T-Bone

Thanks Mark, for emphasizing the role of the Holy Spirit in the Trinity per John 14-16. Most Trinitarian discussions I've been in tend to focus on Jesus – to the exclusion of the other two – especially the Holy Spirit. Speaking for myself – that's someone I know very little about. Some of that may be my fear of any residual TWIt-brain assumptions creeping up when reading any Holy Spirit passages. Some old habits are hard to break. When I spoke about "a reductionism process" earlier this is one of the things I had in mind. One of the dictionary definitions of reductionism is a procedure or theory that reduces complex data or phenomena to simple terms. In science reductionism is the explanation of complex life-science processes in terms of the laws of physics and chemistry. I don't think that is a bad thing necessarily – as long as I'm aware I'm doing that and don't assume that every thing will lend itself to this way of processing data. I come across this in systematic theologies and like I said before TWI takes it to the extreme. TWI reduced God the Father to fit into a manageable box as one to be manipulated by the law-of-believing, our prayers, and good works. The Holy Sprit was de-capitalized and converted into a Sears Die-Hard Battery in each believer – YOUR power source for the more abundant life. Jesus was reduced to window dressing at the front end of the PFAL Class to give the appearance of a Christian organization. I think we may all have some tendency towards reductionism sorting out complicated issues. Invisible Dan's, and Sir Guess a Lot's posts got me thinking about how we process the raw data. In my TWI days I'd read verses like Exodus 20:3 "You shall have no other gods before me" – and think "yup – 'other gods' includes Jesus too." Or read Isaiah 42:8 "I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another or my praise to idols" and thought that Jesus would certainly be "another." Yes – that is one way of looking at those passages. But now – being on the other side of this issue – my brain considers another option – if Christ was pre-existent [which I believe He was as John 1:1,2 suggests] then He was already spoken for in those verses – and is not considered an idol.

Both of you have some very interesting points! I've often wondered about what went on in the heads of believers in the early days of Christianity. It's hard for me to imagine what a major upheaval philosophically it might have been for any Hebrews that came to Christ…I think that would be fun to read up on some of those early Christian writings and even stuff from the pre-Christian Jewish frame-of-thought. Checking out things from another point of view can be very enlightening.

No wait – it’s a dyslexic historical quote clue – and the answer is: 1F by land, 2F by sea…

Dang – there goes another one of those keys from the PFAL Class!...Maybe it’s just slain in the spirit [Keyboard User in whispering tone: “fall over, fall over”].

Damnable Heresies for $400 If TWI charged $100 per student for the PFAL Class - how much would they charge a family of three after finding out the mother is expecting - - or is that believing? [and no help from the math professor please]

That’s funny about true friends helping you bury the body, Sushi and Polar Bear! The down side of that is if true friends ever turn on you – first thing they’ll do is show the Police where they saw YOU bury the body. …On a serious note – my idea of a real friend is one who accepts you as you are – doesn’t try to control you or change you. Thinking about genuine friendships I had in TWI – they were like that – I didn’t have to speak in guarded terms about anything. That provided such a sense of relief while living in a pressure-cooker.

