart good.

two words sisterniKa: YIP PEE !!! ...oh... and thanks for the drink!

I can appreciate where all of you are coming from... as for me... I've grown, over time, to treat anything I heard from veepee as suspect... that's just me...

there is a lot of stuff for "Wink" Martindale though...

was chattingkathy's TG&MM?

Mike in quotes: ummm... I don't think I 'pressed" you on the word reissue. YOU decided that was the focus the sentence not me. I'm questioning the whole sentence "PFAL is God's Word reissued". As of now, I don't buy it (nor do I think others) show us how that works. It's YOUR premise. Explain it. ummm... then why did you make the offer? ummm... I thought your whole premise in this little excercise of yours was that these elements needed to be 'in play' for the 'law of believing' to work. I keep forgetting that this whole little excercise is 'your opinion' so I guess it's all up to you anyway. ummm... you're assuming that "PFAL is written revelation"... is that what you would like for me to use instead of "PFAL is God's Word reissued"? Of course, this too is your opinion since we've had 'testimony' from folks on these boards that that was in fact not the case. ummm... FINALLY... they are your OPINIONS then... I don't really know about all of the others on these boards but, if you had stated things that way in the beginning instead of presenting them as "The Truth" I don't think they would have had as many problems with you as they have... I know that's what's always baffled me... that you've presented these OPINIONS (or if you want to call them IDEAS) of yours as "The Truth". ummm... yes, I agree, politeness is much preferred. Thank you for being polite. Now... reading your two posts immediately precding this one I'm confused (again)... wasn't the whole pretext of this little excercise of yours to show what elements must be present to 'operate the law of believing'... it seems that now you're saying that, at times, any or all of these elements could be involved... which is a lot different than the path I thought we started down when you referred to them at different times as "elements of/to/for the law of believing"... Further, you said you were "seeking PFAL grads who studied the books and can help me [Mike] collect the elements that make up the law of believing".... And finally, you said "The Law of Believing is, most properly expressed, would be the set of ALL [Mike's caps] elements that go into the makeup of this law." That's why I'm a little confused. If you're now saying that saying some elements are present... or all elements must be present... which is it?