doojable

And what if Jesus had done this? He could have "winked at sin" and not have thrown over the money changers' tables. He could have not chastised the Pharisees for abusing the belief of the people.

Would you care to elaborate? Which statement are you refering to? I've made many. What is your point? CK - you may think that I want to mock you - I assure you, I do not. I really and truly want to see you get you thoughts on paper and see you make that leap to deep thought. So please explain yourself -I'll be patient.

Can see the second pic - but I'll venture a guess frowat I can see: "Live and Let Die"

Sir G, I see your point. I also want to make the point that its not only important to be knowlegdeable - You have to know what you don't know. In order to learn anything it takes being able to step and ask questions even if you think you know the answer. Paul burst on to the scene as a murderer. He had to earn trust and he had to LEARN - so he went and got out of the way for 14 years. I'll venture to say that Paul just might have been an arrogant 19 year old when he was slashing Christians - Then Jesus told him he was moving in the wrong direction - BY BLINDING HIM. Funny, Paul had to be shown that he couldn't see the truth by having his sight taken. So we can be more gentle with ck - which I have tried. Ck can listen as well. CK we might ask what seems to be hard questions - they are not to tear you down but to get you to get beyond your limited vista of answers.

First - there isn't one wolf.Second - no one here says that VPW is the antichrist. I said he just Might be a wolf (one of many) And no one knows when the antichrist will come - because no one knows when Jesus Christ will come. You really don't understand the Return and the various stages of the "end times" do you? You're blending too many things that aren't meant to be blended. Third - False prophets will increase - that's what that means - but it doesn't mean that they will live forever until the Apocalypse. Fourth - VPW wasn't right (about a lot of things - but not wrong about everything)- the WORD of GOD is right. BTW - false prophets have been around since the old testament. Jesus said that there would be false prophets and then so did Paul and Peter. VPW only read the scripture. You (or I or the unbeliever down the street) can repeat that same scripture and because the scripture is right, you'll sound right. Oh but there are records of this very thing. First hand testamonials. What do you call it when a guy(VPW) calls a gal into his motorcoach for a pedicure and greets her in nothing but a towel? The when she's done with the feet, he stands up and puts his you know what you know where and tells her to, "Finish the job!" This isn't pouncing? This isn't abuse of power? This is the Love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation? I'll tell you - this is NOT GODLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There is a lot more to the Word of God than what you get in PFAL. And since he is dead - just how do you know what he taught? I'm sad to say that you really don't even have a firm grasp on what was taught, much less have an ability to apply what you were supposed to learn to get the Bible to open up for you. The whole point of the matter is that you are supposed to be able to go to the Word and understand it for yourself. Not that you are to repeat everything you hear like a puppet. (And you really don't repeat it all that well.)

CK - Can you support from scripture that the "wolves(plural)" are the "antichrist (singular)?" You are making the classic mistake of plugging your particular pet peeve in to scripture. THAT young man, is private interpretation and that is not what the man you want to support and think so highly of taught. Ask your dad. Now, the antichrist might be a wolf - but not the only wolf. VPW was most probably a wolf - but not the only wolf. Read other verses in Peter to get the full meaning. BTW - Goey was dead on regarding what the word "thinketh" in "thinketh no evil" means. Go back and read his post. Now how do I know this? I have studied that particular word. It refers to the laying to one's account - as in a savings account. Love does not lay evil to one's account. Now - Jesus Christ loved perfectly - yet he called the Pharisees "vipers" and he said that they were just like their father "the father of lies." He called it as it was. This is not thinking evil. This is thinking. This is being aware. This is being a watchman. If you want to play with the big dogs you can't pee like a puppy. (Sorry - but this line is a favorite of mine and I use it all the time.)

I usually view the pages as Firefox - no problem - I had to switch to Explorer to see George's pics.... Now for this one: hemp/pot/dancing marijuana straw hat Benjamin Franklin, Duh blue iguana/lizard

Ocean's Eleven What the heck, as long as we're making stuff up , might as well be a real movie oh, I know! "RATS!"