Thanks for those links, DMiller. After reviewing The Two Adams and One God, One Lord excerpts – a few things bugged me. The main thing that hit me was reductionism in their reasoning – reminded me of VPW's way of thinking - telling me what God can and cannot do:"…there is nothing in the Bible to indicate that God can become a true man, because He is God. One of the boundaries of God's nature is given in Numbers 23:19: "God is not a man…" And from the beginning, one of Man's defining boundaries was that the consequence for disobeying God's command was death. Potential mortality, then, was always a defining part of man's existence. God, therefore, cannot actually be a man, because He cannot die." [from the beginning of Two Adams]... The reference in Numbers 23:19 is saying God is not a man that he should lie – contrasting the unreliability of man as seen in the passage's context of Balaam himself. When it comes to the pre-existent Word of John 1:1,2 and the Word becoming flesh [John 1:14] I noticed One God, One Lord handled it in a similar fashion as VPW: "…The "word" was with God in the same sense that "wisdom" was with God. Proverbs 8:29b and 30a says, "When He [God] marked out the foundations of the earth, then I [wisdom] was the craftsman at His side." No one we know of believes that there was a being called "Wisdom" who helped God make the heavens and the earth. Everyone knows that wisdom is personified to make the record interesting and easy to understand. So too, in John 1:1 when Scripture says that the logos was "with God," it is a personification…" [from But What about John 1:1? chapter]…I think reducing the Word of John 1:1,2 to a personification is somewhat similar to saying Christ was in God's foreknowledge. The thing I find most dubious is near the end of Two Adams :"…With such a simple but profound basis for biblical understanding, why engage in theological speculation about Christ's identity that can only complicate and compromise the beautiful literary symmetry and integrity of Scripture?" … Why engage in theological speculation? Why engage in speculation in any field of study? I think that's how people explore, learn, and grow. Once again, I see a reductionism process by telling me I better not think outside the box – or in my case the triangle. Because I could complicate and compromise the symmetry and integrity of their interpretation of Scripture.

That’s fine by me – just don’t turn this into an honest discussion about mathematics. Because…honestly…if you think I sound confused on Trinitarian stuff – don’t ask me to share what I know about math. Math is MY basic spiritual problem .

It’s very easy to understand how TWI is in a pickle – its founder was a real “character” who was pickled half the time. Among one of the many sources he “failed” to cite was the distillery where he bought his Drambui.

Thanks Ex10, Hamm, SkyRider, and Tom – for returning our discussion to the previously scheduled program of the importance of character and of the importance of Bible practice compared to just Bible knowledge. SkyRider mentioning the doctrinal forum – got me thinking how doctrine influences practice. Now I'm thinking about how even at the beginning of PFAL he was "softening up" a strict interpretation of the ten commandments. He goes through the mock survey of asking people what's the greatest sin a person can commit. Then refers to Jesus' answer to the question what is the greatest commandment, Jesus saying to love God is the first and greatest, the second is like it – love your neighbor as yourself. Then VPW says by sheer logic the greatest sin a man can commit is to break the greatest commandment – to love something more than God. Now I'll give him this -he does throw in if you love God and your neighbor you won't go around breaking the ten commandments. But he leaves an open-ended thought by saying if you love God and your neighbor you can do as you full well please. What would you label the sin of breaking the first and greatest commandment? I'm thinking "idolatry." Where does it say in the Bible that idolatry is the greatest sin to commit? Why does I Corinthians 5:11 mention believers should not allow in the church the sinful behavior of the sexually immoral or greedy, or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler as well as an idolater? I don't know where I'm going with this – other than it hits me as wrong to play games with a moral scale of values. I'm not trying to minimize the sin of idolatry – but I'm trying to understand what Jesus meant by saying the Law revolved around loving God and neighbor. Interesting to think about - how you would nail someone on committing idolatry? It's all in the mind. I know one of the commandments does specify not to make a graven image of God. There's Old Testament accounts of physical idols being destroyed. But the very first commandment says not to have any other gods before Him. I don't know how my not loving God with all my heart could hurt Him – but I think it does in some way. I most certainly know if I don't love my neighbor – it will issue in some form of harm to him - even if all it amounted to was harboring ill will or not having his best interest in mind if I should negotiate with him. Be it envying his stuff, stealing his stuff, lusting after his wife, committing adultery with his wife [just think of the harm to a lot of people – my wife and kids, my neighbor's family, etc.]. I could go on – but what I'm getting at is maybe the ten commandments and Jesus' summation of them teach about love from both a positive [Jesus' summation] and negative angle [the ten commandments]. Jesus said "this is what love is" and Moses said "this is what love is not." And just in case some people didn't realize it all starts in the mind - Jesus did talk about holding murderous/hateful thoughts towards someone or having lustful thoughts toward a woman. To blur or weaken a literal interpretation of the ten commandments is to blur or weaken the meaning of love. To say "as long as you love God and neighbor you can do whatever you want" is to remove one eye. I'd lose the ability of depth perception. I'm unable to gauge how close or far I was to loving God or neighbor without those reference points. Am I having lustful thoughts about my neighbor's wife? I'd say I'm not holding to the two great commandments – loving God or neighbor…Well – it's a different kind of "loving" I'm thinking of - a sexual "loving"– but bottom line – I'm sinning.

