Ham

and did he realize what would happen when somebody compared his "works" to the originals? so he manufactures more whoppers.. it was GOD who taught it to him, as promised by an audible voice.. "well, no wonder its the same.. its TRUE isn't it?" "besides.. in those early days.. I put aside ALL else and studied da bible sixteen hours a day.." higgins called him on it.. "hey, you sound a LOT like this book I've read.."

I think where the lies turns sour, is when you have amassed a following of some tens of thousands. They slowly age.. the "magic oil" does not reliably guarantee health, financial success, the retention of one's teeth.. without intervention from the evils of higher education, medical and dental care.. then one has to manufacture even bigger whoppers. "It's YOUR fault. Go figure it out, and when you do, report back to me.." in other words, "I don't have a clue.. but I won't even consider admitting that.. I've got da Answers.." "you must be possessed.." "You HAD to have 'missed it' on some 'principle' of st vic"

Isn't it at least intriguing.. here we have a "christian(?)" "minister". And seemingly, about the only time he can exemplify the "holiness" of his calling is when he is on stage somewhere, or in front of a camera. How can the facade be so dazzling.. that for decades later, certain individuals still practically worship him? Still cling to the belief that he was *really* some kind of man of god? What about the plagiarism? "Doesn't make any difference.." What about the alcoholism? "Didn't make him a "bad man".." what about his *habit* of cornering women, some unwilling..? what about the fits of anger, lashing out indiscriminately.. sending God's people into harms way, when there were alternatives.. "well, its still the word.." born again? I would say.. "born again" only in front of a camera, or crowd. Or when it suited him.. and the real tragedy here.. creating his own grandson in vic's image..

there is great wanker, and lesser wanker. Da victoid was the latter of the two..

to innocent bystanders here. This was not intended to be an *entirely* serious discussion. that really is how I understand Bullinger in this.. it is up to the reader..

Orion is "easy". The three stars in his belt. easy to find. but Argo is on page 157. Close to the end of the book.. The return of the great emigrant-ship.. but still.. even 50,000 years ago, there would be nothing in the named stars to suggest any kind of form..

As far as the "star pictures" are concerned: from page 17. "There is nothing in the groups of stars to even suggest the figures. this is the first thing which is noticed by every one who looks at the constellations. Take for example the sign of Virgo, and look at the stars. There is nothing whatever to suggest a human form; still less is there anything to show whether that form is a man or a woman. And so with all the others."

Some might consider some of Bullinger's structures contrived.. but what he does with Psalm 19 on Pages 2-6 is impressive.. of course the vicster greatly plagiarized this in the CFAS class..

sometimes, they enjoy the pictures that illustrate the text.. Bullinger does have a lot of nice pictures. plus he cites his sources. Rolleston, Seiss, Kinns.. this seems to be the "softest" work by Bullinger. page iv.. he leaves it up to the reader to judge how far his conclusions are borne out of the evidence.. to me that seems reasonable.

the way I understand this, so far 9 out of 11 claim that examining the life of vic, he was either not "born again" or they could not tell..

So its all over except for rosie's marking and avoiding, putting on probation, etc, etc.. with all the fuss, you'd think old rosie was among the "investors"..

"connect" really gets my attention.. do we want to connect or not.. you are going to have to let go of a whole bunch of s*it. I've already let go, and lost everything as it is. except for love.. sorry if it is demanding too much of mortal participants here..

It's really a hard question to ask, I think.. what does one do, coming face to face with a Charlatan on the other side of existence.. I've had a lot of dreams.. no, vic was not in any one of them.. no question and answer session.. I've had a couple of dreams like that, with those still living.. no reply yet. Maybe they are still thinking or something..

but to bring it back to topic. Posters here, don't have to worry about topic. On my threads, anyway.. we usually end up in some wonderful place.. just what was the topic.. the vicster. Born again? In way terms.. a free pass to paradise, or the gathering together.. or the third heaven and third earth.. or a free pass beyond the judgment at the lake of fire.. or whatever it i supposed to be.. I don't think so. You'd have to modify too many of the words of Jesus to include him. "come, thou slothful sycophant, existing on the back of others labors.." that's it! You found it..

maybe "rosie the eternally nipping (and barking)".. no, her royal sycophantess doesn't seem to sport a similar name.. vicster. Loyster. husband of Donster? Or is it wife?

"most pathetic" might actually be a good description here.. on a practical level.. one has to believe one's own falsehood at least to the extent that one can sell it..

born again? eternal life? come thou cherished child, into thy eternal reward? You've got to be kidding me.. It doesn't exactly rhyme. But who says it has to..

so.. if the miserable bastard wasn't god on a stick.. what was he? What kind of entity are we dealing with here? *ham passes out lead lined gloves to the other examiners*..

why is it.. that this seems to be some kind of cosmic debriefing.. I mean, we've fought the fight, observed da vicster. the loyster.. da.. I can't think of a rhyming name for the new pres. Now we compare notes..

odds are pretty astronomical, aren't they..

Maybe I should re-phrase that.. in traditional(?) way theology. He is excluded from real *serious* judgement. Other than relinquishing a *few* rewards. heaven bound. "all hell" can't stop him from going. Even himself. assured a *place* on God's right hand. lo shanta..

I mean in the "traditional" way lingo. saved from judgment basically. In the eternal sense. Being SO righteous that it is impossible to sin it out.. no matter what one does.. but the mind is not effected. Or so that is the claim.. so one can be a no good snake in the grass, on one hand, and not one, on the other.. a good friend from my youth was relating some of this "doctrine" to his father. The father steps back a minute, rubs his chin.. and says "it sounds to me like you are using the bible to go to hell.." true story.

so "satan" stands up and says, "he was no good, filthy, one who caused scandal and division among those who believe, a rapist, a false prophet and an immoral arrogant scumbag. " And the Eternal court says.. "is that all you've got? case closed." Really?