Are there any pics!? I'm waiting.........

See CK? You chose not to discuss Goey's post. You have yet to thank anyone for offering you advice about researching the Word - even though many here have suggested that you go to your own father to get this info. What is your motivation? What are you trying to accomplish? What are you trying to provoke? Anger? Love? Rage? Tolerance? It is very hard to take you seriously. I have even wondered if you are who you say you are. You can't prove that on a thread - but if you want to discuss something you should respond to the issues instead of looking to pick a fight. IMHO....

Mike, You seem to conveniently redeem vpw on a regular basis. In the epistles, Paul takes responsiblity for what he teaches - both in word and in deed. He says< "Be ye followers of me....." Dr took the MOG perks but not the responsibility!!!!????? He sure didn't mind getting into our faces when we didn't write our "The Way For Me From Birth to the Corps" papers in a timely manner! Then he was the MAN OF GAWDDD! We had to obey him. A suggestion was tantamount to an order! But he couldn't suggest that prayer wasn't supposed to be a bunch of "gimmes" disguised and thank you's? He couldn't start that correct action as a suggestion? He certainly couldn't admit he was wrong. Part of being a leader is teaching by example. No they weren't supposed to be our providers ( they wanted US to provide for them.) And they weren't supposed to be our babysitters. There WERE on the other hand supposed to be our examples. Besides, VPW, HQ et al were very good and very prolific at telling us what to do. Heck, I was new to the ministry and at a branch meeting and the leader was telling us not to even associate with a certain person , I think it was Peter Wade, it might have been someone associated with him. That was down from HQ. I'm sorry Mike - but sometimes it sure seems like you have blinders on.

Mike - Dr NEVER lead by example on this matter. He himself never changed how he prayed in public. This is something I would have done - if nothing else, because I realized the error of my habits in my prayer life - as a matter of fact I DID change how I prayed. Dr could have done the same. i'm just not buying your reasoning - which is conjecture at best. Sorry.

Actually Mike, I was always frustrated that folks thought they were thanking God - but in reality they were asking. Not that asking was bad - but we had all - every one of us stopped saying, God I need a little help here." Instead it became, "Father, I just want to thank you, Father, for just helpiing me. Father. I know what your word says, Father and I just love you Father." Now that was a request worded as a thankyou. No problem with the request - but the vain repetition, OMG! Then the "justs" and the "Fathers" as if God had altzheiner's and had forgotten who he was. Now we learned that from example - and Dr allowed it to continue. He heard it all the time - at HQ, at Emporia, at the ROA. He even did it himself - well maybe with not so many "Fathers" and "justs." Why didn't we just learn to make a request? - plain and simple? -My kids ask me for stuff, they don't thank me for what I am going to do for them instead of asking. Seems to me that if they came to me and said, "thanks Mom for taking me to the Mall tomorrow - in the Name of (substitute something here for Jesus Christ) I'd feel manipulated. And that is what I feel we were taught to believe - that if you dotted all your "i's" and crossed all your "t's" and got all your needs and wants parallel, and were clear and concerned and knew what was available, and used the magic words: "In the Name of Jesus Christ," that you could manipulate God into doing what you asked - um er - demanded (cuz we were taught that as well.) Now we became God and God became a puppet. Dr taught this because he never corrected it. He allowed doctrinal error to become practical error. He was supposed to be the main watchman - cuz he was the MOG., (or at least he enjoyed the position.) Formulas aren't what God is all about. If you try to squeeze Him in a box - you'll soon be finding yourself disappointed and wanting. Ultimately, God has the privilege of saying,"NO!" because He's God.

What an adventure! Driving in snow so thick you couldn't see......brings back so many memories for me. Glad they left the light on for you....

Oakspear - I hope this gets passed on - I have avoided that thread specifically because I have nothing to add - and I don't think that an argument needs to happen. dooj

Will somebody please nudge Raf and tell him to post..... he's seems to have fallen asleep on the couch again - watching the next movie he's going to post no doubt.