Belle, SirGuessaLot, LindyHopper and JumpinJive made some great points about how ambitious this discussion is – trying to define God or just trying to consider the bigger picture. Like I said before – currently I'm in the Trinitarian camp. Not because I understand or can explain the Trinity – I don't hold to some ironclad statement of faith on the Trinity. I consider myself a Trinitarian because I recognize an assortment of similarities/connectedness/dynamics in the biblical data of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. I believe in the deity of Christ and presently don't see Him and the Father as one and the same person. I am attracted to a lot of Trinitarian doctrine in that I see it as an attempt to make sense of the entire body of Scripture on the subject. Whereas TWI would isolate Scripture, avoid certain passages or flat out twist them - like VPW's handling of John 1:1,2. He presents only one way to interpret how the Word could be in the beginning with God – in God's foreknowledge. He offers the definition of the Greek word for "with" pros as "together with yet distinctly independent of." Which after I left TWI and started analyzing PFAL stuff – found the definition actually negated his argument. If I am thinking about having kids sometime in the future – are my thoughts together with me yet distinctly independent of my mind? Maybe if I'm schizophrenic. In my opinion the real interpretive tool of the Bible is our minds – the way we process information – the way we try to make sense of things. Maybe VPW was right in the way he interpreted John 1:1,2. I don't see it that way. I can't really explain how the Word could have been in the beginning with God and then become flesh – so I file that puzzle in my "Maybe-someday-I'll-figure-it-out-maybe-not-so-I'll-hold-any-conclusions/inferences-in-a-state-of-flux" folder. Like I said at first - reflecting on this topic is a mighty ambitious endeavor. I'm in WAY OVER my head. I think we need to be aware of how subtly our little background processor [assumptions, point of view] fills in the blanks, concocts explanations, plots solutions, makes inferences, and applies intellectual shorthand. Like when I see the classic symbol for the Trinity – that someone came up with – the equilateral triangle. My mind wonders: does each angle have to be same? I know – then it wouldn't be equilateral. Or to say they're identical in terms of either two could be eliminated – I would think "no" because then you'd have one angle like this < . But who knows – you could superimpose all three angles on top of each other and it would look like this < . Big deal – it's geometry and not philosophy anyway…So in my head what it comes down to when reflecting on this symbol – is that it represents some kind of relationship of similarities/connectedness/dynamics of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I'm not saying my perception is right, my understanding is right. I'm just explaining how my mind tries to make sense of this stuff and how I try to make my interpretive tool [my mind] as much an overt process as possible so I can "see" how I'm handling the data coming in.

The way it worked when I was in TWI – people were expected to agree that PFAL was the standard for truth. It was considered the ONLY way to rightly interpret the Bible in order to stand approved before TWI's little god [revealed for the umpteenth time in the next sentence]. God forbid anyone should find something in the Scriptures that contradicts what VPW taught – after all – this PFAL standard wasn't set in place to please God – but man – one man actually – VPW. Yeah – like I really should have been concerned if VPW found out what I thought of Jesus Christ. Like he would be able to gauge how far I would go spiritually. A very good salesman VPW he was [simulated Yoda manner of speaking] – using the old bait and switch routine. At the beginning of the sales pitch there's lots of talk about Jesus, the ten commandments, a sprinkling of some Greek words. Sounds like some good wholesome Christian stuff…Somewhere along that gosh awful long stretch of class VPW substitutes his own little distorted version of Christianity – where Jesus Christ is eliminated. You don't read the gospels anymore because they're not addressed to you. Hmmmm – that's odd - the gospels are the only four books in the Bible that are ALL ABOUT Jesus Christ! I'll tell you what a typical student thinks of Jesus after taking PFAL - not much. PFAL knowledge IS power to TWI-followers. In order to stand approved before TWI you better at least act like that's true. Maybe recalling something else VPW said in PFAL would be more conducive to a Christian getting back on track with knowing Jesus Christ. It's the story of the crooked handle bars on the bike. The bike rider got use to them being crooked – when someone came along and straightened them out – the rider crashed. PFAL does a wonderful job of skewing the student's thinking process. There is no way students can thoughtfully process the Bible themselves once they've been trained to VPW's way of thinking. They have been trained to absorb instead of analyze. If there are any Christians who just left TWI and are reading this post - may I suggest something. Read the Bible - maybe even get another version - at least one that doesn't have your TWI notes in it. Read it...think...question...pray...keep on with the keeping on...

If that was a barrel full of monkeys - that ain't silt!

Welcome to GSC, Son of Arthur. Great idea for a thread and great posts by everyone! I think this is one of those topics that’s so big/deep/complicated as to defy any conventional means of organizing a “study” – because as finite beings we’re attempting to understand someone infinite! You labeled this an “honest discussion” and not a debate. I don’t think it does the topic justice to draw a line in the sand with relevant Scripture and arguments of anti-Trinitarian and pro-Trinitarian folks stockpiled on either side. And to be honest with everyone I’d like to state upfront I am amazed or maybe it’s more like…uhmm…perplexed at the evolution of this topic in my personal study and reflection of the biblical data. Since leaving TWI I’ve flip flopped a number of times. And I’m not playing some politician’s waffling tactic in an open forum for fear of getting nailed by an opposing party. If there is no middle ground [who set up these rules anyway?] - I guess at this stage of exploring my faith – you can put me down as a Trinitarian. Your particular post REALLY got my attention because your questions [QUESTIONS – I love QUESTIONS!] are very close to what issues have driven me in my studies. How does my understanding of Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit affect how I apply my faith? What is the relationship of Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit and what bearing does it have on me in matters of worship, prayer, guidance, redemption, evangelism, personal struggles, spiritual warfare, and interpersonal dynamics? In my humble opinion, some topics transcend scriptural specificity and articulation. This is one of them. That may be wrong thinking on my part – perhaps being reactionary to TWI’s mindset. TWI had a tendency to reduce everything to formulas, laws, rigid concepts, ideas you could wrap your mind around – which gives one a sense of absolute comprehension and control. And even in mainstream Christianity - reviewing a number of systematic theologies [currently I have fifteen from authors of various backgrounds] I think that’s somewhat how we approach things nowadays [not necessarily with as much rigidity, reductionism, or arrogance as TWI]. We feel comfortable with everything organized in one place. I’m not knocking systematic theology – just trying to explain that I view it as a handy framework maybe even a necessary tool for sorting out things. But I don’t consider it gospel truth. I read somewhere [in an Alister McGrath book Understanding Doctrine I think] of doctrines being likened to botanists going out into the wild, bringing back samples, organizing them by genus in a greenhouse. In the wild, – these plants are scattered all over the place – but in the greenhouse they are arranged according to how the botanists decided to group them. Similarly – the Bible is not arranged like a textbook with indexes, diagrams, organized topics, etc. What one person says is a verse that is relevant to one topic – may actually touch upon another as well, or perhaps the person is wrong altogether. So I’m not criticizing systematic theology – I’m just saying I try to remember when I read this stuff – that it’s a framework of thought, a point of view, people’s way of organizing information. I believe we have a God-breathed Word. But I don’t think there’s a God-breathed systematic theology book. Sometimes while reading systematic theology books – I think about the early church – specifically the Book of Acts period. When studying theology and doctrinal application I think we forget how informative historical proximity [a reference source closer to the event] can be. I catch myself thinking, “We’re so sophisticated now. They didn’t have the whole Bible then. We have such an advantage now.” Yet as I read Acts I’m impressed with the confidence of their faith and practice...And with regard to historical proximity and thinking about the Trinity and the writers of the New Testament – what intrigues me is that in some instances I find – I don’t know – ambiguity. Is the writer speaking about Jesus or God? Is this something the Holy Spirit does – or Jesus or the Father? So…boiling this all down to what do I have to offer this discussion – not a whole lot. Sorry. But I do like reading other people’s stuff…I’m still exploring…I’m not hung up on nailing this one down. Personally – I don’t think it can be done. But I could be wrong…I don’t consider it a mission-critical thing that I have to settle in order to effectively serve my Lord…I certainly would appreciate a better understanding of Him – which I think is a lifetime endeavor [and that includes the eternal portion as well]. So, I continue to practice my faith according to the dictates of my heart and understanding of the Scriptures so as to please Him.