Ck - I was referring to the pattern of posting you have shown.

Jonny Lingo I am sooooooo very glad that you posted here! I was missing you and your amazing stooorees when an angel that sounded just like James Earl Jones Came to me in a dream and told me to start this thread, "If you build it, He will come!" So thankful that: God is good - ALL the time!

Ck - be well aware that your failure to respond with temperance and gentility to non-hostile questions make you out to be a trouble-maker. (In fact, answering congenially even in the face of attacks would make major points for you - and it's scriptural as well.) Again - no judgement - but it stands to reason that if you wanted to truly "think no evil" you wouldn't be positioning yourself as an angry young man who has a bone to pick with everyone around here. It's more valuable to answer the hard questions. You seem to only be interested in seeing what trouble you can stir up so that you can watch the show. IF this is true - I said IF - then this is extremely immature and you shouldn't be surprised if you continue to be met with disdain and lack of respect. I fit isn't true - well then start acting like the intelligent man you claim to be and the God-fearing man you claim to be. Remember that old saying, "You will catch more flies with honey than with vinegar." It's true and there's a scripture that says about the same in Proverbs " A soft answer turns away wrath." Perhaps this is one of those scriptures taht you need to incorporate in your lifestyle while you're choosing to "think no evil." You can't just pick and choose which verses you want to obey and which just don't work for you.

And I thank you for being a gentleman. :)

Ck, Why do you only answer the "slams?" You never really anwer the questions of substance. All this doesn't look good for you. It appears that you are just interested in stirring things up and watching the feathers fly. Now THAT would be "rejoicing in iniquity," IF that was what you were doing. And that wouldn't be loving with the "Love of God in the renewed mind in manifestion" - now would it? Notice that I refrained from judging you. I only ask that you properly judge yourself. But while we are on the subject... Is it "thinking evil" to say that Adolf Hitler was a bad person? What of Saddam Hussein? Atilla the Hun? Herod? Pontius Pilate? Or is it just calling a spade a spade? Whatever you say here applies across the board! It has to by logic.

There are many places one can - FRY! I'm sure someone can find a place for him...

Oak, I am politely asking for a skepticism-free zone. Please, please. pretty please.

Rhino - I was thinking "Duh!" but dumb will work as well. So now its your turn Rhino..

Mike, oh my oh my oh my- I have always done things the way I thougth Dr and Walter taught. I remember Dr himself in the JCNG book saying that when he began writing he wanted to prove and understand the trinity - then he ended up with a different conclusion. Walter C. taught that you never start out with a pre-conceived conclusion - you study and gather data as if you are breaking new ground - every time. So, yes I can give you not only what vpw said in the class - in fact I used to teach session one. I can also give you a gaggle of scripture that comes form session one. I am not "Not motivated," I am hesitant, and distrustful. I always feel like I am being required to jump through hoops to prove my knowledge to you so that you will deem me worthy of conversation, Not only didn't Jesus do this - vpw didn't do this either. The class anwers only part of these questions because on some level it is rhetorical. Of course you cannot ask for what isn't available. What the class doesn't anwer is the part that TWI was always bad about - GOD CANNOT BE MANIPULATED! So many of us were badgered and condemned and torn to bits and ravaged by wolves because TWI was of the opinion that all you had to do was plop your prayers into this recipe for believing and all would be well. If anything went off in your life - well it was your fault. Now I won't get personal here Mike - but you know in the depth of your soul that there are some things in your life that went wrong and yes, you bear some responsiblity - but you know you would drop kick anyone who said that you didn't believe enough - or that you were ignorant of what was available. I think this is what everyone here is trying to communicate. They aren't ignorant, they are holding back and not telling you what you want to hear because they want to re-examine the evidence - not be taught PFAL again. What I am hearing from everyone is that they want to scrap the class and go back to the scriptures (that we all agree on) and see what turns up. Can you handle that? Are you motivated? Since I spoke for a lot of people here, if I got this wrong feel free to correct me.