After scouring the International Recipes and Menus database our research department has found something that I am sure will match your specs, Water Buffalo. Although it lacks color, flavor, aroma, weight, and a third dimension this sketch of a slice of cheesecake most assuredly lacks any calories. Enjoy!

I quit when I realized that TWI had nothing to do with reconciling people back to God. TWI-world made life a rather convoluted journey through leadership's whim-of-the-week agenda – fantasizing we can alter reality through the magic of believing. Yeah…normal people don't go through life like that. I don't think people went nuts. It's just a little unnerving when I'm comfy on my couch watching Boston Legal and notice a stranger peeking through the blinds…and it kinda creeps out my wife too...What's the matter - TV broke at your house?

What the heck is he talking about? I didn't know I had a spiritual equilibrium...And then there's that "renewed mind faith" thing - can't I just get by with plain ol' faith?

It's good to know your position on the second coming.

Don’t mean to be putting pressure on either group – but you all better settle this quick! Before Tom Strange gets wind of it and calls in the Mother Ship – that thing will swoop down here faster than lightning and steal everybody away!

Oak, I don’t know if this is the best way to do multiple quotes but I’ve found it works okay for me. I think there’s a short time-frame for it to work this way – anyway…say there’s 3 posts I want to quote on a thread – I go to the first post click on Reply – as soon as the Reply Window comes up I immediately click on Add Reply. Then I go to the next post and do the same thing, then the third post – same thing. I think because I do it within a short time-frame of each other – all three posts that I’ve quoted appear as only one reply by me. Then – by clicking on the Edit Button I open my post and edit the quotes down and add my comments. By the way - I liked your reply on this a lot better than mine – short and to the point…Guess I’m still stuck in some TWIt-brain line of thinking…dunno…is there a gift ministry of verbosity? The Right Reverend Hot Air…

Yes - good point, OldiesMan. And it's interesting to read the context of that reference – especially on this thread about character. [NIV renders the KJV of "…sweet water and bitter…" as "…fresh water and salt water…" in verse 11.] James 3:1-12 NIV 1 Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. 2 We all stumble in many ways. If anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to keep his whole body in check. 3 When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can turn the whole animal. 4 Or take ships as an example. Although they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are steered by a very small rudder wherever the pilot wants to go. 5 Likewise the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts. Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. 6 The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole person, sets the whole course of his life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell. 7 All kinds of animals, birds, reptiles and creatures of the sea are being tamed and have been tamed by man, 8 but no man can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. 9 With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God's likeness. 10 Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be. 11 Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? 12 My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water. People can be walking contradictions at times. Nobody is perfect. But I think we've all come across people in life who seem to excel at being contradictory. I mean we all have our own litmus test for determining hypocrites. I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing. Maybe that's why there's passages in the Bible like the above – that seem to set a standard…a code of conduct…for a teacher of God's Word, for a believer of God's Word. People are made in God's likeness [verse 9] – which ain't bad! Yet sometimes people can act so ungodly [verse 10] – which ain't good. It's contrary to what we were designed to be. Jesus said what comes out of a person's mouth is only the tip of the iceberg. Matthew 15:10-20 NIV 10 Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. 11 What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' " 12 Then the disciples came to him and asked, "Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?" 13 He replied, "Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. 14 Leave them; they are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit." 15 Peter said, "Explain the parable to us." 16 "Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them. 17 "Don't you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? 18 But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man 'unclean.' 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. 20 These are what make a man 'unclean'; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him 'unclean.' " As verse 18 shows – and what's been said earlier on this thread in a number of ways – what's in a person's heart eventually makes its way out. Character is revealed by actions… I am amazed by the shallow concept some VPW-defenders seem to have of what it means to be a minister of God, a teacher of God's Word, a spiritual leader. I think James and Jesus emphasize that what a teacher DOES is important! Do you think it really matters to God that some "teacher" showed there were four crucified with Jesus? Is the whole Bible really going to fall to pieces if there were only two crucified with Jesus? Do you think it matters to God when that same teacher sexually molested women? What about their whole life falling to pieces because of what he did to them? How does any amount of Bible teaching justify such acts? "There must be something wrong with our scale of values…" Oh yeah – I remember that line from PFAL. This rationalizing by some VPW-defenders makes me think of Martin Luther's time. Martin Luther noticed that many people in Wittenberg weren't coming to church for confession anymore. He found out they were going to neighboring towns to buy Indulgences. People were paying the church to pardon their sins – any church history buffs correct me if I'm remembering this wrong – but I think you could buy an Indulgence to remit punishment of any past, present or future sin. How is that so different from thinking: "Look at all these people VPW helped with PFAL. Surely that's worth something to God. So what if he had a little bad habit. The good he's done far outweighs the bad." Proverbs 9:10 NIV The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding. I think the Bible puts more emphasis on the moral aspect of God's wisdom rather than any academic perspective of it. The fear of the Lord is what bows the soul to humbly accept His way of doing things. It looks to me like getting to know the Holy One – personally – is the key to understanding – that's a lot different than just gaining a knowledge of the Holy Bible… "Holy" – sacred, perfect in goodness and righteousness…I would think these are ideas a good teacher of the Bible would want to instill in his students.

Ah Reverend Groucho fine sir…this dream boy is starting to give me nightmares…is it my imagination or is he a kinda mean?...alright – if yah ain't looking for any research staffers – how about a damn fine plagiarist? I'll do yah proud! Need more clergy? I've got the gift ministry of an idiot.

You certainly have struck a familiar chord…Where have I heard that tune before? Wait…wait! It's coming to me…lots of talk about research and then there's laying the old guilt trip of me not doing enough according to someone else's agenda…So it's the same old song and dance of TWI. I'm not angry – it's more like…amused…How much research has gone into the way you research? I am not surprised at the tone of your posts – it sounds to me like someone who is stuck in the TWI method of processing information. What TWI followers do is not research – but regurgitate the assumptions and point of view of TWI. So even when a follower leaves TWI – unless they start identifying the assumptions they absorbed – they continue to process information the same way with the same results and with the same accompanying side effects – like pride and hatred. …I'm sure there's always something more I could do – but when I recall a verse like Colossians 3:23 Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men… …I think there's a lot that can be said for building a marriage, a family, a career. The passage says "whatever you do." It's not restricted to only the "spiritually elite." I think something is amiss when any group claims to be serving God and drives their followers to do busy work to maintain and increase the ranks at the expense of their marriages, families, and careers. These are things that God instituted in the first place. …This is goofy…somebody thinks they've cornered the market on truth and now they're not satisfied until they've convinced someone else of their great find. Now they pass on the torch – the mission – which is more important than marriage, family and career – is to convince someone else of this great truth.

I'm sure there's always something more I could do – but when I recall a verse like Colossians 3:23 Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men… A few things come to mind…it doesn't specify how much I do – or what I do. It does say WHATEVER I do…and it specifies that I do it for the Lord! So I'm to the point in my life where I don't care about the agenda of any wannabe revivalist – what they think I should do…I think there's a lot to be said for raising a family and making an honest living and…and…and…and that's it! Funny isn't it. TWI was into getting followers out there doing busy work to maintain and increase the ranks – and so marriages, families and careers suffered due to neglect…This is silly. What does that say about what TWI thinks is important? Wow – what an important mission: I must go out into the world and find somebody who I can convince that there's more important things in life than their marriage, family or career. There's the mission I'm on…"Oh that's just another one of those pyramid schemes," you say. Ah, but it's a human pyramid.

Happy Birthday, Kevlar - when I said I'd buy you another round - I meant beer - not ammo!